,IEEEEELEEEI E:EE
EIEII’“ EEEZEE EEIEE'E.
I .EIEEI

EEEEIE..{II I;

I.
EEEEEEEI’

'd EAE

I ' 4 'E’E‘ _
I . I “

. E E E‘E'.:' EE I E.”

‘ ‘ I l

E . I .
E' . L E1 ,, 1"
E I .r .12:

. y 3%

I O "' II E ‘

Q‘s-3%
m.

     
    

 

- -:’-Qoso AQHJ-‘M v.7 .;__;.‘._;a‘
; ~‘ - ’

1...:-
.35..

 

EEE II
EEEEI EEEEEEE

      

__

tigfi' .

- 0-. “WM
.._.

          
   

I

‘39—... .0"
“.

 

 

 

   

EEE ‘Hr'
EEEEI' EEEEE':

EEEE EEE'EEEEEE
EE'EI EEEEEIEE EEIE EEEEEE
”I EEEEEEEEEEEEEE IE

 

..._-_.—

W

* v—v‘ F..—-o-—.-m

  

~' “'b“; _,|' - ‘
-— ,_- .
- -u.
w“ . ,
-‘-_.g__ M-

‘.
at. .
...‘
—>u-
7H’

_. ,,
A. - ‘-—.
_... .
.. _
v—n-u “: fr-
.- _.. L: _
k .
.....
c» 37;..4-
.w -.
.
-

     
 

   
 
  
 
   

 
 
 
   
   
 
  

._._~..

     
   

 

. 0' .‘E :‘h E [£3 E?” -E
E EEE" EEE‘EEE 1.-. EEEE Egg” EEEEEEEEEEE‘ EEEEEE E231 EE . {EEE o E BEE?
E 'E.‘EEE. EEEE: '33. c ENOi EKIE; 1:5“:' 1‘
E :E’EEEiE EEEEIIIIH: EESEEE EEEEEE :fi EEI . EEE: EEE #311134” HIEEEJEEIE
EE EE EEEEE EE EIEEEEEE EEE} EEEEIEEIEEEEEEEE I QIEEII ‘E "W "IE'E- .1 ‘ -
E 1.... WI . "31L: 1 v 1‘ .'
I! ':

 
 

EEE'.EEEE"EIEI‘EE

 

     

 

     
 

   

      
    
     
  
   

   
  

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

u -o
.9;

n

”:33

   
    

.- 77"! ‘6 $61": '4'; EC:‘!‘ 20!: .
T"... a. ' 330. E: 2i“; :JEEEEEE 1‘1?"
E".E, ‘g: E DEW-”E?” EEE—:5. "EIE EEEE x I “'1 u:
I IE‘II E" III E III EEMII'IEEUE
E; EEE i. " {TL EEEIE a"? EWIE; IE E1”. 4 E ."
vE v E ”1;: E EEE EEE EE:I?E' ‘1 4. .EIJ ! .I
E I II'II'IIIIII IEI i'

1'» !I"I13I .III "III M I E ‘M.
E II EEEE' 1.3,, git ..

I I UTI‘E‘; EEE ‘H‘E

  

  
     

-t. _
c - I.p-
«- n a.
no
t

  
 
 

  

   
  

  

  
     

    
 

 

:‘o, E I ’7
1?:01'.fi'f:'11?a3‘y£f1‘
E E ElIIIE WEN E; E"

 

 

E:EEE ,3 ""‘rIE. ‘EEE' , E3. . I ,5" E'
E’I Et II:E'EE1:EE E EEEE. EE'EE “EEE E
HIE. NEW . HI) I; I, I" In
:IEI-l - . 'E‘ EE E EEE IEEE EE IE E EEE EEEE EEEE IEEEEE EE‘EEEEEE HE n ERNIE“
‘ E. 1‘ . WEE-E: EElkE t-Ei Eh; EEEE! EEE EEEE EEE' E EEEiEpr EEEJEE EEEE an a} lit" i HJEE w". ‘l {132“ ”El EEEEEEE; __\'. KElE‘EL
EE

   

~ Mini-.01: EEEEEE IE; II EEEEII EEEE EEEEEEEE‘E EEEEEE‘ EEEEEEE'E fig? EEEEEEEKEEE
..I...;-'..f~,;" I _ ”5' II: I ‘1-E’LEE . 'EE~ .
2,59,“; :-..I"I.I:v: I’EEIE; .. .IEI'IE III‘EIE'E'EI EEEEEIEEEEEEEE EEEE‘EEIEEEIEIIEE‘EE‘ EEE: EIE'E'II ' EEEE E E E’
. u ' EIIEEEEE’E ’ _ E I‘ IE 1. “I3" EEEE EEEE ‘EEEEE E EEEEEEE EEE‘E EEE

    
 

.. E. EEEE-E'EEEEEXIEEE ““’1"E I‘o’EE-E.‘ EE‘EEEIEE EEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEE EEE'EEEEEEEEIEEEEEEEEESEEEESEE E'E EE’EEE fight?
E}

II I EEEEEEEEEEEEEEI‘E
I ' - - 35 EE 211.1,
EEEEE “E‘E: EE'rEEEEE-EE EEHLEI III "EITIU'JIIH IEEEEE E E EEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEE EEE EEEEEEE EEEE EEEEEIE EELEEEEE ‘Elfl J E I :1”: 'IEE:

EE
EEI EEE

 

 

m WWW/WWW

2

   

LIBRARY

chigan State
University

    

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

CORPORATE CAREER DEVELOPMENT TRAINING PROGRAM--AN
EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANT BEHAVIORAL AND PERCEPTION CHANGES

presented by

Maryann Frederick Cox

has been accepted towards fulfillrnent
of the requirements for

 

Ph.D degree in Educational Administration

 

Date@//Z Aifé

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

 

 

 

MSU

LIBRARIES
-:—.

 

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

' s5 I ’31,. K“<Z-‘--;)‘3m

tw':'j~, hf"
‘rrfl”1ir¥

6'“ ~-

JUN 1‘ Kim

 

 

 

\b

#07afl

CORPORATE CAREER DEVELOPMENT TRAINING PROGRAM-~AN

EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANT BEHAVIORAL AND PERCEPTION

BY

Maryann Frederick Cox

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Educational Administration

1986

CHANGES

 

§$
‘\
v

A"

 

 

ABSTRACT

CORPORATE CAREER DEVELOPMENT TRAINING PROGRAM--AN
EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANT BEHAVIORAL AND PERCEPTION CHANGES

BY

Maryann Frederick Cox

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to determine the effects of
a Career Self Management training program on behaviors
exhibited and perceptions held by the program participants.
Answers to the following questions were sought:

1. What career self management behavior changes

occurred for program participants?
2. What career self management perception changes

occurred for program participants?

Procedures
A questionnaire was developed, piloted, and administered
to one hundred Career Self Management program participants
and one hundred non-participants. The following statistical
procedures were utilized to analyze the data: frequency
comparisons; correlation coefficient; multi-variant step-

wise linear regression; percentiles; and the chi-square test.

LL

IH

.
k‘ I
4‘ \‘ I:
l

‘i

Q i
l
(x
I. c. .4
. a -
'3 " ”nut“.
i

 

Findings

1. Sixty-five percent of the areas researched through
the use of the Career Self Management Questionnaire were
significantly impacted, indicating significant behavior and
perception changes, as measured by the statistical analyses.

2. There were significant differences between the
responses of the experimental group to questions on the pre-
test, post-test, and post-post test within the following
areas: development of career goals; assignment of self
responsibility for one's career; assessment of strengths and
weaknesses; assessment of life purpose; importance of
analyzing work values; assessment of values and ideals;
awareness that life is ”always changing;” comfortableness in
handling personal and career changes; gathering of informa-
tion for furthering career growth; realization that all parts
of life are interdependent; use of learning style; use of
visualization; and investigation of career opportunities
within the company.

3. There were significant differences between responses
of the experimental group and responses of the control group
within the following areas: development of career goals;
assignment of self responsibility for career; assessment of
strengths and weaknesses; assessment of life purpose;

assessment of values and ideals; awareness that life is

”always changing;' gathering information for furthering
career growth; use of learning style; use of visualization;

and investigation of career opportunities within the company.

DEDICATION

This is dedicated to my father, who once told me that
I could accomplish anything I wanted to accomplish; to my
mother (posthumously), who through the years encouraged me
to achieve and who delighted so in the accomplishments of
her children; and to my children, Kelly and Steve, who
demonstrated their independence and supported me with their
love, understanding, and admiration.

I dedicate this to you.

ii

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The number of individuals who have influenced, sup-
ported, or encouraged me in this effort are numerous.

Deepest appreciation goes to Dr. Richard E. Gardner,
my advisor throughout my doctoral program and chairperson
of my committee. His continuous guidance, understanding,
support, and encouragement have been immeasurable as he
provided me with academic inspiration and direction. He has
stimulated my interests in many new areas of endeavor and
challenged me with high standards of performance. To him
I owe a large debt of gratitude.

I am also very grateful for the assistance and advice of
my committee members: Dr. Casmer Heilman, whose teaching
greatly enhanced my knowledge in the field of career develop-
ment; Dr. Louis Romano, whose enthusiastic encouragement in-
spired me to pursue the completion of this task; and Dr. Ben
Bohnhorst, whose teaching in the field of curriculum develop-
ment broadened my educational horizon. Working with them has
been a pleasure and has given me valuable experience.

Without the support and assistance of the Dow Corning

iii

Corporation, this study would not have been possible. Dow
Corning employees who so willingly volunteered to participate
in the study, the Education and Training Department, and the
Department of Personnel all deserve special acknowledgment
for their very important roles.

Much appreciation goes to Dan Bourrie, research and
statistics consultant, whose expertise proved invaluable to
the completion of this project. Through his diligence,
untiring efforts, and patience, the statistical analyses
for this dissertation were completed.

A special note of gratitude goes to Denise Spencer, who
not only served as dissertation typist, but who also provided
valuable input for improvement; and to Joy Danley, who spent
numerous hours extracting and tabulating all the data from
the 500 research questionnaires.

I wish to express appreciation to Dr. Ron Kyhos for his
meticulous editing of the dissertation and his thoughtful
suggestions. Special thanks also go to long-term friends,
Lou Person and Patti Tuma, who reviewed the final copy and
offered important comments.

No publication represents the work of the writer alone.
Many people contribute to the final product, and this

(dissertation is no exception.

iv

CHAPTER

LIST OF

I.

II.

III.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLES O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O C

THE STUDY 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Introduction. . . . . .
Background of the Study .
Rationale for the Study .
Purpose of the Study. . .
Statement of the Problem. .
Procedures. . . . . .
Limitations of the Study. .
Statement of the Null Hypo ot

hes ses. . .
Definition of Terms . . . .
Organization of the Study .

REVIEW OF PRECEDENT LITERATURE. . . . .

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . .
Career Development in Organizations . .
Corporate Career Development Programs
Development and Application of Training
Evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN OF THE RESEARCH.

Introduction. . . .
The Setting . . . .
The Population. . .
The Questionnaire .
Data Collection . .

e

Data Analysis Proc dures

PAGE

vii

H

Hra
hJCMOCD~JQLnuaH

H
.5

15
15
15
25

31

44
44

47
49
52
53

CHAPTER

IV.

THE FINDINGS. O O O O O O O O 0

Introduction. . . . . . . . . .

Career Self Management Program Research Findings.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND

REFLECTIONS O O O I O I O I I

Introduction. . . . . . . . . .
Purpose of the Study. . . . . .
Research Methods and Procedures
Summary of Research Findings. .
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . .
Recommendations . . . . . . . .
Reflections . . . . . . . . . .

APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

REFERENCES 0 I O O O O O O O O O O O 0

vi

PAGE

55

55
60

98

98
98
99
102
104
106
109

111

133

CHAPTER

IV. THE FINDINGS. . .

Introduction. . .

Career Self Management Program Research Findings.

V. SUMMARY,
REFLECTIONS . .

Introduction. . .

Purpose of the Study.
Research Methods and Procedures
Summary of Research

Conclusions . . .
Recommendations .
Reflections . . .

APPENDICES . . . . . . .

REFERENCES 0 O O O O O 0

Findings.

vi

CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND

PAGE

55

55
60

98
98
99

102
104

106
109

111

133

TABLE

LIST OF TABLES

Career Self Management Population Frequency

Comparison. . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 1 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 2 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 3 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 4 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 5 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 6 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 7‘ . ... .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 8 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 9 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 10 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 11 . . . .

With Alpha Levels--.

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels-—

vii

PAGE

48

61

63

65

66

68

70

71

73

75

77

78

Frequency Comparisons
Question 12 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 13 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 14 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 15 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 16 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 17 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 18 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 19 . . . .

Frequency Comparisons
Question 20 . . . .

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels--

With Alpha Levels-—

With Alpha Levels—-

With Alpha Levels-—

viii

80

81

83

84

86

87

89

91

92

CHAPTER I

THE STUDY

Introduction

Corporate cultures have become increasingly preoccupied
with productivity, the measure of individual or organization-
al ability to produce quality goods and services effectively
at the lowest possible cost. Deming (1982) related that
rapid technological change and the need to achieve better
return on investment constitute major challenges. Although
many concepts and techniques exist to deal with these dual
challenges, he felt that the innovations derived through
application of the concepts and techniques eventually must
be rendered to the work force who, directly or indirectly,
produce the goods and provide the services. The necessary
link is training. Such a great reliance on training places
a large responsibility on the training function to be
accountable for its effectiveness. Deming concluded that
training requires systematic evaluation, assessment, and
feedback to generate improved performance.

One way that organizations have made efforts to keep

performance levels high is by establishing career paths for

their employees. However, often the employees are moved
along those paths without the proper individual assessment or
the necessary training. Glitzer and Maher (1982) reported
that now many corporate employees are participating in a
relatively new phenomenon, as they systematically plan their
careers under the organization's guidance. A number of
organizations are moving from the traditional approach to
career development, in which the organization was the primary
mover behind people's careers, to a more contemporary model,
in which the individual exhibits career self management. As
a result, career development training programs have_come into
existence in which corporate employees practice self assess-
ment, career exploration, career planning, and career and
life management.

The hallmark of a plan providing a career development
program is the use of evaluation to assess program results
and to perhaps redesign the program for further effective-
ness. Evaluations from the training program and an analysis
of the program's effects, based on data collected before and
after its implementation, help to identify areas for improve-
ment, according to Bakken and Bernstein (1982).

Evaluation is an important part of any training and

cievelopment effort. As well as an assessment of outcomes

or effects, evaluation is also a systematic inquiry into
training contexts, needs, plans, and operations. The
benefits of career development training evaluation need to be
fully recognized. Brinkerhoff (1981) emphasized that with
good assessments of effectiveness, career development train-
ing programs can be made more relevant and practical for both

individuals and the organization.

Background of the Study

In general, the career planning and development activi-
ties practiced in a corporation can be vital contributions
to the positive quality of work life of the organization. If
corporate leaders are to evolve effective career development
programs in their organizations, they need to correlate their
perceptions of what is most beneficial for employees with an
accurate gauge of employees' perceptions of needed career
development activities. A portion of this feedback can be
obtained from employees who participate in the corporation's
career development training program.

Another consideration is the size of the organization;
for as the size of an organization grows, the need for
career self management, including self assessment and net-

working, becomes more and more urgent, since individual

qualifications become less generally known due to the
increased number of people. The Dow Corning Corporation, a
Fortune 500 company, met this need by developing a custom
designed Career Self Management training program for company
employees.

The objective of the Career Self Management program was:
to provide a systematic approach for employees to examine
their personal capabilities, interests, opportunities, and
choices, and to identify and follow through with career
growth objectives and plans. Designed within the program
context, there were two basic truths underlying the Career
Self Management program: (1) Everything is always changing,
and (2) Everything is interdependent. Also in the develop-
ment of the program three assumptions were identified: (1)
The better the "match” between participants' unique needs and
abilities and the career paths provided by their organiza-
tion, the greater the chances for satisfaction and a pro-
ductive relationship, (2) Participants must continue to grow
in order to feel satisfied and to maintain productivity in
their career, and (3) Analyzing the ”match" and planning for
growth are the purposes of the program.

The program was taught, within a two—day format, to

‘training groups consisting of 15-25 participants. Most of

the programs were taught by the researcher who is an outside
consultant for the Dow Corning Corporation. All of the
programs were given at an off-site location, rather than in
the corporate training facility.

The study consisted of surveying, through the use of a
research questionnaire, 106 program participants (experi-
mental group) and 122 employees who did not participate in
the Career Self Management program (control group). The
experimental group completed the questionnaire immediately
before the'training program, immediately after the program,
and approximately four months after the completion of the
training program. The control group, selected from the popu-
lations of other Dow Corning training programs, completed two
questionnaires, with a four-month interval between them.

The intent of Dow Corning Corporation and the researcher
was to determine what, if any, career self management
behavior changes and perception changes occurred for program
participants and how the behaviors and perceptions of the

experimental and control groups compared.

Rationale for the Study
The development and implementation of the Career Self

lflanagement program at Dow Corning Corporation stimulated

positive responses from the program participants and, in some
cases, from their supervisors and managers. Primarily, the
program was viewed as a vehicle for meeting an existing need
of the company and its employees. Although these positive
reactions were gratifying, many more specific questions were
unanswered. No prior data had been collected regarding the

application of the Career Self Management program; no data

had been recorded in terms of behavior or perception changes.
Neither was there information as to any behavior or percep-
tion changes correlating with the independent variables of
age, sex, Hay points, organizational function, and exempt/
non-exempt status of program participants.

Training represents a significant expenditure of funds
from an organization and the evaluative procedures within
this study were to help justify such expenditures. The study
also provided a more thorough examination of the program's
overall educational value to its participants.

A review of the literature revealed that no other
studies had been completed to assess the effectiveness of a
corporate career development training program._ Although
evaluation results cannot be borrowed, evaluation techniques

can be replicated. It is the hope of the researcher that

this study will serve as ground work for more research to be
completed in the same area.

Because of the fact that the Career Self Management
program was custom designed for Dow Corning employees, this

assures the study's uniqueness.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study was to determine the effects
of a Career Self Management training program on the perceived
career self management behaviors and perceptions of the pro-
gram participants. Answers to the following questions were
sought:

1. What career self management behavior changes

occurred for program participants?
2. What career self management perception changes

occurred for program participants?

Statement of the Problem
The major problem of this study was to assess the
effectiveness of the Career Self Management training program
jprovided within the Dow Corning Corporation and to determine
'what behavior changes and perception changes occurred for
program participants. There was an analysis of data

codiected from participants in the Career Self Management

program and an analysis of data collected from an equal

number of training program non-participants. The data col-

lected were in respect to behaviors and perceptions regarding

career self management.

Procedures

The major dimensions of the study included:

1.

Securing permission from the Manager of Personnel
and the Manager of Education and Training, Dow
Corning Corporation, to survey the program partici-
pants and non-participants involved in the study.
The construction of the research questionnaire com-
posed of questions relating to the career self
management behaviors and perceptions.

Administering the questionnaire to a pilot group and
using the group's feedback for necessary modifica-
tion of the questionnaire.

Administration of the questionnaire to the Career
Self Management program participants. The question-
naire was administered to this group immediately
before the training program, immediately upon com-
pletion of the program, and approximately four

months later by mail.

5. Administration of the questionnaire to the program
non-participants. The questionnaire was adminis-
tered to this group, which was selected from parti—
cipants of other Dow Corning training programs, dur-
ing the training program from which they were
selected. A second questionnaire was administered
four months later by mail.

6. Tabulation and coding of data in preparation for
statistical analysis.

7. Application of the following statistical procedures:
frequency comparisons; correlation coefficient;
multi-variant step-wise linear regression; percen-
tiles, which generated the mean, standard deviation,
skewness and kurtosis, and the median for each inde-
pendent and dependent variable; and the chi-square
test.

8. Development of conclusions and recommendations in
regard to Dow Corning's Career Self Management
training program, corporate career develOpment pro-
grams in general, and the evaluation of such pro-
grams.

Limitations of the Study

The limitations inherent in the study were:

10

1. Program participants voluntarily registered for the
Career Self Management program.

2. Program non-participants were selected without the
use of a random selection method.

3. The program participants were at various Hay point
levels, from various organizational functions, and
of both exempt and non-exempt status.

4. The researcher had no control of the placement of
participants in the Career Self Management programs.

5. Program participants completed the research
questionnaire while in the training room among peers
and in the presence of the researcher.

6. The researcher was the training instructor for the
Career Self Management program.

7. No attempt was made by the researcher to individual-

ly interview the groups involved in the study.

Statement of the Null Hypotheses
In completing the research study, the following null
hypotheses were tested by the researcher:
1. There will be no significant differences between the
responses of the experimental group to questions on

the pre-test, post-test, and post-post test, as

11

indicated by both correlation coefficient values

of less than .70 or more than —.70 and the chi-
square test at the .05 level of confidence.

There will be no significant differences between the
responses of the control group to questions on the
pre-test and post-test, as indicated by both cor-
relation coefficient values of less than .70 or more
than -.70 and the chi-square test at the .05 level
of confidence.

There will be no significant differences between
responses of the experimental group and responses of
the control group with respect to career self
management behavior changes and perception changes,
as measured by the Career Self Management Question-
naire. Statistical differences will be indicated by
both correlation coefficient values of less than .70
or more than -.70 and the chi-square test at the .05
level of confidence.

There will be no significant differences of the
responses on each set of Career Self Management
Questionnaires with the independent variables of
age, sex, Hay points, organizational function, and

exempt/non-exempt status, as measured by both

12

correlation coefficient values of less than .70 and

more than -.70 and the chi-square test at the .05

level of confidence.

Definition of Terms

In order to clarify the nature of this study, the fol-

lowing terms are defined:

Behavior Change

Career Deve10pment

Career Self
Management

Control Group

Exempt Status!

Experimental Group

Hay Points

Non-Exempt Status

A difference in the actions or
activities of a person, as indicated
by that person.

A life-long process which includes
gathering and assessing information
on work experiences, skills, person—
al traits, interests, and uniqueness
in order to choose career situations
that are satisfying and productive.

Dow Corning Corporation's name for
an employee career development pro-
gram.

The group involved in the study who
were program non-participants.

Classification of an employee who is
not eligible to receive overtime
compensation.

‘The group involved in the study who

were program participants.

Designated measures formulated as
criteria for job level and salary
determination.

Classification of an employee who is
eligible to receive overtime
compensation.

Non-Participant

Organizational
Functions

Paired Sets of
Questionnaires

Participant

Perception Change

Pre-Test (Control
Group)

Pre—Test (Experi-
mental Group)

Post-Post Test
(Experimental
Group)

Post-Test (Control
Group)

Post-Test (Experi-
mental Group)

Set of Question—
naires

13

An individual involved in the study
who did not participate in the
Career Self Management program.

Divisions or departments within the
Dow Corning Corporation, depicting
various types of jobs and job
activities.

Two groups of survey instruments

that are suitable for statistical
comparison.

A learner actively involved in a
training program. '

A difference in the ideas, im-
pressions, or insights held by a
person, as indicated by that person.

The first of two questionnaires
administered to program non-partici-
pants.

Questionnaire administered to the

program participants at the begin-
ning of the Career Self Management
program.

Questionnaire administered to pro-
gram participants at a time inter-
val of four months following the
Career Self Management program.

The second questionnaire administer-
ed to non-participants approximately
four months after the administration
of the first questionnaire.

Questionnaire administered to parti-
cipants immediately following the
Career Self Management program.

A particular group of research sur-
vey instruments, consisting of

14

either the pre-tests, post-tests,
or the post-post tests for the ex-
perimental group, or the pre-tests
or post-tests for the control group.
Training Program A formalized, intense learning
experience of specific length, which
is meant to provide immediate appli-
cation of learning on the job.
Organization of the Study
In Chapter II a review of precedent literature is pro-
vided; methodology and the design of the research are
presented in Chapter III; Chapter IV is an analysis of the

resezarch findings; the summary, conclusions, recommendations,

and ireflections are offered in Chapter V.

CHAPTER I I

REVIEW OF PRECEDENT LITERATURE

Introduction
There has been a paucity of data regarding the evalua-
tion of corporate career development training programs.
This review of precedent literature will include career
development in organizations, corporate career development

programs, and the development and application. of training

evaluation.

Career Development in Organizations

In viewing career development in organizations, London
(1983) outlined the components of career motivation and pro-
POSed relationships among them. The components consist of
individual characteristics organized into the three. domains
Of career identity, career insight, and career resilience,
with corresponding situational characteristics, and career
decisions and behaviors. The relationships among the com-
Ponents are based on prospective and retrospective rational-
fly, with prospective rationality being the process by which
ind ividuals' career decisions and behaviors are affected by
What they believe will happen in the future. Retrospective

15

16

rationality is based on the idea that social learning and
information processing influence individual characteristics.
The importance of different individual characteristics will
change with the salience of corresponding elements of the
situation and one's decisions and behaviors. Testing the
model provides results that are likely to be valuable for
designing new motivational strategies, London concluded.
Danforth and Alden (1983) advocated that organizations
need a career development concept that alleviates the in-
creasing pressure of first-level and middle managers who are
competing for limited numbers of jobs, yet that ensures that
qualified personnel are identified and groomed for top
management. Because of the volume of well-trained, expectant
professionals waiting for management slots, the increased
technical nature of business, and the growing recognition and
acceptance of the job/person fit concept, they proposed dual
career ladders that legitimize career stages for both
managers and technical professionals, suggesting a career
ladder for each one of these two groups. In conjunction with
their dual career track approach, they incorporated the four
career stages of: learner, doer, manager, and mentor. Es-
sentially, they stated, this concept holds that there are

normal progressions through these ascending stages, with

17

required transitions and changes in job structure to accom-
pany the individual's unfolding career needs. After five to
seven years within an organization, an assessment of the per—
son's long-range aptitude and interests in either technical
specialties or generalized management is made. Based on the
assessment, an individual employee begins in-depth develop-

ment.

The authors justified that with the implementation of a
dual-career ladder, an organization will be better equipped
to define the performance that it expects from both pro-
fessionals and managers. For those on the professional
track, it will create opportunities to be rewarded for pro-
fessional achievement in ways that the single-career ladder
has always provided for managers, allowing for both groups
a better match between a person's strengths and capabilities
and the company's needs.

Speaking also to the issue of the job/person fit within
organizations, Walker (1978) explored the risks and benefits
of career development, finding that many executives support
career planning and development as a worthwhile concept but
:fear such a formal program would raise employee expectations
arui anxieties, increase turnover, burden supervisors, and

imply an unrealistic management commitment to career

18

development. Rather than viewing career planning as a risk,
Walker described it as a benefit that results in better
matching of individuals and jobs and improved utilization of
capabilities. His research indicated that some companies
have initiated career planning programs to reduce turnover,
improve the quality of working life, help minimize the chance
of white collar unionization, and improve on-the-job per-
formance. Other companies have adopted career planning pro—
grams to specifically focus on ”achievement motivation train-.
ing" and to help those employees with career expectations
that were too low. Walker continued that career planning
should help employees come to grips with what they want out
of their working lives and translate these wants into realis-
tic action plans that get results with the support of company
resources.

The key to effective career planning appears to be

in developing more realistic—-not raised--career

expectations. Companies that have been successful

in their career planning efforts have guided employees

toward opportunities and resources that are actually

available. (p. 3)

Career planning should not disrupt the functioning of
the organization, Walker concluded, but rather, it should be

.another way to make personal career plans fit into the com-

pany's organizational plans, needs, and ways of doing.

19

business.

Sikula and McKenna (1983) related that the basic problem
the career development process in organizations must face is
the effective and continuous matching of the needs and ex-
pectations of the employer with the needs and expectations of
the employee. The emphasis on career development implies
that as the organization transcends time and alters_ite goals
and missions, certain human resource qualities will be de-
manded and others will become obsolete. They recognized that
for the organization to be certain that the specific skills
and knowledge it requires be present, it must address the
issue of career management and development. The organization
must also realize that to do less is to create an ineffective
and inefficient linkage between itself and its personnel.

Sikula and McKenna presented yet another perspective
with regards to career development in organizations. With
increased worker mobility becoming the norm in many profes-
sional fields, the position of the organization with regard
to contemporary career development changes. They proposed
that as long as the relationship between the individual and
the employer is viewed by both entities as being increas-
ingly temporary, the organization is less powerful in pro-

‘viding the traditional career guidance it once might have

20

achieved. The individual now has the responsibility for
career management. As social and institutional norms regard-
ing permanent work organization linkages have changed, so too
has the ultimate responsibility for career development.

Effective career management should no longer be
viewed as the responsibility of the personnel
department; rather, individuals now must assume
authority and responsibility for their own careers

as they chart out career paths on an inter-organise-
tional basis. What complicates this problem further

is the reality that only a few individuals are both

technically prepared and willing to handle this new
assignment. (p. 90)

Sikula and McKenna concluded that given social and
institutional trends, the burden for career development can
no longer be placed in the hands of the employing organiza-
tion. Rather it will continue to be more and more beneficial
for the individual to assume responsibility. The implica-
tions of the shift will place additional emphasis on the need
for individuals to understand the criteria and processes of

career decision making.

As social norms and trends change with regard to
employment expectations, both the individual and the
organization must remain sensitive to these environ-
mental shifts. Additionally, these changes must be
reflected in both personal and organizational strategies
for effectively linking people to organizations. The,
concept of career self-management is a personal and or-
ganizational employment philosophy which matches employ-

er and employee and job and career expectations.
(9- 97)

21

The concept of individuals managing their own career

planning is also addressed by Wilhelm (1983). He expressed

that people want personal freedom, opportunities for growth

and development, and a chance to make their own choices and

commitments.

management of
Increasingly,
ning of their

Accurate
enormous

They are, therefore, less willing to leave the
their careers solely up to their employers.
they are demanding an active part in the plan-
professional development.

self-assessment requires that one collect
amounts of data for analysis and inter-

pretation, a process that takes considerable time,
effort, and inspiration. Like a physical fitness

regime,

it is a task that's often better accomplished

in a group setting--where momentum and motivation can
be shared and maintained. Because taking stock of
oneself is extremely personal and demanding, a work—
shop setting is essential. Furthermore, having a
person independent of the company in charge can
relieve some of the participants' anxiety because the
process seems less threatening. (p. 85)

Wilhelm adhered to the idea that employees who have

thought about what they want from their careers and who have

been given a chance to express those aspirations are less

likely to leave. With a realistic understanding and appreci-

at ion of what

the company can offer them and with a sense of

how their goals fit with those of their employer, they are

(xften more content to stay. Where immediate advancement is

not possible,

employees may accept a lateral promotion in

22

which they are given two to three years for exposure to a
new idea. In this way, the company is able to retain valued
workers while it awaits the opening of more suitable posi-
tions.

Wilhelm concluded that perhaps the most persuasive
reason for career self management training is the need to
remain competitive. Those companies that recognize the need
to provide employees with satisfying opportunities will have
the decided advantage of a loyal and industrious work force.

Companies willing to engage in comprehensive career

self-management training wind up with more purposeful,

self-assured, productive employees. Instead of bring-
ing on increased turnover, such efforts can boost
companies' stability. The need for more and better
employee career management is clear. Companies ex-
perienced with the process have learned that career
self-management can be highly successful as a motiva-

tor of today's changing work force. (p. 89)

Zenger (1981) agreed that employees should take full
responsibility for their own careers, determining their own
abilities, interests, strengths, and desires for work.
Following that, he focused on becoming acquainted with the
organization and the opportunities that exist within it by
developing an information network. He discussed the im-
portance of looking for a broad career growth experience,

exploring job enrichment or additional job responsibilities,

rather than seeking only the next promotion. Zenger further

23

encouraged aggressively pursuing career opportunities as
they become available within the organization.

Leibowitz and Scholssberg (1982) addressed the issue of
career transitions within organizations and the implications
that, therefore, exist for designing a new set of career
services within the organization's career development frame-
work.

These authors, like those previously noted, expressed
their belief that a balanced career development program may
put the major responsibility on employees for their own
careers; however, organizations must be responsible for
providing conditions in which employees can exercise self-
responsibility, they said.

According to Leibowitz and Scholssberg, critical career
transitions are events that necessitate a change in the
individual's assumptive world or that necessitate changes in
the individual's relationships. Falling into this category
are moves into new jobs or advancements, lateral moves, job
losses, and non-occurrences, which describe situations where
employees have reached transition points because of their
non-movement. The model they proposed emphasized working
with homogeneous groups in which all participants face the

same type of transition and offering them support systems,

24

cognitive information on the issues and feelings associated
with their specific situation, and planning strategies.
Review of the literature indicated that networking, and
particularly, mentoring is a key element in the career pat-
terns of successful employees, especially those who initiate
self responsibility and self management in planning their
lives and careers. Missirian's (1980) research revealed
three characteristic elements which distinguish mentoring
relationships as the highest point on a continuum of sup-
portive relationships. The three elements are: the degree
of power the mentor commands in terms of access to resources,
both material and personal; the level of identification with
the mentor; and the intensity of emotional involvement with
the mentor. Missirian supported the idea that mentoring
relationships, although unique and complex, can be approxi-
mated, if not fully reached, at all levels of the organiza-
tion. Conclusions drawn from Barnier's (1981) study coincide
with Missiarian's evidence, as Barnier concludes that mentor-
ing, or at least supportive relationships, are beneficial,
if not necessary, to the career development of individuals

within the career development framework of organizations.

25

Corporate Career Development Programs

Many organizations are taking greater interest in
helping employees analyze their abilities and interests
through the implementation of career planning activities and
corporate career development programs. LaVan, Mathys, and
Drehmer (1983) identified three reasons for corporations to
institute career development programs. The reasons are:
increased government involvement and intervention in
employee/employer relations; increased employee stress; and
technological advances and innovations within organizations.
The authors contended that career development programs
coupled with personal counseling programs are needed to
assist employees in coping with the stresses of organization-
al change, job pressures, and workrrelated problems.

LaVan, Mathys, and Drehmer advocated that great strides
can be made in employee development by training supervisors
in basic skills such as employee counseling and coaching,
listening, performance appraisal and feedback, mutual goal
setting, and job redesign. This training, they felt, would
enable the supervisors to more effectively provide career
«development assistance to their employees. For this to occur
and for the career development programs to be more widely

accepted, greater line management involvement in the design

26

and implementation of programs seems warranted, they
contended.

In view of the relatively low educational requirements

for the professional counseling staff and lack of

training provided to supervisors involved in counseling,
there appears to be a need for more training. If
measures of effectiveness were developed, they could be
useful in determining the nature and extent of any
additional training required for the provider of

counseling. (p. 146)

”To be effective,” declared Kaye (1981), ”career devel-
opment programs in organizations must be linked to other
human resource activities that are already in place.‘' (p. 36)
Kaye viewed that the most important task of the career devel-
opment practitioner initiating a comprehensive process is
to conceptualize the career development program as a logical,
step-by-step framework and to determine how human resource
development efforts can be supported by and supportive of
each step. She defined a complete career development process
as a cycle that moves sequentially through the six stages of:
preparation, profiling, targeting, strategizing, execution,
and integration. The six-stage career development provides
an integrative element within career development programs
and encourages employees to be proactive.

Kaye also supported the idea that supervisors play an

important role in their employees' career development. They

27

must be willing and able to act as the program participant's
first contact for career development questions, ideas, and
reality-testing. Additionally, supervisors need to be
motivated and rewarded for their contribution, and often
trained in coaching as well.

For the career development program participant, the
practitioner is both guide and advisor. The responsibility
here is to design, manage, and implement interventions that
stimulate enthusiasm and learning. In planning such inter-
ventions, Kaye continued, the practitioner will need to
strike a fine balance between providing structure for devel-
opmental activities and providing latitude for unique indivi-
dual needs and career directions. In the long run, however,
'the major responsibility for moving onward with career devel-
opment rests with each individual.

Kaye had this to say regarding the importance of career
development training programs:

The concerned practitioner could respond to career

development by organizing a few specialized activities,

such as workshops based on the six-stage model.

Clearly, workshops could present appropriate and mean-

ingful profiling, targeting, and strategizing tech-

niques. They could even introduce the execution stage
by describing the availability of learning resources or

by distributing a catalogue of courses. (p. 40)

Baird and Kram (1983) looked at the partnership of the

28

company and employee as it relates within the corporate
career development program structure. They viewed a per-
son's career in stages that are interdependent with his or
her personal needs and the needs of the company. What one
wants and needs from a job, they stated, depends on the
person's career stage, jobs previously held, current posi-
tion, and the direction in which one is moving within the
organization. Baird and Kram concluded that individuals
progress through the particular career stages of establish-
ment, advancement, maintenance, and withdrawal; therefore,
the need for career planning programs is not just at the be-
ginning of one's career. It is an ongoing need as a person
goes through each career stage with all of its continuum of
changes, dilemmas and concerns.

Otte (1982) addressed the integration of career develop-
ment programs into the corporate organization. He advocated
that the influential person could succeed in creating suc-
cessful programs through an integration of career development
activities and various components within the existing organ-
izational framework. The integrated program is more likely
to be successful, but it is also more difficult to establish.
Proposing changes involving other existing organizational

components requires understanding how those components

29

function.

He continued by relating that although career develop-
ment literature strongly endorses the concept of individual
responsibility, if an organization fails to develop employ-
ees to fill future organizational needs (through abdicating
all responsibility for development), the organization will
suffer, as will individuals who find themselves with no place
in it. Providing incentives and services that encourage
individuals to be personally responsible benefits everyone.
He discussed how there must be a vision of a career develop-
ment program which is appropriate to the individual and the
organization:

The vision must include broad program goals, more

specific objectives, and alternate ways of developing

indicators to determine if the objectives have been
achieved. The broad goals can remain constant. Ob-
jectives and ways of reaching them will probably need
to be modified in light of experience, and specific
indicators of program success will probably need to

be negotiated with various persons as the program

evolves. (pp. 30-31)

Otte concluded that the program leader must be prepared
to change proqram design, based on new data from management
or employees. Career development programs can accomplish
many things, but claiming too much will ensure later disap—

pointments. The career development program leader must

patiently and persistently push for change, thoroughly

30

understand the nature of the change that is being attempted,
recognize the implications of the proposed change for exist-
ing organizational components, and be able to secure the
support of key leaders in the organization at all levels.

In conjunction with the same line of thinking, Gillespie
(1983), after researching the role of the corporate educator
in career development, found that although corporate educa-
tors play a strategic role in developing the instructional
component of the career development program, their more en-
compassing role is to facilitate career development as an
educative process that undergirds the sustained productivity
and profitability of the corporation.

Increased effectiveness of program implementation is an
issue addressed by Hanson (1981). Program objectives and
related responsibilities need to be expressed explicitly to
avoid false perceptions that lead to false expectations.
Most employers agree that organizations and individuals
alike benefit when employees build skills and competencies
that are aligned with organizational needs. This philosophy
needs to be well articulated. Attention needs to be given
to the involvement and self esteem of management so that
they completely understand their role within the career de-

velopment program--their responsibilities before program

31

inception, responsibilities during the program, and any
necessary follow-up procedures. Administrative detail and
procedure is also something that cannot be overlooked, for

when it is, program image suffers needlessly.

Development and Application of Training Evaluation

Successful training must meet specific objectives. Yet
this fact has seldom received the practical attention it
deserves. Typically trainers respond to management's request
for help by implementing training programs, and the success
of these programs is determined by looking at the reactions
of the trainees or by looking at a report stating the number
of hours of class, the number of trainees, or the number of
classes or topics. Michalak and Yager (1979) related this
as they also stated valid reasons for evaluating training
programs:

The primary reason for evaluation is to see if the

training program has accomplished its assigned

objectives; that is, to see if the problem that was

identified in the first place has disappeared after

the training. (p. 130)

Another reason for evaluating training programs is to

identify the strengths and weaknesses of the training

activity. The training department ought to be viewed

as a contributor to the bottom line. An evaluation

can help to determine the contribution of the training
process. (p. 130)

Training programs should be evaluated in order that
management can determine the cost/value ratio of the
training program. By focusing on the costs of the
training in terms of time allowed employees off the

job and also out-of—pocket expenses spent on the train—

ing, and the alternate potential of these expenses, an

organization can determine the cost/value ratio of the

program. (p. 130)

Finally, training programs should be evaluated so that

trainers can establish a data base that they can use to

demonstrate the productivity of their department.

(p. 131)

Evaluation can take many approaches. Each of them can
be helpful as long as the objectives and limitations are
understood. Kirkpatrick (1971) divided evaluation into four
separate but related steps: (1) reaction, (2) learning,

(3) behavior change, and (4) results. He stated step one,
reaction, measures participants' immediate reaction to the
training and that it should be done on a regular and
systematic basis. It is the beginning point of evaluation,
though he pointed out that all the steps can make a con-
tribution in determining the effectiveness of a training pro-
gram. Steps two through four (learning, behavior change,

and results) should follow in sequence as knowledge, time,
and money permit. Learning measures skills or knowledges
acquired; behavior change refers to the different action or

performance exhibited by a trainee; and results are measured

in a quantifiable method such as monetary results or a

33

measurement of reduction in absenteeism or turnover.
Coinciding with Kirkpatrick's four techniques, Brethower
and Rummler (1979) address the four levels of evaluation with
four corresponding questions: (1) Do trainees like the
training? (2) Do trainees learn from the training? (3) Do
trainees use what they learn? (4) Does the organization
benefit from the newly learned performance? (p. 16) They
stressed the importance of the evaluator realizing that
training evaluation will probably not be as obvious as lab-
oratory research. They recommend initially obtaining infor-
mation from a small pilot group for the achievement of great-
er control and for obtaining more effectively the necessary
detailed information. Training evaluation, they stated,
should be conducted in the simplest possible way, yet answer
the questions that the organization needs to have answered.
In addition to Kirkpatrick's renowned model, another
widely-accepted evaluation model was developed by Stuffle-
beam (1985) and leading educators serving on the National
Study Committee on Evaluation of Phi Delta Kappa, an inter—
national society of professional educators. The model is
called “CIPP,” developed in reference to four basic types of
evaluation used: context, input, process, and product.

Stufflebeam's CIPP model and the four types of evaluation

34

therein are derived from the four basic types of decisions
made in education: planning, structuring, implementing, and
recycling.

The objective of context evaluation is to define the
institutional context, to identify the target population and
assess its needs, to identify opportunities for addressing

the needs, to diagnose problems underlying the needs, and to

judge whether proposed objectives are sufficiently responsive
to the assessed needs. The objective of input evaluation is
to identify and assess system capabilities, alternative pro-
gram strategies, and the procedural designs for implementing
the strategies, budgets, and schedules. Process evaluation
identifies or predicts in process the defects in design or
provides information for decisions, as well as recording and
judging procedural events and activities. Product evaluation
collects descriptions and judgments of outcomes and reflects
them to objectives, context, input, and process information,
interpreting their worth and merit.

Determining what methods will be used to measure the
final effects of a corporate career development program is
contingent on: the size and sophistication of the organiza-
tion; the number, nature, and accessibility of participants;

and the nature of the job the participants need to perform.

35

Cornwell (1980) offered three basic questions to be asked
regardless of the differences in evaluation techniques:
(1) How accurately did the training program address the exact
requirements of the job? (2) How successfully are the parti-
cipants performing each activity learned in the training
program? and, (3) What consequences have occurred other than
those intended? (PP. 34-36) The first two questions are
answered through the use of well-designed questionnaires to
participants and supervisors, supplemented with observation,
interviews, and an analysis of any available work-reporting
data. The use of information from both a control group and
the experimental group will be most helpful in answering the
third question.

Until good research is provided, management support

will be based primarily on faith and emotions, both

of which can change radically. (p. 11)
This statement was made by Zenger and Hargis (1982) who
discussed that in the collection of data, the three issues
of rigor, relevance, and economy need to be considered.
Rigor refers to the reliability, validity, and precision of
measurement. Relevance connotes a link to organizational
goals; and economy analyzes the trade-off between costs and
benefits. The rewards from such research can be enormous, as

training programs can be fine-tuned in content and

36

methodologY: the training department gains by having a viable
method for justifying its existence and for seeking ways to
increase its influence and visibility; and the training
specialist gains credibility within his or her organization.
Human resource managers across the country seem to
reflect a common attitude about the state of affairs in

training evaluation. After years of being a critical issue.

and in spite of the development of a series of models and
methods, the evaluation of training and development is still
thought to be a nebulous topic. These ideas were expressed
by Galagan (1983) who feels that training evaluation should
be a management information system that will enable manage-
ment to take action; it should not be merely an audit of what
has taken place. She perceives evaluation as meaningful when
agreement exists as to why the evaluation is taking place and
when complete data collection is possible. Meeting an organ-
izational requirement or mandate, making a go/no-go decision
about a program, identifying opportunities and actions for
improving a training program, selling the program, and manag-
ing the training organization are reasons she established for
pursuing training evaluation.

Hartley (1973) looked at corporate training evaluation

from yet another perspective. He indicated that evaluation

37

is not an isolated event done at the end of a training pro-
cess. Pursuing evaluation means questioning not only the
course objectives, but also questioning why the training was
required. In order that evaluation should play its full
part in the training process, people concerned with evalua-
tive techniques should also be concerned with the initial
design of the training program, the setting of objectives,
the analyses involved, and the determination of appropriate
teaching strategies. Evaluation is, therefore, concerned
with the whole training process, not just its outcomes.
Speaking to the interrelationships between course objectives,
teaching methods and evaluation strategies, he reiterated
that different course objectives imply different teaching
strategies and different methods of learning; therefore, they
demand different methods of evaluation. Another factor of
importance to consider, he concluded, is the timing of the
evaluation with respect to course objectives. The advantages
of this type of evaluation are that decision processes are
based on open evidence for inspection and the whole organiza-
tion is involved in improving efficiency.

Alden (1978), Bakken and Bernstein (1982), and Clement
and Aranda (1982) all had similar ideas as they expressed

evaluation as an integrative force throughout the total

38

training process.

Alden (1978) attributed the failure of evaluation
projects to influence the form and substance of training pro-
grams they are appraising to the evaluator's lack of focus.
Before a meaningful evaluation project can be designed,
evaluators need to know if management will even consider mak-
ing a decision about whether or not to change a program or
how it should be changed. They also need to determine what
research questions will provide the data necessary to make
the management decisions and what level of data is practical
to collect and important enough for management to use in the
decision-making process. Also, they must predetermine what
criteria management will use to make the decision. Once
these determinations are made, the evaluator should attempt
to focus the research questions on the critical factors that
will decide the issues--the concern with effectiveness, the
concern with efficiency, and the concern with relevance.

A straight-forward, systematic approach to designing
corporate training evaluation was developed by Bakken and
Bernstein (1982). By identifying the decision makers who
need or desire information about the effectiveness of train-
ing, and by clarifying the goals of training, the trainer

or designer who employs this approach can easily determine

39

which observable outcomes will meet the needs of decision
makers and show whether the objectives of training were

achieved.

We have found this approach to evaluation helpful in
organizing the diverse elements of training so that
we can determine "what to measure" and can answer the
question, "Was training effective?" (p. 51)

Since this approach takes into account the information
needs of decision makers and the objectives of the training
program, these two elements are directives to the appropriate
observable outcomes among learner reactions, knowledge out-
comes, job performance, and organizational and bottom line
results. To be most effective, they concluded, this approach
is applied before training occurs, with the evaluation
strategy being determined during the developmental phase of a
training program.

Clement and Aranda also felt there is a need for
evaluators to be better informed, as most evaluators have
placed little emphasis on important variables beyond the
training course itself. Yet the success of management train-
ing may be contingent upon such variables as the organiza-
tional setting within which the manager attempts to use the
training, the unique characteristics of the manager to be

trained, and the nature of the organizational problem to be

40

solved by the training. To measure effectiveness of manage-
ment training, the training professional must assess the
impact of training on each of these variables. Suggested by
Clement and Aranda is the use of a four dimensional approach
for evaluating the organizational variables involved--the
manager, the subordinate, and the organization as a whole.
The four dimensions are: training results, relative effec-
tiveness of technique, impact of individual differences, and
impact of the environment. What is analyzed with the four'
dimensional approach includes the actual job performance
impact of training, the effective use of training techniques,
the receptiveness of the manager to the training, and the
extent to which the new behavior matches the climate of the
organization.

The aforementioned contingency framework for training
evaluation offers a way for the evaluator to assess program
results in an organizationally relevant way, allowing for
problem-solving and improvements. It can be used by both
the provider and user of training to jointly determine the
training effectiveness, collaborating on what needs to be
accomplished and how it should be done.

As a research guide, the format also allows the trainer

to develop an evaluation design that considers the importance

41

of various elements of the training program.

The four-dimension contingency format to training

evaluation provides a simple, relevant, research-

based way to measure training. It provides a way

for training to justify its existence and for the

manager to justify his or her expenditure of train-

ing dollars. (p. 43)

Two methods of evaluation, formative and summative,
were pointed out by Goldstein (1974). Formative evaluation
is utilized to determine if the program is operating as
originally planned, or if improvements are necessary before
the program is implemented. Summative evaluation, on the
other hand, concerns itself with the evaluation of the final
product and appraisal of the program after implementation.
Thus, formative evaluation stresses tryout and revision pro-
cesses, using primarily process criteria, while summative
evaluation uses outcome criteria to appraise the instruction-
al program.

Mahoney, Jerdee, and Korman (1960) cited two other
distinct evaluation methods: substantive and procedural.
Substantive evaluation is concerned with net effects of the
activity; procedural is concerned with the conformity to
practice certain established standards considered essential

to the achievement of desired effects. Procedural evaluation

is most useful where relationships between procedures and

42

results have been established or where a substantive evalua-
tion is not possible.

Three basic designs for evaluation are found in prac-
tice, they continued. The first of these focuses on the
level of achievement of objectives upon completion of train-
ing activities. A second approach involves measurement both
before and after training which are compared to indicate
change in achievement of objectives associated with training
activities. A third approach involves applications of the
same measures to a control group similar in all respects to
the experimental group undergoing training. Achievement of
the two groups is compared to indicate changes or results
specifically associated with the training.

Two authors dealt with the issue of economics as it
relates to training evaluation. The ultimate goal of all
employee training, stated Rose (1968), is to develop the
abilities of the work force so that the functions of the
organization are performed expertly and at a minimum cost.
To that end, he stated, that the purposes of evaluation are
to determine whether or not the objectives and the content
of training courses are consistent with the mission and cur-
rent needs of the organization, to determine if the objec-

tives are being reached in the most effective and economical

43

way, and if not, what changes should be made.

Comprehensive evaluation, according to Rose, includes:
an assessment of the plan for training, as related to well-
established needs; the methods, instructional materials, and
training aids used for training; and the performance and
achievement of those being trained.

Lott (1977) stated that it is evident that an induce-
ment beyond course quality enhancement is needed if evalua-
tion is to transcend its generally superficial status, and
become a highly intensive and objective exercise through
education and training. By directing evaluation efforts more
consciously and aggressively toward the goal of shortening
courses and reducing costs, Lott believed there exists a
possibility of raising the interest level of business man-
agers, public administrators, and leaders in education and
training with regard to the whole subject of course evalua-
tion. Evaluation will emerge far more rapidly, Lott pointed
out, when top management sees evidence that it can be used to
reduce training costs or stretch available training dollars.

Chapter II has provided precedent literature focused on
career development in organizations, corporate career devel-
opment programs, and the development and application of

training evaluation.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN OF THE RESEARCH

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to determine the effec-

tiveness of a Career Self Management training program within

the Dow Corning Corporation. A survey questionnaire to

assess behavior and perception changes of the program parti-

cipants and non-participants was administered for evaluating

the program's effectiveness. Tested were four null hypothe-

385:

There will be no significant differences between the
responses of the experimental group to questions on
the pre-test, post-test, and post-post test, as
indicated by both correlation coefficient values of
less than .70 and more than -.70 and the chi-square
test at the .05 level of confidence.

There will be no significant differences between the
responses of the control group to questions on the
pre-test and post-test as indicated by both cor-
relation coefficient values of less than .70 and

more than -.70 and the chi-square test at the

44

45

.05 level of confidence.

3. There will be no significant differences between
responses of the experimental group and responses of
the control group with respect to career self man-
agement behavior changes and perception changes, as
indicated by the Career Self Management Question-
naire. Statistical differences will be indicated by
both correlation coefficient values of less than .70
and more than -.70 and the chi-square test at the
.05 level of confidence.

4. There will be no significant differences of the
responses on each set of Career Self Management
Questionnaires with the independent variables of
age, sex, Hay points, organizational function, and
exempt/non-exempt status, as indicated by both cor-
relation coefficient values of more than .70 and
less than —.70 and the chi-square test at the .05
level of confidence.

The impetus for acquiring the data in this study origi-

nated from: (1) a need to determine the program's effective-
ness, based on individuals' behavior and perception changes;

(2) a need for the Dow Corning Corporation to implement an

46

initial evaluation process which could be used as a basis
for further evaluation of other corporate training programs,
and (3) the reactions of the individuals who participated in
the first Career Self Management programs.

The methodology encompassed: securing permission from
the Dow Corning Corporation to conduct the research; con-
structing the research questionnaire; administering the ques-
tionnaire to a pilot group and modifying the questionnaire
accordingly; administering the questionnaire in the form of a
pre-test, a post-test, and a post-post test to individuals in
the experimental group; administering the questionnaire in
the form of a pre-test and a post-test to individuals in the
control group; tabulating and coding the data; analyzing the
data and applying statistical measures; and developing con-

clusions and recommendations.

The Setting
The study was completed within the Dow Corning Corpora-
tion, a Fortune 500 company. Dow Corning has a comprehen-
sive, multi-dimensional Education and Training Department.
The overall objective of Dow Corning's Education and Training
Department is to enhance the knowledge and skill level of Dow

Corning employees so they can maximize their achievement of

47

personal and corporate objectives. An assessment of the
corporation's educational and training needs revealed that
employees needed career development guidance. As a result,
the Career Self Management program was custom designed for
Dow Corning employees and later implemented in April, 1984,
as one of the corporation's ongoing programs offered to both
exempt and non-exempt employees.

The Population

The population of the study consisted of Dow Corning
employees, both male and female of various ages, with various
Hay point levels, and of both exempt and non—exempt status.
Individuals in the population were from the four corporate
functions: Administration; Manufacturing and Engineering;
Marketing and Sales; and Research, Development and Engineer-
ing Services. Data relative to the population are pre-
sented in Table 3.1.

The experimental group included 100 program partici-
pants, who completed the Career Self Management program in
the last three quarters of 1984 and the first quarter of
1985. Included in the control group were 100 program non-
participants who were selected to be part of the study.

This selection was made while these individuals were partici-

pants in other Dow Corning training programs.

Table 3.1

Career_Self Management Population Frequency Comparisons

 

 

 

 

Experimental Control
Pre Post Post-Post Pre Post
Age
20-29 20 20 19 22 20
30-39 41 41 42 45 43
40-49 32 32 32 27 31
50-59 6 6 6 6 6
60+ 1 l l 0 0
Sex
Male 55 5 5
Female 45 4g 33 35 36
Hay Points
134 0 0 0 9 9
166 16 16 16 0 0
196 0 0 0 10 10
233 7 7 6 2 2
276 5 5 6 4 3
340 5 5 5 8 9
435 17 l7 l7 13 13
510 l9 19 19 15 15
600 l3 13 13 17 17
702 ll 11 ll l3 13
824 6 6 6 8 8
994 1 l 1 l 1
Function
1 Admin 28 28 28 21 21
2 M & E 31 31 31 40 40
3 M a S .13 13 13 12 12
4 RDES 2 28 28 27 27
Status
Non-exempt 28 28 28 24 24
Exempt 72 72 72 76 76
1 Administration
2 Manufacturing and Engineering
3 Marketing an Sales .
4 Research, Development, and Engineering Services

 

48

49

The Questionnaire

The research questionnaire was developed to answer the
two basic questions underlying the research: (1) What
career self management behavior changes occurred for program
participants? and, (2) What career self management percep-
tion changes occurred for program participants?

Questions for the Career Self Management Questionnaire
were developed in concert with Richard Leider (1982), design-
er of the Career Self Management program and co-author of the
book used within the program. Leider approved the questions
as being reflective of the instructional objectives of the
training program and the planned outcomes. This approval
focused on the content validity of the instrument, the degree
to which the instrument represents the content that it is
designed to measure. Borg and Gall (1973) stated that con-
tent validation is a particularly important consideration in
selecting an instrument for experiments involving the effect
of training methods.

A pilot study was conducted with a group of Career Self
Management participants. These participants were not part of
this study. Based on constructive feedback from the group,

two items were deleted and the questionnaire was modified

50

with a different layout. Some rewording and some rephrasing
were also accomplished, as per their suggestions. The final
questionnaire can be found in Appendix A. A cover letter
was designed for the pre-test for both groups; another one
for the post—test for the control group and the post-post
test for the experimental group. The cover letters can be
found in Appendices B and C.

The specific objectives of the research questionnaire
were to determine:

(1) How extensively the individual had formulated his/
her career goals;

(2) How extensively the individual had formulated his/
her personal life goals;

(3) The individual's perception of the company's per-
ception of the importance of career growth and development;

(4) The individual's perception of the company's responé
sibility for handling his/her career self management;

(5) The individual's perception of the value of a
career self analysis;

(6) How extensively the individual had assessed his/her
strengths and weaknesses;

(7) How extensively the individual had assessed his/her

life purpose by looking at a combination of his/her personal

I

51

qualities, values, and life issues;

(8) The individual's perception of the importance of a
work values analysis to career and life satisfaction;

(9) The extent the individual had assessed the values
and ideals held to be most important within his/her life;

(10) The individual's perception of the extent to which
things within his/her life are always changing;

(11) The individual's perception of comfortableness in
handling changes in his/her life;

(12) The extent the individual had discussed career and
self development goals and objectives with his/her immediate
supervisor;

(13) The extent the individual had gathered information
for helping to further his/her career growth and self devel-
opment;

(14) The extent to which the individual consulted with
a network of mentors, role models, and intimates in the
process of making career and self development decisions;

(15) The individual's perception of interdependence of
things within his/her life;

(16) How extensively the individual had attempted to keep

his/her life style in balance;

52

(17) The extent to which the individual used his/her
learning style in determining his/her most compatible career
opportunities;

(18) The extent the individual used visualization when
striving toward the accomplishment of a goal or objective;

(19) The extent the individual had investigated possible
career opportunities within the company;

(20) The extent the individual had investigated possible

career Opportunities outside the company.

Data Collection

The research questionnaire, with cover letter, was ad-
ministered to individuals in the experimental group at the
beginning of the Career Self Management programs. The re-
searcher gave a few brief comments regarding the purpose of
the research and the confidentiality afforded to the partici-
pants in terms of their responses. Immediately following the
close of the program, the same participants again completed
the questionnaire. Approximately four months later, a third
questionnaire, with cover letter and a stamped, self-
addressed envelope to the researcher for the return of re-
sponses, was mailed. Follow-up telephone calls were made to

the recipients of the questionnaire who did not initially

53

respond.

The research questionnaire was administered to the
individuals in the control group, the Career Self Management
nonhparticipants, during the time they were trainees in other
Dow Corning programs. The questionnaire had a cover letter
attached; in addition, the researcher gave a brief explana-
tion of the study's purpose and reinforced the fact that
responses would be kept in confidence. A second question-
'naire, cover letter, and return envelope were sent by mail
approximately four months later to the individuals in the
control group. Follow-up telephone calls were also made to

the population of this group who made no initial response.

Data Analysis Procedures

As the questionnaires were returned, the responses
were tabulated. The open-ended questions were recorded and
later categorized. All other data were coded with numerical
value for use with the P-STAT 8 statistical analysis and
Lotus 123 software packages. The software packages were used
on an IBM PC/XT to conduct the following statistical pro-
cedures: \

(1) Frequency comparisons for each set of responses on

each set of questionnaires and for the demographics;

54

(2) Correlation coefficients for each pair of responses
and for each response with all independent variables for each
set of questionnaires;

(3) Correlation coefficients between all possible paired
combinations of independent variables and responses for all
paired combinations of sets of questionnaires;

(4) Multi-variant step-wise linear regression for the
determination of significant differences based upon the tim-
ing of the questionnaire administered, the group to whom it
was administered, and the independent variables of age, sex,
Hay points, organizational function, and exempt/non-exempt
status;

(5) Percentiles, generating the mean, standard devia-
tion, skewness, kurtosis, and the median for each independent
and dependent variable;

(6) Chi-square test to determine the relative signifi-
cance of differences between responses to the same questions
on different sets of questionnaires.

Chapter III has presented data on the setting, the
population, the development and validation of the question-
naire, the data collection, and the analysis procedures and

techniques.

CHAPTER IV

THE FINDINGS

Introduction
The major purpose of this study was to assess the ef-
fectiveness of the Career Self Management training program
provided within the Dow Corning Corporation. There was an

analysis of data collected from 100 participants in the Ca-

reer Self Management program and an analysis of data collect—
ed from 100 training program non-participants. The data were
in respect to behaviors and perceptions regarding career self
management. Answers to the following research questions were
sought:
1. What career self management behavior changes
occurred for program participants?
2. What career self management perception changes
occurred for program participants?
The major dimensions of the study included:
1. Securing permission from the Manager of Personnel
and the Manager of Education and Training, Dow Corn-
ing Corporation, to survey the program participants

and non-participants involved in the study.

55

56

The construction of the research questionnaire com-
posed of questions relating to the career self
management behaviors and perceptions.

Administering the questionnaire to a pilot group and
using the group's feedback for necessary modifica-
tion of the questionnaire.

Administration of the questionnaire to the Career
Self Management program participants. The question—
naire was administered to this group immediately
before the training program, immediately upon com-
pletion of the program, and approximately four
months later by mail.

Administration of the questionnaire to the program
non-participants. The questionnaire was adminis-
tered to this group, which was selected from parti-
cipants of other Dow Corning training programs, dur-
ing the training program from which they were
selected. A second questionnaire was administered
four months later by mail.

Tabulation and coding of data to prepare data for
statistical analysis.

Application of the following statistical procedures:

57

frequency comparisons; correlation coefficient;
multi-variant step-wise linear regression;
percentiles, which generated the mean, standard
deviation, skewness and kurtosis, and the median for
each independent and dependent variable; and the
chi-square test.

Development of implications and recommendations in
regard to possible program redesign and greater

overall program effectiveness.

In completing the research, the following null hypo-

theses were tested:

1.

There will be no significant differences between the
responses of the experimental group to questions on
the pre-test, post-test, and post-post test, as
indicated by both correlation coefficient values

of less than .70 and more than -.70 and the chi-
square test at the .05 level of confidence.

There will be no significant differences between the
responses of the control group to questions on the
pre-test and post-test, as indicated by both cor-
relation coefficient values of less than .70 and
more than -.70 and the chi-square test at the .05

level of confidence.

58

3. There will be no significant differences between
responses of the experimental group and responses of
the control group with respect to career self
management behavior changes and perception changes,
as measured by the Career Self Management Question-
naire. Statistical differences will be indicated by
both correlation coefficient values of less than .70
and more than -.70 and the chi-square test at the
.05 level of confidence.

4. There will be no significant differences of the
responses on each set of Career Self Management
Questionnaires with the independent variables of
age, sex, Hay points, organizational function, and
exempt/non-exempt status, as indicated by both cor-
relation coefficient values of less than .70 and
more than -.70 and the chi-square test at the .05
level of confidence.

Descriptions of the statistical analyses used to test

the hypotheses are as follows:

Frequency comparisons measured how frequently each re-

sponse was recorded for each question within a set of ques-
tionnaires. This procedure provided the first analysis of

the data and was a necessary step before applying more

sophisticated statistical techniques.

Correlation coefficients measured the degree of linear
relationship between two variables which were paired. When
one variable increased, the second may also have increased,
resulting in a positive correlation coefficient. If the
second variable decreased when the first increased this re-
sulted in a negative correlation coefficient. The absolute
value of the correlation coefficient indicated how strong
a relationship existed. A correlation c0efficient of 1.0 or
-l.0 indicated a perfect relationship between the paired
variables. A correlation coefficient of 0.0 indicated that
no linear relationship existed. A correlation coefficient
with a value between -.70 and .70 did not indicate a strong
relationship.

Regression analysis considered the relationship of a
dependent variable to one or more independent variables.
The multiple step-wise linear regression procedure fit a
linear equation to observed values of the dependent and in-
dependent variables by adding the independent variables one
at a time and testing the significance of their inclusion in
the equation. The goal of a step-wise regression was to in-
clude only the independent variables which contributed sig-

nificantly to the definition of the relationship with the

60

dependent variable. The P-STAT procedures required a matrix
of the correlation coefficients between pairs of variables.
This matrix was prepared by the P-STAT correlate procedure.

Descriptive statistics summarized the values of a vari-
able in a sample and permitted an immediate check of the
surface validity of the input data. The P-STAT percentiles
procedure produced values for the high, low, mean, standard
deviation, skewness, kurtosis, and median for each variable.
This information was used to validate the data entry step of
the analyses.

The chi-square test was used to test the null hypothe-
ses. A two way chi-square with two independent variables
with two levels each was used. This procedure, when coupled
with a standard table of chi-square values, provided the in-
formation necessary to determine which questions had statis-
tically significant different responses on different sets of

questionnaires.

Career Self Management Program Research Findings

Following is a listing of each of the Career Self Man-
agement questions and the corresponding research findings.
The findings are based on the frequency comparison of answers

as listed here for each question. (Composite frequency

61
comparisons for all questions Can be found in Appendix D.)

Development of Career Goals

Question 1. Do you presently have any career goals? If your
answer is ”YES,“ please list one or two of your career goals
here:

 

Table 4.1

Frequengy Comparisons With Alpha Levels-:Questionwl

 

EXPERIMENTAL ‘CONTROL
PRE POST POST-POST PRE POST

 

 

NO 21 8 9 17 14
YES 78 91 91 83 86

alpha of PRE

EXPERIMENTAL

with indicated

column *.025 *.05

alpha of POST

EXPERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .975

alpha of PRE

CONTROL with

POST CONTROL .50

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

The experimental group, prior to the training program,
was comparable to the control group in the response to this

question with 78% and 83% of the respondents, respectively,

62

having career goals (see Table 4.1). Immediately after the
program, 91% of the experimental group had established career
goals, with the same percentage being maintained after a
four-month period of time. These data indicated that at that
time 9% of the experimental group had no career goals.

The data revealed a significant difference between
responses on the pre-test and the post-test and a significant
difference between responses on the pre-test and post-post
test within the experimental group. These findings, there-
fore, reject Hypothesis tl. Because there were no signifi-
cant differences between the responses on the pre-test and
the post-test within the control group, and there were
significant differences between responses on the pre-test and
responses on the post-post test within the experimental
group, these findings also reject Hypothesis #3.

The career goals listed by both the participants and
non-participants were varied with the individuals' answers.
However, the goals became more specific for the participants

after completing the program.

63

Development of Personal Goals

Qpestion 2. Do you presently have any personal life goals?
If your answer is ”YES," please list one or two of your per-
sonal life goals here:

Table 4.2

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels--gpestion 2

EXPERIMENTAL c ugnog
en's "—38“? 'r '“W- mg

no . 13 7 9 12 10
yes 87 92 91 87 90

 

alpha of PRE

EXPERIMENTAL

with indicated

column .25 .25

alpha of POST

EXPERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .75

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL .75

 

Prior to the program, 87% of the participants in the
experimental group had formulated personal life goals; four
months later the number had increased to 91% (see Table 4.2).
A comparable number of non-participants had also formulated

goals, with 87% reporting goals in the pre-control group and

64

90% in the post-control group. These changes, however, were
not statistically significant.

For both program participants and non-participants the
personal life goals listed focused on the following themes:
spirituality, the church, and the Christian ethic; education
for themselves and their children; financial security; family
life; and personal happiness. After completion of the pro-
gram, participants generally expressed their personal life

goals more specifically.

Perception of Company's Importance Placed on Career Growth
Statistically, there were no significant differences
revealed in the responses within either the experimental
group or the control group as to the extent they believed
the company considered career growth and development to be
important (see Table 4.3). However, there were five more
respondents who, immediately after the program, felt that
the company considered career growth and self development
to be important to a ”great extent" or a "very great extent.”
The number of responses from the experimental group for the
same answer categories decreased by nine after a four-month

period of time.

65

Perception of Company's Importance Placed on Career Growth

uestion 3. To what extent do you believe the company con-
s1ders your career growth and self development to be impor-
tant?

 

Table 4.3

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels--Question 3

- H 7A.- L“... _, '\x 44‘jxts’ ..L

 

EXPERIMENTAL ggggggg
PRE POST POST-POST E
VERY GREAT 2 3 3 7 5
GREAT 30 34 25 38 33
SOME 50 50 55 45 48
LITTLE 10 11 10 7 7
VERY LITTLE 6 2 5 3 5
NONE 1 0 2 0 2

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

alpha of PRE

EXPERIMENTAL

with indicated

column .50 .50

alpha of POST

EXPERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .10

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL .25

 

66

Assignment of Self Responsibility for Career

Qpestion 4. Which of the following represents how you feel
the responsibility for your career should be divided between
the company and you?

 

Table 4.4

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels-jguestion 4

 

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL

PRE POST POST-POST PRE POST
COMPANY gpp

100% 0% 0 o 0 0 0
80% 20% 2 5 1 4 2
60% 40% 8 7 3 16 11
50% 50% 35 17 31 39 45
40% 60% 26 25 31 23 23
20% 80% 25 36 41 18 17
0% 100% 4 9 3 0 2

for "YOU" greater than or equal to 80%

alpha of PRE

EXPERIMENTAL

with indicated

column *.01 *.025

alpha of POST

EXPERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .25

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL .95

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

 

67

After the Career Self Management training program, the
participants indicated they assumed more responsibility for
their careers (see Table 4.4). Prior to the program, 29% of
the experimental group respondents assigned self responsibil-
ity for their career at 80% or more. After participation in
the program, 45% answered in this way. The change in atti-
tude was not temporary, as post-post test responses four
months later indicated that 44% of the participants still
felt that the self responsibility was at 80% or more. The
control group's responses remained somewhat consistent with
time, as 18% and 19% of the control group answered in this
manner on the pre-test and post-test respectively.

The data revealed a significant difference between
responses on the pre-test and post-test within the experi-
mental group. There was also a significant difference
between responses on the pre-test and the post-post test of
the experimental group participants. These findings reject,
therefore, Hypothesis #1. Hypothesis #3 is also rejected
with the significant difference existing between the pre-test
and post-post test responses within the experimental group
and no significant differences existing between the pre-test

and post-test responses of the control group.

68

Perception of Value in Analyzing One's Career

Qpestion 5. To what extent do you believe there is value in

 

analyzing your career?

Table 4.5

Frequencpropparisons With Alpha Levels--Question 5

 

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL

PRE POST POST-POST
VERY GREAT 38 41 43
GREAT . 48 46 45
SOME 13 12 9
LITTLE 0 l 2
VERY LITTLE 0 0 1
NOT AT ALL 0 0 0
for GREAT and VERY GREAT
alpha of PRE
EXPERIMENTAL
with indicated
column .75 .975
alpha of POST
EXPERIMENTAL
with POST-POST
EXPERIMENTAL .995

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL

 

CONTROL
PRE POST
33 29
42 44
21 23
2 4
0 0
0 . 0

.50

 

The experimental group was more involved in career

analysis than the control group, as evidenced by the 86%

to 88% range of participants in the experimental group

69

who answered "very great extent” or "great extent” during the
four-month period, versus the 73% to 75% range of control
group respondents answering the same way during the same time
period (see Table 4.5). These findings were consistent with
the fact that the experimental group volunteered to partici-
pate in the training program. Differences in responses to

this question, however, are not statistically significant.

Assessment of Strengths and Weaknesses

Prior to the training program, 75% of the experimental
group indicated they had assessed their strengths and weak-
nesses (see Table 4.6). The number increased to 93% and 90%
respectively for the responses to the post-test and post-post
test. Within the control group, the numbers remained fairly
stable.

There was a significant difference between responses on
the experimental group's pre-test and post-test, as well as
a significant difference between responses on the pre-test
and post-post test. Therefore, these data reject Hypothesis
#1. Because there was no significant difference between the
pre-test and post-test responses within the control group
and a significant difference did exist between the responses

of the pre-test and post-post test of the experimental group,

70

Hypothesis #3 is also rejected by these data.

The strengths and weaknesses listed varied widely within
both the experimental and control groups. After completion
of the Career Self Management program, participants generally
were able to list a greater number of their strengths and

weaknesses, however.

Assessment of Strengths and Weaknesses

Question 6. Have you recently assessed your own strengths
and weaknesses? If your answer is "YES,” please list one or
two of your strengths and one or two of your weaknesses here:

 

Table 4.6

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels-:Question 6

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL
PRE POST POST-POST PRE POST

 

NO 24 7 9 23 27
YES 75 93 90 77 72

alpha of PRE

EXPERIMENTAL

with indicated

column *.005 *.01

alpha of POST

EXPERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .90

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL .50

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

 

71

Assessment of Life Purpose

Question 7. To what extent have you assessed your life pur-
oking at a comb1nat1on of your personal qua11t1es

and your values?

Table 4.7

Frequencpromparisons With Alpha Levels-—Question 7

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL
' POST—POST

 

POST
14
42

VERY GREAT
GREAT

SOME

LITTLE

VERY LITTLE
NONE

U)
\i

bmnH
hmwwmo

ONU'I

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

alpha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

with 1nd1cated

column *.005

a1 ha of POST
EX ERIMENTAL
with POST-POST
EXPERIMENTAL

al ha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL

for LITTLE, VERY LITTLE, and NONE

a1 ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

with 1nd1cated

column *.005

a1 ha of POST
EX ERIMENTAL
w1th POST-POST
EXPERIMENTAL

alpha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL

*Significant at the .05 level

cmsw
oooquo
HbN

[0:50)QO
HDN
5150-1me

*.005

.90

.95

*.005

.75

.75
of confidence

 

72

There was an increase of the "great" and ”very great"
responses from 22% prior to the program to 51% immediately
after the program (see Table 4.7). The same responses four
months later remained near the post-program level at 53%.
Conversely, prior to the program, 25% of the respondents in
the experimental group replied with answers less than or
equal to "little." This number decreased to 7% post—program
and 9% after the four-month period of time.

The data revealed a significant difference between
responses on both the pre-test and post-test and the pre-
test and post-post test within the experimental group. These
findings reject Hypothesis #1. With a significant difference
existing between pre-test and post-post test responses within
the experimental group and no significant differences exist-
ing between the pre-test and post-test responses within the

control group, these findings also reject Hypothesis #3.

Importance of Analyzing Work Values
Responses to Question 8 revealed a temporary change
(see Table 4.8). Seventy-five percent of the experimental
group, prior to the program, indicated they felt to a "great
extent" or a "very great extent" that it was important to an-
alyze work values. Post program the number increased to 89%.
After the four-month time period, however, there was a de-

crease to 74%. No significant changes occurred within the

73

Importance of Analyzing Work Values

Question 8. To what extent do you feel that it is important
to analyze your work values in order to have career and life
satisfaction?

 

Table 4.8

Frequencpromparisons With Alpha Levels-jQuestion 8

 

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL

PRE POST POST-POST PRE POST
VERY GREAT 20 30 19 18 17
GREAT, 55 59 55 54 55
SOME 25 11 26 26 25
LITTLE 0 O 0 l 0
VERY LITTLE 0 0 0 1 2
NONE O 0 0 0 0

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

alpha of PRE

EXPERIMENTAL

with indicated

column *.025 .995

alpha of POST

EXPERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL *.025

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL .95

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

 

74

control group.

There was a significant difference between responses on
both the experimental group's pre-test and post-test and the
group's post-test and post-post test. There was no signifi-
cant difference between the pre-test and the post-post test
of the experimental group or between the pre-test and post-
test of the control group. With these findings, Hypothesis

#1 is rejected.

Assessment of Values and Ideals

Post-program level of participants who had assessed
their values and ideals was 88%, as compared to the 53% who
indicated they had done the assessment prior to the program
(see Table 4.9). The post-program level remained somewhat
stable, with a slight decrease to 85% after a four-month
period of time.

There is a significant difference between responses on
both the pre-test and post-test and the pre-test and post-
post test within the experimental group. These findings
reject Hypothesis #1. With a significant difference existing
between the pre-test and the post-post test within the
experimental group and no significant difference evident
between the control group's pre-test and post-test responses,
findings here also reject Hypothesis #3.

For both program participants and non-participants the

75

values and ideals listed focused on the following themes:
the family; the Christian ethic, the church, and Christian

living; and economic security.

Assessment of Values and Ideals

Question 9. Have you recently assessed the values and ideals
you hold to be most important within your life? If your an-
swer is "YES,” please list here some of those values and
ideals: -

 

Table 4.9

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels--Question 9

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL
PRE POST POST-POST PRE POST

 

 

NO 46 ' 12 15 '39 37
YES 53 88 85 60 63

alpha of PRE

EXPERIMENTAL

with indicated

column *.005 *.005

alpha of POST

EXPERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .50

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL .75

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

 

76

Awareness that Life is ”Always Changing"

Prior to the program, 53% of the respondents in the ex-
perimental group indicated that to a ”great extent” or a
”very great extent" they felt their life was "always chang-
ing" (see Table 4.10). Seventy-six percent of post-program
responses were in these categories; four months later there
was a decrease to 64%. The number responding to "little" or
”very little” decreased from 12% pre-program to 2% for both
the post-test and post-post test. Any changes over time
within the control group were very slight.

The data revealed a significant difference between
responses on the pre-test and post-test of the experimental
group, in regard to ”great" and ”very great" responses.

There was also a significant difference between responses on
both the pre-test and post-test and the pre-test and post-
post test when statistically analyzing the responses of ”lit-
tle' or less than "little." There was no significant differ-
ence between the pre-test and post-test of the control group.

These findings, therefore, reject Hypotheses #1 and #3.

Comfortableness in Handling Personal and Career Changes
Thirty-six percent of the program participants who,
prior to the program, felt comfortable to a "great extent” or

a "very great extent" about handling personal and career

changes increased to 57% immediately after the program

Awareness that Life is ”Always Changing"

Question 10. iTo?¥hat extent do you feel that your life is

ng ng

Table 4.10

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels-~Qpestion 10

77

 

EXPERIMENTAL

BUST

22

VERY GREAT
GREAT 3

SOME

LITTLE

VERY LITTLE
NOT

WWI-H
OQGU‘IGN
OHI-‘Nnb

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

al ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th 1nd1cated

column *.005

a1 ha of POST
EX ERIMENTAL
w1th POST-POST
EXPERIMENTAL

al ha of PRE
CO TROL w1th
POST CONTROL

for LITTLE, VERY LITTLE, and NONE

a1 ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

with indicated

column *.025

a1 ha of POST
EX ERIMENTAL
with POST-POST
EXPERIMENTAL

al ha of PRE
CO TROL w1th
POST CONTROL

*Significant at the .05 level

UhN
owbho

.10

*.05

*.025

.50

of confidence

CONTROL

UhH

OMDH

bub

HMO-b

.75

.75

 

78

Comfortableness in Handling Personal and Career Changes

uestion 11. To what extent do you feel comfortable about
Handrtfig‘pErsonal and career changes?

Table 4.11
Frequencpromparisons With Alpha Levels--Question ll

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL
PRE’ POST POST=POST
VERY GREAT 9 12 ll 9 4
GREAT 27 45 38 26 49
SOME 52 41 4 ; 40
LITTLE 10 l 3
VERY LITTLE l l 0 3
NONE l 0 0 l l

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

a1 ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th Indicated

column *.005 *.05

a1 ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th POST—POST

EXPERIMENTAL .25

al ha of PRE
CO TROL w1th
POST CONTROL .25

for LITTLE, VERY LITTLE, and NONE

a1 ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

with indicated

column *.025 .25

a1 ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .10

al ha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL .95

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

 

79

(see Table 4.11). Post-post tests showed that number de-
creasing to 49%. There was an increase from 45% to 53% of
the control group who responded in the same manner on the
pre-test and post-test, respectively.

There was a significant difference between responses on
the experimental group's pre-test and post-test and between
the pre-test and post-post test when analyzing the responses
that are equal to or greater than “great." When analyzing
the responses of "little" or less than "little," there was
also a significant difference between responses on the pre-
test and post-test of the experimental group. These findings
reject Hypothesis #1. There were no statistically signifi-

cant changes within the control group.

Discussion of Career Goals with Supervisor
In this area, very little change occurred in responses
after participation in the training program (see Table 4.12).
There also was very little difference in the responses from
the control group. Statistically, any differences in re-

sponses were not significant.

Gathering Career Information
The pre-program number of 15% who had gathered career
growth and self development information to a ”great” or
”very great" extent increased to 35% post-program (see Table
4.13). The number increased slightly to 38% after the four-

month period of time. Significant changes were not noted

Discussion of Career Goals with Supervisor

80

Question 12. TO what extent have you discussed career and
self development goals and objectives with your supervisor?

 

Table 4.12

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels--Question l2

 

VERY GREAT
GREAT

SOME

LITTLE

VERY LITTLE
NONE

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

alpha of PRE
EXPERIMENTAL
with indicated
column

alpha Of POST
EXPERIMENTAL
with POST-POST
EXPERIMENTAL

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL

PRE POST POST-POST
6 3 6
16 l9 19
49 55 56
18 9 9
6 6 5
5 8 5
.75 .50
.50

CONTROL
PRE POST
7 4
25 22
44 49
ll 13
10 5
3 7
.25

 

81

Gathering Career Information

uestion 13. To what extent have you gathered information
to further your career growth and self develop-
ment? nless your answer is "not a all ” please list here
the sources from which you Obtained the 1nformat1on.

Table 4.13
Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels--Question l3

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL
PRE* POST IPOST=POST

VERY GREAT 3 5 l3 5 4
GREAT 12 30 25 12 19
SOME 53 53 51 is i
LITTLE 21 9 6

VERY LITTLE 8 3 3 10 l
NONE 2 0 2 3 4

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

a1 ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th 1nd1cated

column *.005 *.005

al ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .75

al ha of PRE
CO TROL w1th
POST CONTROL .25

for LITTLE, VERY LITTLE, and NONE

al ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th 1nd1cated

column *.005 *.005

a1 ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .95

a1 ha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL .25

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

 

82

within the control group.

There was a significant difference between responses on
both the pre-test and post—test and the pre-test and post-
post test within the experimental group. These differences
were evident when analyzing both the responses relating to
”great” and "little." There was not a significant difference
between responses on the pre-test and post-test of the con-
trol group. Therefore, these findings reject both Hypothesis
#1 and Hypothesis #3.

Sources of information listed by the experimental and
control groups included: in-house training programs; college
classes; peers, supervisors, and managers; professional jour-
nals and organizations; and various library resources. Upon
completion of the Career Self Management program, partici-
pants frequently listed the program as a primary source of
information for helping to further their career growth and

self development.

_Consultation with a Support Network
There was a small increase in consultation within the
experimental group after the four-month period of time,
although the change was not statistically significant

(see Table 4.14). The control group showed no significant

change.

Consultation with a Support Network

Qpestion 14. To what extent do you consult with your own

 

network of mentors,

Table 4.14

83

role models, and intimates when dealing
with your career and self development?

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels--Qpestion 14

 

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL

PRE POST POST-POST
VERY GREAT 2 3 2
GREAT 14 12 23
SOME 40 49 39
LITTLE 22 20 19
VERY LITTLE 16 12 11
NONE 6 4 6
for GREAT and VERY GREAT
alpha of PRE
EXPERIMENTAL
with indicated
column .95 .10
alpha of POST
EXPERIMENTAL
with POST-POST
EXPERIMENTAL .10

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL

_pCONTROL
PRE POST
5 3
l8 17
50 46
14 21
7 7
6 5
.25

 

Interdependence of Life Areas

uestion 15. To what extent do you feel that all parts of
gvur‘rtfe—are interdependent?

Table 4.15

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels--Question 15

84

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL
VERY GREAT 23 32 24 21
GREAT .45 50 50 2
SOME 24 13 28 b
LITTLE 5
VERY LITTLE 3 1 3 14
NONE O 0 0 2

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

a1 ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

with indicated

column *.05 .25

a1 ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .10

al ha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL

for LITTLE, VERY LITTLE, and NONE ‘

al ha of PRE

EX ER MENTAL

with ndicated

column .25 .10

al ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .95

a1 ha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

”DH
H-bml-“O

.09

.09

 

85

Greater interdependence within one's life was indicated
by participants immediately following the program (see Table
4.15). Prior to the program, 68% responded to "great" or
"very great;' these responses increased to 82% immediately
following the program. Four months later 74% responded in
this way.

There was a significant difference between responses on
the pre-test and post-test of the experimental group. There-
fore, these findings reject Hypothesis #1. Although there
were no significant differences (alpha of .05 or less) be-
tween the responses on the pre-test and post-test within the
control group, this question with an alpha of .09 had the
smallest alpha of the control group. Therefore, this ques-
tion was closer to a rejection of Hypothesis #2 than any

other question on the Career Self Management questionnaire.

Attempt at Keeping Balanced Life Style

A change in the extent that a balanced life style was
attempted, although not significant, was noted in the
experimental group (see Table 4.16). Fifty—five percent of
the respondents stated they attempted to keep a balanced life
style to a ”very great extent" or a ”great extent” after the
four-month period of time. This percent is in contrast to
the 49% who responded the same way prior to the program.

Statistically, no change was noted in the control group.

86

Attempt at Keeping Balanced Life Style

Question 16. To what extent do you attempt to keep a
balanced life style?

 

Table 4.16

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels-:Question l6

 

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL

PRE POST POST-POST PRE POST
VERY GREAT 11 13 16 15 15
GREAT 38 35 38 40 38
SOME 45 44 39 37 41
LITTLE 3 7 5 6 5
VERY LITTLE 3 1 l 1 1
NONE O 0 0 1 0

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

alpha of PRE

EXPERIMENTAL

with indicated

column .95 .50

alpha of POST

EXPERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .25

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL .75

 

Use of "Learning Style”

87

uestion 17. To what extent do you use your,'learning style"
you to determine your most compatible career

opportuni ies?

Table 4.17

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels::Question l7

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL

”POST -
VERY GREAT 5 6 6
GREAT 16 41 43
SOME 49 43 38
LITTLE 16 8 7
VERY LITTLE 10 2 3
NONE 4 0 3

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

al ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th 1nd1cated

column *.005 *.005

a1 ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .75

alpha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL

for LITTLE, VERY LITTLE, and NONE

a1 ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

with indicated

column *.005 *.01

a1 ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .50

a1 ha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

CONTROL
3 4
34 31
48 44
8 11
4 4
3 4
.95
.50

 

88

An increase in the use of the participants' learning
styles was observed after completion of the Career Self
Management program (see Table 4.17). Prior to the program,
21% indicated they used their learning styles to a ”great“ or
"very great” extent. Immediately after the program, 47% an-
swered in that manner. There was no significant change re-
corded for the control group.

There was a significant difference between responses on
both the pre-test and post-test and the pre-test and post-
post test within the experimental group when analyzing the
responses relating to ”great” or "very great.“ In an analy-
sis of responses relating to "little" or less than ”little"
there was a significant difference between responses on the
pre-test and post-test and a significant difference between
responses on the pre-test and the post-post test. These

data reject Hypotheses #l and #3.

Use of "Visualization"

There was an increased application of visualization in
post-program situations (see Table 4.18). Prior to the pro-
gram, 30% of the experimental group responded to "almost al-
ways“ and "much of the time." Immediately after the program,
33% responded in this manner; four months later, 42% respond-
ed to those two answers. The increase, however, was not

statistically significant. The responses of ”not very

Use of "Visualization”

Quegtion 18. How often do you use the technique of

. n striv1ng towar
Objective?

Table 4.18

'visua

the accomplishment of a goal

Frequency;COmparisons With Alpha Levels--Question 18

89

1i-

0!

 

EXPERIMENTAL

SOMETIMES
NOT OFTEN
ALMOST NEVER
NEVER

for MUCH and ALWAYS

al ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th 1nd1cated

column .75 .10

a1 ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .10

a1 ha of PRE
CO TROL w1th
POST CONTROL

for NOT OFTEN, ALMOST NEVER, and NEVER

a1 ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

w1th 1nd1cated

column .10 *.01

a1 ha of POST

EX ERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .10

al ha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL

2
9
|-<
m
HHWN a
uommnm

5
ii 3
17 i
5
l

Obi-400$

*Significant at the .05 level of confidence

RUST POST‘PUST

MN

GQWUVD

CONTROL

HUMP
DOWOO

.95

.75

 

90

often,“ ”almost never,” and "never," declined from 32% to
23%, pre-test to post-test, then finally to 15% on the post-
post test. This was a significant difference between the re-
sponses on the pre-test and post-post test of the experimen-
tal group. The control group showed no statistically signif-
icant change in its use of the technique. These data reject

Hypothesis #1 and Hypothesis #3.

Investigation of Career Opportunities Within Company

Participants in the Career Self Management program in-
creased their investigation Of in-house possibilities (see
Table 4.19). A lasting change was noted as the ”great“ and
"very great" responses rose from 19% prior to the program, to
24% immediately after the program, to 36% four months later.
The gain in these responses was matched by a decrease in re-
sponses to ”little” or less than "little."

No significant change was noted in the control group's
responses. However, within the experimental group there was
a significant difference between responses on the pre-test
and the post-post test when analyzing the responses of
”great” and ”very great." In regard to responses relating to
”little" and less than “little," there were significant dif-
ferences between responses on the pre-test and post-test and
the pre-test and post-post test. These findings reject

Hypothesis #1 and Hypothesis #3.

91

Investigation of Career Opportunities Within Company

Question 19. To what extent have you igv

rtunities within the company

Table 4.19

estigated possible

Frequency Comparisons With Alpha Levels--Qpestion l9

 

EXPERIMENTAL

‘PUST
VERY GREAT
GREAT

SOME

LITTLE

VERY LITTLE
NONE

tmbH

qunqw
HUWJ

l-‘UthbQQ

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

al ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

with indicated

column .25

al ha of POST
EX ERIMENTAL
with POST-POST
EXPERIMENTAL

al ha of RE
CO TROL w th
POST CONTROL

for LITTLE, VERY LITTLE, and NONE

al ha of PRE

EX ERIMENTAL

with 1nd1cated

column *.05

alpha of POST
EX ERIMENTAL
w1th POST-POST
EXPERIMENTAL

al ha of PRE
CO TROL with
POST CONTROL

*Significant at the .05 level

IbN
hWhQQ

*.025

.10

*.025

.75

of confidence

CONTROL
5 7
19 16
a; 43
2 3
.95
.95

 

92

Investigation of Career Opportunities Outside Company

Qpestion 20. To what extent have you investigated possible
career Opportunities outside of the company?

 

Table 4.20

Frequency_Comparisons With Alpha Levels-:Question 20

 

 

 

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL

PRE POST POST-POST PRE POST
VERY GREAT 0 O 3 2 3
GREAT 4 7 9 3 2
SOME 31 39 28 30 23
LITTLE 20 19 22 21 17
VERY LITTLE 25 18 16 18 27
NONE 20 17 22 26 27

for GREAT and VERY GREAT

alpha of PRE

EXPERIMENTAL

with indicated

column .50 .07

alpha of POST

EXPERIMENTAL

with POST-POST

EXPERIMENTAL .25

alpha of PRE
CONTROL with
POST CONTROL .90

 

The number of participants in the experimental group
who investigated outside career opportunities to a "great

extent" or a "very great extent“ four months after the

93

training program was 8% versus the 4% who had done so prior
to the program (see Table 4.20). This increase was not
significant. The control group's responses within the same
answer categories remained at the same number over time.

A further statistical analysis of the research data
relating to percentiles for the responses within each set of
questionnaires was completed. This analysis generated the
mean, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis, and the
median for each dependent and independent variable. These
findings can be found in Appendices E through I.

In regard to Null Hypothesis #1, Career Self Management
Questionnaire questions 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, ll, 13, 15, 17,
18, and 19 did reveal significant differences among the
responses of the experimental group to questions on the pre-
test, post-test, and post-post test, as indicated by the chi-
square tests with alpha values of .05 or less. Although
there were significant differences, there were no strong
linear relationships among the responses to the three
questionnaires. The correlation coefficients of all combina-
tions of paired responses were less than .70 and more than
—.70.

Research findings did not reject Null Hypothesis #2, as

there were no significant differences between the responses

94

of the control group to questions on the pre-test and post-
test, as indicated by both the correlation coefficients which
were less than .70 and more than -.70 and the chi-square
tests with alpha values of more than .05.

In testing Null Hypothesis #3, Career Self Management
Questionnaire questions 1, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, l3, 17, 18, and 19
were found to reject this null hypothesis, as these specific
questions did reveal significant differences between
responses of the experimental group and responses of the
control group with respect to career self management behavior
changes and perception changes. The experimental group's
responses indicated changes in behavior and perception; the
control group's responses did not show any statistically
significant changes. The differences in responses between
the pre-test and post-post test of the experimental group for
the indicated questions were significant as indicated by the
chi-square tests with alpha values of .05 or less. The
differences in responses between the pre—test and post-test
of the control group on all questions were not significant as
indicated by the chi-square tests with alpha values of more
than .05. No significant linear relationships were indicated
for either group since all the pairs of responses to the two

questionnaires completed by each group had correlation

95

coefficients with values less than .70 and more than -.70.

Null Hypothesis #4 was not rejected since findings
indicated no significant differences of the responses of each
set of Career Self Management questionnaires with the
independent variables of age, sex, Hay points, organizational
function, and exempt/non-exempt status, as indicated by both
the correlation coefficient values of less than .70 and more
than -.70 and the chi-square tests with alpha values of more
than .05.

In summary, the purpose of the study was to assess the
effectiveness of a Career Self Management training program in
determining what behavior changes and perception changes
occurred for program participants. Research was conducted
to test a series of hypotheses that addressed the significant
differences between the responses within the experimental
group, the significant differences between responses within
the control group, the significant differences between the
responses of the experimental group and the control group,
and the significant differences between the responses on each
set of questionnaires with the independent variables of age,
sex, Hay points, organizational function, and exempt/non-
exempt status.

It was determined that there were significant

 

96

differences between the responses of the experimental group
to questions on the pre-test, post-test, and post-post test
within the following areas: development of career goals;
assignment of self responsibility for one's career; assess-
ment of strengths and weaknesses; assessment of life purpose;
importance of analyzing work values; assessment of values and
ideals; awareness that life is "always changing;" comfort-
ableness in handling personal and career changes; gathering
of information for furthering career growth; realization that
all parts of life are interdependent; use of learning style;
use of visualization; and investigation of career opportuni-
ties within the company.

There were significant differences between responses of
the eXperimental group and responses of the control group
within the following areas: development of career goals;
assignment of self responsibility for career; assessment of
strengths and weaknesses; assessment of life purpose; assess-
ment of values and ideals; awareness that life is "always
changing;" gathering information for furthering career
growth; use of learning style; use of visualization; and
investigation of career opportunities within the company.

a No significant differences were found between the

responses of the control group to questions on the pre-test

97

and the post-test. Neither were there any significant
differences of the responses on each set of questionnaires
with the independent variables of age, sex, Hay points,
organizational function, and exempt/non-exempt status.
Overall, findings were indicative of positive results
from the Career Self Management training program, as 65% of
the areas researched through the use of the questionnaire
were significantly impacted, indicating significant behavior

and perception changes.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND REFLECTIONS

Introduction
In this chapter the purpose of this study is summarized;
a review of the research methodology and procedures is given;
a summary of the research findings is provided; and con-

clusions, recommendations, and reflections are provided.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to assess the effective-
ness of the Career Self Management training program provided
within the Dow Corning Corporation. The program outline can
be found in Appendix J. There was an analysis of data col-
lected from 100 participants in the Career Self Management
program and an analysis of data collected from 100 training
program non-participants. The data were in respect to behav-
iors and perceptions regarding career self management. An-
swers to the following research questions were sought:

1. What career self management behavior changes

occurred for program participants?

2. What career self management perception changes

98

 

99

occurred for program participants?

Research Methods and Procedures

The major dimensions of the research methods and pro-

cedures included:

1.

Securing permission from the Manager of Personnel
and the Manager of Education and Training, Dow
Corning Corporation, to survey the program partici-
pants and non—participants involved in the study.
The construction of the research questionnaire com-
posed of questions relating to the career self man-
agement behaviors and perceptions.

Administering the questionnaire to a pilot group and
using the group's feedback for necessary modifica-
tion of the questionnaire.

Administration of the questionnaire to the Career
Self Management program participants.) The question-
naire was administered to this group immediately
before the training program, immediately upon com-
pletion of the program, and approximately four
months later by mail.

Administration of the questionnaire to the program

non-participants. The questionnaire was administered

100

to this group, which was selected from participants
of other Dow Corning training programs, during the
training program from which they were selected. A
second questionnaire was administered four months

later by mail. H

6. Tabulation and coding of data in preparation for

 

 

statistical analysis. 1;

7. Application of the following statistical procedures:
frequency comparisons; correlation coefficient;
multi-variant step-wise linear regression;
percentiles, which generated the mean, standard
deviation, skewness and kurtosis, and the median for
each independent and dependent variable; and the
chi-square test.

8. Development of conclusions and recommendations in
regard to Dow Corning's Career Self Management
training program, corporate career development pro—
grams in general, and the evaluation of such pro-
grams.

In completing the research, the following null hypo-

theses were tested:

1. There will be no significant differences between the

responses of the experimental group to questions on

101

the pre-test, post-test, and post-post test, as
indicated by both correlation coefficient values of
less than .70 and more than -.70 and the chi-square
test at the .05 level of confidence.

There will be no significant differences between the

responses of the control group to questions on the 5

 

pre-test and post-test, as indicated by both corre- a
lation coefficient values of less than .70 and more
than -.70 and the chi-square test at the .05 level
of confidence.

There will be no significant differences between
responses of the experimental group and responses of
the control group with respect to career self
management behavior changes and perception changes,
as measured by the Career Self Management Question-
naire. Statistical differences will be indicated by
both correlation coefficient values of less than .70
and more than -.70 and the chi-square test at the
.05 level of confidence.

There will be no significant differences Of the
responses on each set of Career Self Management
Questionnaires with the independent variables of

age, sex, Hay points, organizational function, and

102

exempt/non-exempt status, as indicated by both
correlation coefficient values of less than .70 and
more than -.70 and the chi-square test at the .05

level of confidence.

Summary of Research Findings

Findings are indicative of positive results from the
Career Self Management training program, as 65% of the areas
researched through the use of the Career Self Management
Questionnaire were significantly impacted, indicating signif-
icant behavior and perception changes, as measured by the
statistical analyses listed.

It was determined that there were significant dif-
ferences between the responses of the experimental group to
questions on the pre-test, post-test, and post-post test
within the following areas: development of career goals;
assignment of self responsibility for one's career; assess-
ment of strengths and weaknesses; assessment of life purpose;
importance of analyzing work values; assessment of values and
ideals; awareness that life is "always changing;' comfort-
ableness in handling personal and career changes; gathering
of information for furthering career growth; realization that

all parts of life are interdependent; use of learning style;

103

use of visualization; and investigation of career Opportuni-
ties within the company. There were no significant differ-
ences between responses within the experimental group in the
areas of: development of personal goals; perception of com-
pany's importance placed on career growth and self develop-
ment; perception of value in analyzing one's career; discus-
sion of career and self development goals with supervisor;
consultation with a support network; attempt at keeping a
balanced life style; and investigation of career opportuni-
ties outside the company.

There were significant differences between responses
of the experimental group and responses of the control group
within the following areas: development of career goals;
assignment of self responsibility for career; assessment of
strengths and weaknesses; assessment of life purpose; assess-
ment of values and ideals; awareness that life is “always
changing;' gathering information for furthering career
growth; use of learning style; use of visualization; and
investigation of career opportunities within the company.
There were no significant differences between responses of
the experimental group and responses of the control group
within the areas of: development of personal goals; per-

ception of company's importance placed on career growth and

104

self development; perception of value in analyzing one's
career; importance-Of analyzing work values; comfortableness
in handling personal and career changes; discussion of career
and self development goals with supervisor; consultation with
a support network; realization that all parts of life are
interdependent; attempt at keeping a balanced life style; and
investigation of career opportunities outside the company.

No significant differences were found between the
responses of the control group to questions on the pre-test
and the post-test. Neither were there any significant dif-
ferences of the responses on each set of questionnaires with
the independent variables of age, sex, Hay points, organiza-

tional function, and exempt/non-exempt status.

Conclusions

Based on the research findings, certain conclusions are
made in regard to the behavior changes and perception changes
of the participants in the Career Self Management training
program.

Behavior changes that occurred for program participants
were in the following areas: development of career goals;
assessment of strengths and weaknesses; assessment of life

purpose; assessment of values and ideals; gathering of

105

information for furthering career growth; use of learning
style; use of visualization; and the investigation of career
opportunities within the company.

Perception changes that occurred related to the follow-
ing: assignment of self responsibility for one's career;
importance of analyzing work values; awareness that life is
”always changing;" comfortableness in handling personal and
career changes; and the realization that all parts of life
are interdependent.

Other cOnclusions were also made based on the behavior
changes and perception changes that occurred within the group
of program participants.

1. A training program designed to meet individuals'
career development and self management needs pro-
vided a vehicle for behavior and perception changes
for those who voluntarily participated.

2. The Career Self Management program provided positive
career growth and self development for employees who
participated in the training.

3. The instruction provided in the Career Self Manage—
ment program, based on specific Objectives, made a
difference in the behaviors and perceptions of the

program participants.

106

Program participants were made more aware of them-
selves within the training program, and, therefore,
may develop also a better understanding of others.
Program participants were made more aware of how to
combine various sets of skills they possess, and,
therefore, exited the training program with some new
feasible Options for further career development and/
or life enrichment.

Participants gained an awareness of the corpora-
tion's commitment to the individual's and the cor-
poration's growth and development through career and

self management training.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusions presented in this

study, the following recommendations were made:

1.

The Career Self Management training program within
the Dow Corning Corporation should be strengthened
in the following areas: development of personal
life goals; emphasis of company support of the
importance of career growth and self development;
value of analyzing one's career; discussion of

career and self development goals and objectives

107

with one's supervisor; importance of consulting with
a network of mentors, role models, and intimates
when dealing with career and self development; and
importance of maintaining a balanced life style.

The study should be extended by surveying the same
groups to determine if the behavior changes and
perception changes that occurred are permanent
changes and to determine if other changes occur with
time.

The study should be replicated in order to provide
further insight into the effectiveness of the Career
Self Management program.

Corporations that are interested in career planning
efforts should use the information provided in this
study to provide them with valuable data for
implementing similar programs.

Corporations that are striving to keep pace with
rapid changes, to maintain high performance levels,
and to achieve a better return on investment should
consider the possibilities a career development and
self management program has to offer.

Corporations that thrive on a proactive philosophy

and wish to have their employees think proactively

 

108

should implement a career development and self
management program within their organization.

7. Corporations that are interested in developing more
realistic career expectations for their employees
and in a better matching of individuals and jobs,
should implement a career development program within
their human resource planning efforts.

8. Corporations that believe individuals should
exercise self responsibility for their careers
should implement a program of career development and
self management.

9. There should be more evaluation of training imple-
mented at all levels within organizations to deter-
mine if training objectives are being met and to
enhance training program effectiveness.

10. There should be more published information about
training evaluation to acquaint organizations with
evaluation procedures.

11. There should be more seminars presented on training
evaluation methodologies and procedures to teach
qualified personnel evaluation techniques.

There should be careful consideration given to the con-

clusions and recommendations described herein, as future

 

109

career development programs and evaluation efforts can bene-
fit from them. Success for career development training
programs and the evaluation Of them may well depend on such

actions.

Reflections

Through the Career Self Management program, Dow Corning
employees were provided the opportunity to assess their
interests, abilities, choices, and Opportunities, and to
follow through with objectives and plans.

The commitment of the Dow Corning Corporation, in offer-
ing the Career Self Management training program, provided a
positive career growth and self development experience that
proved to be a vehicle for making a difference in the behav-
iors and perceptions of those who took advantage of the op-
portunity afforded them.

Program participants, after focusing on their assessment
results, rediscovering the importance of self responsibility,
and gaining a new perspective of the interdependence of all
areas of one's life, left the program with a reusable pro-
cess. When properly applied, this reusable process can help
them to personally and professionally grow, to feel self

fulfilled, and to maintain productivity in their lives.

 

110

The Dow Corning Corporation can benefit from the result-
ing changes of the Career Self Management program, as the
employees who reached out for this opportunity are better
informed, have a greater understanding of career growth and
self development, and have the ability to exercise their
strengths in their most productive ways within the corpora-
tion. This is the reward for a corporation's commitment to
its people and an interest in their growth, development, and

self fulfillment.

 

 

 

APPENDICES

 

 

111

APPENDIX A

RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE

Date

 

Career Self Management Questionnaire 3
Do you presently have any career goals?

YES

 

 

NO 2:

 

If your answer is ”YES," please list one or two of your
career goals here:

Do you presently have any personal life goals?

YES

 

NO

 

If your answer is ”YES," please list one or two of your
personal life goals here:

To what extent do you believe the company considers your
career growth and self development to be important?

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

HHH

 

112

Which of the following represents how you feel the

responsibility for your career should be divided between
the company and you?

Company You

 

100% 0
80% 20%
60% 40%
50% 50%
40% 60%
20% 80%

0 100%

 

To what extent do you believe there is value in analyzing
your career? (Such an analysis would include examination
of kinds of work for which you are best suited and that
you enjoy most, as as well as an analysis of your inter-
ests, abilities, values and options available.)

To a very great extent
TO a great extent

To some extent

To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

“WNH
eeee

 

 

Have you recently assessed your own strengths and weak-
nesses?

YES

 

NO

 

If your answer is ”YES," please list one or two of your
strengths and one or two of your weaknesses here:

113

To what extent have you assessed your life pprpose by
looking at a combination of your personal qualities and
your values?

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. TO some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

To what extent do you feel that it is important to
analyze your work values in order to have career and life
satisfaction? (Work values include such values as: re-
cognition, economic security, socioeconomic status, inde-
pendence, leadership and personal power, creativity and
challenge, adventure, and self expression.)

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

Have you recently assessed the values and ideals you hold
to be most important within your life?

YES

 

NO

 

If your answer is "YES,” please list here some of those
values and ideals:

10.

11.

12.

13.

114

To what extent do you feel that your life is "always

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

To what extent do you feel comfortable about handling
personal and career changes?

1. TO a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

To what extent have you discussed career and self
development goals and objectives with your supervisor?

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

To what extent have you gathered information for helping
to further your career growth and self development?

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

Unless your answer is ”not at all,” please list here the
sources from which you obtained the information:

 

 

WK; .‘J‘i’e.

 

14.

15.

16.

115

To what extent do you consult with your own network of
mentors, role models, and intimates when dealing with
your career and self development?

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

To what extent do you feel that all parts of your life
are interdependent? (Examples: Do your work and per—
sonal life affect one another? Is your leisure time
affected by work or personal life?)

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

To what extent do you attempt to keep a balanced life
style? (A balanced life style refers to keeping a bal-
ance of your time and energy demands between work and
personal life.)

1. To a very great extent
. To a great extent

. To some extent

. To a little extent

. To a very little extent
. Not at all

0‘11!wa

17.

18.

19.

20.

116

To what extent do you use your ”learning style” in help-
ing you to determine your most compatible career oppor-
tunities? (The personal way you go about gathering in-
formation, sorting it out, and making decisions is
called your "learning style.')

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

IHII

 

How often do you use the technique of ”visualisation”
when striving toward the accomplishment Of a goal or
objective? (Visualization is the process by which you
can mentally picture your desired goal or results.)

1. Almost always

2. Much of the time
.3. Sometimes

4. Not very often
5. Almost never

6. Never

 

To what extent have you investigated possible career
opportunities within the company?

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. TO some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

To what extent have you investigated possible
career opportunities outside of the company?

1. To a very great extent
2. To a great extent

3. To some extent

4. To a little extent

5. To a very little extent
6. Not at all

 

 

 

 

Please check or list the appropriate

Age Sex

20-29 Male
30-39 Female
40-49

50-59

60 s over

lllll

Your organizational function:

response.
Status

Exempt
Non-exempt

 

Your number of Hay Points:

 

Name:

 

Mailing Address:

 

117

118

APPENDIX B

COVER LETTER FOR RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE
(Pre-Test--Experimental and Control Groups)

Career Self Management Questionnaire

A vital aspect of the education and training function is the
evaluation process. I am conducting an evaluation of the

gaieer Self Management program and I am asking you for your
e p.

Your participation in this evaluation is extremely important.
The attached questionnaire is the first segment of the evalu-
ation procedure and your cooperation in completing it is very
much appreciated.

The data will be used in the assessment of the program effec-
tiveness and, subsequently, the results will be compiled as
part of a doctoral dissertation.

Your individual responses will be kept in the strictest of
confidentiality and will be seen only by the researcher. The
information you provide will be recognized as being volun-
tary, and in no way can the candor of your responses affect
your career. No responses will be linked with your name and
shared with the company personnel.

Your name is needed by the researcher for the purpose of
post-training evaluation. Therefore, your name, as well as
the other information requested on page 7, will be
appreciated.

Thank you for your cooperation and willingness to partici-
pate.

Maryann Frederick Cox, Researcher
Consultant to Dow Corning

119

APPENDIX C

COVER LETTER FOR RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE
(Post-Test--Control Group;
Post-Post Test--Experimental Group)

Career Self Management Questionnaire

As you know, a vital aspect of the education and training
function is the evaluation process. Four months ago you
completed a Career Self Management questionnaire. I am now

asking for your help once again in the final stage of this
evaluation procedure.

Your participation in this evaluation is extremely important,
as the attached questionnaire is your final part of this
evaluation procedure, and therefore, it is needed to complete
the study.

The data will be used in the assessment of program effective-
ness and, subsequently, the results will be compiled as part
of a doctoral dissertation.

Your individual responses will be kept in the strictest of
confidentiality and will be seen only by the researcher. The
information you provide is recognized as being voluntary, and
in no way can the candor of your responses affect your
career. No responses will be linked with your name and
shared with company personnel.

Your name is needed by the researcher for the purpose of
questionnaire comparison with the questionnaire(s) you
previously completed. Therefore, your name, as well as the
other information requested on page 7, will be appreciated.

Please complete the attached questionnaire, including the
information that is requested on page 7, and return to me in
the enclosed, stamped, self-addressed envelope.

Thank you for your cooperation and willingness to
participate.

Maryann Frederick Cox, Researcher
Consultant to Dow Corning

CAREER SELF MANAGEMENT FREQUENCY COMPARISONS

Question 1.

NO
YES

Question 2.

NO
YES

Question 3.

VERY GREAT 2 3 3 7
GREAT 30 34 25 38
SOME 50 50 55 45
LITTLE 10 11 10 7
VERY LITTLE 6 2 5 3
NONE 1 0 2 0

Question 4.

APPENDIX D

120

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL

 

PRE POST POST-POST PRE
Do you presently have any career goals?

21 8 9 17
78 91 91 83

Do you presently have any personal life

13 7 9 12
87 92 91 87

POST

14
86

goals?

10
90

To what extent do you believe the company con-

siders your growth and self development
important?

to be

he»
NU‘QGWU‘

Which of the following represents how you feel

the responsibility for your career should be

divided between the company and you?

COMPANY 39p
100% 0 0 0 0
80% 20% 2 5 1 4
60% 40% 8 7 3 16
50% 50% 35 17 31 39
40% 60% 26 25 31 23
20% 80% 25 36 41 18
0% 100% 4 9 3 o

11
45
23
17

Question 5.

121

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL

 

 

PRE POST POST-POST PRE POST

To what extent do you believe there is value
in analyzing your career?

VERY GREAT 38 41 43 33 29
GREAT 48 46 45 42 44
SOME 13 12 9 21 23
LITTLE O 1 2 2 4
VERY LITTLE 0 0 l 0 0
NONE O O 0 0 0

Question 6.

NO
YES

Question 7.

Have you recently assessed your own strengths
and weaknesses?

24 7 9 23 27
75 93 90 77 72

To what extent have you assessed your life pur-
pose by looking at a combination of your per-
sonal qualities and your values?

VERY GREAT 4 14 10 6 7
GREAT 18 37 43 27 25
SOME 53 42 37 48 49
LITTLE 13 5 9 13 11
VERY LITTLE 8 2 0 4 4
NONE 4 0 0 2 4

Question 8.

To what extent do you feel it is important to
analyze your work values in order to have career
and life satisfaction?

VERY GREAT 20 30 l9 18 17
GREAT 55 59 55 54 55
SOME 25 ll 26 26 25
LITTLE 0 0 0 1 0
VERY LITTLE 0 0 0 l 2

NONE

O 0 0 0 0

 

 

 

Question 9.

NO
YES

Question 10.

VERY GREAT 17 22 20 11 4
GREAT 36 54 44 44 49
SOME 35 22 34 36 40
LITTLE 6 1 1 6 3
VERY LITTLE 6 1 1 3 3
NONE O 0 0 0 1

Question 11.

VERY GREAT 9 12 11 9 4
GREAT 27 45 38 36 49
SOME 52 41 44 47 40
LITTLE 10 1 6 7 3
VERY LITTLE 1 1 l 0 3
NONE 1 0 0 1 1

Question 12.

122

EXPERIMENTAL
POST POST-POST

CONTROL
PRE PRE POST
Have you recently assessed the values and ideals
you hold to be most important in your life?

46
53

12
88

15
85

39
60

37
63

To what extent do you feel your life is "always
changing?”

To what extent do you feel comfortable about
handling personal and career changes?

To what extent have you discussed career and
self development goals with your supervisor?

VERY GREAT 6 3 6 7 4
GREAT 16 19 19 25 22
SOME 49 55 56 44 49
LITTLE 18 9 9 11 13
VERY LITTLE 6 6 5 10 5
NONE

5 8 5 3 7

 

 

Question 13.

123

EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL

 

PRE POST POST-POST PRE POST

To what extent have you gathered information
for helping to further your career growth and
self development? '

VERY GREAT 3 5 13 5 4
GREAT 12 30 25 12 19
SOME 53 53 51 58 46
LITTLE 21 9 6 12 17
VERY LITTLE 8 3 3 10 10
NONE 2 0 2 3 4

Question 14.

To what extent do you consult with your own
network Of mentors, role models, and intimates
when dealing with your career and self
development?

VERY GREAT 2 3 2 5 3

GREAT 14 12 23 18 17
SOME 40 49 39 50 46
LITTLE 22 20 19 14 21
VERY LITTLE 16 12 11 7 7
NONE 6 4 6 6 5

Question 15.

To what extent do you feel that all parts of
your life are interdependent?

VERY GREAT 23 32 24 21 19
GREAT 45 50 50 32 41
SOME 24 14 23 31 25
LITTLE 5 3 0 10 8
VERY LITTLE 3 1 3 14 4
NONE O 0 0 2 1

Question 16.

TO what extent do you attempt to keep a
balanced life style?

VERY GREAT 11 13 16 15 15
GREAT 38 35 38 40 38
SOME 45 44 39 37 41
LITTLE 3 7 5 6 5
VERY LITTLE 3 1 1 1 1
NONE O 0 0 l 0

 

 

 

 

124

EXPERIMENTAL
POST POST-POST

CONTROL

PRE PRE POST

Question 17. To what extent do you use your ”learning
style" in helping you to determine your most
compatible career opportunities?

 

VERY GREAT 5 6 6 3 4
GREAT 16 41 43 34 31
SOME 49 43 38 48 44
LITTLE 16 8 7 8 11
VERY LITTLE 10 2 3 4 11
NONE 4 0 3 3 4
Question 18. How often do you use the technique of “visual-
ization' when striving toward the accomplish-
ment of a goal or objective?
ALWAYS 6 5 8 9 10
MUCH 24 28 34 23 26
SOMETIMES 38 44 43 41 35
NOT OFTEN 19 17 ll l3 l6
ALMOST NEVER 10 5 4 ' 8 9
NEVER 3 l 0 6 4
Question 19. To what extent have you investigated possible
career opportunities within the company?
VERY GREAT 2 7 8 5 7
GREAT l7 17 28 19 16
SOME 44 54 44 53 50
LITTLE 27 16 9 12 15
VERY LITTLE 8 5 7 9 8
NONE 2 l 4 2 3
Question 20. To what extent have you investigated possible
career opportunities outside the company?
VERY GREAT 0 0 3 2 3
GREAT 4 7 9 3 2
SOME 31 39 28 30 23
LITTLE 20 19 22 21 17
VERY LITTLE 25 18 l6 18 27
NONE 20 17 22 26 27

 

NAME

id

function

haypts
age
sex
status

APPENDIX E

PERCENTILES OF PRE-EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

MEAN

53.5000

2.3939

455.7449
32.7000

0.5361
0.7273
0.7879
0.8700
2.9050

39.3000

1.7400
0.7576
3.1500
2.0500
0.5354
2.4800
2.7000
3.1700

3.2525'

3.5400
2.2000
2.4900
3.2200
3.1200
3.2800
4.2600

SOD.

30.7436
1.1677
209.4871
8.8597
0.5013
0.4476
0.4109
0.3380
0.9009
16.2838
0.6760
0.4307
1.0672
0.6723
0.5013
1.0394
0.8819
1.1197
0.9513
1.1584
0.9535
0.8468
1.1154
1.1571
0.9752
1.2112

SKEWNESS

0.
0.242077
0.052468
0.327344
-0.l46990
-1.036390
-l.430134
-2.234045
0.872050
-0.4l4972
0.368524
-l.220655
0.711718
-0.058505
-0.143959
0.577480
0.270476
0.537610
0.413954
0.338546
0.799092
0.388372
0.487662
0.399841
0.341254
0.040343

KURTOSIS

-l.200000
-l.414697
-0.690710
-0.121113
2.020492
-0.945411
0.045797
3.051598
1.276981
0.024724
-0.796795
-0.520941
0.889875
-0.746607
-2.020515
0.217074
1.470055
0.728381
0.907684
-0.358270
0.731004
0.958631
0.389638
-0.090091
0.308231
-1.231180

P.50

53.5
2.0
472.5
30.0

bUWUUNWUwuNHNUHNOUl-‘HHH
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

125

NAME

id

function
haypts

age
sex

status

PERCENTILES OF POST-EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

MEAN

53.5000

2.3939

455.6465
32.6000

0.5354
0.7200
0.9400
0.9293
2.7500

34.7000

1.7300
0.9300
2.4400
1.8100
0.8800
2.0500
2.3400
3.2000
2.7500
3.3800
1.9100

.2.4800

2.5900
2.9200
2.9800
3.9900

APPENDIX F

S.D.

30.7436
1.1677
208.9499
8.7178
0.5013
0.4513
0.3429
0.2576
0.7703
20.1236
0.7086
0.2564
0.8683
0.6146
0.3266
0.7571
0.7416
1.1547
0.8087
1.0710
0.8177
0.8466
0.8052
0.9711
0.9533
1.2431

SKEWNESS

0.
0.242077
0.049088
0.304215
-0.l43959
-0.994945
0.541180
-3.401221
0.329743
0.310299
0.615100
-3.422153
0.235490
0.133143
-2.374505
0.628751
0.114775
1.004204
0.255759
0.445118
0.960501
0.012882
0.411537
0.432845
0.183228
0.341181

KURTOSIS

-1.20000
-l.41470
-0.68613
-0.07024
-2.02051
-l.03112
15.73731
9.76521
0.47866
-0.22569
-0.12800
9.90895
0.32856
-0.45597
3.71213
1.31131
0.62386
0.94049
0.80703
0.29093
1.47141
-0.06117
0.57328
0.46356
0.89734
-1.10023

hUUuUNUUUNNHNNP-‘NOUHHHH
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
oooooooooooooooooooooo

126

 

 

 

APPENDIX G

PERCENTILES OF POST-POST EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

NAME MEAN S.D. SKEWNESS KURTOSIS P.50
id 53.5000 30.7436 0. . -l.20000 53.5
function 2.3939 1.1677 0.242077 -1.41470 2.0
haypts 454.5625 206.5226 0.036980 -0.64520 472.5
age 32.9000 8.7957 0.301851 -0.10700 30.0
sex 0.5556 0.4994 -0.227062 -1.98905 1.0
status 0.7347 0.4438 -1.079773 -0.85190 1.0
ql 0.9150 0.2757 -3.020452 7.38032 1.0
q2 0.9100 0.2876 -2.909132 6.59456 1.0
q3 2.9500 0.9252 0.881315 1.84615 3.0
q4 34.7000 15.6641 0.000307 -0.70086 40.0
q5 1.7300 0.7895 1.276604 2.52253 2.0
q6 0.9091 0.2889 -2.890024 6.48282 1.0
q7 2.4545 0.7989 0.090144 -0.39839 2.0
q8 2.0700 0.6705 -0.081421 -0.73808 2.0
q9 0.8500 0.3589 -1.990373 2.00121 1.0
qu 2.1900 0.8002 0.245060 0.25443 2.0
qll 2.4800 0.8100 0.065902 0.15651 3.0
q12 3.0250 1.0972 0.783660 1.50935 3.0
ql3 2.6700 1.0156 0.587269 1.54632 3.0
ql4 3.3150 1.1692 0.565055 -0.20913 3.0
q15 2.0800 0.8608 1.007363 2.12995 2.0
q16 2.3636 0.8506 0.133409 -0.05754 2.0
ql7 2.6700 1.0156 1.236700 2.30416 3.0
ql8 2.6900 0.9178 0.340410 0.22943 3.0
ql9 2.9050 1.1649 0.728608 0.74880 3.0
q20 4.0400 1.3902 -0.08l390 -0.90185 4.0

127

NAME

id

function
haypts

age
sex

status

APPENDIX H

PERCENTILES OF PRE-CONTROL GROUP

MEAN

61.5000

2.4242

479.4242
31.7172

0.6500
0.7576
0.8300
0.8788
2.6100

45.1000

1.8990
0.7700
2.8800
2.1300
0.6061
2.4600
2.5600
3.0100
3.1900
3.1800
2.5000
2.4100
2.8500
3.0600
3.0700
4.2800

S.D.

35.3624
1.1166
213.8205
8.4564
0.4794
0.4307
0.3775
0.3280
0.8396
14.6677
0.8143
0.4230
0.9876
0.7475
0.4911
0.8810
0.8327
1.1503
1.0415
1.1493
1.1677
0.9222
0.9783
1.2619
1.0275
1.3263

SKEWNESS

0.
0.216478
-0.080879
0.282377
-0.638590
-l.220655
-l.783906
-2.357056
0.428147
-0.196433
0.304616
-l.302795
0.630615
0.523497
-0.440829
0.576213
0.448539
0.589663
0.539196
0.698071
0.718479
0.664443
1.166611
0.593010
0.541840
-0.134685

KURTOSIS

-1.200000
-1.141674
-0.789677
-0.521827
-1.625116
-0.520941
1.206042
3.628622
0.736958
0.131086
-0.518941
-0.309318
1.215562
1.181956
-1.843329
0.712676
2.013593
0.262869
0.908102
0.662354
0.469380
1.571916
2.152913
0.135874
0.739402
-0.923573

P.50

61.5
2.0
510.0

00
O
O

IbWUWNNUUWWNF-‘NWHNOWHPHH
eeeeeeeeeseeeeeeeeeeee
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

128

APPENDIX I

PERCENTILES OF POST-CONTROL GROUP

NAME MEAN

id 61.5000
function 2.4646
haypts 475.5300
age 32.3000
sex 0.6400
status 0.2400
ql 0.8600
q2 0.9000
q3 2.8000
q4 43.3000
qS 2.0200
q6 0.7273
q7 2.9200
q8 2.1500
q9 0.6300
q10 2.4700
qll 2.5500
qlz 3.1400
ql3 3.2200
q14 3.2727
qlS 2.3878
q16 2.3900
ql7 2.9184
q18 3.0000
ql9 3.1010
q20 4.4545

S.D.

35.3624
1.1002
214.5198
8.3913
0.4824
0.4292
0.3487
0.3015
0.9744
14.5682
0.8285
0.4476
1.0795
0.7703
0.4852
0.8582
0.8333
1.1549
1.1154
1.0863
1.0806
0.8396
1.0617
1.2472
1.0926
1.3269

SKEWNESS

0.
0.255799
-0.044359
0.168918
-0.592254
1.236182
-2.106739
-2.707449
0.949160
-0.715412
0.397268
-1.036390
0.800885
0.816748
-0.546756
0.388378
1.334471
0.885097
0.532232
0.604355
0.871830
0.094277
1.009704
0.478138
0.418765
-0.542010

KURTOSIS

-l.200000
-1.280699
-0.820579
-0.589024
-1.683312

-0.481898
2.487710

5.438670
1.757180
0.866443
-0.494893
-0.945411
1.355619
2.248646
-l.736193
0.403577
3.410336
0.866871
0.269809
0.565697
0.809876
-0.014581
1.454126
-0.121487
0.602793
-0.434625

P.50

U‘WUWNNU’WUNNHNUHNOU’HHOH
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

129

130

APPENDIX J

CAREER SELF MANAGEMENT PROGRAM OUTLINE

Day I
A. Introduction

1. Program objectives

2. Two basic truths underlying program
a. Everything is "always changing”
b. Everything is interdependent

3. Assumptions within program

4. Importance of individual within program format

5. Assignment of self responsibility for life and
career growth

Purpose of Career Development

1. Finding the right ”match” between individual's needs,
abilities, and career paths provided

2. Analyzing the "match“ and planning for growth

Learning Style

1. Personal way one gathers infOrmation, makes
decisions, learns new information

2. Tool for interacting well with others

Balanced Life Style

1. Mind/body/spirit balance

131

2. Three "boxes of life"

Life Reflection

E.
1. Life excursion depicting high and low points
experienced
2. ”Triggering events”
F. Film: "When Preparation Meets Opportunity"
G. Career Support Networks
1. Mentors, role models, intimates
H. Life Purpose
1. Values
2. Life issues
3. Personal qualities
Day II
A. Steps for Career Planners
1. Gather information re: skills, abilities,
opportunities
2. Build support networks
3. Develop options
4. Accept responsibility
5. Plan and persevere
B. Work Values

1. Becoming aware of job/career needs, priorities

 

 

 

 

- Mi
7

 

REFERENCES

 

132

2. Development of job criteria
C. Skills Assessment
1. "Root“ skills
2. “Survival” skills
3. .Assessment of strengths, weaknesses
D. “Brainstorming" Sessions
1. Combining all information gathered
2. Developing career/life options
3. Selecting feasible options
E. ”What Do We Do Now?”--Next Steps
1. Discussion of goals, objectives with supervisor,
personnel development manager
2. Investigation of career/life opportunities
3. Promotion/visibility
F. Career/Life Growth Proposals, Plans
1. Development of career goals
2. Development of personal goals
3. Reality checking
4. Use of visualization
G. Summary, Closing

Career Self Management program materials and activities
developed from The Inventurers, Leider & Hagberg (1982)

 

 

 

REFERENCES
Albrecht, M. J. (1983). Managing employee careers. Comput-
erworld, ll(33), 21-32.

Alden, J. (1978). Evaluation in focus. Training and Devel—
opment Journal, ;g(10), 34-39.

 

 

Badawy, M. K. (1983). Managing career transitiOns. Research
Management, XXy;(4), 28-31.

Baird, L., & Kram, K. (1983). Career dynamics: managing the
superior/subordinate relationship. Organizational
Dynamics, ll(4), 46-64.

 

Bakken, D., & Bernstein, A. J. (1982). A systematic approach
to evaluation. Training and Development Journal, ;§(8),
44-51 e

 

Barnier, L. A. (1981). A study of the mentoringflrelation-
ship: an analysis of its relation to career and adult
development in higher education_gnd business. Unpublish-
ed doctoral dissertation, Idaho State University.

 

 

 

Bass, B. M., s Vaughn, J. (1966). Training in industry: the
management of learning. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publish-
ing Company, Inc.

 

 

Bell, C., s Putman, T. (1979). Mastering the art of training
design. Training_and Development Journal, 3Q(5), 57-66.

 

Blumenfeld, W. S., 8 Crane, D. P. (1973). Opinions of train-
ing effectiveness: how good? Training and Development
Journal, 21(12), 299-306.

 

Blumenfeld, W. S., 8 Holland, M. G. (1971). A model for the
emperical evaluation of training effectiveness.
Personnel Journal, 59(8), 637-640.

 

133

 

 

 

134

Bolar, M. (1970). Evaluating management development programs
in industry. Training and Development Journal, 24(3),
265-270.

Bolles, R. (1981). The "warp“ in the way we perceive our
life in the world of work. Trainingpand Development
Journal, l§(ll), 20-27.

Bolles, R. N. (1978). The three boxes of life and how to
get out of them. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press.

Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1973). Educational research
(2nd ed.). New York: David McKay Company, Inc.

Bradenburg, D. C. (1982). Training evaluation: what's the
current status? Training and Development Journal, Q§(8),
14-19.

Brethower, K. S., & Rummler, G. A. (1979). Evaluating train-
ing. Training and Development Journal, 3§(5), 14-22.

Brinkerhoff, R. O. (1981). Making evaluation more
useful. Training and Development Journal, ;§(12), 41-45.

Brinkerhoff, R. O. (1983). The success case: a low-cost,
high-yield, evaluation. Training and Development

 

Brown, M. G. (1980). Evaluating training via multiple base-
line designs. Training and Development Journal, 31(10),
18-24 e

Button, W., & Wasmuth, W. (1964). Employee training in small
business organizations. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

Carlisle, K. E. (1984). Why your training evaluation system
doesn't work. Training, 2l(8), 37-40.

Catalanello, R. E., s Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1968). Evaluating
training programs--the state of the art. Training and
Development Journal, 22(5), 258-262.

Clement, R. W. & Aranda, E. K. (1982). Evaluating
management training: a contingency approach.
Training and Development Journal, §§(8), 39-43.

 

135

Close, J. G. (1981). Executive development: factors and
changes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, United
States International University.

Cornwell, J. B. (1980). Justify your training efforts with
on-the-job performance. Training, ll(8), 34-36.

Couch, P. D., s Strother, G. B. (1971). A critical incident
evaluation of supervisory training. Trainingyand
Development Journal, 25(9), 6-11.

 

Crites, J. O. (1982). Testing for career adjustment and

ggvelopment. Training_and Development Jogpnal, 12(2).
-28e

Crystal, J. C., & Bolles, R. N. (1974) Where do I go from
here with my_life? Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press.

 

Danforth, T., s Alden, A. (1983). Dual career pathing: no
better time, no better reason. Employment Relations
Today, lQ(2), 189-201.

Dauw, D. C. (1980). Up your career! (3rd ed.). Prospect
Heights, IL: Wareland Press, Inc.

 

Davies, I. K. (1973). The organization of training. London:
McGraw Hill.

 

Dayhoff, S. A. (1983). Single and multiple mentors:
perceived effects on managerial success. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Boston University Graduate School.

 

Deming, B. S. (1982). Evaluating job-related training.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

 

Dopyera, J. E., & Lay-Dopyera, M. (1980). Effective evalua-
tion: is there something more? Training and Development

 

Drake, C. P. (1983). Career development for technical pro-
fessionals: organizationalAperspectives. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University.

 

Eckenboy, C. (1983). Evaluating training effectiveness:
a form that seems to work. Training, 39(7), 56-59.

136

F399, S. S. (1981). The identification and comparison of
educational and training experiences seen as necessary
by educators and training/development practitioners in
business. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, East Texas
State University.

 

 

 

Fast, D. (1974). A new approach to quantifying training pro-
gram effectiveness. Training and Development Journal,
.£§(9)r 47-53.

 

Felstehausen, J. T. (1982). The mentoring of noqprofession-
a1, nonmanagerial women who are pursuing_upward career
mobility. UnpublIshed doctoral dissertation, University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Galagan, P. (1983). The numbers game: putting value on
human resource development. Training and Development

 

Galvin, J. C. (1983). What can trainers learn from educators
about evaluating management training? Training_and
Development Journal, 31(8), 52-57.

 

 

Glitzer, B. M., & Maher, 8. (1982). Six steps to contempor-
ary career development. Training, lg(12), 48-52.

Gillespie, M. (1983). Career development as educative pro-
cess: implications for the cogporate educator. Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teach-
er's College.

 

 

Goldstein, I. L. (1974). Training: _program development and
evaluation. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing
Company.

 

 

Hall, D. T., Hall, F. S., & Hinton, R. W. (1978). Research
on organizational career development. Human Resource

Hanson, M. C. (1981). Implementing a career development
program. Training and Development Journal, 15(7), 80-90.

 

137

Hartley, J. (1973). Evaluating the effectiveness of train-
ing. In I. K. Davies (Ed.) The organization of training.
London: McGraw-Hill.

Hillis, D. J. (1983). An operational view of career plan-
ning. Personnel Journal, §2(7), 574-579.

Kaye, B. L. (1981). Career development: the integrating
force. Trainingyand Development Journal, 22(5), 36-40.

Kearsley, G. (1982). Costs, benefits, and_productivity in
training systems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publish-
ifig Company.

 

Keiley, A. I., Orgel, R. F., & Baer, D. M. (1984). Evalua-
tion: the bottom line is closer than you think. Train-
ing and Development Journal, 22(8), 32-37.

Kelly, H. B. (1982). A primer on transfer of training.
Training_and Development Journal, 2§(ll), 102-106.

Kiechel, W. (1983). The neglected art of career planning.
Fortune, 107(13), 153-155.

 

Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1960). Techniques for evaluating train-
ing programs. Journal of the ASTD, 21(2), 37-43.

Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1971). Supervisory training and develop-
ment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Kirn, A. G., & O'Donahue, M. (1978). Life work planning.
(4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill BOok Company.

 

Kotter, J. P., Faux, V. A., s McArthur, C. (1978). Self-
assessment and career development: a systematic approach
to the selection and management of a career. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

 

 

Kram, K. E. (1980). Mentoring processes at work: develop-
mental relationshIps‘In managerial careers. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Yale University.

 

LaVan, H., & Mathys, N. (1983). Career planning: a practi-
cal approach for you and your subordinates. Industrial
Management, 22(3), 20-26.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

138

LaVan, H., Mathys, N., & Drehmer, D. (1983). A look at the
counseling practices of major U.S. corporations.
Personnel Journal, 22(6), 78-81, 143-146.

Lefton, R. E. & Buzzotta, V. R. (1980). Trainers, learners,
training results. Training and Development Journal,
21(11), 12-18.

Leibowitz, 2., & Schlossberg, N. K. (1982). Critical career
transitions: a model for designing career services.
Trainingyand Development Journal, 22(2), 12-19.

Leider, R., & Hagberg, J. (1982). The inventurerg. Reading
MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Cbmpany. '

Lesser, A. E. (1983). The role of educational programs with-
in the business community_in helping_women managers over-
come barriers to career development. Unpublished doctor-
al dissertation, Columbia University Teacher's College.

London, M. (1983). Toward a theory of career motivation.
Academy of Management Review, 2(4), 620-630.

 

Lott, O. C. (1977). Evaluating to reduce training costs.
Training and Development Journal, 22(1), 244-246.

Loughary, J. W., & Ripley, T. M. (1979). Career & life
planning_guide. Chicago, IL: Follett Publishing
Company.

 

Mager, R. F. (1978). Measuring instructional talent.
Belmont: Feron Pitman Publishers, Inc.

 

Mahoney, T. A., Jerdee, T. H., & Korman, A. (1960). An ex-
perimental evaluation of management development.
Personnel Psychology, 22, 81-98.

 

McCampbell, J. F. (1981). Six guiding images to measure
training results. Training, 22(9), 33-38.

Miller, A. F. & Mattson, R. T. (1977). The truth about
yo . Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company.

 

Michalak, D. F. & Yager, E. G. (1979). Making the training
pgocess work. New York: Harper and Row Publi§hers, Inc.

139

Missirian, A. K. (1980). The_process of mentoring in the
career development of female managers. Unpublished
doctoral dissertatiOn, University of Massachusetts.

 

Moore, E. R. (1984). Competency-based evaluation. Training
and Development Journal, 22(11), 92-94.

 

Moses, J. L., & Ritchie, R. J. (1976). Supervisory relation-
ships training: a behavioral evaluation of a behavior
modeling program. Personnel Psychology, 22, 337-343.

 

Otte, F. L. (1982). Creating successful career development
programs. Training and Development Journal, 22(2),
30-37e

Peterson, R. O. (1979). Determining the payoff of management
training. Madison, WI: American Society for Training
Development.

 

Phillips, J. J. (1983). Handbook of training evaluation and
measurement methods. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing
Company.

Popham, J. W. (1976). Educational evaluation. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

 

Putman, A. O. (1980). Pragmatic evaluation. Training_and
Development Journal, 22(10), 27-31.

 

 

Reeves, E. T., & Jensen, J. M. (1972). Effectiveness of pro-
gram evaluation. Training and Development Journal,
22(1), 42-46.

Rinella, R. J., 8 Robbins, C. C. (1980). Careerypower! New
York: American Management Association.

 

Rose, H. C. (1968). A plan for training evaluation. Train-
ing and Development Journal, 22(5), 253-257.

Rothwell, S. (1983). Manpower matters: corporate training
and development strategies. Journal of General Manage-
ment, 2(4), 83-90.

 

Russell, M. (1984). Career planning in a blue collar
company. Training and Development Journal, 2201), 87-88.

140

Rust, H. L. (1979). Job search. New York: Amacom.

 

Salinger, R. D., & Deming, B. S. (1982). Practical strat-
egies for evaluating training. Training and Development

 

Sikula, A. F., & McKenna, J. F. (1983). Individuals must
take charge of career development. Personnel Administra-

Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (1985). Systematic
evaluation: a self-instructional guide to theory and
practice. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.

 

 

Super, D. E. (1980). A life-span, life-space, approach to
career development. In Journal of Vocational Behavior,
pp. 282-298.

 

Walker, J. W. (1978). Does career planning rock the boat?
Human Resource Management, 22(1), 2-7.

 

Warren, M. W. (1969). Training for results. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

 

Weatherley, M. J. (1981). Career self-management for the
mature executive. Human Resource Development, 2(1),
17-21.

 

Weiler, N. W. (1971). Reality_and career_planning. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

 

Wilhelm, W. R. (1983). Helping workers to self-manage their
careers. Personnel Administrator, 22(8), 83-89.

Wowk, R., Williams, D., & Halstead, G. (1983). Do formal
career development programs really increase employee
participation? Training and Development Journal, 22(9),
82-83e

 

Zenger, J. H. (1981). Career planning: coming in from the
cold. Training and Development Journal, 22(7), 47-52.

 

Zenger, J. H., & Hargis, K. (1982). Assessing training re-
sults: it's time to take the plunge! Training and
Development Journal, 22(1), 10-16.

 

   

"‘11111111111111ES