. I I ‘ I . _ I a . . . . . V . . .. . . . . . . . . . ....o . .. ... .. V... ... . o... , ...-..o-o..a.|./V......I.A..1. . .4. . _4..\c‘.lo a. o . ..o‘od.._.¢ (oi-oJV to:
‘. 1.....Jo .1 . .. .oop. . Vooo . .v . .I\ fw.....on.”1n.”.h.utha II . ..I ..... . .0. . . ... “$2.. .. 0. -. ... . . A. I . v k‘ . .. . . _ . o .. . 4 a.‘ . . z . . J .u..
.. o ... .... ...- . 0. .Io .— .u 5 . I . InfTV o . . V a o
. ......Vo...o.' I w . r- a .V , A: . ... ... V .0 .\ . . . . .. .
u . . .0 . . s - ... u .. I. .., 3.u‘. v 1..‘ . J o . o . . . , V a . _ . m . a .
v II III. 0. .0. . .I..(.’WI.9.IO: . n .0, n . ..I. .. . . g . . V...
v o . u . O 1 . c I \ V . . . . . V

. ..o..... .1? ‘

   

. — n n a
. . . . .
I .I.u~ o an._.to . o. o. o . _. . A .‘
u 4
o . -.. . o . . . .... .
. .1. . .. . o.. .
O I; O -
o o . o . .0
. .
. . . o
. ... . .
. . . . . u
o . o . v
n O .0 . .
. .a.. I . u .
I o. o .o .
. . .
. . .o _ . .
' .
u . v .
O
u . .
o _ < .
. . o o . .. .
.
.. P
. .. u .
. .
. . . . . . .. .
. . ..
. .
. . .
. . n
. . . .
. . . u . u
. I
V
. . . .
. .
. .
v A ¢
.
.n
a I . .
. .
. .
.
3 . o... .4 .. ..
- A v i
. . . .. .x . PI ,
. . . . .. . . ...I
. I .-
.. .I . . o r: V.l..
(I;
.00.
A .. II. .90; 05. 3..

c . IG KENNETH Poms
1972.

  

 

E

1

THE; DOUBLE-BIND

IN OR. NJZATIO .'

CONTROL
Thesis for the.

006.100.00.900.

'.”I.an‘o

.......-—.Oo.--.-

3"?"-
a"

 

 

.. . : . . J . .. ..é‘ ‘.o'.A...V ’0 ...II. 4.0.:¢......o O. 1.1UIJIOH 19.9.4'04.’ I - .I: y .- ‘
I. . . . II . o I v V. . .I‘Ia.\ a sl‘. IIIa.lA.»so.b..‘J...ol uh O. ....I-r ...; .o I . coo/.t. ‘IIII' . on! I I
I v. I .n . .3. ‘0 It....... I .I . I .. I V. t. u. I u I» a .5‘31».0 0-115%” ‘d... ....[.L&,. ...-‘2‘... ..I .... .0 >.ooIoa.Ova .. ...... op..l’of. If. ’40- 9‘... I
o I .... . .QOI . Q. of... ... I. I). . I 4. I . 1.0111? 2|: ........:>-I ..«VU .‘o o .|.v..o . 1.... V. .1!» 1. ¢ . . . v. n . .
' }' ill}
I .II‘ I I ..III I I. I
||' I'll IIIIII

 

  
   

LIBRARY

Mimigan Stan:
UnzvctsW .. I

I' I

llmlll'llml HIMHIWUWWlllllllllllll

urn-J“ 1293 00103 3012

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

CONTROL: THE DOUBLE-BIND IN ORGANIZATIONAL POWER

presented by

Craig Kenneth Polite

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. Social Psychology

degree in

 

 

 

 

   
    
   

  

d. ‘5 Bmomew “’
“DAG & SUNS.
800K B'NDERY WC.

LIBRARY BINDERS

miners-Lumen!

  

ABSTRACT
CONTROL: THE DOUBLE-BIND IN ORGANIZATIONAL POWER
By

Craig Kenneth Polite

The purpose of this study was twofold: 1) It was designed to
examine, in a laboratory situation, the Tannenbaum (l968) contention
that the more control an individual has in an organization, the more
control the organization has over that individual; and 2) It was de-
signed to explore the possibility that a differential amount of power
in an organization may be accorded individuals in equal positions of
legitimate authority in a manner analogous to the Aronson and Golden
(l962) finding. That is: Blacks having less influence than did
their White counterparts who presented identical arguments.

Fifty-nine White male introductory psychology students, who
received class credits for their participation in research, were em-
played as subjects. They participated in groups of three consisting
of one subject and two White male confederates employed by the re-
searcher.

The subjects were told that the purpose of this project was
to examine the relationship between attitudes about ecology and the

l

Craig Kenneth Polite

content of a speech. The subjects were also told that they had to
have a supervisor guide them in their speech preparations. In two
experimental conditions, the subjects were given vitas of three
persons, whom they had never met, and told to choose one individual
as their supervisor. The manner in which the group's supervisor was
chosen set up three experimental conditions: Egfl;l, In this situa-
tion the subjects stated a preference for their supervisor and re-
ceived the individual of their choice. 39m;g, In this situation the
subjects stated a preference and received someone other than the in-
dividual of their choice. APPOINTED. In this situation the subjects
were given no Opportunity to express a preference regarding their
supervisor; he was arbitrarily appointed.

There were four supervisors who role played each of the three
individuals for whom vitas were given to the subjects. Two of the
supervisors were Black and two were White, thereby establishing two
additional experimental conditions.

Each supervisor attempted to influence the subjects to make
an effort to prepare a high-quality speech outline (the experimental
task). To aid the subjects in their work, they were told that a
paper on speech style had been reserved for them and that they should
examine the paper and, in general, make every effort to do the best

job that they could.

Craig Kenneth Polite

Three hypotheses were advanced: 1) Where subordinates have
influence over who is named their supervisor and receive the man of
their choice, there will be a higher proportion of subjects examining
the speech style papers and making a general effort to do quality
work, than when the supervisor is arbitrarily appointed without any
consideration for the subordinates' Opinions. 2) Where subordinates
have influence over who is named supervisor and g9_ngt_receive.the
man of their choice, there will be a higher proportion of subjects
examining the speech style papers and making a general effort to do
quality work, than when the supervisor was arbitrarily appointed
without any consideration for the subordinates' opinions. 3) No
differences will exist in the proportion of subjects examining the
speech style papers and making a general effort to do quality work
as a function of the race of their supervisor.

The data indicated that differential perceptions of influence
in the supervisory selection process were established by the treat-
ment conditions and there were no differences, in perception of in-
fluence, within the two supervisor groupings, Black Supervisor and
White Supervisor. These data lead to the conclusion that the obtained
results were a function of the roles being played and not idiosyn-
cratic to the individuals playing the roles.

Regarding the three hypotheses, the results indicated that no

differences were found in the average amount of effort exerted as a
3

Craig Kenneth Polite

function of the three treatment conditions, or as a function of the
race of the supervisor. It appeared that the Tannenbaum theory was
tested and not supported in this experimental situation and that
there was no effect analogous to the Aronson and Golden (1962) finding.
Possible criticisms of the experimental procedure were dis-
cussed and the results were interpreted in full light of these.
Generally, it was concluded that though the results were not in a
direction to support the Tannenbaum model, the data may reflect the
artificial nature of the experimental situation more than the Tannen-

baum notions of control and that further research is necessary. ‘

Approved

 

Date

 

Dissertation Committee

Dr. Eugene H. Jacobson, Chairman
Dr. Jeanne E. Gullahorn

Dr. William D. Crano

Dr. Michael L. Moore

CONTROL: THE DOUBLE-BIND IN ORGANIZATIONAL POWER

By

Craig Kenneth Polite

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Psychology

1972

'l "d <.. "
' 1 ’3 3" fl? /
(:5) ,1‘ I ‘- x
‘O’

To my wife, Donna

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I sincerely wish to thank my chairman, Dr. Eugene H. Jacobson,
for his very challenging conversation and creative suggestions
throughout every phase of this project. The excellence he exempli-
fied and demanded contributed a great deal to the quality of this
research and to its presentation.

A special note of appreciation is also in order for
Dr. Jeanne E. Gullahorn. Her contributions to my graduate education
began the day we met and continued through my masters and doctoral
research. As a friend, a teacher, and a committee member, she has
been a constant source of guidance and encouragement. Her presence
has made my years in graduate school challenging and most of all
rewarding.

I would also like to thank the other members of my disserta-
tion committee, Dr. Michael Moore and Dr. William Crano. Dr. Moore's
pragmatic point of view and uncanny ability to apply pressure when
needed was a tremendous help in my professional training. Dr. Crano
was a constant source of solid ideas and critical comments when they
were needed and, as such, made a significant contribution to my re-

search.

Dr. Joel Aronoff and Dr. John Wakeley have also made contri-
butions of note. Though they were not part of the dissertation
committee, they provided guidance during this research and each has
made significant inputs to some phase of my graduate education.

Dr. Raymond Cochrane, chairman of my masters committee, is
another for whom a note of appreciation is in order. The enlightened
manner in which he guided my initial research attempt has left a
lasting impression. Though physically absent during the doctoral
research, his symbolic presence was always felt and his contribution
to the devel0pment of my research skills is without equal. I hope
that this research and future research will not be a source of em-
barrassment to him.

I would also like to thank every Black teacher that I've
ever had. From elementary through high school, these eleven indi-
.viduals, in conjunction with my parents, gave a damn when very few
others did. Their contribution to this research, though not direct,
is a significant one.

Last, but definitely not least, I wish to thank my wife,
Donna, and my daughter, Kimi. I really don't know how, nor why,

they have put up with me during the past three years.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES ......................... vii
Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION ...................... l

II. LITERATURE REVIEW ................... l3

Control in Organizations: The Tannenbaum Model . . 13

The Bases of Social Power ............. 20

Participation in Decision Making .......... 32

III. SUMMARY AND HYPOTHESES ................. 42

IV. METHOD ......................... 50

Participants .................... 50

Procedure ..................... 50

Dependent Measures ................. 56

V. RESULTS ........................ 58

The Dependent Measures of Control ......... 59

Supervisor Effects ................. 6l

Tests of Hypotheses ................ 63

TABLE OF CONTENTS.--C0nt.

Chapter Page

VI. DISCUSSION ....................... 66

Research Procedure: A Critique .......... 66

Interpretation of Results ............. 7l

PDM: The Necessary Preconditions ......... 74

Conclusions and Implications for Future Research. . 78

REFERENCES ........................... 85
APPENDIX

1. SUPERVISOR AND EXPERIMENTER ROLES ........... 9l

II. EFFORT QUESTIONNAIRE .................. 97

III. STIMULUS PAPER ..................... 104

IV. SPEECH STYLE PAPER ................... 112

V. VITAS ......................... 134

VI. POST HOC ANALYSES TABLES ................ I37

vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF TREATMENT EFFECT SCORES THREE

LEVELS OF INFLUENCE BY TWO OF RACE ........... 59

2. RELIABILITY OF QUESTIONNAIRE MEASURE ESTIMATED BY A
SUBJECT BY ITEM ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE .......... 6O

3. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF AVERAGE EFFORT EXERTED THREE
LEVELS OF INFLUENCE BY TWO 0F BLACK SUPERVISOR ..... 62

3a. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF AVERAGE EFFORT EXERTED THREE
LEVELS OF INFLUENCE BY TWO LEVELS OF WHITE
SUPERVISOR ....................... 62

4. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE 0F AVERAGE EFFORT EXERTED THREE
LEVELS OF INFLUENCE BY TWO LEVELS OF RACE ....... 64

5. AVERAGE EFFORT EXERTED AS A FUNCTION OF THE THREE
LEVELS OF INFLUENCE AND TWO LEVELS OF RACE ....... 65

6. MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF EFFORT SCALE
THREE LEVELS OF INFLUENCE BY TWO OF RACE ........ I37

7. MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF SPEECH EVALUATIONS
THREE LEVELS OF INFLUENCE BY TWO OF RACE ....... '. T38

vii

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

To date, the study of control within the formal organization
structure has been discussed, primarily, in a taxonomic manner.
Though these attempts have taken two distinctive paths, the sociol-
ogists dealing with the structural models and the psychologists deal-
ing with the interpersonal-structural models, both disciplines have
attempted only to define a classification system through which they
view control within organizations.

The sociologists' attempts to deal with this phenomenon have
their theoretical underpinnings in the formulations of Max Weber
(1947). The observational research of Weber resulted in his delin-
eating three forms of legitimate rule. These were: I) Rational-legal
authority--this type of rule rests purely on enactment. The basic
idea is that laws can be enacted and changed at will by formally
correct procedures and that the right to govern is based on a formal
written rule. 2) Traditional authority--this mode of authority rests
on the belief of the sacredness of the social order. Certain people
have the legitimate authority to rule others because this is the way
it has always been. 3) Charismatic authority rests on the affectual

l

and personal devotion of the follower to the lord and his gifts of
grace. They comprise especially magical abilities, revelations of
heroism, power of the mind and of speech.

Variations on the Weberian theme of power are numerous
(Etzioni, l969; Goldhammer and Shils, I939; Gulick and Urwick, T937;
Blau and Scott, 1962). Though the models presented by these neo-
Weberians may differ in varying degrees, they are nonetheless attempts
to deal with the problem of control in the formal organization struc-
turally.

Psychologists have traditionally differed from sociologists
in their study of power and control.1 While remaining cognizant of
the structural variables relevant to the concept, particularly the
Weberian notion of legitimacy, they deal primarily with the inter-
personal and intrapersonal dynamics of control (Cartwright, I965;
Kahn and Boulding, l964; Katz and Kahn, 1966).

The psychological study of control is replete with interven-
ing variables that attenuate any one systematic formulation of the
concept. Sources of variance traditionally taken into account are
the influencing agent, his method of exerting power, the individual

subjected to the influence attempt and the situation in which the

 

1In psychology the relationship between power and control is
analogous to the concepts of potential and kinetic energy in Physics.
That is, power refers to the potential to influence while control
refers to the result of an influence attempt.

influence attempt is made. This list, though not exhaustive, gives
some indication of the sources of variance that the psychologists
have considered significant in their consideration of the concept of
power.

Beyond taxonomic formulations, relatively little empirical
research has been pursued involving control in organizations. Tan-
nenbaum (l968), positing the notion of the control graph, represents
one serious attempt to move beyond this primitive mode of organiza-
tional research. It is the Tannenbaum contention that it's possible
to measure the control that a particular levelflin an organization has
over its environment, by asking the people on a particular level who
controls whom, or how much control does one level have over another. ‘
His main theoretical contribution comes from his notion and demon—
stration that when an organization increases the control that a par-
ticular level has over its environment, it thereby increases its 1
ability to control that level of the organization. In short, he
conceptualizes the notion of control in a non-zero sum context in-"
stead of in a zero sum context. (A

The psychologists' understanding of the phenomenon of control
was advanced immeasurably by the theoretical formulations of French
and Raven (I959). In their paper, "The Bases of Social Power,"
French and Raven maintain that the phenomena of power and influence

involve a dyadic relation between two agents which may be examined

from two points of view: a) What determines the behavior of the
agent who exerts power? b) What determines the reactions of the
recipient of this behavior? Dealing primarily with the second point
of view, they define a theory of power and influence which explains
many of the social phenomena observed each day.

French and Raven define psychological change at a level of
generality which includes changes in behavior, opinions, attitudes,
goals, needs, values, and all other aspects of a person's psycholog-
ical field. Accordingly, change is defined as any alteration of the
state of some system "a" over time. The amount of change is measured
by the difference between the state of system "a" at time l and
time 2. They go on to state

change in any psychological system may be conceptualized
in terms of psychological forces. But it is important
to note that the change must be coordinated to the re-
sultant force of all the forces operating at the moment.
Change in an opinion, for example, may be determined
jointly by a driving force induced by another person,

a restraining force corresponding to anchorage in a
group opinion, and an own force stemming from the per-
son's needs (p. lSl).

In brief, the five bases of social power defined by French
and Raven fall into two general categories: I) those in which the
internalization of a particular value or ethic is prerequisite
(legitimate, referent, and expert powers) and 2) those which are

completely divorced from the internalization phenomenon and dependent

on the presence of the influencing agent (reward and coercive powers).

Resulting from this dichotomy, differential predictions can be made
regarding the amount and kind of behavior change that can be induced
as a function of an individual's perception of his relationship with
a particular leader or organization.

Research (Bachman et al., 1968) employing the Tannenbaum
(l968) notion of control and the French and Raven (1959) model of
social power yielded interesting results. In a study of control,
performance, and satisfaction, Bachman et a1. say:

It is of particular interest to note that the degree of
control exercised by an office manager over his subor-
dinates was positively related to the control they
exercised over him. These findings clearly imply that
control at one level is not exercised at the expense

of another level. On the contrary, the data indicate
that any increase in control by office manager, subor-
dinates, or both should be associated with higher satis-
faction and performance (p. 225).

They go further to note that

Total control, performance and satisfaction with the
office manager were all relatively high for the

office manager whose leadership was perceived as
resting largely upon his skill and expertise and upon
his personal attractiveness. Conversely, the less
effective office manager was one who appeared to rely
more heavily upon the use of rewards and sanctions

and upon the formal authority of his position, as a
formal description of his role might indicate (p. 225).

In formal organizations, a supervisor, by virtue of holding
his position, is invested with the "legal right" to prescribe work
relevant behavior for his subordinates. To facilitate compliance

with his work relevant behavioral prescriptions, the supervisory

position carries with it the capability to mediate rewards and sanc-
tions for the subordinate positions. By using his "legal right" to
prescribe behavior, his legitimate power, the supervisor can control
the structural aspects of the work environment; that is, he can
ensure dependable role performance by his subordinates. He may
ensure (a) the meeting or exceeding of quantitative standards of
performance and (b) the meeting or exceeding of qualitative standards
of performance.

In the past, the control of these structural variables was
considered to be all that was necessary to have an efficiently run
organization (Weber, 1947). This limited control model, based on
Weber's exchange notion (a fair day's pay, with explicit control,
buys a fair day's work from the employee), appeared to be adequate
for the early 20th century German bureaucratic government service
and for the production line, or manual labor situation in this
country. Because most work was manual labor at that time, all that
was necessary in a work situation was for the subordinate to yield
to the legitimate will of his supervisor and production quotas would
be met. Little was required of the man beyond his compliance. Though
far from perfect, the prevailing emphasis on structural control did
appear to be adequate because production quotas were met.

. With the advent of automation, fewer and fewer jobs are manual

in nature and therefore the kind of control that needs to be exerted

by the supervisor is broader than the structural control exerted by
his pre-automation predecessor. As a result of automation, a large
number of the jobs are technical in nature, involve some sort of
specialized training and require that the individual do more than
produce at a specified level of quality and quantity. To a greater
extent than ever before, these jobs require that an individual engage
in cooperative activities with his fellow workers, that the worker
undertake some sort of self—training for either additional organiza-
tional responsibilities, or to keep abreast of advancements in his
field and that he offer creative suggestions regarding his work and
the work of others. Activities of this sort are best referred to
as situational activities.
Katz and Kahn (1966, p. 302) address themselves to this state

of affairs.

When we think of leadership in contrast to routine

role performance, however, we become particularly in-

terested in the kinds of individual behavior which go

beyond required performance and realize more fully the

potential of a given position for organizational in-

fluence. In other words, we consider the essence of

organizational leadership to\be the influential incre-

ment over and above mechanical compliance with the

routine directives of the organization. Such an in-

fluential increment derives from the fact that human

beings rather than computers are in positions of au—

thority and power.

Because the post-automation jobs require, for their meaning-

ful execution, these situational kinds of activities, the supervisor

must have the power to ensure that these activities are engaged in.
The legitimate power provided by the formal organization does noth-
ing, or at best very little, in terms of providing the power to
influence subordinates regarding situational activities. By virtue
of position, the organization provides structural power. However,
the acquisition of situational power falls squarely on the shoulders
of the supervisor.

Situational power as conceptualized here is the ability to
influence men to do something more than they are required, by organi-
zational law, to do. The French and Raven (1959) model indicates
that there are two bases of power that possess this capability:

a) Expert power and b) Referent power.

While situational control based on expert power (the capa-
bility to influence because of expertise in a particular area) is
sufficient to control pe0ple, the range of activities over which the
supervisor may exert control is very narrow and any attempt to in-
fluence in realms other than that in which the supervisor has expertise
will result in diminishing the power. Since all organizational func-
tions are not confined to one particular area, influence based pri-
marily on expert power would result in an inability to exert general
influence. Though expertness is an extremely important source of
power in organizations, it alone is not sufficient to influence

across the broad spectrum.

Situational control based on referent power (the capability
to influence because of the personal attraction of the influencer)
is very broad in its sc0pe. Because it is not content area spe-
cific, supervisors who have situational control based on referent
power are able to influence their subordinates in many different
areas. It might also be reasoned, in fact, that supervisors who
situationally control with referent power as their base, also have
more dependable structural control. That is, when a supervisor
possesses referent power his ability to control the structural
activities of the work situation is not dependent on his presence
or his ability to monitor the adherence to his structural dictates.
Because his power to influence has been internalized by the sub-
ordinate, his symbolic presence is always felt.

Initially it would seem that there is nothing that an organi-
zation could do to aid its supervisors in acquiring situational
power. However, there exists a number of meaningful activities that
may be engaged in toward this end. Most of these activities (e.g.
T-groups or extensive management training) are very costly in terms
of both time and money and may or may not produce the desired result.
Keeping in mind the Tannenbaum (l968) notion of control, that is, by
giving more control to subordinates it increases the extent to which
they are controlled, a simple procedural change may accomplish this

task.

10

Generally, organizational hiring policy is such that the
organizational hierarchy selects the individual who is to fill a
particular leadership position and then informs the subordinates of
that position who is to be their direct supervisor. Through this
‘procedure the superior is invested only with the structural power
that goes with his position. If, on the other hand, the subordinates
have I'greater control" over who is to be their leader, then the in-
dividual who is selected will be invested with the structural power
of his position and perhaps an increment of situational power be-
cause of his subordinates' involvement (control) in his selection.

Greater control, ideally, means that the subordinates have
the final decision about who is to be their superior. However, the
constraints of organizational reality are such that a procedure of
this sort is not possible. Instead, if subordinates realized that
their needs and opinions have a great deal of significance regarding
who is hired, this situation would more closely approximate the ideal
while not being a threat to the right of the management to make de-
cisions regarding whom shall be hired. As a result, the subordinates
would increase their power, the management would not lose any of its
power and theoretically the supervisor should be invested with both
structural and situational power. It is the aim of this research to

examine, in the laboratory, the results of such a procedural change.

ll

Situational power (referent power within the organizational
framework) is a social process and as such subject to systematic as
well as non-systematic influences from the environment. Herzberg
(1959) in his examination of another social process, job satisfac-
tion, found that the systematic influences he called "satisfiers"
were important in a person's satisfaction on the job. He also
found, however, that the not so systematic influences called "dis-
satisfiers," were, at least equally important in an individual's
satisfaction with his job. So important are these dissatisfiers
that it led him to conclude that the crucial aspect in increasing
job satisfaction is not increasing the number of satisfiers but,
in fact, decreasing the number of dissatisfiers.

As a social process, situational power may be influenced by
such variables as the sex of the supervisor and/or the racial compo-
sition of the group. The lists of these influences are endless and
the relative importance of each an open question. Societal pres-
sures have, however, made one of the aforementioned influences, race,
a significant one. Aronson and Golden (1962) have demonstrated that
the race of the communicator is not an "irrelevant" aspect of the
communication situation. They found that Black communicators had
less persuasive influence over an audience than did their White

counterparts who made identical arguments.

12

Today with an emphasis being placed on the development of
management personnel from minority groups, including Blacks and
women, and with full knowledge that situational power is subject to
assorted influences, the implications of the Aronson and Golden
study take on new significance. Could it be that within the formal
organizational framework, a differential amount of situational power
may exist that is analogous to the Aronson and Golden finding? In
theory building, therefore, the effects of race of supervisor must
be addressed. So to examine the theoretical aspects of the phenom-
enon in a realistic fashion, it is the purpose of this research to
simulate varying subordinate control situations and to vary race of
supervisor to examine their joint effects on the situational power
of the supervisor.

Toward this end, the following literature review will examine,
in detail, the theories previously referred to and present the rele-
vant empirical findings on which the theories are based. It will
also examine the theory and literature regarding the effects of par-

ticipation in decision-making on management and labor.

Chapter II

LITERATURE REVIEW

Control in Organizations: The Tannenbaum Model

 

Control as conceptualized by Tannenbaum (1968) is a dynamic
rather than a static process. It is perhaps best understood in terms
of "a cycle beginning with an intent on the part of one person, fol-
lowed by an influence attempt addressed to another person, who then
acts in some way that fulfills the intent of the first" (p. 5).
Basic to this model is the belief that control is a special case of
social causation where a person "0" causes another "P" to act in an
intended way. This definition of control is quite congruent with
other formulations (Cartwright, 1959; Dahl, 1957; French and Raven,
1959; Collins and Raven, 1969).

This model of control differs significantly from the models
advanced by mechanistic organizational theorists (Weber, 1947; Gold-
hammer and Shils, 1939). It was an inherent assumption of the
mechanistic theorists that the sole basis of power was coercion.

In describing the functioning of modern organization, it is stated
as organizational law that "the authority to give the commands re-
quired for the discharge of these duties is distributed in a stable

l3

14

way and is strictly delimited by rules concerning the coercive means,

 

physical, sacerdotal, or otherwise, which may be placed at the dis-
posal of officials" (Weber, 1966, p. 70). While these theorists
limit their conceptualization of control to that based on coercion,
Tannenbaum's model does not. In his model he recognizes that coer-
cion is not the only basis from which an individual, or an organi-
zation, may control.

Secondly, Tannenbaum differs from other models in that in the
traditional analysis of control, the phenomenon is conceptualized as
being a unilateral process; that is "one either leads or is lead, is
strong or weak, controls or is controlled" (p. 11). Basic to the
new model is the idea that control is not a unilateral process but,
instead, a mutual process. In a sense, one person does not do all
of the leading and another all of the following. The model recognizes
that there are no absolutes; there exists no rigidly defined dicho-
tomy between being a leader or being led, between being strong or
being weak, or in fact, between controlling and being controlled.
There are, indeed, subtle interactions.

Perhaps the most radical departure from the traditional school
of thought may be found in Tannenbaum's challenging the most basic
assumption on which previous theory is built. He maintains

traditional analyses of social power assume that the

total amount of power in a social system is a fixed
quantity and that the leaders and followers are engaged

15

in a I'zero sum game": increasing the power of one party
must be accompanied by a corresponding decrease in the
power of the other. The total amount of power in a
social system may grow and leaders and followers may
therefore enhance their power jointly. Total power may
also decline and all groups within the system may

suffer corresponding decreases (p. 12).

It is the essence of the Tannenbaum thesis that all organiza-
tions differ on two crucial aspects: 1) the total amount of control
exerted by the organization and 2) the relative amount of control
exerted by the respective hierarchical echelons of an organization.
These crucial aspects are graphically illustrated in the control
graph used by Tannenbaum (1956) and others (Tannenbaum and Georgop-
oulos, 1957; Smith and Tannenbaum, 1963; Oncken, 1971).

The horizontal base of this graph represents the hierarchical
scale in an organization and the vertical axis, the amount of control
exercised by the respective hierarchical echelons. The measurement
of the total amount and relative amount of control is defined as the
average judgments by organization members in response to question-
naire items dealing with the amount of influence or control exercised
by various levels or groups in their organization. The graphical
configuration resulting from such a procedure makes it clear that
there are many, many different possibilities regarding different

organizations' total control (height of curve) and the relative

amounts of control of the varying levels (slope of the graph).

16

At this point it is essential that an issue is addressed
which is of central importance to the Tannenbaum formulation. A
question may easily be raised regarding exactly what is being mea-
sured and therefore talked about here. Is it perceived control or
actual control? In addressing this issue, it should be realized that
though the measurement procedure involves asking organization members
about their perceptions of control, the author does present construct
validity data (Tannenbaum, 1968) to indicate that the perceptions are
accurate reflections of actual power. Therefore, though control is
measured by organization members' perceptions, these perceptions are
valid reflections of reality and as a result are measures of actual
power.
The ramifications of this new conceptualization are presented
nicely by Tannenbaum.
The assumption of a variable amount of control in
organizations represents, we believe, an assumption
of basic theoretical and practical importance. Theo-
retically, this assumption Opens up a number of pos-
sibilities that would not otherwise be apparent.
Consequently, it allows us to resolve what might
otherwise appear to be Opposing and irreconcilable
arguments concerning the implications of control in
organizations (p. 12).
The prOperties of this model allow the author to speculate
that it is possible, in a work situation, to increase the total

amount of control in an organization and at the same time hold con-

stant the relative amounts of control among the organizational

l7

hierarchy. This increase in the total amount of control may be
accomplished in two ways: 1) The organization may acquire control
over larger and larger segments of its environment. 2) "The second
concerns a number of internal conditions that subsume (A) structural
conditions expediting interaction and influence among members and
(B) motivational conditions implying increased interest by members
in exercising control and a greater amenability by members to being
controlled"1 (Tannenbaum, 1968, p. 14).

The model is not explicit in terms of explaining why in-
creased involvement and interest in control by organization members
will result in a greater amenability by members to being controlled.
However Tannenbaum does present two theoretical models that would

be capable of explaining such a phenomenon.

Control and Exchange

 

Based on the work or Blau (1954), Homans (1961), and Thibaut
and Kelley (1959), control conceptualized in terms of social exchange
theory involves exchanges of resources between the person who con-

trols and the person who is being controlled.

 

1Tannenbaum maintains that one method through which the ap-
prOpriate motivational conditions may be achieved is through the
employment of participation in decision making. This process, how-
ever, will be addressed in detail at a later point.

18

The exercise of control may be viewed as an exchange

of some valued resource dispensed by one person in

return for compliance on the part of another. The

total amount of control or power in a system may

therefore be seen as a function of the amount of

exchange involving compliance. This amount may

change, because the quantity of resources among

members changes or because of a change in the rules

regarding exchange (p. 15).
In a sense, a participant will remain in a relationship with his
supervisor only as long as the inducements offered him are as great

or greater than the contribution he is asked to make.

Control and Partial Inclusion

The principal of partial inclusion was developed by F. Allport

(1933) to refer to the segmental involvement of people in a social
grouping. At the individual level, the role that an organization re-
quires its members to play involves only a segment of the player's
total being. The full range of an individual's capabilities does not
have the Opportunity to manifest itself in terms of the role being
played and as a result he is only partially included in the organiza-
tion.

Because only part of the member is included, only a part

of him is at the disposal, so to speak, of the organiza-

tion. Thus there are limitations to the range of ac-

tivities that are subject to influence; excluded from

influence is that large segment of the person that does
not belong to the organization (p. 16).

19

Anything that enhances member's personal commitment to or
identification with the organization is implicitly including them
more fully within the organization and hence is increasing the possi-
bility of an expanded total amount of control. The human relations
approaches are designed to increase identification of members and
may therefore result in greater inclusion and greater control. Sim-
ilarly, giving members some influence in the organization generally
has the effect of increasing their identification with the organiza-
tion and their inclusion in it. Hence increasing members' influence
may also increase their influenceability and so contribute to a higher
level of control in the system.

In summary, this model represents a radical departure from
traditional theories and, as most models of this kind, is largely
an untested one. To believe that power and control relationships
are other than zero sum in nature, is foreign to this culture's, as
well as many other cultures', way of thinking. Nonetheless, the
model dOes represent a fresh approach to an age-old problem and as
such, deserves serious consideration in psychology's attempt to

understand control in organizations.

20
The Bases of Social Power

The French and Raven (1959) theory of social influence and
power is limited to influence on the person, P, produced by a social
agent, 0, where O can be either another person, a role, a norm, a
group or a part of a group or a work organization.

The influence of O on system "a" in the life space of P is
defined as the resultant force on system a which has its source in
an act of O. This resultant force induced by 0 consists of two com-
ponents: a force to change the system in the direction induced by O
and an Opposing resistance set up by the same act of 0. It therefore
follows that the strength of the social power of 0 over P in some
system "a" is defined as the maximum potential ability of.O to in-
fluence P in "a."

Inherent in the French and Raven definition of social power
are two salient factors that need to be taken into account. The
first of these is the dependence of system "a" on 0. It is assumed,
in this formulation, that any change in the state of a system is
produced by a change in some factor upon which it is functionally
dependent. In short, then, psychological change and stability can
be conceptualized in terms of dynamic dependence.

A second factor which is salient, when considering social
power, is observability as a basis for dependence. The authors,

with an example, handle this nicely:

21

Consider the example of three separated employees who
have been working at the same steady level of produc-
tion despite normal, small fluctuations in the work
environment. The supervisor orders each to increase
his production, and the level of each goes up from

100 to 115 pieces per day. After a week of producing
at the new rate of 115 pieces per day, the supervisor
is removed for a week. The production of employee A
immediately returns to 100 but B and C return to only
110 pieces per day. Other things being equal, we can
infer that A's new rate was completely dependent on
his supervisor whereas the new rate of B and C was
dependent on the supervisor only to the extent of five
pieces. Let us further assume that when the super-
visor returned, the production of B and C returned to
115 without further orders from the supervisor. Now
another month goes by during which B and C maintain

a steady 115 pieces per day. However, there is a
difference between them: B's level of production
still depends on 0 to the extent of 5 pieces whereas

C has come to rely on his own sense of obligation to
obey the orders of his legitimate supervisor rather
than on the supervisor's external pressure for main-
tenance of his 115 pieces per day. Accordingly, the
next time the supervisor departs, B's production again
drops to 110 but C's remains at 115 pieces per day.

In cases like employee B, the degree of dependence is
contingent on the perceived probability that 0 will
observe the state of the system and note P's conform-
ity. The level of observability will in turn depend
on both the nature of the system (e.g. the difference
between a covert opinion and overt behavior) and on
the environmental barriers to observation (e.g. O is
too far away from P). In other cases, for example
that of employee C, the new behavior pattern is highly
dependent on his supervisor, but the degree of depen-
dence on the new state will be related not to the level
of observability but rather to factors inside P, in
this case a sense of duty to perform an act legiti-
mately prescribed by O. The internalization of social
norms is a related process of decreasing degree of
dependence of behavior on an external 0 and increasing
dependence on an internal value; it is usually assumed
that internalization is accompanied by a decrease in
the effects of level of observability (p. 155).

22

The authors define five bases of social power: 1) reward
power, based on P's perception that O has the ability to mediate re-
wards for him; 2) coercive power, based on P's perception that O has
the ability to mediate punishments for him; 3) legitimate power,
based on the perception by P that O has a legitimate right to pre-
scribe behavior for him; 4) referent power, based on P's identifica-
tion with O; 5) expert power, based on the perception that O has

Special knowledge or expertness. A discussion of each follows.

Reward Power

 

The power of 0 over P is a function of the magnitude of the
rewards which P perceives that O can mediate for him. Reward power
depends on 0's ability to administer positive valences and to remove
or decrease negative valences. Note here that reward power depends
upon the probability, that is, perceived probability that O can med-
iate the reward. .

The authors maintain

the new state of the system induced by a promise of re-
ward will be highly dependent on 0. Since 0 mediates
the reward, he controls the probability that P will
receive it. Thus P's new rate of production will be
dependent on his subjective probability that 0 will
reward him for conformity minus the subjective proba-
bility that 0 will reward him even if he returns to

his old level. Both probabilities will be greatly
affected by the level of observability of P's be-
havior (p. 156).

23

The range of the reward power of 0 over P is totally depen-
dent on P's perception of 0's ability to give rewards in varying
situations. When a situation arises where P perceives O as being
unable to mediate positive sanctions 0 has no power over P. While
it is true that the use of rewards within the range of reward power
increases the power, it is equally true that unsuccessful attempts
to exert reward power outside of the range of power would tend to

decrease the power.

Coercive Power

Coercive power is similar to reward power in that it is also
dependent on P's perception of 0's ability to mediate valences. For
0 this power has its basis in the expectation on the part of P that
he will be punished by 0 if he fails to conform to the influence
attempt. Thus,

negative valences will exist in given regions of P's
life space, corresponding to the threatened punishment
by O. The strength of the coercive power depends on
the magnitude of the negative valences of the
threatened punishment multiplied by the perceived
probability that P can avoid the punishment by con-
formity (p. 158).
In comparing this coercive power to reward power, the

authors make a very salient distinction.

The distinction between these two types of power (re-
ward and coercive) is important because the dynamics

24

are different. The concept of "sanctions" sometimes
lumps the two together deSpite their opposite effects.
While reward power may eventually result in an inde-
pendent system, the effects of coercive power will
continue to be dependent. Reward power will tend to
increase the attraction of P toward 0, coercive power
will decrease this attraction. The valence of the
region of behavior will become more stressful, acquir-
ing some negative valence from the threatened punish-
ment. The negative valence of punishment would also
spread to other regions of the life space (p. 158).

Legitimate Power

 

Legitimate power of 0 over P is defined as that power which
stems from internalized values in P which dictate that O has a legi-
timate right to influence P and that P has an obligation to accept
this influence.1 P may accept an induction from 0 simply because he
had previously promised to help 0 and he values his word too much to
break the promise. In all cases, the notion of legitimacy involves
some sort of a code or standard, accepted by the individual, by
virtue of which the external agent can affect his power.

There are three bases of legitimate power. These are:

(1) Cultural values. Item 0 has characteristics which
are specified by the culture as giving him the right
to prescribe behavior for P, who may not have these

characteristics. In some cultures these include age,
intelligence, caste and physical characteristics.

 

1Note that legitimate power is very similar to the notion of
legitimacy of authority employed by Weber (1947); however, legitimate
power here is not always a role relation.

25

(2) The acceptance of social structure is another basis
of legitimate power. If P accepts as right the social
structure of his group organization or society, espe-
cially the social structure involving a hierarchy of
authority, P will accept the legitimate authority of 0,
who occupies a superior office in the hierarchy. Thus
legitimate power in formal organization is largely a
relationship between offices rather than between
persons. (3) Designation by a legitimizing agent is

a third basis for legitimate power. An influencer,

0, may be seen as legitimate in prescribing behavior
for P because he has been granted such power by a le-
gitimizing agent whom P accepts. Thus a department
head may accept the authority of his vice-president

in a certain area because that authority has been
specifically delegated by the president (p. 160).

The results of a legitimate power based induction usually has
high dependence on 0 though it may become independent. Here, however,
the degree of dependence is not related to the level of observability.
Since legitimate power is based on P's values, the source of the

forces induced by 0 include both these internal values and O.

Referent Power

 

According to French and Raven

the referent power of 0 over P has its basis in the
identification of P with 0. By identification, we
mean a feeling of oneness of P with O, or a desire
for such an identity. P's identification with O can
be established or maintained if P behaves, believes
and perceives as 0 does. Accordingly O has the
ability to influence P, even though P may be unaware
of this referent power (p. 162).

26

The basic criterion for distinguishing referent power from
both coercive and reward power is the mediation of the punishment
and the reward by 0. To the extent that O mediates the sanctions
we are dealing with coercive and reward power; however, to the extent
that P avoids discomfort or gains satisfaction by conformity based
on identification, regardless of 0's response, we are dealing with
referent power.

The new state of a system produced by referent power may be
dependent on, or independent of 0, but the degree of dependence is
not affected by the level of observability to 0. Often P is not
consciously aware of the referent power which 0 exerts over him.
There is probably a tendency for some of these dependent changes to

become independent of 0 quite rapidly.

Expert Power

 

This power refers to the capability of an individual 0 to
influence another individual P in some system "A" in which 0 is
acknowledged to have a great deal of knowledge or expertise. In
this situation probably P evaluates 0's expertness in relation to
his own knowledge as well as against some absolute standard.

The authors maintain that

expert power will produce a new cognitive structure
which is initially relatively dependent on 0, but

27

informational influence will produce a more independent

structure. The former is likely to become more inde-

pendent with the passage of time. In both cases, the

degree of dependence on O is not affected by the level

of observability (p. 164).

The concept of social power in general and the French and

Raven model in particular have been the inspiration for a good deal
of research. In the remainder of this section a small segment of

this literature will be reviewed.

The Bases of Social
Power: Research

 

 

Zipf (1960) studied resistance and conformity under reward
and punishment. Here an experiment was designed to compare influence
by means of rewards and punishments for differential effects on moti-
vation to conform (conformity force) and motivation to resist (re-
sistance force) and the resulting change in actions. Subjects were
premeasured on the need to be independent of control figures. It
was demonstrated that the conformity force taken as a combination
of valence of the goal and the probability that trying to conform
will lead to the goal, is positively related to conformity of action
as measured by increase in speed following a sanctioned induction to
go faster. It was further found that the resistance force is nega-
tively related to conformity of action as measured by increase in

Speed after a sanctioned induction to go faster and that influence

28

by means of punishment produces a greater resistance force than in-
fluence by means of reward.

In much the same vein, French et a1. (1960) examined coercive
power and forces affecting conformity. In a laboratory experiment
90 subjects worked on a card sorting task under a supervisor who
created various conditions of coercive power. Thirty-three (legiti-
mate fine) subjects were threatened for working too slowly and later
fined the amount they had been told was legitimate; twenty-two (il-
legitimate fine) subjects were threatened and fined the same amount
which, in this condition, was twice the specified legitimate amount
of fine; and twenty-one (no fine) subjects were neither threatened
nor fined although they were told they were working too slowly. It
was concluded that punishment forces and resistance forces are inde-
pendent determinants of conformity to coercive power. Although it
appears that legitimacy affects resisting forces, this experiment
indicates that such effects are not mediated by low attraction to
the supervisor.

The effects of social power on aspiration setting and striv-
ing was examined by Zander and Curtis (1962). Individual subjects
were observed in a situation for studying the level of aspiration,
while they were to perceive themselves as members of a team which
was not physically present. In two experimental conditions (referent

and coercive) the subjects were provided standards of individual

29

performance for a series of trials, said to originate in other
members of their team. Events were so arranged that subjects, over
the series, did not attain the performance levels put before them by
the others. In a third condition (control) subjects were not pro-
vided standards of performance from others. It was found that
(1) Subjects in a referent relationship with the supervisor make
lower evaluation of their scores than do subjects in a coercive
relationship with the supervisor. (2) Subjects in a referent situa-
tion obtain higher scores than do subjects in a coercive situation.
(3) Subjects in a coercive situation reveal weaker motivation to
reach a high score than do subjects in a referent situation.
(4) Subjects in a coercive situation perceive the supervisor as
less attractive than do subjects in a referent situation. (5) Sub-
jects in a coercive situation state less acceptance of the super-
visor's social pressures than do subjects in a referent situation.
An examination of group support, legitimate power and social
influence was undertaken by Raven and French (1958). It was hypoth-
esized that in an interdependent situation, an election process
would serve to grant to an individual a legitimate right to a super-
visory position. This would result in the supervisors having
greater power to influence his fellow workers. A supervisor who did
not have legitimate power would also be less accepted personally.

Two work situations were created, both interdependent and identical

30

with the exception that in one case the supervisor was elected, and
in the other the supervisor assumed his position without benefit of
election. The hypotheses were substantially supported.

In a further investigation of the effects of legitimacy,
Raven and French (1958a) employed methodology similar to that de-
scribed earlier (Raven and French, 1958). It was concluded here
that the net effect of nonlegitimate and coercive influence may be
an increased discrepancy between private and public opinion and be-
havior with its resulting tensions. Eventually, it is predicted,
that the worker would leave the situation, become hostile toward
the supervisor, reject further influence completely, or otherwise
express this tension.

Adolescent evaluations of rewarding, neutral and punishing
power figures was examined by Brigante (1958). Two studies were
executed in this research. In the first and most important study,
27 adolescent boys interacted with five power figures. Subjects
solved problems about whose solutions each power figure made sug-
gestions. Results showed that the rewarder was rated more favorably
than either the neutral or punishing figure. It was also found that
on a measure of the power figure's influence one week after the ori-
ginal interaction, the neutral figure had exerted more influence
than did either the rewarding or punishing figures. It was concluded

that the study points to the importance of distinguishing between

31

rewarding and punishing power and emphasizes that the consequences of
inducing different amounts of power depend on the particular way in
which power has been experimentally induced.

The bases of supervisory power were studied by Bachman,
Bowers and Marcus (1968). Here the bases of power were examined in
five organizations: 1) salesmen in branch offices, 2) faculty in
liberal arts colleges, 3) agents in life insurance agencies, 4) pro-
duction workers in an appliance firm, and 5) workers in a utility
company. The data, based on questionnaire responses, provides fairly
consistent findings.

(1) Legitimate power was rated one of the two most im-
portant bases of power; however, it did not seem a
consistent factor in organizational effectiveness, nor
was it related significantly to the total amount of
control. (2) Expert power was the other very promi-
nent basis of power, and it was strongly and consis-
tently correlated with satisfaction and performance.
Of the five bases, expert power was most positively
related to total amount of control. (3) Referent
power was of intermediate importance as a reason for
complying with a supervisor's wishes, but in most
cases it was positively correlated with criteria of
organizational effectiveness. In two sites it was
significantly and positively related to total amount
of control. (4) Reward power was also of intermediate
importance; in this case the correlations with organi-
zational effectiveness and with total control were

not consistent. (5) Coercive power was clearly the
least prominent reason for compliance; moreover, this
basis of power was often negatively related to criteria
of effectiveness and in two cases negatively related
to total amount of control (p. 236).

32

Student (1968), employing the Katz and Kahn (1966) concept
of incremental influence, studied supervisory influence and work
group performance. In this study incremental influence was empiri-
cally tested by relating twelve work group performance measures with
measures of supervisors' social power. Referent power and expert
power were conceptualized as incremental influence and considered
qualitatively different from reward power, coercive power and legit-
imate power. Referent power and expert power are considered to
be idiosyncratic in character and depend upon an individual's unique
role behavior, while reward power, coercive power, and legitimate
power are organizationally determined and designed to be equal for
all supervisors on the same hierarchical level. As predicted,
eXpert power was related to a low accident rate, referent power
was somewhat related to measures of subordinate withdrawal, and both
referent power and expert power were generally related to group mea-
sures of production performance. These results were regarded as

supporting the concept of incremental influence.

Participation in Decision Making

While many writers discuss participation in decision making

(Campbell et al., 1970; Hinton and Reitz, 1971) perhaps the most

33

inclusive and definitive statement was made by Katz and Kahn (1966).

Speaking in systems theoretical terms, they maintain
we refer here, however, to the engagement of the indi-
vidual in the system so that he is involved in deci-
sions which affect him as a system member. In effect,
he has both a voice and a vote in the subsystem in
which he functions and a voice and a vote in the rep-
resentation of that subsystem in the larger structure.
And this type of participation also guarantees him an
opportunity to share in the rewards of the group
cooperation that constitutes the system (p. 381).

Employee participation in management decision making has been
frequently discussed in the literature on management and has gener-
ated considerable pro and con comment (Marrow, Bowers and Seashore,
1967). To some writers, participation is the answer to most human
difficulties in decision making. They argue that if an employee
feels he is part of the process of making a decision, he will accept
it more readily and be motivated to implement it more effectively
(Elbing, 1970). The imposition of an apparently arbitrary decision,
it is claimed, may invite a passive or a negative reaction (McGregor,
1960).

In their writings on participation in decision making, Likert
(1961) and Tannenbaum (1966) agree that there are a number of bene-
fits to be derived as a result of this mode of operation. (1) Systems
of this sort tend to be ego enhancing. Indeed, members may derive

satisfaction because of their need forlself determination, or inde-

pendence or power, or as a result of whatever satisfying meanings

34

the exercise of control may have for them. (2) Participation may
result in both material and pragmatic rewards. "Participative deci-
sions are more likely than hierarchical decisions to take into account
the needs and interests of all parties, so that control is less

likely to seem arbitrary and disadvantageous" (Tannenbaum, 1966,

p. 98). (3) As a result of participation, jobs may become intrin-
sically more satisfying, they may become challenging and draw upon

the sum total of the skills that an individual may have. (4) Parti-
cipation reduces disaffection and increases the identification of
members with the organization. Individuals, as a result, are more
likely to feel some sense of commitment and responsibility relative

to tasks that are brought before them in their capacity as decision
makers. (5) Also inherent in participation is its capacity to enhance
the control exercised by managers while increasing that of the rank

and file members (Tannenbaum, 1966, 1968).

Participation in Decision
Making: Research

One of the earliest studies done on authority patterns was
done by Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939). In a first experiment,
Lippitt compared one group of five ten-year-old children, under
autocratic leadership, with a comparable group under democratic

leadership. In a second experiment Lippitt and White studied four

35

comparable clubs of ten-year-old boys, each of which passed succes-
sively five democratic periods, five autocratic periods, and two
laissez-faire periods. In this second experiment personality dif-
ferences were controlled by having each group pass through autocracy
and then democracy and leader effects were controlled for by having
a number of leaders play the varying roles. Extensive records of
meetings were kept and parents and teachers were interviewed.

In the first experiment, hostility was thirty times as fre-
quent in the autocratic as in the democratic group. Aggression was
eight times as frequent. Much of this aggression was directed toward
two successive scapegoats within the group; none of it was directed
toward the autocrat.

In the second experiment, one of the five autocracies showed
the same aggressive reaction as was found in the first experiment.
In the other four autocracies, the boys showed an extremely non-
aggressive pattern of behavior.

Four types of evidence indicate that this lack of aggression
was probably not caused by lack of frustration, but by the repressive
influence of the autocrat: a) outbursts of aggression on the days
of transition to a freer atmosphere; b) a sharp rise of aggression
when the autocrat left the room; c) other indications of generalized
apathy, such as an absence of smiling and joking; and d) the fact

that nineteen out of twenty boys liked their democratic leader better

36

than their autocratic leader and seven out of ten also liked their
laissez-faire leader better. In their interpretation of this data,
the authors state "a general statement on the data of aggression

can be made in terms of four underlying factors: tension, restricted
space of free movement, rigidity of group structure, and style of
living (culture)" (p. 299).

Some effects of decision and discussion on coalescence, change
and effectiveness was examined by Pennington et a1. (1958). Twenty
groups of five subjects per group were divided randomly into four
treatment categories. Each subject twice ranked privately ten sets
of five cities in order of population size. Five groups discussed
the problem but announced no group decision. The results indicated
that: 1) Coalescence was increased by group discussion, group deci-
sion and most of all by the combination of both treatments. 2) Change
of opinion was significantly greater for groups permitted either
discussion or decision, although the effect was much less pronounced
with group decision alone. As was the case earlier, greatest change
occurred when both were permitted.

Preston and Heintz (1949) studied the effects of participatory
vs. supervisory leadership on group judgment. In this study members
of several laboratory classes were asked to rank twelve potential
presidential nominees in their own individual orders of preference.

The subjects were then divided into groups of four or five each.

37

Leaders were elected, drawn aside and instructed to proceed in a par-
ticipatory or a supervisory manner. Group rankings were then formu-
lated. The results show that participatory leadership is more effec-
tive than supervisory leadership as a technique for effecting changes
in attitudes. Responses to supplementary questionnaires revealed that
(a) participatory subjects were satisfied with group rankings more
often than supervisory subjects although the differences were not
always significant (b) participatory subjects more often reported the
task as being interesting and meaningful. Analogous results are also
reported by Morse and Reimer (1956).

In a replication of Preston and Heintz (1949), Hare (1953)
used thirteen-year-old boys as subjects and an analogous procedure.
The data indicated that participatory leadership was more effective
than supervisory leadership as a technique for changing opinions.

In addition, the participatory leader generally had more influence
on the group, a result not obtained with college students.

In a field study Lawler and Hackman (1969) examined the impact
of employee participation in the deveIOpment of pay incentive plans.
The subjects were part-time workers who clean buildings in the even-
ings. Three autonomous work groups deveIOped their own pay incentive
plans to reward good attendance on the job (condition A). These
plans were then imposed by the company on other work groups (condi-

tion B). There were two groups of control subjects: One talked with

38

experimenters about job attendance problems but received no additional
experimental treatment, and the other received no treatment. A sig-
nificant increase in attendance followed only condition "A." The
researchers posited three possible explanations for the results.
(A) participation caused subjects to be more committed to the plan;
(8) subjects who participated in the development of their plan were
more knowledgeable about it; or (C) participation increased the em-
ployees' trust of the good intentions of management with respect to
the plan.

Research done at the Harwood Manufacturing Company (Coch and
French, 1948) has provided perhaps the most definitive statements
regarding participation in decision making. In a study on overcoming
resistance to change, four groups of workers were involved. The
first group, the control group, had their new jobs timed, piece rates
set, and the workers were informed that the changes were to take
place because of competitive market conditions. This was the usual
procedure. The second group employed a system of participation
through representation. After the group representatives met and
heard the need for the changes presented, they argued that the changes
were possible without placing a strain on the workers. Special
workers were then selected to help design and implement the new plan.
The third and fourth groups received similar treatment to the second

group, except that all of the members helped to design the new jobs.

39

The results indicated that the control group production dropped ten
units, the “representative" group production dropped initially but
eventually recovered to its original level and the "total participa-
tion" group's production dropped initially, recovered to original
production levels very quickly and in a short time leveled off at
an average of ten units greater than original production. In con-
clusion it was stated

it is possible for management to modify greatly or to

remove completely group resistance to changes in

methods of work and the ensuing piece rates. This

change can be accomplished by the use of group meet-

ings in which management effectively communicates the

need for change and stimulates group participation in

planning the changes (p. 305).

Anderson and Fiedler (1964) present results which are in gen-
eral accord with those of Coch and French (1948). They studied the
effects of participatory and supervisory leadership on group crea-
tivity. They compared the creativity of four-man groups under two
conditions of leadership. The subjects were ninety freshman and
sophomore Navy ROTC midshipmen and thirty NROTC seniors who served
as group leaders. In fifteen of the groups, the leaders acted as
chairmen who directed the group discussions and contributed to the
task solution. In the other fifteen groups, leaders acted in a
supervisory capacity: they directed and guided group discussion

and they were allowed to encourage members or to reject ideas, but

the leaders were prohibited from contributing to the solution of

40

the task. Groups having participatory leaders were generally superior
in quantity of output while groups under supervisory leaders were
superior in the quality of the product. Although leaders in the two
conditions did not differ in their satisfaction with group product,
the participatory leaders were more satisfied with their own indi-
vidual contribution to the task. The leadership styles did not
produce differences in the member's esteem for the leader or in the
member's morale and satisfaction with the task.

While the presentation, to this point, has been purposely
slanted to demonstrate that there are significant effects when par-
ticipation in decision making is employed, it should be realized that
there do exist variables that attenuate the relationship between
participation in decision making and some of its reported results
(Day and Hamblin, 1964). In this regard, a theory that has received
much attention in recent years is advanced by Fiedler (1967). His
basic thesis is that the type of leadership behavior required for
effective group performance is contingent upon the favorableness of
the group-task situation for the leader, where favorableness refers
to the degree to which the group environment makes it easy or diffi-
cult for the leader to influence the group members. When the group-
task situation is either highly favorable or highly unfavorable for

the leader, controlling, managing, directive leadership behavior is

41

most effective, whereas permissive, considerate, nondirective leader-
ship is needed for moderately unfavorable group-task situations.

Shaw and Blum (1966) in their examination of the effects of
leadership style upon group performance as a function of task struc-
ture, test the generality of the Fiedler Contingency theory. In the
study, five-person groups attempted three tasks under either direc-
tive or nondirective leadership. Leadership behavior was manipulated
by instructions. The three tasks were selected to vary along the
"solution multiplicity dimension," hence, presumed to reflect dif-
ferent levels of favorability for the leader. The results indicated
that the directive leader was more effective than the nondirective
leader only when the group-task situation was highly favorable for
the leader, thus, partially supporting the contingency model.

In summary, the literature on participation in decision
making is rather conclusive. It indicates that there are many de-
sirable consequences of this participatory procedure. While this
mode of management and/or decision making is not universally desir-
able, the literature does indicate that it can be meaningfully em-
ployed in a wide variety of situations and as such PDM has been a
prevalent theme for many years in the human relations approach to

management.

Chapter III

SUMMARY AND HYPOTHESES

Both the organizational control and the social power litera-
ture clearly indicate that there are many avenues yet to be explored
regarding the phenomenon of control within the formal organizational
structure. When it is realized that the Tannenbaum (1968) notions
of control have their theoretical underpinnings in the work of French
(1956) and French and Raven (1959), control within the formal organi-
zation is rightly understood to be a social process subject to all
the variables that affect such processes both within organizations
and elsewhere and does not exist only within the formal organiza-
tional structure.

The literature review of social power indicates that power,
the capability to influence, is affected by such variables as the
means of reward and punishment employed (Zipf, 1960; and French
et al., 1960) and the subordinates' perception of the legitimate
right of a person to hold a supervisory position (Raven and French,
1958). This literature also indicates that social power has varying
effects on the aSpiration setting and striving of subordinates
(Zander and Curtis, 1962) and that nonlegitimate and coercive

42

43

influence attempts result in an increased discrepancy between public
opinion and private behavior (Raven and French, 1958a). Indeed, the
literature is quite conclusive indicating that the possession and
use of power has varying effects on the influencer as well as the
person being influenced.

The control model posited by Tannenbaum (1968) is best de-
scribed as being new and revolutionary. The model questions the
implicit assumption of the mechanistic organizational theorists that
there is a finite amount of power in an organization and that when
one part of an organization increases its power, it does so at the
expense of the other parts. Mechanistic theorists conceptualize
power, and therefore the relationship between management and labor,
in a zero sum context, while Tannenbaum maintains that the relation-
ship is not necessarily zero sum. 0f pivotal importance in this
largely untested model is the Tannenbaum theory regarding the results
of having control in an organization. Tannenbaum maintains that
there is a positive relationship between the amount of control exer-
cised by an individual and the extent to which that individual is
controlled by the organization; the more control a person has, the
more control the organization has over him.

The issue at hand in the research reported in this monograph
centers about the acquisition of social power in an organizational

setting. Specifically, it is concerned with examining a method to

44

increase the power that a supervisor has over his subordinates. While
it has been established that all supervisors, by virtue of position,
have structural power, it was also reasoned that for the meaningful
execution of many supervisory assignments, it is necessary for a
supervisor to influence subordinates in the situational aspects of

the work environment. The ability to influence in these situational
aspects, situational power or incremental influence (Katz and Kahn,
1966), is not provided by the organization and its acquisition rests
solely on the shoulders of the supervisor.

Tannenbaum (l968) maintains that one way to increase the
total amount of control in an organization is through participant
management procedures. The position is best articulated by March
and Simon (1958, p. 54):

Where there is participation, alternatives are suggested

in a setting that permits the organizational hierarchy

to control (at least in part) what is evoked. 'Parti-

cipative management' can be viewed as a device for

permitting management to participate more fully in the

making of decisions as well as a means for expanding

the influence of lower echelons in the organizations.
This mode of thinking, that is the result of participative procedures,
is more than adequately substantiated in the literature (Tannenbaum,
1966; Lawler and Hackman, 1969; Preston and Heintz, 1949; and Coch
and French, 1948).

In addressing the central issue in this research, it is a

small theoretical step to conclude that if it is possible to increase

45

the amount of control of subordinates by a participative management
procedure, and the literature indicates that it is, it would follow
if Tannenbaum is correct, that the organization would, in a like
manner, increase its control over its subordinates. If this in fact
is true, then participation in decision making as a management pro-
cedure would be one way to deal with the problem of the acquisition
of supervisory situational power.

It would be difficult to locate an appropriate experimental
situation, in an ongoing organization, that would provide for an
adequate and pure test of the Tannenbaum theories. As an alternative
it was decided that a good test of the model could be achieved by a
laboratory simulation. Though organizational research in the labora-
tory has been criticized (Dalton, 1964) it is felt that, given the
constraints of organizational reality, a more than adequate test
could be provided by a laboratory simulation procedure.

The Operationalization of participation in decision making
in the laboratory situation should be a straightforward one so that
the subjects are aware of their influence or lack of influence over
their environment. If a task group of experimental subjects were
told that it is necessary for them to have a supervisor to guide
them in accomplishing the task before them and then given an oppor-
tunity to choose from among three candidates for the position, then

this procedure would be analogous to many participative procedures

46

employed in ongoing organizations. What should happen in this situa-
tion is that the subjects should be more ego involved than if they

had no influence over the supervisory selection procedure. They
should be more involved because they have some control over the
situation and by the same token, according to Tannenbaum, their super-
visor should be more able to control them. The control of the super-
visor who comes to his position through a participative procedure
should be measurably greater than his counterpart who comes to his
position through an arbitrary appointment procedure.

Since it has already been established that power can only be
measured by the result of an attempt to influence, it is necessary to
measure the amount of supervisory situation power, to have the super-
visor attempt to influence his subordinates in one of the situational
aspects of the work situation. This influence attempt shoqu have
direct bearing on the task before the group so as to be as close
approximation as possible to supervisory attempts to influence in
an ongoing organization. As a result of constraints of the aforemen-
tioned nature, the following experimental situation and influence
attempt is proposed: Each experimental group is faced with the task
of preparing a speech. After the varying supervisory selection pro-
cesses (participatory or nonparticipatory) have taken place, a
previously unknown individual, the SUpervisor, enters the laboratory,

introduces himself and informs the subjects that in this meeting they

47

are to read a paper on ecology and prepare a rough draft of a speech
outline. He goes on to inform them that they will return the follow-
ing evening and write the final draft of the outline. At the end of
the first session the supervisor initiates an influence attempt. He
informs the subjects that quality is important and that they should
do the best work that they can do. The supervisor attempts to influ-
ence the subjects to do two things: 1) He tells the subjects that
he has reserved a paper on the improvement of speech style for them
and that they should go and examine the paper prior to the second
meeting where they will write the final draft, and 2) He tells them
that because quality is an important dimension, they should make
every effort between the sessions to do a quality speech.

This experimental situation is a viable one in that it iso-
lates and attempts to simulate the supervisor-subordinate relation-
ship often found in work organizations and at the same time it should
provide the subjects with a feeling analogous to that of being a
small part of a large work organization. This design is a viable one
in that it permits a test of the Tannenbaum control model, it permits
a test of a possible extention of the French and Raven model of the
bases of social power and at the same time allows a test for a pos-
sible solution to the problem of a supervisor's acquiring situational

power.

48

Based on the aforementioned rationale, it is concluded that
this procedure would yield an internally valid (Campbell and Stanley,
1966) test of the arguments that have been presented. As a result

of this two hypotheses have been advanced:

1. Where subordinates have influence over who is named super-
visor and receive the man of their choice as supervisor,
there will be a higher proportion of subjects examining the
Speech style paper and making a general effort to do quality
work, than when the supervisor is arbitrarily appointed

without any consideration for the subordinates' opinions.

2. Where subordinates have influence over who is named super-
visor and do not get the supervisor or their choice, there
will be a higher proportion of subjects examining the speech
style papers and making a general effort to do quality work
than when the supervisor is arbitrarily appointed without

any consideration for the subordinates' opinions.

A second issue raised in this research deals with the pos-
sible effect that the race of a supervisor may have on his ability
to control his subordinates. A pragmatic issue raised in light of
the recent social changes and the ever increasing pressure to place

more minorities in management positions, this issue is of both

49

theoretical and practical import. In this vein, research (Aronson
and Golden, 1962) indicated that Black communicators had less per-
suasive influence than their White counterparts who made identical
arguments. These results may be interpreted in many ways according
to the interpreter's religion, politics, and/or political inclina-
tion. Interpretation notwithstanding, the possibility that an ef-
fect, analogous to that demonstrated by Aronson and Golden may-
exist within the confines of the formal work organization is an issue
that needs to be studied. From the point of view of both the orga-
nization and the minority supervisors, it is necessary to establish
whether or not this phenomenon is a fact so that appropriate measures
may be undertaken to deal with the inequality.

The previously described laboratory setting should provide
an opportunity to examine the extent to which the Aronson and Golden
finding may be generalized. In this situation, two Black and two
White supervisors should role play each of the three participation
conditions.

Based on the aforementioned rationale, the following hypoth-

‘ esis is advanced:

3. No difference will exist in the proportion of subjects exam-
ining the speech style papers and making a general effort to

do quality work as a function of the race of the supervisor.

Chapter IV

METHOD

'Particjpants

 

Fifty-nine White male introductory psychology students were
employed in this research (N = 59). Each subject received class
credit for his participation. Their assignment to treatment condi-
tions was random and each subject served in only one experimental
condition.

Supervisors: Four supervisors were used in this experimental
situation; two White and two Black. Each supervisor participated in

each of the three treatment conditions.

Procedure

While waiting to be admitted to the laboratory, the subject
got acquainted with the other two members of his work group. The
other two group members, both White males, were confederates of the

experimenter.

50

51

The group was then brought into the laboratory by an indi—
vidual who introduced himself as an experimenter aide working with
this project (Appendix I). This experimenter told the subjects that
they were taking part in an experiment conducted by the psychology
department of the university. He said, "The purpose of this project
is to examine the relationship between attitudes about ecology and
the content of a speech." He then explained that
previous studies have demonstrated that the attitudes
of a person heavily influence the content of anything
he says or writes. However, there has never been any
research to indicate that the attitudes of an indi-
vidual regarding ecology are related to the content
of a speech that he writes. Therefore, this study is
designed to examine this kind of relationship.

Because the study ostensibly examined the relationship between atti-

tudes and speech content, the experimenter told the group:
It is about the relationship between attitudes about
ecology and the content of a speech; therefore, to
get the credit for participating in the project, you
don't have to write a Nobel Prize winning outline,
but all you need do is write an outline today and
return tomorrow and write the final draft of the
outline.

In the "participation in decision making" situation the group
was then informed, by the experimenter, that they must have a super-
visor whose job it would be to guide them in the preparation of their
speech. They were told that there were three men working with the

project, who were experienced in varying aspects of public speaking

and were available at the time to supervise their efforts. Then

52

the group was presented with the vitas of three individuals whom they
had never met (Appendix V).

The background information revealed that each of three indi-
viduals were competent to direct preparations for public speaking.
Supervisor 1 was described as an experienced public Speaker. He,
as a high school student, was a member of the school public speaking
club and ranked among the best in the club. In his four undergrad-
uate years here at the university, he has participated in the public
speakers forum and in numerous public speaking contests.

Supervisor 2 was described as a senior at M.S.U. majoring in
Secondary Education with a specialty in Speech. Having participated
successfully in his high schools' speech club, he has turned his
efforts to teaching speech and has done so, in conjunction with his
professors, in numerous workshOps and seminars around the state.

Supervisor 3 was described as a student, a senior, who has
been involved since high school in public speaking. With a major in
Journalism, he has, since his freshman year at the university, been
employed as a judge for debating and public speaking contests and on
a number of occasions has covered speeches both here on campus and
at the state capitol, for the university newspaper.

From these three individuals, it was up to the group to come
to a unanimous decision regarding the man they wanted to be the

group's supervisor. During this decision phase, one of the two

53

confederate group members always solicited from the subject his choice
of who the supervisor was to be. At that point one of the confederate
group members agreed with the subject and the other then made some
argument against that choice and offered a choice of his own. A
discussion followed and the dissenting group member was won over by
the superior judgment of the two other work group members.

The group was told that they may or may not get the man they
want to be the supervisor. This was so, they were told, because there
were other groups in the study who were going through the same pro-
‘cess and selecting from the same pool of individuals. The final
supervisory selection rests in the hands of the study director. They
were told that his selection was dependent on a number of factors
which were beyond the experimenter's control; however the study di-
rector would make every effort to give the group the man they pre-
ferred as their supervisor.

This supervisory selection process set up two experimental
conditions: 1) where the group received the supervisor they wanted
(POM l) and 2) where the group received someone other than the super-
visor they chose (PDM 2).

In a third condition the experimenter informed the group
that they also have to have a supervisor to guide them in their
speech preparation. In this condition, however, the supervisor was

appointed by the study director and the experimenter merely informed

54

the group who their supervisor was to be. The wishes of the group
were not considered when determining who the supervisor should be.

In all conditions the experimenter informed the group that
the supervisor had complete control over the speech preparations
of the group. They were to take their directions from him from
that point on.

Fifteen minutes after the group informed the experimenter
whom they wanted to be the SUpervisor or after the supervisory ap-
pointment had been made known (condition 3), the supervisor arrived
and introduced himself. In the first two conditions the supervisor
introduced himself as the man they selected, or someone other than
the man they selected. In the third condition, he simply introduced
himself as the leader and give some background information on him-
self. After the introduction and a brief get acquainted period, the
supervisor in all conditions began to inform the group what was to
be done and how they were to do it.

They were told

your job here is to read a paper on ecology and write
an outline for a speech using this paper as a starting
point. You may outline any type of a speech that you
care to as long as it is about ecology. Tomorrow, you
will return and write the final draft of the speech
outline and complete a short questionnaire.
It was emphasized here that they would not have to give a speech, but

were only to write an outline as though they were going to give a

speech.

55

The supervisor then answered all questions, presented the
group with the ecology paper (Appendix III) and gave them approxi-
mately thirty minutes to read and write a rought draft of their
speech outline. They were told to work individually in this portion
of the project.

After completion of the written portion of the exercise, the
supervisor had the group members read their outlines to him. He
made comments but no criticisms. After all outlines were read he

told the group that ” 's (subject's name) outline seems

 

most reflective of his attitudes and personal beliefs on ecology
and that this is the kind of thing that the project director is
looking for in the outlines; so tomorrow (subject's
name) is to return and write the final draft of his speech outline.
The other two men return at the same time to complete another part
of the research. Each of you, then are told, "is to be at your
respective locations at 7:30 p.m. tomorrow."

At this point the supervisor said,

I'd like to caution you about something before you
leave today. Quality in Speech writing is always an
important dimension and should be strived for at all
times. I think that you should make a significant
effort to put together the best possible speech that
you can. You should make every effort to write a
quality speech; one that reflects your capabilities
and that looks like you really did some work on the
project. To facilitate your efforts, I have placed,
in room 7 in Olds Hall, a paper on the style and
delivery of a speech [Appendix IV]. You should

56

examine these papers tomorrow between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.

These papers may or may not help you in your quest for

a quality paper, however I think that it would be to

your advantage to examine these papers and give them

serious consideration. At any rate, do whatever is

necessary for you tp put together a quality Speech

and I'm sure your speech will be a truly excellent

one.
Then the group was given more details regarding the next evening
and it was emphasized again that the subject would not have to give
a speech; he was reassured that his job was only to write an outline
of a speech.

The next evening the subject returned and in the presence

of other subjects from the previous day, wrote the final draft of the
speech outline. He then completed a brief questionnaire, was thanked
for his participation and told that a full explanation of the study
and its results would be available in the near future. To receive a

copy of the results he was told to contact the Department of Psy-

chology.

Dependent Measures

 

There were two dependent measures employed in this study.
(1) The prOportion of subjects in each condition who went to examine
the speech style papers to which the supervisor made reference.

This dichotomous measure was obtained from the number of subjects

57

who signed the required form to take the papers out and read them.
(2) The amount of effort exerted by the subject to write a quality
paper. This was measured by the subjects' responses to a question-
naire (Appendix II) designed to assess the amount of effort expended

on paper preparation between the first session and the second.

Chapter V

RESULTS

In assessing the results of this experimental procedure, it
was first necessary to establish whether or not the treatment made a
significant difference in terms of the subject's perception of his
influence in the supervisory selection process. The unequivocal
establishment of treatment differences is of pivotal importance to
subsequent interpretation of the results.

To gather information relevant to the subject's influence
perceptions, an item was included in the questionnaire (Appendix II)
which had direct bearing on this issue. The responses to this ques-
tion were analyzed in a three by two analysis of variance (Table l).
The results indicated that the treatment did make a large and sig-
nificant difference in the subject's perceived influence over who
was to be named the supervisor of his work group (F2,53 = 24.808;

p < .0001). The differences were in the expected direction. Sub-
jects in the PDM-l and POM-2 conditions did perceive themselves as
having significantly more influence over who their supervisor was

to be than subjects in the Appointed Condition.

58

59

TABLE 1

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE 0F TREATMENT EFFECT SCORES
THREE LEVELS OF INFLUENCE (A) BY TWO OF RACE (B)

 

 

 

 

Source - df . SS MS F

A 2 23.684 11.842 24.808*
B l .380 .380 .7974
A x B 2 .802 .4018 .8417
Error 53 25.296 ' .4773

*p < .0001.

The Dependent Measures of Control

 

Two measures of supervisory control were used. One was a
dichotomous measure of the proportion of subjects in each condition
who went to examine the speech papers. The second was a continuous
measure, the average amount of effort exerted to do quality work.
This measure was obtained through the subject's responses to a
questionnaire.

Regarding the dichotomous measure, it was found that, of the
total sample of fifty-nine subjects, only four subjects went to

examine the Speech papers. For all practical purposes, this rendered

60

the behavioral measure totally ineffective for this research. The
subjects who did go to examine the speech papers formed no particular
pattern. No statement is possible regarding the treatment condie
tions' effect on the subjects who examined the speech papers.

All subjects completed the questionnaire portion of the study.
Therefore, all subsequent analyses of effort, as a measure of control,
refer to effort as defined by the questionnaire measure.

The reliability of the questionnaire measure was assessed
in an analysis of variance paradigm (Hoyt, 1967), This technique

(Table 2) indicated an internal consistency reliability coefficient

 

 

of .689.
TABLE 2
RELIABILITY OF QUESTIONNAIRE MEASURE ESTIMATED BY A
SUBJECT (A) BY ITEM (B) ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
Source df SS MS F r
A 58 52.343 .902 3.216 .689*
B 7 77.822 11.117 39.618
A x B (Error) 406 113.927 .280

 

*Internal consistency reliability coefficient.

61

Supervisor Effects

 

Any experimental design, where role playing is employed,
is enhanced by having more than one individual play the varying
roles. To have a really effective demonstration of what the study
purports to demonstrate, no differences should exist when two,
three, or more individuals play the same role. If only one person
plays the roles, the results, regardless of direction or their
strength, can be said to be personality specific. That is, it may
be said that the results are attributable to the personality of the
individual playing the role and not to the role itself.

For the purposes of this demonstration, two Black super-
visors and two White supervisors were employed in each of the three
treatment conditions. To ensure that no differences existed, in
terms of the amount of effort exerted within the two pairs of
supervisors (between two Blacks and between two Whites), two anal-
yses of variance (Tables 3 and 3a) were performed. The results in-
dicated that there were no differences between the two Black super-
visors (F1,24 = 2.141; p.> .05) and no differences between the two

White supervisors (F = 0.9768; p > .05). These findings indi-

1,23

cate that the results obtained in the study are due to the roles

being played, Black Supervisor and White Supervisor, and not to

62

the personalities of, or other systematic factors, within the indi-

viduals who played the roles.1

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF AVERAGE EFFORT EXERTED
THREE LEVELS OF INFLUENCE (A) AND TWO LEVELS
OF BLACK SUPERVISOR (8)

TABLE 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source df SS MS F
A 2 .0080 0.0040 .0307
B l .2784 .2784 2.141
A x B 2 .7420 .3710 2.854
Error 24 3.1200 .1300
TABLE 3a
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE 0F AVERAGE EFFORT EXERTED
THREE LEVELS OF INFLUENCE (A) AND TWO LEVELS
OF WHITE SUPERVISOR (B)

Source df SS MS F
A 2 .4142 .2071 2.746
B l .0737 .0737 .9768
A x B 2 .1692 .0845 1.1208
Error 23 1.7342 .0754

 

 

The test for differences between Black Supervisor and White

Supervisor is part of a separate analysis and will be presented later.

63

Tests of Hypotheses

 

Three main hypotheses were tested in this study (1) Where
subordinates have influence over who is named supervisor and receive
the man of their choice as supervisor, there will be a higher pro-
portion of subjects examining the speech style papers and making a
,general effort to do quality work, than when the supervisor was
arbitrarily appointed without any consideration for the subordinates'
Opinions. (2) Where subordinates have influence over who is named
supervisor and_gg_ngt get the supervisor of their choice, there will
be a higher prOportion of subjects examining the speech style papers
and making a general effort to do quality work, than when the super-
visor was arbitrarily appointed without any consideration for the
subordinates' opinions. (3) No differences will exist, in the pro-
portion of subjects examining the speech style papers and making a
general effort to do quality work, as a function of the race of the
supervisor.

To test these hypotheses a three by two analysis of variance
(Table 4) was performed on the amount of effort exerted. Regarding
hypotheses one and two, it was found that no significant differences
existed between PDM-l and Appointed and between POM-2 and Appointed
(F2,53 = .6672; P > .05). That is, in terms of the amount of effort

exerted, there were no differences associated with the three treat-

ment conditions.

64

Regarding hypothesis three, it was found that no differences
existed, in.the amount of effort exerted, when a Black was supervisor

as opposed to when a White was supervisor (F = 1.1600; P > .05).

1,53
TABLE 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF AVERAGE EFFORT EXERTED

BY THREE LEVELS OF INFLUENCE (A) AND
TWO LEVELS OF RACE (B)

 

 

 

Source df SS MS F

A 2 .1540 .0770 .6672
B 1 .0021 .0021 .0186
A x B 2 .2678 .1339 1.1600
Error 53 6.1162 .1154

 

The lack of any differences in effort as a function of the
treatment conditions is graphically demonstrated in Table 5. This
table indicates the average amount of effort exerted as a function
of treatment conditions. Note that between cell differences are

virtually non-existent.

65

TABLE 5

AVERAGE EFFORT EXERTED AS A FUNCTION OF THE

THREE LEVELS OF INFLUENCES AND THE

TWO LEVELS OF RACE

 

 

 

 

 

Race of
Supervisor
Black White
PDM-l 1.58 1.47
Amount
of PDM-2 1.57 1.46
Influence
Appointed 1.54 1.72

 

 

 

 

In summary, the data indicate that differential perceptions
of influence were established by the treatment conditions and there
were no differences within supervisor groups, indicating that the
obtained results of the study were a function of the roles being
played and not idiosyncratic to the individuals playing the roles.
Given these two data and the acceptance of the null hypotheses re—
garding the amount of effort exerted, it appears that the theory
was not supported in this experimental situation.
sources of invalidity in the study and of the conditions necessary

in laboratory for the approximation of organizational reality, will

be undertaken in the next chapter.

A discussion of

 

Chapter VI

DISCUSSION

In the face of experimental results that do not support a
theory, it is necessary, before reconsidering the theory, to examine
each phase of the experimental procedure in search of possible flaws
that may have produced the unanticipated results. Such results are
a fact in the present study and therefore an examination of the
experimental procedure is in order. The critique of the research
procedure will comprise the first section of this discussion. The
remaining three sections will discuss, in order, the meaning of the
results, organizational conditions necessary for meaningful PDM and

implications for future research.

Research Procedure: A Critique

In retrospect a question that is of prime importance is how
much of a "supervisor" was the supervisor? That is, how closely does
the role of supervisor in this study approximate that of supervisor
in an organization? As stated previously, a supervisor by virtue of

holding his position, has at his disposal the ability to mediate
66

67

rewards and punishments.for his subordinates (Weber, 1966). He has
a relationship with his subordinates that has a history and promises
to continue for some time into the future.

In the present study, these two aspects of the relationship
between superior and subordinate are conspicuously absent. The
supervisor has no ability to make the working life of his subordinates
either pleasant or unpleasant; he has no ability to recognize an
individual who has performed admirably nor the ability to punish an
individual who has performed inadequately. In short, he has been
stripped of his organizational reward power and coercive power which
have been, in a traditional organization, provided him to facilitate
his achieving the required goals. Without these sanctions at his
disposal, how much control can the supervisor have?

The lack of power on the part of the supervisor could explain
why the subjects exerted only a marginal effort to do quality work.
An examination of Table 5 indicates, on a five-point scale, that on
the average, regardless of experimental condition, subjects exerted
fietween no effort (a score of l) and little effort (a score of 2)
to do quality work.

The absence of the supervisory ability to mediate positive
and negative sanctions for the subordinates is underscored by the
fact that the subordinate,.after the first meeting, never has to

see his SUpervisor again. In this condition, any situational power

68

the supervisor may have as a result of having a continuing relation-
ship with his subordinates is eliminated. It is quite possible that
if the subject knew that, after the first meeting, they would have
to see their group supervisor again and possibly be asked whether or
not they did what he suggested, they may have been more influenced,
for.whatever reason, to put forth a serious effort.

Inherent in the continuous measure of effort exerted is
another possible source of error in the study. Because the effort
scale has only face validity and has not been validated against an
objective criterion, it is possible that the scale does not measure,
in fact, what, in theory, it is intended to measure. The scale
(Appendix II) consisted of questions such as "which statement best
describes your efforts regarding the content of your speech since
the group meeting?" followed by a number of statements which describe
activities which might be engaged in when an individual is making a
serious effort to do quality work. Indeed, since no attempt was
made prior to employing the instrument, to gather objective validity
data, questions may be raised regarding whether or not the question-
naire measure did what it was intended to do.

While it must be agreed that the previous argument regarding
validity is, indeed, a salient one, it is the opinion of this writer
that it is not sufficient to explain the obtained results. A more

cogent argument, which is closely aligned with the discussion of

69

validity, is the position that the dependent measure, regardless of
how valid, may not have been sensitive enough to small differences

in the amount of effort exerted by the subjects. For the most part,
statement one on the questionnaire (indicating no effort) was a
statement regarding whether or not the respondent gave any thought

to the Speech outline. Statement two (ostensibly indicating slightly
greater effort) was a statement regarding whether or not the subject
actively engaged in some behavior relevant to the speech. It is
quite probable that there are finer discriminations that Should be
made between statement one, thinking, and statement two, engaging in
behavior. The variations in the amount of thinking, which may be
excellent indications of the amount of effort exerted, go totally
unexamined. There are probably many activity levels between doing
absolutely nothing, or giving some thought to (statement 1) and
actively engaging in some behavior to do high quality work (state-
-ment 2). The many activity levels between thinking on the one hand
and actually engaging in behavior, on the other, were not tapped by
the questionnaire measure and as such the difference between respond-
ing in the affirmative to statement one and in the affirmative to
statement two, is, in terms.of effort exerted, tremendous. What,

in effect, has happened, is that.statement two, an amount of behavior
engaged in, represents a certain threshold of behavior noticeable,

or measured, by the scale and the many types of behavior, or those

70

of lesser amounts than that in statement two, go unnoticed or unmea-
sured. The difference in responding in the affirmative to statement
two (actively engaging in behavior) and statement three (actively
engaging in more behavior) is no doubt smaller than between state-
ments one and two. This position leads to two conclusions regarding
the dependent measure: 1) It is, indeed, not sensitive enough to
measure all meaningful variations in effort exerted, and 2) The dif-
ference between responding in the affirmative to any point on the
scale and any other is not equal between all points on the scale.

It appears that the assumptions of sensitivity and of the interval
nature of the scale was not warranted.

A note regarding the apparent frame of mind of the subjects
is also in order here. It is quite possible that the subjects, who
volunteered because of class credit inducements and may have been
willing to do only a minimal amount of work, may have been given a
license to do nothing and receive the desired credits. In the ini-
tial phase of the study, the experimenter (Appendix I) said to the
subjects:

You should realize two things about this study:

1) it is about the relationship between attitudes
about ecology and the content of a speech.
Therefore, to get the Six credits for participating
you don't have to write a Nobel Prize winning out-
line, but all you have to do is to write an outline

today and return tomorrow to write the final draft
of the outline.

71

Because the dependent variable involved the subject's doing something,
it is probable that the research procedure may have mitigated against

obtaining results that would support the Tannenbaum (l968) thesis.

Interpretation of Results

 

In the face of the aforementioned procedural limitations, the
results of the study are more easily explained. While it was estab-
lished that the treatment (Table 1) was successful, the results
(Table 4) indicated that there was no significant difference in the
amount of effort exerted as a function of the three treatment condi-

tions (F .6672; p > .05), or as a function of the race of the

2,53 =
supervisor (F1,53 = 1.160; p > .05). Because of the previously dis-
cussed lack of resources at the diSposal of the supervisor, it must
be concluded that these results reflect the general lack of super-
visory control. They cannot be said to reflect, adequately, a test
of the theory that they were originally intended to evaluate. Sup-
port for this interpretation is found when we consider that the sub-
jects' responses were all skewed to the low-effort end of the con-
tinuum (Table 5). An examination of the cell means presented in

this table indicate that all supervisors had, at best, very little

control over their subordinates. Because this situation exists here,

72

it lends to the artificial nature of the experimental situation.
Indeed, it is difficult to believe that supervisors in an organiza-

tion have so little control over their subordinates.

Two Post Hoc Analyses

 

It is interesting to note that when a separate analysis is
performed on the elements comprising the dependent measure, a mar-
ginally significant effect.is found for the "amount of effort exerted"
as a function of the treatment conditions. The three by two multi-
variate analysis of variance with eight dependent measures (each of
the eight questions in the dependent measure), indicated that the
treatment conditions did have an effect on the "amount of effort
exerted" as measured by the eight separate questions (F16,92 = 1.6273;
p < .0771). The general effect (Appendix VI) seems to be in a direc-
tion opposite to that which the Tannenbaum model would predict.
Indeed, it appears that in the appointed condition, more effort was
exerted than in the.participation.in decision making conditions.

While this effect is not consistent for each of the eight measures,

it does appear in the three measures that exhibit the most variation.
Though the results of this post hoc analysis are weak and constitute
statistically inadmissable evidence, they do tend to give credence to

the aforementioned criticisms of the dependent measure.

73

In a separate analysis the second drafts of the Speech out-
lines were evaluated on three dimensions of quality. The first per-
tained to exactly what the subject did with the outline; did he merely
outline the paper he read during the first meeting, did the outline
consist primarily of the subject's Opinions, was the outline a combi-
nation of the twO? Generally the subjects were evaluated on
the apparent amount of effort that went into writing the outline.

The second dimension was a subjective evaluation of the overall qual-
ity of the outline. Here the outlines were rated as being of poor,
marginal, adequate, good, or.excellent.quality. The third dimension
was an objective one. The quality of effort exerted was evaluated

by counting the number of words in the outline.

The three evaluations were analyzed in a three by two multi-
variate analysis of variance design. The results (Appendix VI)
indicated that no differences exist as a function of the treatment
conditions (F6,88 = .8431; p > .05) or as a function of the race of
the supervisor (F3,44 = .7475; p > .05).

Quality of output is perhaps the most sensitive measure
possible of the amount of effort exerted to do quality work. As
such, the failure to find differences as a function of treatment
conditions, or race of supervisor, which is consistent with the

findings when the questionnaire measure is employed, lends credence

74

to the contention that the supervisors were not sufficiently powerful

to influence their subordinates in a significant manner.

PDM: The Necessarngreconditioning

 

While Tannenbaum does not make it clear under what circum-
stances increased control on the part of subordinates results in
increased power on the part of the organization, over the subordi-
nates, a statement in this regard is in order. Considering the ethos
of the times in which the model was formulated (the model having its
roots in the Human Relations School of Management), it would seem
that two prime organizational ingredients are necessary for the hy-
pothesized relationship between having power and being controlled to
manifest itself. These are: 1) An atmosphere of trust between
management and labor, and 2) Some amount of ego involvement with the
organization on the part of those individuals who are concerned. A
brief discussion of each of these will be undertaken.

In the literature of the human relations approach to manage-
ment it is implicit (Herzberg, 1966), and explicit (Argyris, 1964),
that an essential element in the develOpment of a meaningful rela-
tionship between management and labor, or for that matter between

management and management and/or labor and labor, is trust. Whether

75

in organizational development one is attempting to institute the
linking—pin notions of Likert (1961) or the Scanlon Plan notions
described by Lesieur (1968), the trust relationship between the in-
dividuals involved must be addressed and established. Argyris
(1964, p. 31) speaks to this issue.

The degree of trust and respect between management
and employees are also very important factors. “As
we shall see, when the climate of trust is low, the
employees may gain part of their success by aspiring
to break various management rules and "get away with
it." Under conditions of low trust (and high frus-
tration) the employee may express his agitation by
setting very low or very unrealistically high levels
of aspiration. In either case, the goals will prob-
ably never be achieved.

Argyris goes on to state,

however, under a climate of trust the individuals
may increase their opportunities for psychological
success. With trust, the management may tend to feel
less of a need to develop tight control mechanisms,
thereby creating greater opportunity for psycholog-
ical success. However, also under a climate of mu-
tual trust, the employees may be more willing to see
the legitimate needs of the organization (p. 32).

Similar statements regarding the importance of the trust
relationship have been made by other theorists (Campbell et al.,
1970; Marrow et al., 1967).= Generally, they conclude that the trust
relationship is the cornerstone on which any form of human relations

management is built and without such a relationship efforts to make

significant changes in an organization would be fruitless.

76

Ego involvement on the part of all concerned is another point
stressed by the human relations school of management. Lesieur (1968,
p. 52), in describing worker participation on production problems,
speaks to this issue.

The ideas on production methods and the problems of the
business as seen by workers, by foremen, and by top
‘management are laid before members of the organization.
The constructive efforts, mental as well as physical,
of everyone are solicited. Each individual then, has
the Opportunity and feels the obligation to work for
the best interests of the group. This is what "parti-
cipation" means--not only strong criticism of many
established practices, but positive and constructive
suggestions for improvement.

Let there be no mistake at this point. Though these crucial
aspects of PDM have their roots in the Human Relations appraoch to
management, they represent an expansion of the Human Relations model
and are best understood as being representative of the Human Resources
model of PDM. The difference between these two models is a qualita-
tive one. Ritchie and Miles (1970, p. 348) make this difference
clear:

Managers who hold the Human Relations theory of PDM
believe simply in involvement for the sake of involve-
'ment, arguing that as long as subordinates feel they
are participating and are being consulted, their ego
needs will be satisfied and they will be more cooper-
ative. The Human Relations theory of PDM thus stresses
only the amount of involvement and implies that par-
ticipation in routine organizational matters or limited
consultation on important issues is sufficient to
produce the desired results-~an increase in satisfac-
tion and thus in COOperation. On the other hand, the

77

Human Resources theory of PDM is primarily concerned

with the meaningful utilization of subordinates' capa-

bilities and views satisfaction as a by-product of

their participation in important organizational de-

ClSlonS.
This need for quality participation is again substantiated by Pelz
(1958). In a study of some factors in group decisions the author
concludes that mere discussion, or participation, is not sufficient
to increase the amount of positive action on the part of experimental
subjects; what is necessary is a combination of discussion and mean-
ingful decision making, or quality participation.

Though the aforementioned aspects of the work situation are
more implicit than explicit in the Tannenbaum writings they are,
nonetheless, crucial to the success of the model. Anyone who would
consider testing the Tannenbaum thesis, in an experimental or non-
experimental organization, Should realize the salience of these
preconditions and act in a manner to ensure that these conditions
are part of his, or her research. In this same vein, anyone who
would seek to implement these notions of control in an ongoing system
for unilateral gains, should assess their motives for doing so, and
tbe overwhelming likelihood that these motives will manifest them-

selves, in full light of the necessary precondition for meaningful

and effective PDM.

78

Conclusions and Implications for Future Research

 

Perhaps the most salient conclusion that can be arrived at is
in regard to the apparent need for coercive and reward power on the
part of the supervisor. While Tannenbaum (1968) and Katz and Kahn
(1966) discuss, at length, the need for supervisors to have control
based on legitimate, referent, or expert powers, it appears that one
should not lose Sight of the central importance of supervisory coer-
cive and reward power; that is, one should never forget that the
supervisor role carries with it the ability to make life pleasant or
unpleasant for subordinates and this power is the first law of orga-
nizational life. In many situations coercive and reward powers are
enough to influence subordinates to accomplish at least a marginal
amount of work. However, as these results may be said to indicate,
referent power in and of itself may not be sufficient to influence
subordinates adequately. The subjects did virtually nothing. It is
concluded, therefore, that Tannenbaum, Katz and Kahn, and other
theorists should, in their discussions of control and incremental
influence, consider that the foundations of supervisory control may
be the coercive and reward capability of the supervisor and that
reciprocal control and incremental influence represents supplementary
power and should not be considered as a substitute for the primary

bases of power, except under special conditions.

79

Basically, many of the original questions of this research
still remain. How does an organization go about aiding its super-
visors in gaining the type of power that is needed to bring many
jobs to a successful conclusion? Do supervisors possess differing
amounts of power over their subordinates as a function of the
supervisor's race,-or sex, or his national origin? These questions
were crucial at the outset, have been inadequately addressed here,
and are no less crucial at this point.

A relatively small but significant procedural change should
provide for an adequate test of the original propositions of this
research. As was mentioned previously, subjects took part in the
research to receive extra class credit and were told that all they
needed do for their credit was to write the rough draft of the speech
outline and return the following evening to write the final draft
of the outline. If, instead of giving the subjects a fixed amount
of credit for a minimum amount of work, the subjects were told that
they would receive a variable amount of credit and the amount they
would receive would be determined in part by the supervisor, the
supervisor would then be invested with a measure of power traditionally
provided in ongoing.organizations-_ In this situation the subjects
would never be given any reason to believe that the amount of credit
received was a function of the amount of effort exerted. The reward

contingencies should definitely remain unclear to the subjects.

80

This situation would more closely approximate organizational reality
and as such correct a source of internal invalidity and allow a better
test of the research questions at hand.

It.seems clear that in future research attempts should be
made to explore the effects of the human relations approaches to
management on the ability of a supervisor to control his subordinates.
This issue of influence is, indeed, of both theoretical and of ob—
vious practical importanCe.

Research to date has not dealt adequately with the extent to
which an organization can control the behavior of its members at
varying levels. The control exerted by a supervisor over his pro-
duction line employees, where compliance or failure to comply is
readily observable, is of little theoretical interest. The exertion
of power in this case is of such minor interest because it is axio-
matic that the failure on the part of the subordinate to yield to the
legitimate will of his supervisor will lead to reprimand or dismissal.
0n the other hand when we are concerned with situations where failure
to comply with the directives of the superior is not readily observ-
able, as in the situation of a manager or professional receiving a
directive from his superior, the ability of that superior to control
the behavior of the subordinate is quite another matter. It is
possible that among managers or professionals the supervisor has very

little control. Because today more and more jobs are of the

81

technical, managerial, or professional type, the matter of controlling
the individuals in these jobs is increasing in importance and future
research should reflect this trend. Katz and Kahn (1966) employing
the concept of incremental influence, which is based on French and
Raven (1959) concept of referent power, represents one attempt to
move in this direction.
The implications of this mode of research are far reaching.

Today, many changes in social.policy are being implemented through
large governmental bureaucracies. Within these bureaucracies there
is ample opportunity for individuals whose attitudes may be counter
to the policies being implemented to selectively implement or dif-
ferentially interpret the policy with no repercussions to themselves.
Cyert and MacCrimmon (1968) Speak to this issue:

Leadership may be directed toward accomplishment of

organizational goals or toward the fulfillment of the

participants' own needs. The discretionary component

of the role of a participant may be used to further

his own needs at the expense of the goals of the

organization, or perhaps more generally, without any

regard for the goals of the organization. The extent

of such behavior depends not only on the discretionary

component, but also on the resources available to the

particular role occupant and on the generally con-

straints imposed by the organization on a partici-

pant in any role.

It should be clear, at this point, that, if social policy is to be

carried out through large bureaucratic organizations, effective modes

82

of ensuring that each individual at each level is performing in
accordance with policy must be established.

_The supervisory selection process and its effects on the
selectee's control capability over his subordinates, is another area
of research that demands further attention. Would arbitrary, as
opposed to participatory, supervisory selection procedures have the
same result among professional staffs as among manual labor personnel?
In Spite of the general trend toward participation in decision making
for most aspects of organizations, it is likely that professional
staffs would expegt_some form of meaningful participation in selecting
their supervisors. Thisrmayxnot be the case with manual labor per-
sonnel. The violation of expectations may have deleterious effects.
Scontrino (1971) studied the effects of fulfilling and violating
group members' expectations about leadership style. His results
indicated that failure to fulfill expectations that participation
will be used, leads to less positive attitudes than if the employees
had expected that participation would not be used. If, in fact,
professional staffs do expect.participation, any procedures not in-
volving them in.the selection decision, would result in very negative
attitudes on the staff's part.

Closely aligned with this mode of thinking is the largely un-
tested Tannenbaum concept of reciprocal control. This notion implies

that a supervisor has control over his subordinates and at the same

83

time the subordinates have control over their supervisor. Documen-
tation of this phenomenon has only been found in nonexperimental
field studies of control (e.g. Bachman et al., 1968). As a result
this reciprocal control has never been operationalized and proven,
experimentally, to exist. The Operationalization of reciprocal
control in an experimenta] situation would be a relatively simple
task. All that need be created is a situation where a subject,
playing a supervisory role, attempts to influence another subject,
playing a subordinate role, to perform in a certain manner; at some
later point in the situation the subordinate subject could attempt
to influence the superior subject to behave in some prescribed manner.
If Tannenbaum is correct there should be a positive relationship
between the amount of control of a supervisor over his subordinates
and the amount of control of subordinates over their supervisor.
Because reciprocal control is so easy and interesting to study, it
is difficult to see how future research could ignore the phenomenon.
Perhaps more than anything else, the direction of future re-
search will be in the study of the interaction, in terms of amount
of supervisory influence, between participation in decision making
and a host of organizational variables (e.g. the nature of the peOple
involved in the work situation). Classically, PDM is talked about
as th§_solution, or mode of Operation; it is only recently that

researchers are coming to recognize that everybody does not want the

84

responsibility that comes with meaningful participation. Vroom (1968,

p. 239) states:

It would be naive to think that group decision making is
always more "effective" than autocratic decision making,
or vice versa; the relative effectiveness of these two
extreme'methods depends both on the weights attached to
..quality, acceptance, and time variables and on differ-
ences in amounts of these outcomes resulting from these
methods, neither of which is invariant from one situa-
tion to another. The critics and prOponents of parti-
cipative management would do well to direct their ef-
forts toward identifying the properties of situations
in which different decision-making approaches are
effective rather than toward wholesale condemnation
or deification of one approach.

It is in these directions that I see future research moving.

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

Allport, F. 1933. Institutional Behavior. Chapel Hill, North Caro-
lina: The University of North Carolina Press.

 

Anderson, L. and Fiedler, F. 1964. The Effects of Participatory
and Supervisory Leadership on Group Creativity. Journal of
Applied Psychology. 48, 227-236.

 

 

Argyris, C. 1964. Integrating the Individual and the Organization.
New York, New York: Wiley.

 

Aronson, E., and Golden, B. 1962. The Effects of Relevant and Ir-
relevant Aspects of Communicator Credibility on Attitude
Change. Journal of Personality, 30, 135-146.

Bachman, G., Bowers, D., and Marcus, P. 1968. Bases of Supervisory
Power: A Comparative Study in Five Organizational Settings.
In A. Tannenbaum (Ed.) Control in Organizations. New York,
New York: McGraw-Hill. Pp. 229-238.

 

Bachman, G., Smith, C., and Slesinger, J. 1968. Control, Perform-
ance and Satisfaction: An Analysis of Structural and Indi-
vidual Effects. In A. Tannenbaum (Ed.) Control in Organi-
zations. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill. Pp. 213-228.

 

Blau, P. 1964. Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York, New
York: Wiley.

Blau, P., and Scott, W. 1962. Formal Organizations. San Francisco,
California: Chandler.

 

Brigante, T. 1958. Adolescent Evaluations of Rewarding, Neutral,

and Punishing Power Figures. Journal of Personality, 26,
435-450.

 

Campbell, 0., and Stanley, J. 1966. Experimental and Quasi-
Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago, Illinois: Rand
McNally.

 

 

85

86

Campbell, J., Dunnette, M., Lawler, E., and Weick, K. 1970. Mana-
gerial Behavior, Performance, and Effectiveness. New York,
New York: McGraw-Hill.

 

Cartwright, 0. (Ed.) 1959. Studies in Social Power. Ann Arbor,
Michigan: University of Michigan Press.

 

Cartwright, D. 1965. Influence, Leadership and Control. In J.
March (Ed.), Handbook of Organizations. New York, New York:
Rand McNally. Pp. 1-47.

 

Coch, L., and French, J. 1948. Overcoming Resistance to Change.
Human Relations, 1, 512-532.

 

Collins, 8., and Raven, B. 1969. Psychological Aspects of Structure
in the Small Group: Interpersonal Attractions, Coalitions,
Communication, and Power. In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eds.),
Handbook of Social Psychology. Reading, Massachusetts:

Addison Wesley. Pp. 102-204.

Cyert, R., and MacCrimmon, K. 1968. Organizations. In A. G. Lind-
zey and E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology.
Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley. Pp. 568-614.

Dahl, R. 1957. The Concept of Power. Behavioral Science, 2, 201-218.

 

Dalton, M. 1964. Preconditions and Methods in Men who Manage. In
P. E. Hammond (Ed.), Sociologists at Work. New York, New
York: Basic Books. Pp. 50-95.

 

Day, R. and Hamblin, R. 1964. Some Effects of Close and Punitive
Styles of Supervision. American J. of Sociology, 69, 499-510.

 

Elbing, A. 1970. Behavioral Decisions in Organizations. Oakland,
New Jersey: Scott, Foresman.

Etzioni, A. 1969. A Sociological Reader on Complex Organizations.
New York, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Fiedler, F. 1967. A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. .New York,
New York: McGraw-Hill.

 

French, J. 1956. A Formal Theory of Social Power. Psychological
Review, 63, 181-194.

 

87

French, J., Morrison, H., and Levinger, G. 1960. Coercive Power and
Forces Affecting Conformity. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 61, 93-101.

 

 

French, J., and Raven, B. 1959. The Bases of Social Power. In D.
Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in Social Power. Ann Arbor, Mich-
igan: University of Michigan Press. Pp. 150-167.

 

GOldhamer, H., and Shils, E. 1939. Types of Power and Status.
American Journal of Sociology, 45, 171-182.

 

Gulick, L., and Urwick, L. (Eds.) 1947. Papers on the Science of
Administration. New York, New York: Institute of Public
Administration.

 

 

Hare, A. 1953. Small Group Discussions with Participatory and Su-
pervisory Leadership. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psy-
chology, 48, 273-275.

 

Herzberg, F. 1966. Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland, Ohio:
World.

 

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., and Snyderman, B. 1959. The Motivation
to Work. New York, New York; Wiley.

 

Hinton, B. and Reitz, H. 1971. Groups and Organizations: Integrated
Readings in the Analysis of Social Behavior. Belmont, Cali-
fornia: Wadsworth.

 

Homans, G. 1961. Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York,
New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

 

Hoyt, C. 1967. Test Reliability Estimated by Analysis of Variance.
In Wm. Mehrens and R. Ebel (Eds.), Principles of Educational

and Psychological Measurement. Chicago, Illinois: Rand
McNally.

 

 

Kahn, R., and Boulding, E. (Eds.) 1964. Power and Conflict in
Organizations. New York, New York: Basic Books.

 

 

Katz, 0., and Kahn, R. 1966. The Social Psychology of Organizations.
New York, New York: Wiley.

88

Lawler, E. and Hackman, R. 1969. Impact of Employee Participation
in the Development of Pay Incentive Plans: A Field Experi-
ment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 467-471.

 

Lesieur, F. 1958. The Scanlon Plan A Frontier in Labor-Management
Cooperation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The M.I.T. Press.

 

 

Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., and White, R. 1939. Patterns of Aggressive
Behavior in Experimentally Created Social Climates. Journal
of Social Psychologx) 10, 271-299.

 

Likert, R. 1961. New Patterns of Management. New York, New York:
McGraw-Hill.

 

March, J., and Simon, H. 1958. Organizations. New York, New York:
Wiley.

 

Marrow, A., Bowers, D., and Seashore, S. 1967. Management by Par-
ticipation. New York, New York: Harper and Row.

 

 

McGregor, D. 1960. The Human Side of Enterprise. New York, New
York: McGraw-Hill.

Morse, N., and Reimer, E. 1956. The Experimental Change of a Major
Organizational Variable. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 52, 120-129.

 

 

Oncken, G. 1971. Organizational Control in University_Dapartments.
Technical Report No. 71-20. Seattle, Washington: Univer-
sity of Washington.

Pelz, E. 1958. Some Factors in Group Decision. In E. Maccoby,
T. Newcomb and E. Hartly (Eds.), Readings in Social Psy-

chology, 3rd Edition. New York, New York: Wiley. Pp. 212-
219.

 

Pennington, D., Haravey, F., and Bass, 8. 1958. Some Effects of
Decision and Discussion in Coalescence, Change, and Effec-
tiveness. ,Journal of Applied Psychology, 42, 404-405.

Preston, M. and Heintz, R. 1949. Effects of Participatory vs.
Supervisory Leadership on Group Judgments. Journal of Ab-
normal and Social Psychology, 44, 345-355.

 

 

89

~Raven,-B. and French, J. 1958. Group Support, Legitimate Power and
Social Influence. Journal of Personality, 26, 400-409.

 

Raven, B. and French, J. 1958a. Legitimate Power, Coercive Power
and Observability in Social Influence. Sociometry, 21, 83-97.

 

Ritchie,.J., and Miles, R. 1970. An Analysis of Quantity and Qual-
ity of Participation as Mediating Variables in the Partici-

pative Decision Making Process. Personnel Psychology, 23,
347-359.

Scontrino, M. 1971. The Effects of Fulfilling and Violating Group,
A_Members' Expectations about Leadership Style. Unpublished
Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University.

Shaw, M., and Blum, J. 1966. Effects of Leadership Style upon Group
Performance as a Function of Task Structure. Journal of
Personality and Social Paychology, 3, 238-242.

 

Smith, C., and Tannenbaum, A. 1963. Organizational Control Struc-
ture: A Comparative Analysis. Human Relations, 16, 299-316.

Student, K. 1968. Supervisory Influence and Work-Group Performance.
Journal of Applied Paychology, 52, 188-194.

Tannenbaum, A. 1956. Control Structure and Union Functions. Amer-
ican Journal of Sociolpgy, 61, 6, 536-545.

Tannenbaum, A. 1966. Social Psychology of the Work Organization.
Belmont, California: Wadsworth.

Tannenbaum, A. (Ed.) 1968. Control in Organizations. New York,
New York: McGraw-Hill.

Tannenbaum, A., and Georgopoulos, B. 1957. The Distribution of
Control in Formal Organizations. Social Forces, 36, 1, 13-19.

Thibaut, J., and Kelley, H. 1959. The Social Psychology of Groups.
New York, New York: Wiley.

Vroom, V. 1968. Industrial Social Psychology. In G. Lindzey and
E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology. Reading,
Massachusetts: Addison Wesley. Pp. 196-268.

90

-Weber, M. 1947., The Theory_of Social and Economic Organizations.
Fair Lawn, New Jersey: Oxford. (Translated by A. M. Hender-
son and Talcott Parsons.)

 

Weber, M. 1966. Bureaucracy. In A. H. Rubenstein and C. J. Haber-
Stroh (Eds.), Some Theories of Organization. Homewood, Illi-
nois: Irwin, Dorsey. Pp. 70-81.

 

Zander, A. and Curtis, T. 1962. Effects of Social Power on Aspira-
tion Setting and Striving. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 64, 63-74.

Zipf, S. 1960. Resistance and Conformity under Reward and PuniSh-
ment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61, 102-109.

APPENDIX I

SUPERVISOR AND EXPERIMENTER ROLES

APPENDIX I

SUPERVISOR AND EXPERIMENTER ROLES

SUPERVISOR

 

Entrance:
PDM ONE (subjects have influence and get the supervisor of
their choice)
Upon entering the room the supervisor greets the group and informs

them that his name is and that he is to be their super-

 

visor for the following activities. He says "he is happy that the
Project Director was able to match their desires with the demands of
the project." At this time, he repeats his qualifications relating

to the particular task at hand.

PDM TWO (subjects have influence but don't get the supervisor
of their choice)
Upon entering the room the supervisor greets the group and informs

them that his name is and that he is to be their supervisor

 

for the following activities. He says "it is unfortunate that the
Project Director was unable to match their desires with the demands of
the project but that he is a capable supervisor and hopes that we will

91

92

be able to affect a good working relationship." At this time, he

repeats his qualifications relating to the task at hand.

APPOINTED (subjects have absolutely no influence regarding
who their supervisor is to be)
Upon entering the room, the supervisor greets the subjects and informs
them that he is to be their supervisor for the following activities.
He then gives his name and qualifications and begins to talk about

the nature of the project at hand.

AFTER THE INITIAL STATEMENT, THE PROCEDURE IS EXACTLY THE SAME FOR

ALL CONDITIONS.

THE TEXT

He then tells the subjects that "your job here is to read a
paper on ecology and write an outline for a speech using this paper
as a starting point. You may summarize the paper, criticize it, or
write a Speech based on your ideas that the paper evokes. You may
outline any type of a speech that you care to as long as it is about
ecology. Tomorrow, you will return and write the final draft of the
speech outline and complete a short questionnaire." At that point
the supervisor pauses to answer questions that may have come up re-

garding their activities both today and tomorrow.

93

He then gives the group about thirty minutes to read and write
a rough draft of their speech outline.

After completion of the writing portion of the exercise, he
then has each subject read their.outlines to him and he makes comments,
but no criticisms. After each paper is read he tells the group that

" (name) outline seems most reflective of his attitudes and

 

personal beliefs on ecology and that this is the kind of thing that
the project director is looking for in the outlines. So tomorrow

(name) is to go to 304c Wells Hall where he will write

 

the final draft of his speech outline and you other men return to
Baker Hall then to complete another part of the research. Each of
you are to be at your respective locations at 7:30 p.m. tomorrow."
At this point the supervisor says: "I'd like to caution you
about something before you leave today. Quality in speech writing
is always an important dimension and should be strived for at all
times. I think that you should make a significant effort to put
together the best possible speech that you can. You should make
every effort to write a quality speech; one that reflects your capa-
bilities and that looks like you really did some work on the project.
To facilitate your efforts, I have placed in room 7 in Olds Hall, a
paper on the style and delivery of a speech. You should examine
these papers tomorrow between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. These papers may or

may not help you in your quest for a quality paper; however, I think

94

that it.wouId.be.to your advantage to examine these papers and give
them serious consideration. At any rate, do whatever is necessary
for you to put together a quality speech and I'm sure your speech will
be a truely excellent one."

He then answers questions and tells the group that they may

leave now.

EXPERIMENTER

 

The experimenter enters the room and introduces himself to
the three subjects as an aide whose job it is to inform the subjects
as to what is happening in the project and to help them get oriented.

He says, "The purpose of this project is to examine the rela-
tionship between attitudes about ecology and the content of a speech."
He then says, "previous studies have demonstrated that the attitudes
of_a person heavily influence the content of anything he says or
writes. However, there has never been any research to indicate that
the attitudes of an individual regarding ecology is related to the
content of a speech that he writes. Therefore, this study is designed
to examine this kind of relationship."

He tells the group then: "Your job today will be merely to

read a paper about ecology and using the paper as a reference point,

95

you are to write out an outline of a speech that you would give about
ecology. Tomorrow you will have to return and simply write out the
final draft of the outline."

He then says, "you should realize two things about this study:
1) It is about the relationship between attitudes about ecology and
the content of a speech; therefore, to get the credits for participat-
ing in the project, you don't have to write a Nobel Prize winning out-
line, but all you need do is write an outline today and return tomorrow
and write the final draft of the outline. What the research is about
is content and not the quality of your writing ability. 2) Secondly,
you should keep in mind the fact that you will not actually have to
deliver the speech at anytime; the total extent of your job is to act

as though you were to give the speech and write an outline accordingly.

PDM (choice of supervisor)

The experimenter then says, IITo guide you in the preparations
of your speech outline, it is necessary to have a supervisor. We don't
want to assign you arbitrarily, a person to be your supervisor. What
we would like to do is to match your desires in terms of who the
supervisor is to be, with the requirements of this research project.
What I want you to do now is choose between these individuals (giving
them the vitas) the person you prefer to be the supervisor. This, of

course, is no guarantee that you will get the person that you want.

96

The Project Director is attempting to come as close as possible to
matching your desires with the demands imposed by the research situa-
tion." Also the subjects are told at this point, "when making your
decision I want you to justify why you chose the person that you did.
The people are somewhat similar but there are differences. Don't
just pick one of the peOple at random, but choose based on some
knowledge or a personal preference."

He then says, "you people come to a consensus about the person
you want and I'll return in about five minutes for your decision."

He returns in a few minutes, asks for the decision of the group,
asks if everybody understands the exact nature of their task and repeats
it if necessary. He then says, "I'm going to give your choice to the
Project Director and he'll make the final decision regarding the
supervisor. The supervisor should be here shortly."

APPOINTED CONDITION (subjects have
no choice at all)

The experimenter says, "To guide you in the preparation of the
speech outline we have appointed a supervisor for your group. He is a
person who has had a good deal of experience in the area of speech and
he will fill you in on more details about the study." He asks if every-
body understands the exact nature of the study, repeats its purpose if
necessary and then tells the group that their supervisor will be here

shortly. He then leaves the room.

APPENDIX II

QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX II

QUESTIONNAIRE

General Information

 

Name Student No.

 

 

1 Caucasian
2 Black

3 Oriental
4 Other

1. Race:

 

 

 

 

1 17-18
2 19-20
3 21-22
4
5

 

 

 

23-25
25 or older

 

 

3. Marital Status: 1 Single
2 Married
3 Divorced or Separated
4 Widowed

4. Your overall G.P.A. is:

 

 

 

 

5. What year in school are you? 1 Freshman

 

2 Sophomore

 

3 Junior

 

4 Senior

 

6. On most political issues, I perceive myself as:
1 Left
2 Liberal
3 Moderate
4 Conservative
5 Right

 

 

97

98

7. Regarding the number of children in your family (family meaning,
your father, mother, sisters and/or brothers), which are you:
1 The only child
2 The oldest (first born)
3 The middle child (not the oldest, but not the youngest)____
4 The youngest child

 

 

 

8. What kind of a writer are you?

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

A poor writer

A marginal writer
A competent writer
A good writer

An excellent writer

 

 

 

 

9. How much influence did you have over the decision as to who the
Supervisor of your group was to be.

1.

2.

3.

No influence at all and final decision was made by the
research director of the project.
Some influence but the final decision was made by the
research director of the project.
Considerable influence but the final decision was made
by the research director of the project.

 

 

 

The following are questions and statements about your prepara-
tions for writing the final draft of the speech outline. Simple circle
the number next to the statement which best describes your activities.

10. Since the group meeting, how many books, periodicals, etc. have
you examined relating to the content of your Speech?

01-5de

I examined no additional materials.

I examined only two or three additional sources.
I examined four to five additional sources.

I examined six or seven additional sources.

I examined more than eight additional sources.

11.

12.

13.

99

Which statement best describes your efforts regarding the content
of your speech since the group meeting?

1

2

3

I exerted no more effort than was absolutely required for
the completion of this project.

I solicited advice from friends (those readily accessible)
regarding the content of my speech.

I exerted a special effort to solicit the advice of friends
(those not readily accessible) who are knowledgeable in

the content area of my speech.

I solicited the advice of my instructors (those with whom

I have a class) regarding the content of my Speech.

I exerted a: Special effort to solicit the advice of par-
ticular instructors (instructors other than those with whom
I have a class) who are knowledgeable in the content area
of my Speech.

I exerted a special effort to solicit the advice of friends
and instructors who are knowledgeable in the content area
of my speech.

Since the group meeting how many books, periodicals, etc. have you
examined relating to the style of your speech?

U‘l-bWNd

Which

I examined no additional materials.

examined only two or three additional sources.
examined four to five additional sources.
examined six to seven additional sources.

I
I
I
I examined more than eight sources.

statement best describes your efforts regarding the style of

your speech Since the group meeting?

1

2

3

I exerted no more effort than was absolutely required for
the completion of this project.

I solicited advice from friends (those readily accessible)
regarding the style of my speech.

I exerted a special effort to solicit the advice of friends
(those not readily accessible) who are knowledgeable in

the style aspects of my speech.

I solicited the advice of my instructors (those with whom

I have a class) regarding the style of my speech.

I exerted a special effort to solicit the advice of partic-
ular instructors (instructors other than those with whom I
have a class) who are knowledgeable in the style aspects of
speech.

I exerted a special effort to solicit the advice of friends
and instructors who are knowledgeable in the style aspects
of speech.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

100

How much time did you spend thinking, beyond that during the group
meeting, about what you would write for a speech?
I spent no time at all.
spent little time thinking about it.
spent considerable time thinking about it.
spent a lot of time thinking about it.
spent a great deal of time thinking about the speech.

01th
HHI—IIHH

How much effort did you spend rewriting the speech in preparation
for the final write up.
1 I did absolutely no rewriting of the outline beyond the
draft prepared at the group meeting.
2 I did some but not very much rewriting beyond the draft
prepared at the group meeting.
3 I did considerable rewriting beyond the draft prepared at
the group meeting.
4 I did a lot of rewriting beyond the draft prepared at the
group meeting.
5 I did a great deal of rewriting beyond the draft prepared
at the group meeting.

How would you feel if the quality of the speeches were assessed
and yours was determined to be of poor quality?

1 I would be totally unaffected.

2 I would feel somewhat badly.

3 I would feel very badly.

Which statement best describes your feelings about returning today
and writing the final draft of the speech?

1 It really didn't matter whether I returned or not.

2 I was concerned about my performance, however, I was very
calm.
I was somewhat anxious about my performance.
I was very anxious about my performance.

#00

During the group meeting the leader of your group told you that
there were some speech style papers and said that he thought it
to be a good idea if you examined the papers. Did you examine
the papers?

1 NO

2 YES

101

This portion of the questionnaire is concerned with your feel-
ings about the supervisor of your group. Again, respond by circling
the number next to the statement which best describes your feelings.

19. What kind of a supervisor directed your group?

1

He was totally incompetent.

2 He was somewhat incompetent.

3

He was competent.

4 He was very competent.

5

He was extremely competent and knowledgeable.

20. What did you think of your supervisor as a person?

1

2

3

He was the kind of person that I'd definitely not like to
encounter again.

He was the kind of person that I'd rather not encounter
again.

It really wouldn't matter if I encountered him again or not.
He was the kind of person I would rather like to encounter
again.

He was the kind of person I'd definitely like to encounter
again.

***To answer the following questions imagine that you have worked with
your group supervisor over a prolonged period of time and respond based
on your limited impressions of him.

21. When a question arises about how something should be done, my
supervisor is most apt to:

1

2 .

3

Insist that, rules or no rules, everything be done in the
supervisor's way.

Insist everything be done according to organization rules
and regulations.

Insist that the individuals, in the group, must adjust to
the work in his own way.

Insist that the work groups come to a common agreement about
the work.

102

22. When my supervisor finds someone disagreeing with him, he is most
likely to:

1

2

3

Refer to his own experience and know-how to back up his
opinions and act accordingly.

Get agreement on his ideas by influencing certain indi-
viduals.

He would do both A and B.

Go along with the decision of the work group in deciding

the issue.

Reconcile the opinions of the work group and the established
policies of the organization in deciding what course of
action would be best.

23. My supervisor is most likely to give out new orders and information

by:
1

Sending or posting a written notice for those subordinates
who are directly affected.

Sending or posting a written notice for every subordinate
in the work group.

Telling each employee about them if he feels it is necessary.
Discussing them with the group and getting the group's com-
ments and questions.

24. My supervisor tries to get the work accomplished by:

l

2

3

4

Carefully instructing and constantly supervising the workers
regarding the exact procedure to do the job.

Carefully instructing and providing some supervision re-
garding the exact procedure to do the job.

Carefully instructing and providing minimal supervision
regarding the exact procedure to do the job.

Carefully instructing and allowing a great deal of inter-
action between himself and subordinates regarding the pro-
cedure to do the job.

25. To accomplish his job, my supervisor seems to depend most on:

1

2

3

His ability to punish a subordinate if he performs inade-
quately.

His ability to reward a subordinate if he does the proper
thing.

His ability to influence subordinates to do the job simply
because he is the supervisor and has the right to prescribe
behavior for those individuals who are his subordinates.
His general ability (because people like him) to influence
people to do what has to be done.

His technical knowledge of the area in which the group is
working.

103

26. In general, what effect does your supervisor have on his subordi-
nates:

1 He seems to create an "I don't care" attitude.

2 He seems to create an atmosphere where his subordinates
have only marginal interest in whether or not the task is
accomplished.

3 He seems to create an atmosphere where his subordinates
are somewhat interested in whether or not the task is
accomplished.

4 He seems to create an atmosphere where his subordinates
are very interested in whether or not the task is accom-
plished.

APPENDIX III

ECOLOGY PAPER

A Future That Makes Ecological Sense

By

Garrett De Bell

104

105

For the last few years I've noticed two trends in literature

about the future. Journals like Audubon Magazine, Sierra Club Bulle-

 

 

tin, and Cry California are generally concerned about imminent ecolog-
ical disaster--the death of canyons and valleys, the end of whales,
big cats, eagles, falcons, pelicans, and even man. The magazines

pOpularizing science, such as Popular Science and POpular Mechanics,

 

speak of the technological UtOpia of the future--a television screen
attached to every telephone, a heliCOpter on every rooftOp, and sleek
supersonic transports for the fortunate few within them who cannot
hear their sonic boom. The two kinds of journal seem oblivious of
each other and mutually exclusive. Yet there is a connection: The
more we strive to reach the pOpular science future, the more likely
we are to achieve the ecological disaster.

The production, use and disposal of technologically SOphisti-
cated gadgets is a big part of our ecological problem. The solution
to the problem is not found in a simple banning of billboards and non-
returnable bottles, nor in the promotion of anti-litter campaigns and
highway beautification. Some of our best polluters encourage such
useful activities with advertising that professes deep concern about
environment. This kind of effort is at worst cynical and at best
misguided. Dealing with our ecological crises in population, water

and air pollution, pesticides, transportation and the quality of life

106

requires more than mere palliatives. It requires the restructuring of
many aspects of society.

We need first to halt growth of the world's population and
then work toward reducing the current three and a half billion people
to something less than one billion people. This number, perhaps, could
be supported at a standard of living roughly similar to that of coun-
tries such as Norway and the Netherlands at the present time. The
absurdly affluent and destructive standard of living in a countrly like
the United States could not be sustained for very long for a population
of more than three or four hundred million people all over the world.

One of the main purposes of the teach-in and the whole ecolog-
ical movement in this country today is to direct attention to a new
kind of thinking about our environmental problems, a search for options
so that we can decide the goals and the directions to take to provide
for a future that makes ecological sense. What might such a future be
like? Imagine your own.

You can imagine hearing someone say, "Remember the subdivision
that used to be where that orange grove is?" You can see a web of
parks throughout the cities replacing the freeways and streets that
once dominated. You can see agriculture become diversified again,
with a great variety of crops grown together, replacing the old
reliance on mass-produced single crop operations that are highly

dependent on pesticides, machines, and cheap farm labor. The

107

traditional American values of rural life come back, and many more
people grow their own food on smaller holdings and with a better
quality of existence for the farm workers--and for everyone else.

More fruits and vegetables have insects on them instead of
poisons. They can be brushed off or swallowed accidentally without
harm. They are not mutagenic. They eat very little themselves, and
because there is no monocrop, they can't wipe it out.

We see an end to some of the contradictions in American life.
Where we once burned fossil fuels and polluted the air to provide
electricity to run the escalators and other labor—saving devices that
fattened us and sent us to the electric exercise machines and calorie-
free soft drinks, we can rediscover walking. Where we overheated or
overconditioned our air, we rely again on the human adaptability to
stress that shaped us and gave us our physical integrity over a million
years of living. Although the small labor-saving devices did not use
much power, their aggregate use increased the demand for electricity,
and with it the need for more dams, more oxidizing of fossil fuel,
and more proliferation of nuclear power plants and their radionuclides.
We find that diminishing dependence upon electric devices diminishes
the need to build dams on wild rivers, pollute the air and sea with
fossil fuels, and poison the ecosphere with dispersing nuclear waste.

With conspicuous consumption eliminated, we have more leisure

time and a shorter work week. There are fewer automobiles, less

108

reliance upon wasteful packaging, and less need for the labor-saving
devices that exploited natural resources in order to save time to spend
With little reward in our overdepleted world. We produce what we need
and not a surplus. We allocate limited resources. New economists
adjust economic sights to accommodate the requirements of our Spaceship
Earth, limited closed system that it is. The economists rethink about
growth and know that "growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of
the cancer cell,II as Edward Abbey pointed out.

There is less spectator sport and more participating. The
American peOple, once a nation of watchers, are "do-it-yourself people"
again. They ski where the snowmobiles took them, walk where trail
bikes crudded the wilderness and swim where motorboats droned over
lakes they oiled. The peOple buy less music and make more of their
own. There is a world quiet enough to hear it in.

People are healthier. Fewer coronaries strike them because
walking and bicycling and swimming keep them fitter. They are fewer
people in hospitals because the old murderous automobile-oriented
transportation system has been brought under control. Even the former
automobile manufacturers, salesmen, and service people live longer,
better lives. One major change is that every product we buy includes
in its price the cost of its ultimate disposal. The many products
that once were cheap because they were dumped at will have become so

expensive that they no longer end up cluttering the environment.

109

Many of the people who were producing automobiles have'been
shifted into the housing and building industry. Their main job is
restructuring the urban wastes to planned cities, restoring land to
good agricultural use, building high-quality clustered dwellings at
the edges of the good agricultural land, using recycled material from
the old buildings. PeOple ride the short distance to their work and
have a chance to farm a little in the sun. There are legs and arms
and abdomens where the flab was, and the air is once again transparent.

The idea that a steady state works is commonplace. The popu-
lation is declining slowly toward a balance between man and the other
living things upon which his own life depends. The need for, and
number of, schools, doctors, highways, roads, public parks, recrea-
tional facilities, swimming pools, and other facilities is roughly
the same from year to year. People work enough to service equipment
and to replace things that wear out. They devote energy to increasing
the quality of life rather than to providing more and more possessions.
The job of the garbage man and junk man is elevated to the stature of
recycling engineer, looping systems in such a way that materials cause
no environmental deterioration. Many power plants and dams are dis-
mantled as the amount of energy needed each year delinces and peOple
develop sensible ways of living that require much less power, pollu-

tion, and environmental disruption. There is decentralization of many

110

basic services. Ecologically sound food stores prosper, offering
pesticide-free.produce in returnable containers.

.Advertising serves to inform, not to overstimulate, and is
believable again.. Wilderness areas are no longer under attack, and
retread wilderness increases substantially each year; less land is
needed for commercial timber production because of effective recycling
of wood products, reduction of conspicuous consumption and the lessen-
ing of need as the population drops. Poisoning of the ecosystem by
the leaded automobile gasoline has ceased because engine redesign
eliminates the need for lead additives.

Emphysema and lung cancer caused by smog are eliminated and
the smog goes. PeOple learn how to garden again, and allow the re-
covery to take place of the natural forms of "pest" control instead
of heavy doses of pesticides.

People are learning progressively more about relying less on
gadgets. They have long since refused to buy ten cents worth of food
in a T.V. dinner on an aluminum platter that will outlast the food
for generations.

Many of the things built in the past in the name of conservation
are being unbuilt. The Army Corps of Engineers is spending its time
undoing the damage it has done over the past decades. Cities no longer
ask the Corps to build a dam to prevent flooding of houses unwisely

built on a flood plain. Instead, they ask the Corps to restore the

111

flood plain to a vegetative cover that accommodates floods--good
creative work for engineers.

And that technological mistake, the supersonic transport, has
long since been a strange delusion, the few that were built having
been dismantled and forgotten.

So much for one view of the future--more Utopian than likely,
unless people want it that way. Many believe we cannot solve the
environmental problems because of the powerful influence of vested
interests. Obviously we can't solve these problems unless we meet
these interests directly in the political arena and demonstrate that
survival--theirs and ours--requires continuing change. The massive
, grass-roots.political movement which we now see growing can bring
this about. One of the major changes of the decade can come from an
ecological-political movement that bridges the gap between Left and
Right and young and old. This movement will get people together
behind candidates who press for a healthy environment and will turn
out of office those who only pretend to do so.

The thing peOple must realize above all is that the solution
to our environmental crises involves simple, small measures by many
peOple in accelerating sequence. The changes needed will require a
conversion like that required to win World War II and then to recon-
vert to peace. The reward is worth this kind of effort. Consider

the alternative.

APPENDIX IV

SPEECH STYLE PAPER

THE GROWTH OF A SPEAKER: FROM MEDIOCRITY

TO EXCELLENCE

By

Elwood Murray

112

113

It is easy to become a mediocre Speaker. Most of us achieve
that my merely being alive, well, and talking. Obviously, the better
speaker you are, the more influence you will exert in your environ-
ment. This seems like something worth working toward.

The past chapters have dealt with various concepts and per-
ceptions of thought and of communications processes. So far, you
have been dealing mainly with ideas and images. Now, you will become
involved in a more personal sense, for our emphasis in this chapter
shifts to people speaking.

While we will be dealing with reluctant speakers in much of
our writing here, just keep in mind that no one is yet a perfect
speaker. If he were,.there would be no need for him to read this book
or to take a speech course.

The Message: Semantic Overloads
and Underloads

 

 

An easy way to lose contact with your audience is to present
new or complicated information too quickly. You should realize from
your own experiences as a listener that even one new work or new
technical phrase can block attention to an important message. Each
of us has his own level of input for new information, and anything
that goes beyond that level is semantic overload. The result is a

blown fuse in the brain, which sends out blocking signals saying

114

"I don't get it" or "That's beyond me." At this point, communication
quickly halts. And if the speaker is perceptive, he will note the
negative feedback and attempt to correct the semantic overload by
connecting the new idea with an existing memory or an experience stored
in the receiver's memory bank.

The thing for you to remember is not to crowd ideas on top of
each other so quickly that your listeners cannot assimilate each mean-
ing fast enough for comprehension and still keep up with your delivery.
As an intelligent Speaker, you will pace your delivery by regulating
your rate of speaking, pitch and vocal modulations to keep the semantic
patterns you are evoking in phase with your isomorphisms. Keeping
pace with your listeners, allowing them to evaluate and comprehend
the isomorphic concepts of your message, is an excellent measure of a
Speaker's deliberation, and deliberation is a meaningful measure of
the Speaker as an artist.

As you'll recall, we cautioned earlier about professional qr ;
occupational specialists who cloud listeners' minds with technical
overload, e.g., the electrician speaking of "ohms," "nuviStor," andi'.
"diodes"; or the pilot Speaking of "Omni," "VFR," and “IFR approachV;__
or the academician who speaks of "underachievers,Y "heterogeneous
grouping," and "comprehensive evaluatory experience" to the local

Rotary Club.

115

You, as a student fairly new to the world of communication,
should be cautioned against using many of the new terms we have covered
in this book merely to impress your less-fortunate friends who have

not yet discovered us. Such frightening words as allness, isomorphism,

 

and entrOpy are enough to frighten away most people and induce barriers
to communication even among your own peers.

Semantic overload may be reduced by the use of diagrams, by
roleplaying, by familiar examples, or by various visuals. In one way
or another, you must always attempt to build a communications bridge
across the semantic barrier between you and your listeners.

In addition to overloading your listener and blocking your

message, you can find your message ignored through semantic underload.

 

This happens when your listener recognizes your message as "old stuff";
redundancy immediately sets up a chair for boredom to sit in. When
this happens, you also lose the listener.

Granted, some repetition of any idea may be necessary to
establish meaningful communication. When more than one person is in
your audience, your risk of semantic overlap and redundancy is
greater. However, you must minimize this overlap as much as possible
so as not to lose your group. Naturally, the more highly educated
and sophisticated your audience, the less tolerance they will have

for overlap.

116

The artful speaker succeeds in keeping himself balanced upon
a tightrope, with the obscurity of overload on one side and the boredom
of underload on another. In baseball, the successful base stealer
knows just how much or little lead to take on the pitcher, and in
speaking, the same knowledge applies the same way--that is, if you
stay too close to the "base," you won't advance; if you get too far
off, you might be tagged out.

Perhaps our best advice here might be: watch your words as
carefully as you watch your step.

Awakening the Slow Learner:
He Finally Makes It

 

There is a vast difference between the slow learner and the
retarded person yet both may be more intelligent than initial contact
would indicate. In the case of the slow learner, his problem usually
is one of assimilation and comprehension, which seem guarded by a
barrier of unresponsive lack of ambition. The retarded person, on
the other hand, is usually a victim of a birth injury, childhood
disease, or other physical abnormality.

In the case of the slow learner--and there are thousands of
people of all ages in this category--the major problems are cultural

deprivation; lack of stimulation, social contacts, and motivations;

117

a strong antilearning environment; and self-inflicted semantic dis-
Orders, e.g., the "I-can't-learn" feeling.

While the retarded have been aided greatly by both medical
specialists and special-education peOple, the slow learners have been
less fortunate in many cases. In instances where the special-education
professionals have been able to work with slow learners, the progress
in attainment has been marvelous. One of the most exciting ideas to
come along in recent years is that the traditional IQ test measure of
a person's intelligence is not a static quantity, and that a person
who scores badly on an IQ test is not necessarily doomed to second-
rate citizenship and mental inferiority for the rest of his life.

In the great gray "prisons" of our nation's slums and ghettos
are children who have never been to a zoo or to a museum. They are
hemmed in economically and socially, and they live in utter monotony,
isolated from the rest of the world by neglect. No wonder they become
hostile to the constructive, educational influences in society. Once
in school, failure is heaped upon failure. For most, even a feeble
showing of desire or curiosity is derided by peers or parents or
squelched by an insensitive teacher. These rejections result in a
loss of identity, and the youngster falls under the example of his
peer group in his desperate search for "Who am I?" This is the classic
life cycle of the dropout and delinquent and is an extreme case,

both in terms and numbers, because there are so many of these young

118

people in our society today. They are easy prey for extremists who
mobilize youthful anxieties into pointless violence.

Other slow learners come from low- and middle-class homes and
don't live in ghetto areas. They, too, may be culturally deprived,
and they often have emotional problems for one reason or another.
While their problem is different and ostensibly less extreme than
that of the ghetto child, it is no less distressing and often harder
to overcome. In both cases,.it is the communicator's role and the
teacher's job to knock down the barriers to communication and learn-
ing. Let's look at these problems a little more specifically.

Slow learners typically abstract less than their capacities
warrant, yet they notice and retain only a meager amount of informa-
tion. They are dull in the discrimination of differences, and their
inferences stop at the lower orders of abstraction. Obviously, be-
cause of the deprivations they have, they possess less with which to
abstract. When self-reflectiveness is a factor, their predictability
and evaluating become twisted and inadequate, and their abstraction
of similarities soon becomes 13, activated by unpleasant past situa-
tions. Their "allness" attitudes are based on hopelessness, if not
open hostility. They are often predominantly intensional in orien-
tation.

As we've stated, release from these semantic disorders re-

quires specialized help from schools and from community. Many slow

119

learners could be pulled from the morass of mediocrity by cooperative
teamwork among parents, teachers, and otherw within the community and
its social system. The basic problem is twofold: placing the child
in decent personal relationship with his situation and showing him
how to think relationally about what he could write or speak. Obvi- “‘1
ously, as his experience deepens, his reading and speaking take on

fuller meanings, and his deprivations will begin to wash out of his

 

active mind. As he begins to understand comparison and analogy, he

 

m;..-l.'." ail-L

sees meaningful relationships, and he begins to learn how to abstract,
and his awareness deepens. In a reward sense, he finds his personal
influence over his environment growing as his abilities grow.

Perhaps you wonder about the relevance of so many sentences
about the slow learner. Perhaps you can identify only partly with
his problems. Please recall that the term "slow learner" is a rela-
tive term, and we have given you only the darker side to show that
nothing is impossible when it comes to communication and education.
What application does this have for you? As a future teacher? As a
speech student right now? As a businessman in a few years? As a
civic leader later? As a housewife? As a human being? Only you can
answer the question about your relationship to the slow 1earner--and
we bet somewhere in your mind you are already doing so. With that,
let's take another step up the educational ladder in our quest for

communication betterment.

120

From Reticence Into Leadership

The reticent speaker is not a slow learner in the sense of
that term as we have just covered it. He is a person who, for one
reason or another would prefer to remain silent and uncommunicative.
Part of this attitude may lie within the person, e.g., he just has
nothing to say for one reason or another. The major reason, usually,
is a lack of confidence.in ability to Speak to others. For fear of
failure, the reticent speaker shrivels his communication with others,
and lets the less inhibited monopolize conversations.

Study of case histories of the reticent speaker indicates
that little failures tend to escalate into bigger and bigger failures.
Sensitive to the failure to meet the goals, the person begins to
narrow his attempts, and a self negating pity begins to take over.
How often have you heard a student express such attitudes as "I'm no
good at . . ."; ”I'm afraid of . . ."; "I couldn't do . . ."; "I just
know I'd fail . . .“? Or how many times have you said something like
that yourself?

This student passes up verbal opportunities, and often takes
refuge in another type of activity, always seeking some means by
which to win recognition. Oddly, some of the more reticent become
excellent writers of theory and history, because they can "hide" in
libraries, do research and writing, and let someone else promote

their work.

121

To some degree, the reticent speaker recognizes his problems,
and although he may not face up to them immediately, at least he knows
he has a communications problem. Some authorities suggest that se-
mantic indexing and semantic dating are possible solutions for the
problem of reticence, in that both reduce the damaging assumptions
of 13 and "allness" attitudes. The goal is the gradual increase of
extensionality, which will cause the past influences to fade, and
the spontaneity of thought, Speech, and action to blossom forth.

What we are saying, of course, is that the person who is
reticent needs to have his confidence developed. He should recognize,
and so should his teachers, that this comes about gradually, with a
block of success here and a block of success there . . . finally,
someday, forming a solid foundation from which the newly successful
speaker may address his peers. As this process is going on, however,
the circles of influence widen as the speaker gains more and more
confidence.

A college speech class probably offers the finest opportunity
for the reticent to make progress in communication growth. This
shouldn't surprise you. After all, do you come to a speech class as
perfect Speakers, only there to amaze each other with your oral
grandeur, or do you come to learn and practice? The more useful
Speech classes will offer an assortment of activities for students

including many channels for the reticent to interact with others

122

similar to him, and with other students too. For example, roleplay-
ing has been demonstrated as an effective aid in developing confi-
dence in reticents. Oral interpretation of drama and other writing
has helped these communication-shy persons too. Hundreds of young
men and women, for instance, have diminished their speech reluctances
by taking the roles of Romeo and Juliet in the famous balcony scene,
and have gone from there into more difficult areas that strike more
directly, and actively, at their semantic disorders.

In addition to the above techniques, case studies and prac-
tical Situations may be designed around the family, job, church,
fraternity, sorority, or the community. Valuable preparation and
involvement may be gained for the reticent when he takes part in
these sociodrama situations. Of course, sociodrama is not truly
real life, but it comes close, and it will at the very least provide
a familiar referrent when the student does find himself in the "live"
situation.

A similar activity that will aid the reticent in improving
his ability is to take part in public Speaking, discussion group,
and debate activities. These are active and potent means for him to
improve his speech personality, and they will enable him to build
confidence in his own ability.

Unexpected bonuses await the student who is willing to admit

he has a reticence problem, and is even more willing to try to do

123

something about it. We've listed a few examples of those "somethings"
above. His reward? Improvement in relations with others is a direct
result of improved speech communication. And with better relations

in oral communication, the entire academic and social world suddenly

becomes much brighter and more rewarding to the individual.

From Crudity and Affectation--To Art

 

Speech, like other disciplines, has several areas of specialty.
Public speaking, discussion, and debate often have been called "ap-
plied arts,“ while oral interpretation and drama are classes as "fine
arts.” The time has.passed when this dichotomy served any useful pur-
pose. All of us have been present at speeches, discussions, and
debates--in person or on T.V.--that for ease, grace, wit, and finess
we called "art." Whether they were "applied" or "fine" art was un-
important.

Such men as John F. Kennedy, Winston Churchill, or Adlai
Stevenson represent maturity of communication. Their "art" was far
more than simple refinement and skill in language, logic, and per-
suasion. They achieved a pinnacle with their "art" because no one
could seriously doubt their honesty, sincerity, and integrity. They
seem to fulfill the classical concept of the speaker as a "good man
who speaks well." They could stand up to judgment on both their

purposes and their means.

124

This is very important to success at communication. Men who
understand themselves extensionally have no trouble with their means.

This is very important to success at communication. Men who
understand themselves extensionally have no trouble with their own
identity. They understand what they can do and what they cannot do r~a
in a given situation. They are able to utilize many resources as
they present their message. The expression of integrity or athg§_

from such men makes them appear credible, believable, to their lis- i

 

teners. True credibility cannot be achieved merely by sharpening
skill.

The highest degree of wit, polish, and cultivation can become
an instant and hostile interference with communication if there is
the least suspicion that the Speaker is not fully committed to what
he says, particularly if the audience suspects some selfish motive
or vested interest is concealed in the message. This was the problem
faced by President Lyndon Johnson when he confronted the "credibility
gap" issue, for many Americans suspected him of deceit, though little
tangible evidence was offered by anyone to prove it. The late Senator
Robert Kennedy encountered the same kind of suspicion in his tragic-
ally short campaign for the presidency in 1968. Many labeled him an
"Opportunist," a charge from which he never fully recovered. Thus
neither position nor sophistication seems to be sufficient to estab-

lish credibility. The most scientific selection of words and phrases,

125

the most carefully selected, tailor-made ideas, beautifully enunci-
ated, still do not raise the act of communication to the status of
"art."

The man who is skilled, but is not fully credible is called a
SOphist. This uncomplimentary epithet implies that the audience re-
gards the speaker as a "slicker" or "con artist." This inference is
made often, and unjustly, about able and articulate speakers who
appear crude and uncoordinated.

Whatever their validity, a speaker must live with the evalua-
tions of his audience. The reputation lives and transfers to other
times and other situations, for it cannot be assumed that the typical
audience is capable or willing to use the semantic devices. Part of
develOpment of skill, therefore, demands the develOpment of a strong
athp§_capable of carrying the speaker through the most threatening
situations of negative evaluation.

Many of us react negatively to certain speech styles. We
label a cultured tone as "phony," "put on," "ivory tower," or "the-
atrical." On the other hand, many listeners may be overawed by this
same SOphistication. There is a tendency to equate smooth and fluent
delivery with superior intelligence. These peOple, according to
Wendell Johnson, overvalue delivery without subjecting it to critical

evaluation. It would appear that the intellectually snobbish, then,

126

are no less gullible as listeners than those persons with educational
or cultural deprivation!

At that lower end of the cultural spectrum, you find the
crude, gross, and uncouth mores of language and speech. Vocabulary
is meager, and repetitious slang hangs heavy in the speech patterns,
grammar is ignored; miSpronunciation abounds, and profanity and vul-
garity run rampant through conversation. There is no model of per-
sonality that these persons can follow to better their communication
patterns.

Of course, a great deal of communication at this level is re-
bellion by young peOple against the standards demanded by their family
and school situations. This rebellious use of crude patterns differs
greatly from the slum-area patterns, although the results are likely
to be self-defeating. While it is clearly understood that profanity,
for example, can be a natural part of a man's style, the normal lis-
tener will still evaluate it negatively.

The only way to bridge this semantic gap is through face-to-
face communication and a I'selling job" on the idea that there is a
better way to communicate, and that it really is better! In this
respect, the mass media can do much to aid communication betterment.
Television is widely criticized because it does not meet the cultural
standards imposed upon it by various self-proclaimed literati who

feel the medium must conform to their set of rules. However, the

127

success that television has had as a mass medium can be attributed
to the fact that it does not conform to these elite ideals; instead,
it is a natural idiom couched in the language and imagery of the mass
population. Television "talks" the language of a far larger percentage
of our pOpulation than do the literati who deem the medium a cultural
desert or vast wasteland. While we could debate the honest and sin-
cere motives behind contemporary programming practices, there is
absolutely no doubt that television communicates effectively.

You, of course, share a great deal of responsibility in this
area too, and this betterment of communication might just be one of

the debts you owe your society. Think about it.

When Science and Art Join in Speech

 

An art_is generated by the semantic responses of the person
who involves his relationships with that which he beholds. Art is a
value judgment, and an appreciation based on past experiences related
to present penceptions. This does not mean that a man seeing Edward
Steichen's photographs or hearing a Beatles' composition for the
first time cannot appreciate either as art--a1though he must have
something in his memory bank with which to associate the new percep-
tion in order to identify and evaluate it. Remember, though, that

in communicating about any art, you are as subject to reactions and

128

to semantic disorders as you are to what the objects themselves sym-
bolize.

We are saying that art is a series of abstractings of value
judgments made on the symbolic worth--to the perceiver--of objects
and ideas. Many speech students are blithely unaware of confusing
orders of abstraction as they engage in futile arguments about what
j§_or what i§_npt_art, what j§_or i§_np£_a speech disorder, or what
i§_or i§_npt good television programming. In discussions, and often
in loose-format graduate seminars, speech students are prone to carry
their rhetoric into even higher orders of abstractions after only the
most meager analysis, and with little Specific reference to the topic
itself. This develops into unintelligent, generalized, intensional
complaint about a concept into which the critic has little insight.
Such emissions cannot be considered "art" regardless of the vehemence
with which they are uttered.

If a message is not to the point, directly relevant to speaker
and listener concerns, it cannot be art. Some speakers try to cloak
their remarks in long words, attenuated and contrived phrases, hoping,
perhaps, to overcome deficiencies in reason through the power of words.
But words have little power if they do not point to extensional data.
The typical audience responds to such a speech as "arty," and with-

draws into a semantic stupor, hiding their real feelings with

129

devastating remarks like, "isn't that interesting?" A more frequent
reaction, however, is a noncommittal, negative silence.

Response to an artistic performance is displayed through a
change in our personality. An exciting speech, a truly great play
or musical performance excites us, and we cannot help but express our
understanding and approval. A speaker can estimate his own approach
to the quality that would make him artistic by taking an extensional
view of the response given to him and his message. When he is spe-
cifically aware that the audience "understands" and accepts, then he
can feel secure in continuing. Messages of confusion or rejection
require that he alter his style. It is imperative, when speaking to
others, to make them the prime focus of concern. The speaker's task
is to relate audience and topic. His personal concerns must be min-
imal in order to bring this about.

Every idea has its own rhetoric, sources of persuasion. The
speaker must discover in an idea elements that give it appeal for the
audience. Part of this can be done by organizing or structuring it
into a form that makes it easy for the audience to understand. The
language with which the idea is expressed must be carefully selected
so that words do not confuse or distract, and the delivery of the
message should be coherent and appealing. Each of these isomorphisms
represents a harmonious expression of the idea, a reinforcement that

helps drive the idea through the various resistances that an audience

130

can raise against it. The speaker is the medium, and he and the mes-
sage combine to reach the minds of the listener. The Speech becomes
an "extension of man” in the best McLuhan sense.

Now that we have found the art, the next logical step would
be to draw some boundary lines around it. But there are no precise
measures to separate the crude, the vulgar, and the tasteless from
the beautiful and the cultured. It is functionally impossible be-
cause so much depends on the tastes of the listeners and the demands
of the situation. Just as there are disagreements about what object
is worthy of being in an art museum, there is discord about the
qualities that make a communication "sublime." Of course, we will
probably always have self-styled censors who would impose their own,
often neurotic, whims and tastes upon us all. And, there will always
be blind prejudice against new and startling ideas, forms, and styles.
Critics will continue to be critics, usually unaware of what they
are doing, as they blindly abstract and segment the communication
process in their critique of various art and social forms and concepts.
Surely, though, there must be a better way!

Perhaps, in the future, we can utilize scientific methods to
help define the art of communication at Operational levels. We have
been discussing these operational levels in each chapter of this
book so far, and we have been trying--almost desperately--to point

routes along which the two forces could proceed toward unification

131

at the great common denominator--human interaction in the search for
truth and authenticity.

It has been said that the greatness of a message lies in the
.prgph_it manifests. This word trptp_needs much indexing and dating,
because there are as many truths as there are communicators and re-
ceivers to symbolize, everyone has his own truth. For example, truth
may lie only in fidelity to the drives of the artist as he creates,
without reference to others who might experience it. Art may lie in
the capacity of the communicator to achieve goals, though this perhaps
might be called "expediency." Art may refer to elevating the emo-
tions, though this might be termed "demagoguery." Each definition
that we make of art can be called by another name, a pejorative
designation.

When scientific propositions are applied to an understanding
of art, the production often loses its vigor. It does not help much
to attempt to explain DaVinci by detailing the chemical composition
of the colors he used on his canvas. By the same token, even the
most careful examination of the nature of the words and phrases used
by "artistic" speakers will offer little insight into what made their
speaking great.

If we try to operationalize our investigation, we find some
useful precepts. For example, we can be quite certain that effec-

tiveness in speaking is related to the amount of understanding of,

132

and concern for, the audience that the speaker shows. We know that
effectiveness has something to do with the speaker's unwillingness
to compromise his personal belief, even while he adapts it to his
audience's capacity to understand and believe. We know that pro-
priety has something to do with effectiveness that communications
which appear awkward, disjointed, or out-of—phase with the occasion
or audience do not succeed well. We know that the artist-speaker
must Show more concern for a specific audience than the artist-
writer, for the reader can put down what he finds unpleasant or
obscure, while a listening audience often has no choice but to hear
it out.

What we do not yet understand is the relationship between
effectiveness and art. It appears, at this moment in time, that
scientific investigation of the communication process can help us
to become more effective. We do not yet have a way to pinpoint the
elusive quality that carries us beyond effectiveness to art, and
thus, we find ourselves still rooted in the term science-art when
he talk about learning to speak well.

There are many texts which offer Specific instruction for
achieving success. This particular text will make no such sugges-
tions. In the first place, the authors would have little more to
offer than can be found in many good books. The Bobbs-Merrill Series

in Speech Communication, for example, examines many types and styles

133

of speaking in detail, and covers the-same ground we would have to
cover, if we were attempting to give such advice. There is nothing
to prevent a student from picking up these books and examining them,
provided he understands that even though it appears that "rules of
success" are being offered, the individual human is so crucial in the
communication act, that the eventual result is a unique methodology,
necessarily your own!

And so we repeat our one bit of advice. Learning to commun-
icate well proceeds best through communicating, not in the form of
isolated exercises, but with real people, about real issues, in real
situations. Each experience can display improvement if the Speaker
carefully admits the maximum information (feedback) from his audience
and processes it in his mind in reference to the reality. Conscious-
ness of the goal, improvement of communication, helps the student
speaker develop his own methodology for improvement. It seems to us
that this is the only rational way.

Whatever happens, we must know that whatever change we make
in our communication style will also change our personality. Or, do
we have to change our personality to alter our communication style?

Perhpas the next chapter will help us to answer this.

APPENDIX V

VITAS

Journalist

 

1. Personal Information

 

Name: Gary D. Johnson

Address: Department of Psychology
Baker Hall
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan

Birth Date: December 2, 1950
Age: 21

Marital Status: Married
2. Present Position

Presently I am a senior (June, 1972 graduate) in the
School of Journalism.

3. Education

High School: Brooklyn Technical High School
Brooklyn, New York

College: B.A. (expected) June, 1972, Michigan State
University Major: Journalism

4. Relevant Experience and Interests

During my four years at Brooklyn Tech, I was a member
of the school's Debating Society. As a member of the
society, I took part in a lot of debating contests
and went to the semi finals in the city scholastic
(high school) debating contest.

While at Michigan State, I retained my interest in
debating. This interest is represented in my choice
as majors. I am now a senior in the school of jour-
nalism. In this vain I have experience writing for
the State News and am particularly experienced in
covering addresses both here on campus and at the
state capitol.

All in all, I am particularly experienced and
adept at evaluating speeches, etc.

134

1.

135

Public Speaker

 

Personal Information

 

Name: Steven A. Thomas

Address: Department of Psychology
Baker Hall
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan

Birth Date: August 29, 1950
Age: 21

Marital Status: Married

 

I am a senior in the College of Communication Arts.

 

High School: The High School for the Performing Arts
Manhattan, New York

College: B.A. (expected) June, 1972, Michigan State
University Major: Television and
Radio production

2. Present Position
3. Education
4.

Relevant Experience and Interests

 

I

Firstly, it should be realized that I am an experienced
public speaker. In high school I took part in the
public speakers club. As a member of the club we
gave speeches on many topics both for class credit
and in competition.

While at Michigan State, I have participated in
the Speakers Forum and other debate clubs. Until my
SOphomore year, I participated in these activities
only as a hobby; now however, I have decided to do
graduate work in Television and Radio and seek a
career as a T.V. or radio announcer. Throughout high
school and college, I have given a total of one
hundred and forty-three public speeches and as a re-
sult feel competent to direct speech preparations.

136

Speech Teacher

1. Personal Information

Name: Prentice Stewart

Address: Department of Psychology
Baker Hall
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan

Birth Date: June 8, 1950
Age: 21

Marital Status: Married

2. Present Position

I am presently a senior in the College of Education.
My major is secondary education and my minor is
speech in the college of Communications.

3. Education

 

High School: Andrew Jackson High School
Cambria Heights, New York

College: B.ED (expected) June, 1972, Michigan State
University Major: Secondary Education
Minor: Speech (Communications)

4. Relevant Experience and Interests

As a high school student I participated in the Public
Speaking and Debating club. As a member of the club,
I gave numerous speeches in both public speaking and
debating contests.

Although during my freshman year at Michigan State
I participated in the Speakers Forum, I have since
then, turned my interests to the teaching of speech.
Since shifting my emphasis to teaching, I have parti-
cipated, in conjunction with my professors, in numerous
speaking and debating seminars around the state.

As a result of this experience I feel uniquely
qualified to take part in this project.

APPENDIX VI

POST HOC ANALYSES TABLES

137

TABLE 6

MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF EFFORT SCALE
THREE LEVELS OF INFLUENCE (A) BY THO OF RACE (8)

 

F-Ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors = 1.6273

 

Source A Of n 16 and 92 P < .0771
Variable Mean Square F (Univariate) P Less Than

1. Book related to content 0.0002 0.0018 0.9983
2. Effort related to content 2.4020 3.8014 0.0287
3. Books related to style 0.0487 0.9565 0.3908
4. Effort related to style 0.3235 1.6975 0.1930
5. Amount of thinking 0.4549 0.8704 0.4248
6. Amount of rewriting 0.2377 0.4480 0.6414
7. Feelings about returning 0.1138 0.3128 0.7328
8. Attitude of group 0.0903 0.2118 0.8098

0F (Hypothesis) = 2
OF (Error) I 53

F-Ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors - 1.3671

 

 

' Source 3 or - a and 46 P < .2362
Variable Mean Square F (Univariate) P Less Than
1. BKSCON 0.0002 0.0018 0.9659
2. EFFCON 0.0249 0.0393 0.8436
3. BKSSTY 0.0170 0.3330 0.5664
4. EFFSTY 0.0207 0.1087 0.7429
5. THINKN 0.5181 0.9913 0.3240
6. Rewrit 0.9370 5.5352 0.0224
7. Feelin 0.3891 1.0693 0.3059
8. Attitu 0.7461 1.7496 0.1917
0F (Hypothesis) - 1
OF (Error) - 53
F-Ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors = 0.7005
Source A x 8 OF - 15 and 92 P < .7867
Variable Mean Square F (Univariate) P Less Than

1. BKSCON 0.0002 0.0020 0.9981
2. EFFCON 0.1971 0.3119 0.7334
3. BKSSTY 0.0165 0.3242 0.7246
4. EFFSTY 0.2094 1.0987 0.3408
5. THINKN 0.3344 0.6398 0.5315
6. Rewrit 1.2835 2.4190 0.0988
7. Feelin 0.1149 0.3158 0.7306
8. Attitu 0.2875 0.6742 0.5139

0F (Hypothesis) - 2
OF (Error) - 53

 

 

PI . I ..-I .'".t&

138

TABLE 7

MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR EVALUATION
OF SPEECH OUTLINES--THREE LEVELS OF
INFLUENCE (A) BY TWO LEVELS OF RACE (B)

 

 

 

Source F Ratio for Multivariate Test of

A Equality of Mean Vectors = 0.8431

DF = 6 and 88 P < .5402
Variable Between Univariate F P Less Than
Mean Square

1. Quality of Effort 0.9156 0.9753 0.3848
2. Overall Evaluation 1.0652 1.6499 0.2033
3. No. of Words in Outline 68l8.3122 .8113 0.4506

8 F Ratio for Multivariate Test of

Equality of Mean Vectors = .7475
OF = 3 and 44 P < .5297

1. Quality of Effort 0.0925 0.0985 0.7551
2. Overall Evaluation 1.3494 2.0902 0.1551
3. No. of Words in Outline 8537.4454 1.0159 0.3188
A x B F Ratio for Multivariate Test of

Equality of Mean Vectors ! .7589
OF = 6 and 88 P < .6041
1. Quality of Effort .2913 0.3103 .7348
2. Overall Evaluation 1.2961 2.0076 .1460
3. No. of Words in Outline 1299.7030 0.1547 .8572

 

MICHIGAN STQTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES

1|lllllllllllHllHlllilllllllllllllllillllllllllilllllllllllll
31293001033012