Title Page
 Review of related literature
 Design and methodology
 Results and analysis of data
 Summary, conclusions, and...
 Biographical sketch

Title: Relationships among work behavior type, personality function, job satisfaction, and effectiveness ratings of vocational education administrators /
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00099080/00001
 Material Information
Title: Relationships among work behavior type, personality function, job satisfaction, and effectiveness ratings of vocational education administrators /
Alternate Title: Relationships among work behavior type, personality function ..
Physical Description: ix, 153 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Glenn, Martha Anne
Publication Date: 1982
Copyright Date: 1982
Subject: Work -- Psychological aspects   ( lcsh )
Personality   ( lcsh )
Job satisfaction   ( lcsh )
Vocational education -- Personnel management   ( lcsh )
Educational Administration and Supervision thesis Ph. D   ( lcsh )
Dissertations, Academic -- Educational Administration and Supervision -- UF   ( lcsh )
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
Thesis: Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1982.
Bibliography: Bibliography: leaves 142-151.
Statement of Responsibility: by Martha Anne Glenn.
General Note: Typescript.
General Note: Vita.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00099080
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: alephbibnum - 000334449
oclc - 09387400
notis - ABW4089


This item has the following downloads:

PDF ( 5 MBs ) ( PDF )

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Page i
        Page ii
        Page iii
        Page iv
        Page v
        Page vi
        Page vii
        Page viii
        Page ix
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
    Review of related literature
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
    Design and methodology
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
    Results and analysis of data
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
        Page 119
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Page 125
        Page 126
        Page 127
    Summary, conclusions, and implications
        Page 128
        Page 129
        Page 130
        Page 131
        Page 132
        Page 133
        Page 134
        Page 135
        Page 136
        Page 137
        Page 138
        Page 139
        Page 140
        Page 141
        Page 142
        Page 143
        Page 144
        Page 145
        Page 146
        Page 147
        Page 148
        Page 149
        Page 150
        Page 151
    Biographical sketch
        Page 152
        Page 153
        Page 154
        Page 155
Full Text



Martha Anne Glenn




Copyright 1982


Martha Anne Glenn

To Tami Anne and Richard Clark


Completion of this work represents the efforts of many

individuals. I am grateful to all who made the path a

little easier and the burden a little lighter. Deep

acknowledgment and heartfelt thanks are extended to the

members of my supervisory committee, Drs. Phillip A. Clark,

John M. Nickens, and Arthur J. Lewis. Dr. Clark was instru-

mental in my obtaining a Mott Fellowship and my entering

this doctoral program. He served as chairman of my commit-

tee and for his efforts on my behalf I am grateful.

Dr. Nickens' unrelentless support and expert guidance made

this study possible. His constant empathy and encouragement

made me believe I could do it. Dr. Lewis showed genuine

interest in my many projects and elicited the thinker in

me. He is a true mentor.

Dr. Jay S. Mendell, Professor, Florida Atlantic

University, supervised my internship and contributed a

great deal of effort toward my professional development.

To him who showed me the meaning of the word "Visionary,"

I owe much appreciation. Dr. Margaret P. Korb believed

in me, cultivated my potential, and, over the years, has

served as mentor, colleague and friend.

Cynthia B. Heine first encouraged me to enter this doc-

toral program and has been a steadfast friend throughout.

James R. Hasselback gave help and support without which

this task would have been most difficult. Barbara Beynon

patiently and cheerfully edited the manuscript. Her

expertise was invaluable. Anne Taylor-Covell's calm,

reassuring manner and professional expertise saw me through

the final hours of preparation of the manuscript.

I am especially indebted to the memory of my mother

whose truisms and celebration of every morning were

present throughout this project. Finally, I express my

deepest gratitude to my children, Tami and Ricky, to whom

this work is lovingly dedicated.



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................... iv

ABSTRACT... ........................................... viii

I INTRODUCTION........................................1

Organization of the Chapter .........................1
Background and Rationale ............................1
Statement of the Problem ............................7
Delimitations and Limitations .......................7
Justification for the Study .........................8
Assumptions..... ...................................11
Definition of Terms ................................11
Organization of Subsequent Chapters ................14

II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ......................15

Organization of the Chapter ........................15
Work Behavior Type..................................16
Jung's Typology and the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator ...................................51
Job Satisfaction....................................60
Conclusion................................................ 84
Summary................................................... 89

III DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY.............................90

Organization of the Chapter ........................90
Procedures................................................ 90
Summary of Design and Methodology.................101

IV RESULTS AND ANALYSIS OF DATA......................102

Organization of the Chapter.......................102
Relationships Between Work Behavior Type
and Personality Function ........................102
Work Behavior Type and Overall Job
Satisfaction ................................... 113
Factor Analysis of Work Behavior Type
on Selected Areas of Job Satisfaction...........115
Correlations Between Work Behavior Type, Person-
ality Functions and Effectiveness Ratings....... 121
Summary of Results and Analysis.................... 126


Organization of the Chapter .......................128
Problem and Procedures ............................ 128
Results ..............................................131
Implications .......................................135

APPENDICES ............................................. 139

A Job Satisfaction Questionnaire ...............139
B Role Effectiveness Questionnaire .............141

REFERENCES ................................................142

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .....................................152

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy



Martha Anne Glenn

August 1982

Chairman: Dr. Phillip A. Clark
Major Department: Educational Administration and Supervision

The problem of this study was to determine relation-

ships among work behavior type, personality function, job

satisfaction, and effectiveness of vocational education

administrators. As a result of this study, the following

specific questions were answered

1. Within each work behavior type, do participants
score higher on one personality function than

2. Do participants' work behavior types relate to
their overall job satisfaction?

3. Do scores in job satisfaction areas relate to
work behavior type?

4. Do participants' work behavior types relate to
their effectiveness ratings?

The Marcus Paul Placement Profile (MPPP) was used to

discern work behavior type and the Myers-Briggs Type In-

dicator (MBTI) was employed to determine personality func-

tion. Degree of job satisfaction or dissatisfaction was

measured by the Job Satisfaction Questionnaire, and effec-

tiveness measures were obtained from supervisors' ratings

on the Role Effectiveness Questionnaire. The MPPP, the

MBTI, and the Job Satisfaction Questionnaire were adminis-

tered to 43 vocational education administrators. The Role

Effectiveness Questionnaire was completed by each partici-

pant's supervisor.

Data were analyzed by the Statistical Package for the

Social Sciences using Pearson correlations, crosstabulations,

and factor analysis.

Results of this study showed that some work behavior

types were significantly related to some personality func-

tions. Also, significant relationships were found between

work behavior type and areas of job satisfaction. Addi-

tionally, specific areas of job effectiveness were found

to be significantly related to work behavior type. These

findings were consistent with expectations based on a

synthesis of related literature. Neither overall job sat-

isfaction nor overall effectiveness was found to be sig-

nificantly related to either work behavior type or person-

ality function.

Implications for the findings of this study for per-

sonnel management include the use of work behavior type

in job matching, development and training, and team building.

Further research is needed to determine the effect under-

standing one's own and others' work behavior type may

have on job satisfaction, effectiveness, and job turnover.


Organization of the Chapter

Chapter I presents an introduction to the study which

begins with background and rationale. This general back-

ground information is followed by a statement of the problem,

delimitations and limitations, justification for the study,

assumptions, and definition of terms. A statement of the

organization of subsequent chapters concludes Chapter I.

Background and Rationale

Educational institutions, governmental agencies, and

private industry spend millions of dollars each year hiring

personnel. This costly process of matching the right per-

son with the right job is difficult and often unsuccessful.

A recent study of more than 350,000 individuals reports

that four out of five people are in the wrong job.

Greenberg (1979), states that "80 per cent of the people

now employed are doing jobs either totally wrong for them,

or at best, clearly not the most appropriate to permit

their maximum contribution" (p.56).

Being in the wrong job can produce employee frustration,

discontent, uncertain loyalty, and poor motivation, all of

which typically lead to counter-productive behavior such as

sloppiness, tardiness, absenteeism, poor service to clients,

and eventually, job turnover (Bruno, 1979; Greenberg, 1979;

Hackman, Lawler & Porter, 1977; Haldane, 1974; Schmidt &

Hunter, 1979; Silver & Berke, 1981).

All of this spells decreased productivity, efficiency,

and effectiveness and increased cost to the organization.

The cost of hiring the wrong person is increasing (Bruno,

1979). If a person placed in a job for which he or she is

ill-suited leaves the organization within the first year, a

drain is placed on the recruiting/training budget, and-

there is much loss of time and productivity. A seldom

explored facet of this problem is the toll it takes on both

administrator and employee, for in a very real sense, each

has experienced failure

At the time of selection, there is an implied
assumption on the part of the manager and employee
that it will work out. When it doesn't, both feel
like failures and that pain lingers to shadow
future recruiting experiences for both. (Merrill
& Stimpson, 1979, p.14)

The well-qualified person who is not hired experiences an

obvious loss. Not so obvious is the monetary loss to the

organization in terms of recruiting, training, and


Many organizations have turnover rates of 40 per cent

with 50 to 60 per cent not uncommon (Silver & Berke, 1981).

This represents a more costly operation in which effective

planning becomes almost impossible. Merrill and Stimpson

(1979) reported that at least 60 per cent of newly hired

personnel do not meet standards first set by the organiza-

tion, and almost 44 per cent of those who survive the first

year of employment leave during the second year.

This enormous drain on both organizational and human

resources is a people problem and, as such, is complex,

involving legal, moral, social, and psychological consid-

erations. In the broadest sense, the issue is optimal

utilization of human resources. Not only hiring practices,

or the initial matching of the right person with the right

job are involved, but also building effective teams,

assigning work, conducting training, and grooming entry-

level persons for promotions. Individual career planning,

organizational planning, individual employee evaluations,

transfer, termination, and retirement decisions are affected

as well. This human aspect is indeed important. In fact,

Silver and Berke (1981) state that, "overlooking the people

problem is the leading cause of failure in business" (p.10).

In her book, Career Management for the Individual and

the Organization, Mariann Jelinik (1979) states, "Most

employers claim that their human resources are their most

important asset. Yet the typical organization's behavior

does not lend credence to the claim" (p.287). She lists

the following as examples:

Employees may be used ineffectively in the sense
that their existing skills, knowledge, and aptitudes
are poorly matched with the requirements of their
jobs--the round peg in the square hole.

The abilities and intellectual and psychological
potential of employees also are often underutilized

in terms of what they are expected to do in their
jobs--lack of self actualization.

Although most work is carried out by groups, very
little is done to develop work groups that are
effective--the whole is not greater than the sum
of its parts (p.287).

Jelinik states further that this is due to ineffective human

resource development systems that do not match the capa-

bilities of employees with the growth and production

requirements of the organization.

Even the most sophisticated organizations--those
exhibiting excellence in technological development,
marketing, and finance--are relative novices when
it comes to the proper development and utilization
of human beings.(Jelinik, 1979, p.287)

The problem of human resource development begins when

a job applicant enters the recruitment process and continues

throughout employment. It is a process, a continuing

series of decisional steps, not a single event (Dunnette &

Borman, 1979). As such, organizations must recognize the

importance of spending more effort and utilizing the best

tools available at the selection stage (Schmidt & Hunter,

1979; Silver & Berke, 1981).

Traditional methods of identifying the skills, talents,

and predispositions of men and women are outmoded and do

not meet current needs (Haldane, 1974). To date, the

greatest criteria for job placement continue to be education

and prior experience, both of which have proven to have

little correlation to job success (Greenberg, 1979;

Haldane, 1974; Silver & Berke, 1981). More subjective

measures, such as interviewing and checking employment

and personal references, are in themselves not adequate

either (Silver & Berke, 1981).

What is needed is a more holistic approach: subjective

and objective measures which consider the employee as a

multi-faceted person and include personality dimensions

and preferences, and work behavior traits. Fortunately,

today we have the capacity to measure behavioral components

of jobs and job performance dimensions. We now know more

about basic structures and taxonomies of human characteris-

tics (Dunnette & Borman, 1979).

Use of the above-mentioned subjective components of

job placement have been documented in the literature.

Much has also been written about more objective measures

such as aptitude testing. The use of personality tests

and interest inventories in job placement has also been

researched. However, research about the use of information

regarding work behavior traits in employment selection, job

placement, or other personnel decisions is lacking. Re-

search of the literature revealed no citations of work done

in this area in the field of education or educational


Dunnette and Borman (1979) point out the limited work

that has been done in the area of matching personal attri-

butes with specific job characteristics, and call for

further research in this area. McCormick (1976) and Cleff

(1971) report significant relationships among job turnover,

productivity, supervisory ratings and scores on a profile

of an individual's job experience, preference scores, and

job profile scores. The emphasis here, however, is more

on matching job traits and traits of the employee's pre-

vious experience than the employee's personality traits,

natural preferred mode of working, or work behavior traits.

Different personality types excel in different areas

of the work situation (Holland, 1959). Because of certain

predispositions, some people, for example, work best under

close supervision while others are more productive and

better satisfied when they have a greater degree of autonomy

Some people are happy to give much attention to small

details and organization while others prefer to work with

an idea or the whole picture and leave the details to

someone else. If a supervisor does not recognize these

traits, he or she may assign a "detail" job to an "idea"

person, who soon becomes dissatisfied and frustrated and

quits, creating a personal and organizational deficit.

Further research is needed to learn the relationship

of individual personality and work behavior traits to job

success. The assumption is that if an employee is satis-

fied in his or her job and the supervisor rates his or her

job performance as effective, a good job match exists. If,

as a result of research, one knows the personality and work

behavior traits of successful incumbents in a particular

job, this information can be used for more effective utili-

zation of future personnel.

Successful job matching will naturally increase worker

satisfaction and productivity and will gratify more fully

the needs of both organizations and individuals. "We look

forward to the next few years as a time when personnel

selection practices can take rapid strides to assure im-

proved matches between persons and jobs for the good of

everyone" (Dunnette & Borman, 1979, p.482). One purpose of

this study was to provide information which would lead to

improved matches between persons and jobs, especially in

the field of educational administration.

Statement of the Problem

The problem of this study was to determine the rela-

tionships among work behavior type, personality function,

job satisfaction, and effectiveness of vocational education

administrators in the state of Florida.

Specifically, the study sought to answer the following


1. Within each work behavior type, will
participants be more likely to score higher
on one personality function than another?

2. Do participants' work behavior types relate
to their overall job satisfaction?

3. Do scores in job satisfaction areas relate
to work behavior type?

4. Do participants' work behavior types relate
to their effectiveness ratings?

Delimitations and Limitations

In answering the preceding questions, the following

delimitations were observed:

1. This study was limited to vocational education
administrators, and included all incumbents in
the five offices of the Vocational Division
in the state of Florida.

2. Additional data were sought from vocational
education administrators who had left their
positions within the past two years.

3. Information about work behavior type and
preference was limited to that identified by
the Marcus Paul Placement Profile.

4. Information about personality functions,
preferences and traits was limited to that
identified by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

5. Measures regarding job satisfaction and
dissatisfaction were limited to those indicated
in the Job Satisfaction Questionnaire.

6. Measures of effectiveness were limited to those
indicated in the Role Effectiveness Questionnaire.

In addition,the following limitations were inherent in

this study:

1. Since this study was limited to vocational
education administrators in the state of
Florida, it is not possible to generalize
these findings to other occupational types.

2. The Job Satisfaction Questionnaire was
prepared specifically for vocational education
administrators and is not appropriate for use
with other populations.

3. Measures of effectiveness were limited to those
indicated by the administrators' supraordinate
and did not consider effectiveness that might
be perceived by clients or co-workers.

Justification for the Study

The literature is replete with evidence of inability

to match the right person with the right job, yet there is

a conspicuous void in the literature relating work behavior

type and personality type to worker effectiveness or job

satisfaction. This poor job matching represents a misuse

of human resources and has been a far more significant

cause of dissatisfaction and poor performance among admini-

strators than the much vaunted squeeze on pay of the last

decade (Fogarty & Reid, 1980). A glance at the advertise-

ments for educational administrators in The Chronicle of

Higher Education reveals an abundance of top and mid-level

administrative openings and very few entry-level openings,

which may signify in part, a high degree of job dissatis-

faction and an ill-fit between administrator and job

(Thomas, 1977). Clearly, more research is needed in this

area, particularly in the field of educational administra-

tion which has a high rate of turnover.

Since it was not feasible to study administrators

across-the-board, a specific population of educational

administrators who exhibit both diverse administrative

backgrounds and a high rate of turnover seemed appropriate

for this study. Vocational education administrators are

such a group, having typically come from other administra-

tive posts in education or industry (Trapnell, 1977).

Significant also is a particularly high rate of turnover

among vocational education administrators in the state of

Florida: approximately 33 per cent within the past two

years and 100 per cent within the past five years. This

rate of turnover leaves crucial gaps in services; entire

programs suffer while new administrators are being recruited

and oriented to their new positions. If more data were

available about vocational education administrators' work

behavior and personality types, personnel practices of

recruiting, hiring, training and placement could be


Since vocational education administrators represent

broad geographical areas as well as diverse administrative

roles, it is believed that the findings of this study

could be utilized for more effective personnel decision-

making regarding administrators in general.

In short, more research regarding the relationships

among work behavior type, personality function, job

satisfaction, andworker effectiveness would add to the

body of knowledge of personnel decision-making and human

resource management in educational administration.

Increasing this knowledge has implications for both

organization and individual. For the organization, there

is potential for greater utilization of human resources in

general. Specifically, potential exists for more effective

team building, better job assignment, training and promotion

decisions,plus decreased turnover and increased commitment

which come from more satisfied workers. For the individual,

a job well suited to his or her personality and work beha-

vior preferences has obvious potential for much satisfaction

and increased quality of life in general.

Information derived from this study can assist in

solving the problem of matching the right person with the

right job and thereby help increase job satisfaction and

worker effectiveness. These findings would be a valuable

contribution to the literature as well as a practical aid

for employers in making personnel decisions.


For the purpose of this study, the following assump-

tions are presented:

1. The Marcus Paul Placement Profile is a valid
and reliable instrument for measuring work
behavior type.

2. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is a valid
and reliable instrument for measuring
personality preference, function, and type.

3. The Job Satisfaction Questionnaire is a
valid and reliable measure of worker

4. The Role Effectiveness Questionnaire is a
valid and reliable measure of worker

5. Supervisors are the most appropriate and
valid source for measures of worker

Definition of Terms

General Terms

Vocational Education Program Administrator. One who

is employed by the Department of Education and assigned to

one of five regional offices within the Division of

Vocational Education of the state of Florida. His or her

primary role is to provide consulting services and technical

assistance in a specific vocational program area to local

education agencies within the geographic region.

Vocational program area. An organized program of

instruction, offered at the middle school, junior high

school, high school, post-secondary and adult levels, in

one of six instructional subject areas: agri-business and

natural resources, home economics, business, health and

public service, industrial, marketing and distributive, and

industrial arts education.

Vocational Education Supervisor. One who is employed

by the Department of Education and assigned to administer

the activities of one of the five regional offices of the

Division of Vocational Education.

Effectiveness. The extent to which an employee meets

the role expectations of the supervisor. These expectations

encompass the supervisor's degree of satisfaction with over-

all job performance as well as degree of satisfaction with

the quality of work in specific areas of the job. For the

purpose of this study, effectiveness is defined as the

supervisor's rating on the Role Effectiveness Questionnaire.

Marcus Paul Placement Profile Terms

Marcus Paul Placement Profile (MPPP). An instrument

designed to measure work behavior type.

Energizer type. A work behavior type which describes

an individual who is interested in getting results, is

typically assertive, direct, impatient with detail, but

quite creative in the work situation.

Inducer type. A work behavior type which indicates an

individual who is people-oriented, sensitive, and optimistic

and who places more emphasis on interpersonal relations and

getting things accomplished within the group than on the

organization itself.

Concentrator type. A work behavior type which

describes an individual who is a loyal, steadyworker who

tends to be patient, systematic, and effective.

Producer type. A work behavior type which indicates

an individual who strives for quality, follows guidelines

carefully, and supports his or her work and decisions with


Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Terms

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). An instrument

designed to measure Jungian psychological types.

Personality type. An indication of differences in

personality that result from the way individuals perceive

their world and make judgments about their perceptions.

Personality preference. One of four dichotomous

dimensions within a personality type. MBTI personality

preferences are

1. Extraversion-Introversion. Refers to one's
orientation toward the world: either the
outer world of people and things or the inner
world of thoughts and ideas.

2. Judging-Perceiving. Refers to one's approach
to the outer world: either planned and
orderly or flexible and spontaneous.

3. Sensing-Intuition. Refers to the way in which
individuals become aware of their world:
either through realistic, practical evidence or
relying more on imagination and hunches.

4. Thinking-Feeling. Refers to the way in which
an individual attaches value to an experience:
either using logic and facts, or personal values.

Personality attitude. The Jungian and MBTI personality

preference of either Extravert or Introvert.

Personality function. The Jungian andMBTI personality

preferences of either Sensing or Intuition, Thinking or

Feeling, Judgment or Perception.

Organization of Subsequent Chapters

A review of the literature is presented in Chapter II.

Included are major areas of research and related literature

relevant to work behavior type, the use of Jungian concepts

and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in personnel practices,

and general theories of job satisfaction and employee


The design and methodology of the study appear in

Chapter III. The research design, data source, data

collection, instrumentation, and data treatment are


Chapter IV presents the results and analysis of the

data. The data specific to each question addressed in the

study are summarized, followed by a presentation of the

relationships among the Marcus Paul Placement Profile, the

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, the Job Satisfaction Question-

naire and the Role Effectiveness Questionnaire.

Chapter V includes the summary of all data presented,

conclusions drawn, and recommendations made.


Organization of the Chapter

The thrust of this study was to ascertain the rela-

tionships among work behavior type, personality function,

job satisfaction, and worker effectiveness. In order to

understand these relationships, it is helpful to have some

insight into the theoretical background and relevant

research in each area.

It was apparent from examining the literature that

this topic is just now becoming significant in the fields

of administration and personnel management. The constructs

which form the basis of this study are well documented,

but research is nonexistent in the areas of work behavior

type and effective matching of persons and jobs to increase

job satisfaction and worker effectiveness (Dunnette &

Borman, 1979; Neff, 1969). Therefore, review of the litera-

ture primarily consists of the research and theories which

have led to interest in work behavior type.

The first section discusses several areas of literature

related to work behavior type. The second section presents

an overview of Jung's Typology and includes research re-

lated to the Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator as used in

personnel management. The third section consists of an


overall view of job satisfaction and emphasizes its rela-

tionship to effectiveness. The final section discusses

effectiveness as it relates to worker satisfaction and work


Work Behavior Type

Very little research has been done on work behavior type

itself. However, research has been completed in areas tan-

gential to the understanding and application of work

behavior type. An overview of the historical antecedents

of work behavior type is presented, as well as a view of

the field of industrial psychology and selected theories of

vocational choice. The importance of trait and type theory

and the development of a current model of work behavior

type are also covered.

Historical Antecedents

One of the earliest writings calling attention to work

and work behavior is found in the Old Testament in which

Adam and Eve are banished from the Garden of Eden, to earn

their living by the sweat of their brows. Ancient Greece

shows its concern for matching individual abilities to types

of training and jobs in written records. The Greeks used

elaborate tests of physical skill for boys and kept records

on the results so as to monitor and guide these youths into

manhood. Socrates developed many tests to measure his

students' learning in order to judge their readiness for

further training and or work (Dunnette, 1977). Plato

recognized that individuals possessed different abilities

and sought to assign persons according to their skills so

that they could fulfill their potential and make a maximum

contribution to society. Hull (1928) cites Plato as saying:

No two persons are born exactly alike, but each
differs from the other in natural endowments, one
being suited for one occupation and another for
another. From these considerations, it follows
that all things will be produced in superior quantity
and quality, and with greater ease when each man works
at a single occupation in accordance with his
natural gifts (p.245).

This concern for matching skills, abilities and predis-

positions to appropriate occupations did not keep pace with

the growth of civilizations. Work has not been given as

prominent a place in literature as its counterparts love

and play, despite the fact that work occupies a major portion

of one's life.

Serious study of work behavior is a very recent

phenomenon (Neff, 1969) and has grown out of subspecialties

of sociology and psychology. Sociologists are more con-

cerned with the social structures and institutions within

which people work than with the individual worker or work

behavior (Nosow & Form, 1962). Psychologists who deal with

work behavior tend to fall into one of two categories:

either industry or education.

Industrial Psychology

The major discipline dealing with the individual's

behavior in the work setting is industrial psychology.

This branch of behavior science emphasizes the importance

of individual differences (Landy & Trumbo, 1976). Some

researchers (Naylor, Pritchard, & Ilgen, 1980) feel that

"work behavior is not idiosyncratic" and that any theories

related to general behavior are applicable to an individual

in any context, including the work setting (p.42). Others

(Bass & Barrett, 1974; Landy & Trumbo, 1976) presume that

the work environment is, indeed, different from other

environments. Bass and Barrett (1974) state that "we can

obtain hunches and theories from general psychology appli-

cable to the performance of men at work, but these need to

be tested at the work place" (p.4).

Since this young discipline began, these beliefs and

theories have grown and changed, as has its primary thrust.

Frederick Taylor (1911) conducted the first critical inves-

tigations of work behavior. These time-and-motion studies

were done in the interest of efficient factory management

and were the forerunners of our modern field of industrial

engineering. This field has been concerned with the devel-

opment of elaborate theories and programs which deal with

human work behavior and machines (Gagne, 1962).

World War I necessitated placing thousands of men in

jobs quickly; with this need came the advent of testing. In

the decades that followed, testing has become increasingly

sophisticated and widely utilized.

The 1920's saw the emergence of concern for individual

differences in aptitude and proficiency. Management began

to consider this individuality in the design of machinery

and work stations as well as in work routines.

Later studies (Mayo, 1933; Roethlisberger and Dickson,

1939) began to shed light on the human side of work behavior

and showed that "the working human being is an extremely

complex entity, who not only varies in physical and mental

capacity but also in feelings, emotions, attitudes, beliefs,

aspirations, and ideals" (Neff, 1969, p.21).

Maslow's theory of self-actualization had tremendous

impact on modern concepts of work behavior and motivation

(Bass & Barrett, 1974). This theory postulated that human

needs could be arranged in a hierarchy which ranged from the

lowest level of physiological needs to the highest level of

self-actualization needs. He believed that the lower-level

needs were the primary motivators of workers and that when

these were satisfied, the next level of need became


Herzberg's theory of motivation and job satisfaction

also impacted industrial psychology. This theory is dis-

cussed more fully in the section of this chapter which

specifically addresses job satisfaction. Both Maslow's and

Herzberg's theories have since been seriously questioned

(Miner, 1980), but the fact remains that their theories

shaped much of the thinking in fields of business, industry,

psychology, and education, and had definite impact on the

understanding of work behavior and policies relating to it.

Much has been written regarding individual worker

behavior as it relates to organizations. Organizational

behavior concerns itself primarily with global work behavior

and its integration into the whole organization. This field

focuses on the similarities of human behavior within an

organization while industrial psychology focuses on the

differences in individual behavior, the unique needs and

behaviors of workers. Although these fields intersect,

organizational behavior research is not included here due

to its organizational rather than individual orientation.

Current concerns of persons involved with work behavior

are accurate selection practices which include matching the

right person with the right job and improving training

procedures. Other concerns are employee participation in

decision-making and overall improvement of the quality of

work life (Bass & Barrett, 1974; Dunnette & Borman, 1979;

Ouchi, 1980; Owens, 1981).

While industrial psychologists have been examining

individual work behavior, educational psychologists have had

a somewhat different focus.

Educational Psychology

Educational psychologists have been concerned with

career planning, occupational preference, and vocational

counseling. Their research deals not so much with the

psychology of work behavior as with the psychology of

occupational choice. A brief summary of the early work of

Super, Ginzberg, and Holland is appropriate since much

current vocational guidance and personnel practice is based

on these theories.

Donald Super. Using longitudinal studies, Super and

his associates at Teachers College, Columbia University,

ascertained the crucial factors and stages in vocational

development (Super, 1953, 1957, 1960; Super & Overstreet,

1960; Super, Starishevsky, Matlin & Jordaan, 1963). Their

chief supposition was that the major determining factor in

a career pattern is self-concept. While this theory has

been criticized as being too restrictive and simplistic

(Neff, 1969), Super has shown the importance of longitudinal

research in studying vocational selection and work behavior.

Eli Ginzberg. Ginzberg's background was economics and

his interest was in a theory which would help solve some of

the problems in industry related to the availability,

development and conservation of human resources. In his

books Occupational Choice (with Ginsburg, Axelrad & Herma,

1951) and The Development of Human Resources (1966),

Ginzberg et al. explain the three components of his theory.

First, he states that occupational choice is not a single

event, but is a developmental process which takes place over

a period of eight to ten years. "Each step in the process

has a meaningful relation to those which precede and follow

it" (Ginzberg, 1966, p.47). Ginzberg postulates that the

process of vocational choice is largely irreversible.

That is, experiences of the past cannot be relived nor

reversed, for they represent investments in time, money,

education, and self. "Of course, the individual can shift

even after he has tentatively committed himself to a particular

choice. But the entire process of decision-making cannot

be repeated and later decisions are limited by previous

decisions" (Ginzberg, 1966, p.47). The third component of

Ginzberg's theory is that the process of occupational choice

ends in a compromise among interests, capacities, values,

and opportunities. "Throughout the years of his development,

the individual has been trying to learn enough about

[himself or herself]... and about the opportunities and

limitations in the real world, to make an occupational

choice that will yield maximum satisfaction" (Ginzberg,

1966, p.47).

Any given occupational choice, then, is a function of

intrinsic factors such as abilities, interests, values,

and capacities; and extrinsic factors such as environmental

opportunities, demands, and constraints. Ginzberg added

this second dimension, augmenting Super's theory. Holland

further augments these two theories with his theory concern-

ing the role personality plays in vocational development.

John Holland. Holland's theory is drawn from need

theory, role theory, self theory, social learning theory,

psychoanalytic theory, and sociology (Carkhuff, Alexik &

Anderson, 1967). Holland (1959, 1966) considers hereditary

and environmental factors as primary bases for the develop-

ment of a hierarchy or pattern, a preferred mode for

dealing with the world. This preferred mode tends to propel

one toward one of six orientations or occupational groups

(Holland, 1966):

1. The Motoric Orientation. Persons with this
orientation enjoy activities requiring physical
strength, aggressive action, motor co-ordination,
and skill . they wish to play masculine
roles, dealing with concrete, well-defined prob-
lems as opposed to abstract, intangible ones . .
they prefer to act out rather than think through.

2. The Intellectual Orientation. Persons of this
orientation appear to be task-oriented .
[preferring to] think through rather than act out
problems. . They need to organize and under-
stand the world. They enjoy ambiguous work tasks
and interactive activities and possess somewhat
unconventional values and attitudes.

3. The Supportive Orientation. Persons of this ori-
entation prefer teaching or therapeutic roles. .
They possess verbal and interpersonal skills .
are responsible, socially oriented and accepting
of feminine impulses and roles. . They prefer
to deal with problems through feeling and inter-
personal manipulations of others.

4. The Conforming Orientation. Persons of this class
prefer structured verbal and numerical activities
and subordinate roles. They achieve their goals
through conformity. In this fashion, they obtain
satisfaction and avoid conflict and anxiety
aroused by ambiguous situations or problems
involving interpersonal relationships and physical

5. The Persuasive Orientation. Persons of this class
prefer to use their verbal skills in situations
which provide opportunities for dominating,
selling, or leading others. They conceive of
themselves as strong masculine leaders. They
avoid well-defined work situations. They are
concerned with power and status.

6. The Esthetic Orientation. Persons of this
orientation prefer indirect relationships with
others. They [are] artistic . need individual
expression, are more feminine, and have less ego
strength. (pp.36-37)

From these major life styles or behavioral orientations,

one can make predictions concerning the success of indi-

vidual career decisions (Osipaw, Ashby & Wall, 1966)

because, states Holland (1959), "persons with particular

personality patterns achieve in some environments and not

in others" (p.38).

In summary then, self concept plays an important role

in the development of personality and therefore in one's

predisposition toward a particular work behavior. One

might extrapolate from Ginzberg's theory that not only is

choosing a career path a compromise and a process, so too

is matching the right person with the right job. It is

dynamic, not a one-time match (Dunnette &Borman, 1979).

It stands to reason, also, that the more information one

has about one's own personality and work behavior, the more

one can find appropriate opportunities to utilize talents

and develop potential.

Trait and Type Theory

In examining work behavior type, one must also explore

the historical antecedents found in typology and trait

theory. In doing so, it should be remembered that for as

long as there has been language, human beings have attempted

to describe and categorize their fellowmen. For

example, in ancient Athens, Theophrastus described 30

typical characteristics in vivid and precise language

(Geier, 1979), and Hippocrates employed the types Sanguine,

Choleric, Melancholic, and Phlegmatic in describing his

patients (Cattell, 1946).

One would think, then, with so much time spent in this

area, that describing behavior would be an exact science by

now, but "until a hundred years ago, little advance had

been made on the methods of classical times" (Cattell, 1950,

p.135). Throughout history, people have been described by

the same logical language used to describe things. Cattell

(1950) further states that "we have used either qualities

or categories, which, in describing organisms, we call

respectively, traits and types" (p.135).

For decades "trait" theorists and "type" theorists

have been divided in their view of the best method of

categorizing behavior. For example, Geier (1980) states

that "the type approach is too limited; individuals cannot

be fitted into categories.. In contrast,the trait approach

provides a greater latitude for describing individual

differences" (p.3). One is reminded by Cattell (1950) that

"descriptions by types and by traits do not constitute two

distinct methods, but rather extremes of the same statis-

tical procedure" (p.135).

Traits and types serve different purposes, however.

Types are used when broad categorizations of behavior are

desired. Traits, on the other hand, are more specific and

not as broadly applicable. Our common language indicates

that an individual "has a trait but fits a type" indicating

that types do not exist in nature or people but rather in

the eye of the observer (Allport, 1961, p.349). Allport

(1961) further states that "Traits reside in the person;

types in some outside point of view" (p.349). Thus, trait

and type are indispensable concepts in psychology, each

having its own place and function (Allport, 1961; Cattell,

1946; Murphy, 1947).

Types indicate that certain individuals resemble other

individuals in some respect. Murphy (1947) defines type

as a

central form about which variations center...In a
given group, persons having a majority of the
characteristics which are common or peculiar to the
group are said to be typical of that group. Type
is thus a matter of averages. It is that which
marks off or characterizes a group of persons.

Typology, specifically that of Jung, will be discussed more

fully in a later section of this chapter.

Traits have been studied, measured, categorized, and

defined by numerous psychological theorists. May (1932)

states that "traits are only convenient names given to types

or qualities of behavior which have elements in common.

They are not psychological entities but rather categories

for the classification of habits" (p.133). Allport (1937),

who spent a number of years studying and classifying traits,

states that "traits underlie what is 'characteristic' in

conduct" (p.334), and furthermore, "a common trait is a

category for classifying functionally equivalent forms of

behavior in a general population of people" (p. 349).

Murphy (1947) defines trait as "anything by means of which

one person may be distinguished from another" (p.999).

It will be shown in the following section how one

psychologist developed a system of types based on four

primary emotions. These types, which began as clusters of

traits, later led to the formulation of a model for

categorizing work behavior.

Evolution of Work Behavior Types

The study of work behavior traits and types as known

today, began with the work of William Moulton Marston,

psychologist, professor, and scientist. Marston was very

much involved in the controversy of his day regarding the

question of whether or not emotions, meanings, intentions,

and other elements of consciousness had any physiological

correlates, especially in the brain. He published prolifi-

cally and often criticized his colleagues. "Psychologists

seem to have failed to find motor consciousness, all these

years, simply because they did not know what they were

looking for, and consequently did not recognize motation

[feeling as motor consciousness] as such when it was re-

peatedly thrust upon their attention" (Marston, 1928,

p.63). However, having committed himself to this stand,

he writes, "I have entered the gates of motor consciousness

long guarded by psychology's sacred taboo. Once one has

entered this forbidden territory, however, one finds the

building materials for affective and emotional theories

ready-cut and prepared for immediate use" (p.77).

Marston built his first theories on the work of his

German predecessor, Wundt, who dared to depart from the

then current notion that there were only two emotions:

pleasantness and unpleasantness. Wundt, in his Grundzuge

der Physiologischen Psychologie of 1896, proposed that

there were six primary emotions: pleasantness and un-

pleasantness, excitement and depression, tension and

relaxation (Marston, 1928). Marston thought that Wundt was

on the verge of accuracy, but that his theory needed more

scientific research. He spent many years thereafter,

building on these original ideas, and through research

began perfecting his own theories.

In his book, Emotions of Normal People (1928),

Marston laid the foundation for greater understanding of

human behavior in personal as well as work situations.

The development of the work behavior instrument used in

this study owes its theoretical inception to his early

research and writing. The description of Marston's contri-

butions will be divided into four areas. First, the

explanation of primary emotions will be presented, followed

by a description of each emotion. Next, Marston's two

axis model is explained, and finally the actual clustered

traits are listed.

Primary emotions. The first tenet of Marston's (1928)

theory relates to what he calls primary emotions. He

explained in great detail the physiological and psychologi-

cal interactions which encompass emotions, and defined

a primary emotion as

an emotion which contains the maximal amount of
alliance, antagonism, superiority of strength of
the motor self in respect to the motor stimulus.

His idea was that a primary emotion may be designated

according to an individual's reaction in a favorable envi-

ronment (alliance) or unfavorable environment (antagonism)

and according to his or her actions being active (superior

strength) or passive (inferior strength). He emphasized

the organism's need for balance between active and passive

in its interaction with the environment. He also recognized

that the intensity of an emotion or subsequent reaction to

a stimulus, depends to a large degree on the individual's

past experience.

Piaget's concepts of adaption which encompass assimi-

lation (the active component) and accommodation (the passive

component) are consistent with Marston's model. Flavell

(1963) explains that assimilation involves structuring or

restructuring one's environment, or "bending a reality

event to the templet of one's ongoing structure" (p.48).

Accommodation, on the other hand, implies one's learning

to desire what the environment has to offer, or "adapting

to the variegated requirements or demands which the world

of objects imposes upon one" (Flavell, 1963, p. 48).

Marston and Piaget both realized that these aspects are not

totally separable in the living organism but do give a

basis from which to view behavior.

Marston (1928), then, named the four primary emotions:

Dominance, Compliance, Submission and Inducement. He took

great care in selecting these terms, being certain that

each word accurately describe the "objective relationship

between motor self and motor stimulus" and that each word

"must suggest the experience in question" (p.107).

Geier (1967, 1979, 1980), who added much to the under-

standing and practical utilization of Marston's work,

states that

Marston's model of four primary emotions is to be
viewed as more than a typology system. Instead, it
is a dynamic, in that it recognizes that human
beings respond as situations require them to respond;
that whatever their biological diversities, they will,
if capable of learning, take on the attributes the
situations call for. This then, is a situational
theory held in high esteem by current psychological
researchers. (1979, p.9)

Thus, this situational theory contained not only the four

emotions, but also a dynamic model for understanding beha-

vioral responses which considered both active and passive

orientations to the environment.

In an earlier research report, Marston (1927) explained

his four primary emotions in the light of his own physio-

logical research and correlated this closely with Watson's

(1925) findings as reported in Behaviorism. By the follow-

ing year when his first book Emotions of Normal People was

published, Marston (1928) had added much to his model in

terms of describing behaviors associated with the emotions.

Presented here is a brief summary of his physiological

explanation of each emotion, followed by a behavioral

description. He begins by describing the most basic

emotion, Dominance.

Dominance. Marston (1927) defines Dominance as a

"central release of additional motor energy directed toward

dominating obstacles to a reaction already in progress

(p.349). Further, the dominance emotion consists of "an

increase of the self to overcome an opponent, . .a feeling

of an outrush of energy to remove opposition" (Marston,

1928, p.140). Geier (1979) updated and clarified some of

Marston's terminology and defines Dominance as "active

positive movement in an antagonistic environment" (p.2).

Dominance, states Marston (1928) "seems to comprise

the most fundamental and primitive type of emotional inte-

gration found in animals or human beings" (p.119). The

emotion Dominance is not only responsible for man's survival

as a species, but is also the primary life-propelling emo-

tion of infants for the first three years of life (Marston,

1927; Watson, 1925). Dominance has given impetus to much

art, music, and literature throughout history. One piece

which succinctly describes Dominance is Henley's "Invictus":

Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the Pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.

It matters not how strait the gait,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
I am the captain of my soul. (1979, p.245)

Compliance. Marston (1927) states that Compliance

ranks with Dominance as a basic emotional response.

"Compliance means control (but not inhibition) of tonic

motor discharge reinforcement by a phasic reflex" (p.350).

Compliance can also mean taking an interest in the stimuli.

It "is not to be confused with inaction, or inhibition"

(p.351). Later, Marston (1928) defines Compliance as a

decrease of the motor self to let an opponent move
the organism as if by will; either passively, by
making the self give up some dominant activity, or
actively, by compelling the organism to move in
some anti-dominant way...[It is a] feeling of
acceptance of an object or force as inevitably just
what it is, followed by self-yielding sufficient to
bring about harmonious readjustment of self to
object. (p.183)

Geier (1979) states that compliance is a cautious tentative

response designated to reduce antagonistic factors in an

unfavorable environment" (p.2).

Compliance may arise from fear, from being startled,

from sudden change or simply from voluntary surrender. It

results from the recognition (or belief) that forces or

stimuli outside oneself are immanently stronger. Compliance

may also result from an enduring or repeated environmental

stimulus which is intense. That same stimuli, if experi-

enced only once may be ineffectual, whereas repeated over

a period of time, it brings compliance (Marston, 1928).

For example, many people can take a one-time punishment,

even though it may be extremely harsh, but a prolonged

punishment of a much lesser degree brings compliance more

quickly. Terrorists, interrogators, some employers, and

even parents have practiced this for centuries.

Compliance, or giving over oneself, surrendering, is

often but not always unpleasant; it can be considered part

of "being in the flow" of the universe. One must surrender

self to be at one with God or nature, to feel empathy for

a friend, or at times to be an effective member of a team.

As the Chinese believe, it is part of the Tao, the flow.

Dominance and Compliance. Dominance and Compliance

form one axis. There are times when these emotions occur

in varying degrees in different individuals. Regardless of

their order or intensity, the organism strives to maintain

a balance between the two (Marston, 1928). It will be

shown in a later section how this translates into specific

behaviors and behavior types.

Marston (1927) concurs with Watson (1925) that the

emotions Submission and Inducement (Watson's love mechan-

isms), are more difficult to study than Dominance and

Compliance. However, Marston expands Watson's ideas and

broadens the scope of the behavioral categories to encom-

pass more than love mechanisms, thereby making these primary

emotions applicable to an entire spectrum of behaviors.

The primary emotion, Submission,will be considered first.

Submission. Marston (1927) defines Submission as a

"voluntary yielding to whatever stimuli may be imposed .

It does not seem to overwhelm, or dominate the subject

organism by force, but rather brings about a spontaneous

lessening of the subject's resistance to it until the

subject has become less strong than the stimulus" (pp.356-

357). Submission can also be thought of as willingness,

or the introspective meaning of mutual warmth of feeling

between the person submitting and the person submitted to

(Marston, 1928). Geier (1979) defines submission as "passive

aggressiveness in a favorable environment" (p.2).

While compliance is often unpleasant, or at least not

optimally desirable, submission is usually pleasant. It

emanates from the natural law wherein the "weaker attractive

force progressively weakens itself by facilitating the

compulsion exercised upon itself by the stronger attractive

force. .The lesser ally submits to the greater by decreasing

itself to make the alliance closer" (Marston, 1928, p.222).

A simple distinction might be that one complies with an

order but submits to a request.

Watson (1925) terms submission the "love response" and

states that it is a natural, unlearned emotional reaction.

For lovers, submission is a willingness to give of oneself

completely and without question for the sake of the other.

In more general behavior, submission takes the form of con-

sideration, service to others, selflessness, accommodation,

and generosity.

Inducement. The final primary emotion explained by

Marston (1927) is Inducement. It is the "active solicitation

of attention and stimulation [from the other]..... [It is]

calculated to reinforce submission reactions in order to

induce further submission from another individual" (p.539).

He further states that "Inducement may be defined as central

release of additional motor energy directed toward drawing

forth, or inducing submission responses from another indi-

vidual" (p.361).

Marston's 1928 definition states that

Inducement consists of an increase of the self, and
making of the self more completely allied with the
stimulus person, for the purpose of establishing
control over that person's behavior. . .The definite
characteristic of inducement is a feeling that is
utterly necessary to win the voluntary submission of
another person to do what the subject says. This
feeling [is] increasingly pleasant in proportion as
the other person submits. (p.273)

Geier (1979) defines Inducement as "active positive movement

in a favorable environment" (p.2).

Inducement behavior can be seen in those who gain

voluntary submission of others. It most often involves

persuasion, personal charm, friendliness, and frequently

seduction or subtle manipulation. One of the greatest

examples of inducement in our culture is advertising, in

which industry and business use every emotional appeal to

convince observers that it is in their best interest to buy

the product on display. Every positive relationship contains

some inducement behavior, for there must be inducement and

submission for alliance to occur.

Submission and Inducement. It has been shown that

Dominance and Compliance form one axis. Similarly,

Submission and Inducement form the other axis of Marston's

model. They are at opposite ends of a continuum, being

separated by intensity of response, either active or passive;

and orientation of the individual, either outward or inward.

While dominance is antagonistic toward its subject and

demands compliance, inducement is allied with its subject

and requests submission. Inducement and submission are

like the law of gravity. "When two physical objects exer-

cise attractive or gravitational force upon one another,

the smaller body is drawn toward the larger. During this

movement, the stronger allied body controls and directs the

attractive force of the smaller object" (Marston, 1928,

p.270). These two forces remain in alliance throughout

the interaction. Thus, we have the traditional male-female

relationship. Although current ideas about the male role of

inducement and the female role of submission are changing,

the principles of inducement and submission remain the same.

The key word is alliance. Much in the literature since the

humanistic movement calls for replacing the dominance-

compliance relationship with the inducement-submission

relationship in the work situation. Again, the key is

alliance of purpose.

The Two-Axis Model. Marston's theory of the four pri-

mary emotions is expressed as a two axis model which aids

in the understanding of behavior. Marston's model appears

as Figure 1 and illustrates that the emotions Dominance and

Compliance form one axis, and Inducement and Submission









Figure 1 Marston's Two Axis Model

form the other. This is to imply that each pair of emotions

exists on a continuum, being separated by degree of activity

or passivity and outward or inward orientation.

The axes are divided horizontally to designate other

similarities. The upper dimensions Dominance and Induce-

ment comprise the active component (what Piaget might term

assimilation), and lower dimensions Submission and Com-

pliance make up the passive component (Piaget's accommoda-

tion). Outward and inward orientation is viewed in the

same manner. It will be shown later that Marston's active

and outward orientation dimensions relate to Jung's Extra-

vert and Intuitive functions and the passive and inward

dimensions relate to his Introvert and Sensing functions.

Geier (1979) added to Marston's model the idea that

persons whose traits cluster predominately around the

Dominance or the Inducement dimensions have a process ori-

entation while those whose traits cluster predominately

around the Submission or Compliance dimensions are more

product-oriented. Process-oriented persons "want to shape

the environment according to their particular view. These

are individuals who continually test and push the limits"

(Geier, 1979, p.3). By contrast, Product-oriented indivi-

duals "focus on the how and the why" (Geier, 1979, p.3).

The circle in the center of Figure 1 indicates that

the dimensions are not all-inclusive labels but rather that

they designate tendencies. Individuals exhibit some of all

the types of behaviors but their behavior traits will tend

to cluster around one dimension more than others.

Clustered Traits. Marston later clustered traits for

each of the four emotions, which are listed in Figure 2.

This list helps transform Marston's physiological data and

theories into a useful model for understanding normal

behavior. As did Marston, Cattell (1946) sought to charac-

terize a person by providing a short list of main common

traits and then constructing a psychograph or profile of

the individual. Although Marston did not statistically

confirm his trait clusters as did Cattell, later researchers

(Allport & Odbert, 1936; Geier, 1967, 1979, 1980) used fac-

tor analysis as suggested by Cattell in substantiating trait

clusters. Geier (1980) states, "I have found that many of

Marston's suggested adjectives for each of his four emotions

have correlated together at least R = .60" (p.14).

It is interesting to note that many psychologists of

the past few decades have attempted to explain personality

in terms of clustered traits. For the sake of comparison,

the literature was examined to discover other models which

might either support or refute Marston's model. Most the-

ories or models contain numerous clusters and many are

pathologically-oriented, while Marston's model uses four

simple categories with cluster traits to support each

dimension. Marston's model has an explicit non-pathological

orientation, which is most appropriate for this study.


ego centricity
fighting instinct
force of character
high spirit
inferiority feeling
superiority complex


well disciplined
"getting down to
brass tacks"
"oneness with
open mindedness
being a realist
"swimming with the
weak will
yielding to


"a good child"
"being an easy mark"
good nature
"being manageable"
tender heartedness
"being tractable"
willing service


"attractive personality"
"inducing a
"making an impression"
"personal magnetism"
"selling an idea"
"selling oneself"
"winning a person's
"winning a person's

Figure 2 Marston's Behavioral Description of the Four Primary Emotions

Further, most trait psychologists (Allport, 1937; Allport

& Odbert, 1936; Cattell, 1946; Duffy, 1949; Eysenck, 1947)

begin with long lists of traits and later try to cluster

them into categories. Marston begins with physiological

responses and universal law and later adds traits as a

natural product of his findings.

Figure 2 shows Marston's behavioral descriptions, or

traits, which describe the four primary emotions. The order

of presentation has been alphabetized to facilitate cross-

referencing with the Geier list (Figure 3 ) and the

Marcus Paul Placement Profile list (Figure 4 ).

Geier (1980) believed that Marston's list of traits

was particularly valuable because it provided a theoretical

basis for predicting behavior. He thought that

the answer for formulating a theory lay in Marston's
construct of the primary emotions--tied to the motor
self. The primary emotions of the motor self--
dominance, inducement, submission, and compliance--
defined how the motor self responded to either an
antagonistic or a favorable environment. Standing
for clusters of traits, these words are the major
parameters for predicting the predominant way the
individual perceives the world and will tend to
act. Marston also allowed for a dynamic view of the
individual who responded to various situations with
different behavior. The primary emotions provide a
language and a theoretical frame-work for determining
the individual differences in people. (p.26)

Geier (1967) began researching Marston's constructs in

a trait approach to leadership. The study consisted of 16

leaderless groups and proposed to answer questions regarding

the method of collecting data by way of focused interviews

and diaries, and gives information about participants' use

of trait terminology in describing the style of group

members. Results indicated that diaries and focused

interviews were effective methods of recording group par-

ticipants' perceptions of their own behavior traits and

the behavior traits of others. A high degree of agreement

existed among the subjects in their perceptions of member

behavior. It was concluded that participants can accurately

describe their experience within a given situation. It was

also found that subjects utilized trait terminology to

describe the behavior and leadership style of others. The

finding which later guided the format of an instrument to

discern work behavior type dealt with descriptions of traits

which were not only most like a subject, but also least like

the subject. Geier discovered that participants reported

the traits of others in terms of what they were most, while

their terminology for describing themselves was in terms of

behavior they exhibited least.

Building on Marston's theory and cluster traits, and

utilizing the list of traits by Alport and Odbert (1936),

Geier developed his own list of traits. It included words

which were more in keeping with today's language. Geier

(1980) states that

one must consider semantic change, or change of
meaning. Then, too some words acquire negative
connotations over time, or with much repetition
have lost their original vividness and become worn
and faded (p.12)

Figure 3 presents Geier's updated list of cluster traits.

Figure 3 Geier's Revised List of Traits Which Correspond
to the Four Primary Emotions


force of character
will power


good mixer
life of the party


easy mark



Geier, 1980
* Marston's (1928)original terms

Note that Geier has listed most of the traits as adjectives,

making them more grammatically compatible and easier with

which to work.

Geier's list of clustered traits has been used in fur-

ther research. In an effort to develop dental teams,

Meskin (1974) conducted a study of 300 dentists in which

each dentist was asked to rate his or her behavior in a

series of forced-choice groupings of Geier's clustered

traits. The dentists were later observed in their work

setting. The study served to correlate actual behavior with

the specific categories. Dentists who rated themselves as

high in Dominance or Influencing reflected these character-

istics in their practice. For example, Dominance and Influ-

encing types dislike details and, as might be expected,

these dentists tended to hire more auxiliary personnel to

do the detail work than did the other types. Being out-

going and process-oriented, they were more accepting of the

team approach to dentistry. Given the Dominance type

energy and drive to achieve, it is not surprising to discover

that the high Dominance dentists worked more hours than did

other types. By contrast, high Steadiness and high Compli-

ance types preferred to do more of the work themselves and

to work alone. They hired fewer auxiliary personnel and

were reluctant to utilize the team approach to dentistry.

Marcus Paul Placement Profile

In the late 1970's the Marcus Paul Placement Profile

(MPPP) was developed using Marston's model and the research

of Geier. The intention was to produce an instrument which

would discern work behavior type for the purpose of matching

individuals and jobs. The instrument was designed to be

utilized as a tool in the educational setting for student

personnel and placement as well as in the business setting

for recruiting, job placement, work assignment, team build-

ing, and training (Bauch, 1981).

In keeping with the work of Argyris (1964), Blake and

Mouton (1964), McGregor (1960), and others who have brought

humanistic principles into the work place, the aim was to

design an instrument which would increase understanding of

work behavior, both for employer and employee. Bauch (1981)

believed that work behavior traits and types were not judg-

ments of work behaviors but were terms to be employed to

increase understanding of work behaviors. Accordingly, he

felt that any terminology used should be positive or neutral,

and that the terms in the profile should reflect work

behaviors. Therefore, some of Marston and Geier's terminol-

ogy was modified for application in the work setting. Words

with negative connotations were replaced by terms which were

more positive or neutral. For example, the titles of

Marston's original categories were Dominance, Inducement,

Submission, and Compliance. Geier changed these to

Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Compliance. In the

MPPP, the work behavior types appear as Energizer, Inducer,

Concentrator, and Producer.

The term "Energizer" seems to fit the set of behaviors

which cluster on the Dominance dimension, and has the added

benefit of a positive connotation. It is also more descrip-

tive of this type as found in the work setting. The term

"Inducer" is both positive and accurate in its description

of the work behaviors found in this dimension. In naming

the third type, Marston's Submission type and Geier's

Steadiness type became the MPPP Concentrator type. The term

"Concentrator" appears more positive than the term "Sub-

mission" and is a more inclusive description of this

particular work behavior type than "Steadiness", although

steadiness is one quality of this dimension. The term

"Producer" replaced Marston and Geier's label "Compliance".

As with the other changes, Producer is both more positive

and more descriptive of this particular type. These labels

were also changed from adjectives to nouns to denote a

dimension or type, rather than a trait (Bauch, 1981).

Figure 4 lists the MPPP work behavior traits under each

type heading. A comparison of the MPPP list with Geier's

list (Figure 3) and Marston's list (Figure 2) reveals the

semantic changes which have evolved from Marston's descrip-

tions of the primary emotions. The trait names from the

MPPP list are employed in the MPPP in the form of 24 sets

of forced choice items. In each set, respondents indicate

the term which is most descriptive of his or her work

behavior and the term which is least descriptive of his

or her work behavior. This format was derived from Geier's


new ideas
takes charge


attracts people
change agent
seeks new ideas
team leader


easy going


follows orders
follows procedures

Bauch, 1981
* Marston's (1928) original terms

Figure 4 Marcus Paul Placement Profile List of Traits

(1967) research which indicated that individuals frequently

describe themselves in terms of behaviors or traits which

are least like their own.

Upon completion of the instrument, the responses are

entered into a computer which is pre-programmed for the

MPPP, and the individual's work behavior profile is genera-

ted instantly. The profile includes identification of one

of the four work behavior types and a narrative describing

the individual's strengths and tendencies in the work


Work Behavior Type and Vocational Development

It is interesting to note the relationships between

work behavior types and the theories of vocational develop-

ment. Super's (1953) self-concept theory of vocational

choice is tied to a predisposition to not only the type of

work one finds satisfying, but the particular behaviors

which one brings to the work environment. There also

appear to be similarities between Holland's six Orienta-

tion groups and the MPPP work behavior types. When Holland

(1966) describes the Persusasive Orientation, he might well

be describing the Energizer work behavior type. Both are

comfortable dominating others, are concerned with power and

status, and think of themselves as strong leaders. His

description of the Supportive Orientation applies to the

Inducer work behavior type as well, in that they both

prefer roles which require verbal and interpersonal skills,

and both are people-oriented. Holland's Conforming

Orientation and the MPPP Producer type are quite similar.

Both prefer structured activities and subordinate roles,

and both try to avoid ambiguity and conflict. The descrip-

tion of the Intellectual Orientation fits the Concentrator

work behavior type, but this parallel is not as strong as

the others. Both the Intellectual and the Concentrator are

task oriented and have a need to categorize and understand

the world. However, the Concentrator is not comfortable

with ambiguous work tasks as is the Intellectual.

Further research would be required to ascertain whether

or not correlations between Holland's orientations and the

MPPP work behavior types are statistically significant.

Combining the research which led to the formulation of work

behavior type and to Holland's theories of vocational choice

could lead to a list of viable occupations in which specific

work behavior types would find a comfortable environment and

an opportunity for optimal utilization of their skills.

Such an environment would increase motivation and effective-

ness as well as enhance feelings of satisfaction and self-


It is also conceivable that both Holland's orientations

and the MPPP work behavior types would correlate positively

with Jung's personality types and the Myers-Briggs person-

ality functions. The next section presents an overview of

Jung's typology and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as they

relate to personnel selection and placement.

Summary. It is interesting to note the many divergent

fields which have led to the development of an instrument

to measure work behavior type. The fields of sociology,

psychology, education, business and industry, and technology

have all contributed. Since the turn of the century when

instruments were being developed to differentiate individual

aptitudes, and studies were being conducted to increase

worker efficiency and productivity, the beginnings of

interest in job placement and work behavior became evident.

As concern for the worker as an individual grew, many new

theories and practices, whose basis was more humanitarian,


The focus has gone from studies of the unskilled assem-

bly line worker, to semi-skilled laborers, to professional

engineers and accountants. Now, the focus is increasingly

on the organization as an integrated whole. The current

movement is toward maximum participation of employees in

making decisions and setting objectives which effect them.

There is increased concern for appropriate matching of job

and employee. Abovs all, there is a need to understand

work behavior types so that each employee can be placed in

the most appropriate job, effective teams can be formed,

training can be more meaningful, and workers can utilize

more of their potential.

Jung's Typology and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

This section presents an overview of Jung's Typology

and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and includes reports

of related research in the areas of job satisfaction and

employee effectiveness.

The instrument used in this study to measure person-

ality function is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).

It is based on the work of Carl Jung (1971) who stated that

types are simplified descriptions of the average behavior

of individuals belonging to particular groups. Jung (1923)

wanted to devise a method of classifying personalities, a

typology whose type designations were equal and in which

one type was not valued any higher than another.

His type theory contains two attitude dimensions and

four basic function dimensions. The attitudes are extra-

version and introversion, which Jung (1971) explains in

terms of libido, or psychic energy. This is the energy

which performs the work of the personality. A person is

considered an introvert type whose libido is turned

toward the inner world of ideas. Such an individual bases

decisions on his or her internal, subjective world. By

contrast, one whose actions are determined by the objective

world is considered an extravert.

Jung (1971) continues by explaining the four functions,

which are thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuition.

Thinking is the process of combining ideas in order to arrive

at a concept or a solution to a problem. Feeling is an

evaluation function and is based on the degree to which a

thought gives rise to feelings of pleasantness or unpleas-

antness. Sensation is sense perception of conscious

experiences through the use of the sounds, smells, sights,

taste, or touch. Intuition is instinctively knowing

something. It does not require external stimuli. When

external sensory stimuli are involved in perception, one is

using sensing, but if perceptions cannot be traced to con-

scious sensory experience, one is using intuition. Jung

(1971) differentiates the two in stating that sensation is

perception which occurs by way of the unconscious. Sen-

sation and intuition are functions which deal with facts.

Thinking and feeling are functions of judgment.

As individuals develop, they begin to favor some

functions. Because those functions become more comfortable

for the individuals, they also become more pronounced and

the counterpart functions recede. Each individual has both

a primary function and an auxiliary function (Jung, 1971).

According to Jung (1971), this function shapes the type.

If the primary function is on the sensation/intuition

dimension, then the auxiliary function will be on the

thinking/feeling dimension, and vice versa. For example,

if one's primary function is intuition, then the auxiliary

function would be either thinking or feeling. If the

primary function is thinking, then the auxiliary function

would be either sensation or intuition. Figure 5 depicts

the dimensions and their combinations.

When the attitude dimension of introvert/extravert is

added to the two function dimensions, thinking/feeling and

sensation/intuition, the eight basic personality types

emerge (Jung, 1971).



Sensation i






Figure 5 Jung's Perception-Judging Combinations

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

Extending Jung's theory of typology, Isabel Briggs

Myers and Katherine Briggs developed the Myers-Briggs Type

Indicator (MBTI), the instrument used in this study to

measure personality function. In formulating the MBTI they

added another function dimension. Myers (1962) called this

function perception/judgment. This is used in determining

the dominant function of the personality type. Perception

is described by Myers (1962) as the process whereby one

becomes aware of his or her environment, and judgment is

the process of coming to conclusions about what is being

perceived. If an individual is of the perceiving mode,

then his or her most preferred or dominant function is

either sensing or intution. If one is of the judging mode,

then the dominant function is either thinking or feeling.

Myers (1962) explains that the sensing/intuition index

is independent of the thinking/feeling index. Thus, either

type of perception can combine with either type of judgment,

producing one of four possible outcomes:

Sensing plus Thinking
Sensing plus Feeling
Intuition plus Feeling
Intuition plus Thinking

Each of these combinations produces different kinds of

personality which vary in interests, needs, values, and

habits. For example, individuals who prefer the Sensing

and Thinking functions will focus their attention on facts,

handling these on an impersonal basis. Thus, they tend

to become practical and matter-of-fact and develop tech-

nical skills. These poeple tend to prefer vocations which

deal with facts and objects such as the applied sciences,

business,or production (Myers, 1976). Figure 6 lists some

characteristics of the various combinations of personality


Use of the MBTI

Much research has been reported using the MBTI in

counseling and education and especially in the allied health

professions. However, the use of the MBTI in personnel

placement or other aspects of business has not been well

documented, as evidenced by a void in the literature.

Several studies have shown significant correlations

between MBTI type and career choice. Myers and Davis

(1964) conducted a 12-year follow-up study of 4,274

physicians and concluded that type was associated with

vocational choice. They explain that the reason seems to

be that

people like to use their preferred kind of perception
and their preferred kind of judgment, and tend to
choose occupations that give them that choice.
(Myers & Davis, 1964, p.9)

Other findings have since corroborated those of Myers and

Davis (Bowling, 1973; Brown, 1973; Fellers, 1974; Hill,

1974; McCaulley & Tonesk, 1974; Otis & Weiss, 1973).

Williams (1975) studied 306 medical technologists

using the MBTI and the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) to

discern the relationship between personality type and

job satisfaction. The JDI, on which the job satisfaction

People who

+ Thinking

+ Feeling

+ Feeling

+ Thinking

focus their
attention on:

and handle
these with:

Thus they tend
to become:

and find scope
for their
abilities in:

For example:




Practical and

Technical skills
with facts and

Applied science


and friendly

Practical help
and services
for people

Patient care



& insightful

Understanding &
with people

Literature &
Teaching, etc.



Logical and

Theoretical and

Physical science
Forecasts &

(Myers, 1976, p. 3)

Figure 6 Effects of the Combination of Perception and Judgment

instrument for this study is based, is explained more

thoroughly later in this chapter. The JDI is comprised

of five areas of job satisfaction: work, pay, promotion,

supervision, and co-workers. Results of this study indi-

cate that those with the Extravert preference were less

satisfied with promotion policies than those with the

Introvert preference. Also, those who exhibited a Feeling

preference were more satisfied with their co-workers and

with pay than those with a Thinking preference.

As evidenced by a lack of literature, the use of the

MBTI in business in the United States has not been well

documented. The Center for Applications of Psychological

Type (CAPT) reports that many businesses are currently

using the MBTI but research is lacking (McCauley, 1982).

In workshops for managers, W. F. Pilder (1981), an

organizational consultant, uses the MBTI in assessing

managerial style, and in relating adult development to

organizational development. He states that "the majority

of the workforce in this country has need for meaningful

work" (p.l). He emphasizes the fact that it is up to the

manager to begin to relate the day to day demands of

business to the personal needs of the worker. In order to

do this, he or she must have a deeper understanding of

his or her own development. Pilder reports that the MBTI

is a powerful tool for fostering understanding of self and

others within the organization. "The perspective provided

by the MBTI is much more effective than any number of

techniques preferred as solutions to current management

problems" (p.2).

He points out that the current fascination with

Japanese management techniques indicates that management

is beginning to realize that the American workforce has

lost its spirit. "The art of Japanese management," he


is the ability to inspire loyalty, intimacy and
trust in their workforce. We must do the same.
Yet to do so requires that we now go deeper in
our thinking about developing people and
organizations. (p.2)

He views the MBTI as the most practical way for management

to restore spirit to the workplace (Pilder, 1981).

The Japanese have been using the MBTI for a number

of years. Oshwa (1975) reports that translation of the

MBTI began in 1964.

We examined the reliability of each index and
conducted validity studies. We began to use the
MBTI formally in 1968. . .[Since that time] about
366,000 persons took the MBTI in Japan. (p.l)

He reports studies relating the MBTI to specific jobs

and occupations. For example, in a study of 56 top-level

managers of large companies, 64 per cent were Extraverts,

57 per cent were Sensing, 68 per cent were Thinking, and

66 per cent were Judging. In another study of 366 mid-

level managers, 63 per cent were extraverts, 72 per cent

were Sensing, 67 per cent were Thinking and 64 per cent

were Judging. The two studies reveal that both top and

mid-level managers in Japan tend to be Extraverted

Sensing types who use Thinking and Judging functions.

In a study relating job success to type, Oshawa (1975)

compared the performance of 40 factory supervisors of a

large manufacturing company. Results showed that those who

were rated very high as supervisors were predominately

Thinking and Judging types.

Believing that personality traits are factors in

individual job satisfaction, Oshawa (1975) conducted

several studies to ascertain the relationship of personality

function to job satisfaction. Of 240 foreman in a food

production company, Extraverts who prefer the Judging

function rated themselves as most satisfied with their

jobs. Other studies of sales managers showed that the

more satisfied the manager, the more likely he or she is to

be Extraverted (Oshawa, 1975).

The MBTI has been shown to be an appropriate instrument

for use in the work setting. Its usefulness is only

beginning to be discovered in America where there is a

movement in management circles toward more integration of

personal needs and development with goals and policies of

the organization. More information is needed. Researching

the relationship of individual job satisfaction and effec-

tiveness to personality traits using the MBTI, is a step in

that direction. Job satisfaction, as it relates to these

factors, is explored further in the next section.

Job Satisfaction

This section of the review of literature describes

how job satisfaction relates to work behavior type,

personality function, and worker effectiveness. It begins

with a definition and overview, followed by a brief history

and report of current theories. Discussions of satisfaction

measurement and job satisfaction as it relates to worker

effectiveness follow.


There is no universal definition for job satisfaction.

Most researchers use their own operational definition

(Gruneberg, 1979). Wanous and Lawler (1972) list nine

different definitions, each based on a different theoretical

orientation to job satisfaction, and each yielding different

measures. In general, job satisfaction refers to the indi-

vidual's emotional reaction to a particular job. Locke

(1976) states that job satisfaction is a pleasurable,

positive state of emotions which results from the appraisal

of one's job or job experience. Davis' (1977) definition

is particularly relevant to this study because he relates

degree of job satisfaction to the fit between employee and

job. He states that

job satisfaction is the favorableness or unfavor-
ableness with which employees view their work.
It results when there is a fit between job
characteristics and the wants of employees. It
expresses the amount of congruence between one's
expectation of the job and the rewards that the
job provides. (p.74)

It should be noted that the term job satisfaction is

not synonymous with morale. Job satisfaction is an indi-

vidual state of mind, whereas morale is the feeling of

commitment to and oneness with a group (Blum, 1956).

Motivation is another term to consider. Byers and Rue

(1979) point out that, while the terms job satisfaction and

motivation are often used interchangeably, they are not

synonymous. Satisfaction reflects an employee's attitude

toward the job while motivation refers to a drive to

perform. The factors determining satisfaction are dif-

ferent from those which determine motivation. The two are

closely linked, however.

Motivation results in added effort that in turn
leads to increased performance...The result of
high satisfaction is increased commitment to the
organization, which may or may not result in better
performance. This increased commitment normally
will lessen the number of personnel-related problems,
such as strikes, excessive absenteeism, tardiness,
and turnover. (Byars & Rue, 1979, p.227)


Job satisfaction has been the subject of an enormous

amount of literature in the past two decades (Naylor,

Pritchard & Ilgen, 1980) and is probably one of the most

researched topics in psychology (Gruneberg, 1979). Lock

(1976) reported that over three thousand articles, dis-

sertations, or books have been published dealing with

measuring job satisfaction, examining factors which affect

it, and relating it to behavior. Despite all this research,

Lawler (1977) contends that little is known about the

determinants and consequences of satisfaction compared to

what is known about motivation. He states that "no well-

developed theories of satisfaction have appeared and little

theoretically-based research has been done on satisfaction"

(p.39). He further states that the research has not

examined causal relationships and it has been largely

anti-theoretical. "Our understanding of job satisfaction,"

Lawler continues, "has not substantially increased during

the last 30 years" (p.40).

Despite this criticism,the study of job satisfaction

has merit. Davis (1977) points out the benefits of con-

ducting such research within an organization.

It gives management an indication of the general
levels of satisfaction in a company. . The survey
is a powerful diagnostic instrument for looking
at employee problems.

Another benefit is the valuable communication
brought on by a job satisfaction survey. Communi-
cation flows in all directions as people plan
the survey, take it, and discuss the results.

One benefit is improved attitudes. . The survey is
a safety valve, an emotional release. .a tangible
expression of management's interest in employee

Surveys [help] to determine certain training needs.

Surveys. .benefit unions [in determining] what the
employees want. (p.29)

Thus, statistical significance of the research notwith-

standing, studying job satisfaction can be beneficial to

both individual and organization. As evidenced by the

volume of research, interest in job satisfaction and in

the broader term "quality of life" continues to grow as

individuals seek more meaning from their jobs.


Interest in job satisfaction and quality of work life

is not new. Weir (1976) points out that since the Indus-

trial Revolution, when craftsmanship was replaced by

machine-tending, people have been concerned about fragmented

work and tasks which had no meaning.

The initial study of job satisfaction by psychologists

was not humanitarian but was in the interest of increasing

production. Following the Taylor (1911) studies, the

Hawthorne studies (Rothlisberger & Dickson, 1939) investi-

gated the role of illumination, rest, hours of work, payment

systems, and temperature control. They concluded that the

increase in productivity of 30 per cent over a two year

period was due mainly to human factors. Although later

speculated to be invalid (Alderfer, 1969; Beer, 1968;

Gruneberg, 1979; and Hall & Nougaim, 1968), these studies

are of considerable historical importance because they

opened the door to a new era which has since been termed

the Human Relations Movement. Initially, this movement

held that positive human relationships in organizations

led to job satisfaction and that job satisfaction led to


One of the first actual studies of job satisfaction

was in the field of education. Hoppock (1935) queried

500 teachers about different aspects of their jobs and

then analyzed the 100 most satisfied and the 100 least

satisfied responses. From this he formulated his theory

which suggested that satisfaction and dissatisfaction

comprised a continuum.

Current Theories

Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler, and Weik (1970) divided

the present-day theories into two categories: content

theories and process theories. The content theorists

were interested in determining what motivates people to

work. They were concerned with

identifying the needs/drives that people have and
how needs/drives are prioritized. They were
concerned with the types of incentives or goals
that people strive to attain in order to be
satisfied and perform well. (Luthans, 1981, p.177)

Maslow's (1943) Needs Hierarchy Theory and its development

by Herzberg into the Two-Factor (Motivator-Hygiene) Theory

will be summarized under this heading.

The process theorists were concerned with identifying

variables such as expectations, needs, and values, and

ascertaining how they relate to each other and to job

characteristics in order to produce job satisfaction.

Vroom's Expectancy Theory, the Porter-Lawler Model, and

Adams' Equity Theory are presented under the process theory


Content theories. Maslow's (1943) Needs Hierarchy

has gained wide attention. His theory posits that all

human needs can be arranged in an ascending hierarchy of

five levels. These levels represent basic psychological

needs, safety and security needs, social (affection)

needs, esteem needs, and self-actualization needs.

Maslow (1970) states that the driving force that causes

people to join an organization, stay in it, and work

toward its goal, is this hierarchy of needs. If one's

basic or lower level needs are not met, they take prece-

dence over higher level needs. Also, as soon as a

particular set of needs are met, they no longer serve to

motivate an individual. The next level needs become the

motivators. "Employees are enthusiastically motivated

by what they are seeking, more than by what they already

have" (Davis, 1977, p.47).

Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman (1959) further

developed Maslow's theory for application in the work

setting. Using the critical incident technique, Herzberg

et al. conducted a motivational study of 300 professional

accountants and engineers. The subjects reported good

feelings and bad feelings related to work. The findings

led Herzberg to formulate his Two-Factor Theory which

states that motivation does not exist on a continuum as

Hoppock had postulated but that there are two continue:

job satisfiers, which he called motivators, and job

dissatisfiers, which he labeled hygiene factors.

Herzberg's theory has been both very popular and

highly criticized (Bockman, 1971; Ewen, 1964; Gardner,

1977; King, 1970; Lock, 1976; Vroom, 1964). In fact,

Aebi (1973) discovered over 150 studies designed to test

Herzberg's theory. In Work and Motivation, Vroom (1964)

stated that any number of conclusions could have been

reached from Herzberg's findings. Ewen, Smith, Hulin,

and Lock (1966) were critical of the Two-Factor Theory

because it tended to ignore measures of overall satisfac-


However strong the controversy, one cannot deny that

Herzberg's theory not only increased the awareness of

management of the need to examine job satisfaction, but

also emphasized the importance of analyzing specific

characteristics of the work itself when examining job

satisfaction (Gruneberg, 1979).

Process theories. Robins (1976) states that Vroom's

Expectancy Theory of Motivation is the most recent, the

most widely known and validly substantiated approach to

motivation and satisfaction. Vroom's (1964) theory evolved

from his search for an alternative to the content models.

He based his work on that of psychologists Lewin (1938) and

Tolman (1959) who formulated the concept of valence. Vroom

adapted this theory for use in organizations. Expectancy

Theory is based on three assumptions:

People do not just respond to events after they
occur; they anticipate (or expect) that things
will occur and that certain behaviors in response
to those events will probably produce predictable

Humans usually confront possible alternative
behaviors (and their probable consequences) in
rational ways.

Through experience, individuals learn to anticipate
the likely consequences of alternative ways of
dealing with events and, through this learning,
modify their responses. (Owens, 1981, p.127)

Expectancy Theory, then, states that individuals are highly

proactive, not merely reactive, and that one's

desire to produce at any given time depends on his
particular goals and his perception of relative
worth of performance as a path to the attainment
of these goals. (Robins, 1976, p.313)

In contrast to the Human Relations models which support

the assumption that satisfied workers will be more pro-

ductive, Expectancy theory posits that productivity is a

means to satisfaction.

Vroom's theory considers individual differences in job

satisfaction and motivation. He does not feel it necessary

to enumerate these differences, nor does he offer specific

suggestions as to how individuals within an organization

can best be motivated, as did Maslow and Herzberg. His

model does not contribute techniques,but it is a valuable

aid in understanding organizational behavior (Luthans, 1981).

The implications of Vroom's model are explored by Hunt

and Hill (1969). They explain that

Instead of assuming that satisfaction of a specific
need is likely to influence organizational objec-
tives in a certain way, we can find out how important
to the employees are the various second-level outcomes
(worker goals), the instrumentality of various
first-level outcomes (organizational objectives) for
their attainment, and the expectancies that are held
with respect to the employee's ability to influence
the first-level outcomes. (p.105)

Porter and Lawler produced a later model which is more

complete and more complex than Vroom's, and is more appli-

cations-oriented (Luthans, 1981; Owens, 1981). Porter and

Lawler (1968) challenge managers and administrators to go

beyond the traditional "satisfaction" attitude and measure

variables such as the values of possible reward of high

efforts, employee perceptions of reward and role percep-

tions. Also, organizations

should concentrate on determining how closely levels
of satisfaction are related to levels of perfor-
mance, ... to examine reward practices to determine
if they are working as planned...[and] monitor
employee attitudes on a continuing basis. (p.183)

Equity theory refers to a group of theories which

evolved from the independent work of several theorists.

It has been termed "cognitive dissonance" theory by

Festinger (1957) and by Heider (1958), "exchange" theory

by Homans (1961),and "equity" theory by Adams (1965).

Pritchard (1969) states that Adams' version of Equity

Theory is the most explicit and the most extensive.

Adams' (1965) theory argues that a major factor in

determining motivation or job satisfaction is the degree

of equity or inequity that an employee perceives in a job

situation when compared to other employees in a similar

situation. Adams uses the term Inputs to refer to any-

thing of value that an individual gives to the work, such

as skills, personal traits, or experience. He uses

Outputs to refer to anything of value that an individual

receives from the work, such as salary, promotions, or

praise. This ratio is compared with the ratio of others.

If the employee perceives the values as equal, satisfaction

exists. If values are perceived as being inequal, tension

and resentment result.

In an overview of job satisfaction, how one measures

satisfaction within the organization is important to consider.

Measuring Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction has typically been measured by one of

three types of surveys: either objective, descriptive,

or projective. Objective surveys are usually in the form

of questions with pre-determined responses. Descriptive

surveys are more subjective, giving the respondent an

opportunity to give unstructured feedback. Often the

format is open-ended questions. Projective surveys are

instruments devised and administered by psychiatrists or

psychologists for studying mental health, and are rarely

used in the work setting (Davis, 1977).

Often a combination of objective and descriptive

surveys are used in the form of a structured instrument

in conjunction with an interview. Herzberg (1966) popu-

larized a form of descriptive survey, the critical incident

technique, in which workers were asked to think of a time

when they felt exceptionally good or exceptionally bad

about their job. This technique has been both widely used

and highly criticized (Gardner, 1977; King, 1970).

There are very few standardized measures of job

satisfaction. Most investigators adapt other instruments

or devise new ones to meet the demands of their special

population. Gruneberg (1979) states that a current review

of the literature suggests that there is no optimal way to

measure job satisfaction.

The best measure depends on what variable overall
satisfaction is related to. Clearly, then, when

considering research on job satisfaction, it is
important to bear in mind just how complex is
the interpretation of research findings, given the
multiplicity of ways in which it can be conceived
and measured. (Gruneberg, 1979, p.3)

Despite the controversy concerning the measurement of

job satisfaction, one measure is foremost throughout the

literature. It is the Job Descriptive Index (JDI), on

which the measures of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction

for this study are based. The JDI was designed by

Patricia Cain Smith (Smith, Kendall & Hulin, 1969) after

researching over 35,000 employees. "The product of this

research," states Vroom (1964), "is without doubt the most

carefully constructed measure of job satisfaction in

existence today" (p.100). Gruneberg (1979) hails the JDI

as "the most carefully developed instrument for measuring

job satisfaction" (p.3).

Elaborating on their rationale for the instrument

design, Smith, Kendall, and Hulin (1969) explain that

if one takes into account the different terms used
by different investigators to describe the same or
similar facts, ... and the fact that many of the
inventories which have been factored were originally
designed with a specific population in mind, then
it appears to us that factor analytic studies which
have been performed on the various job satisfaction
inventories have yielded a very consistent pattern
of factors. The factors which seem to emerge most
consistently are a general factor, a pay and material-
rewards factor, a factor dealing with the work
itself, a supervision factor, and a factor related
to the other workers on the job. (p.30)

The JDI, then, consists of five subscales, chosen by

factor analyses of many possible dimensions of job satis-

faction. The sub-scales involve the areas of

Satisfaction with work,

Satisfaction with pay,

Satisfaction with opportunities for promotion,

Satisfaction with supervision, and

Satisfaction with co-workers.

Bass and Barrett (1974) state that "the areas tapped by

the JDI have been shown to be quite reliable" (p.82).

Gruneberg (1979) weighs the pros and cons of standard-

ized versus researcher-constructed instruments. While the

use of a standardized scale is valuable in comparing

different studies, it has the drawback of not considering

individual situations. Clearly, the researcher must be

guided by objectives set for the study.

Job Satisfaction and Worker Effectiveness

The literature is replete with findings relating job

satisfaction to productivity (Gruneberg, 1979; Katzell &

Yankelovich, 1975). However, almost nothing exists linking

satisfaction to effectiveness. While some conclusions may

be drawn regarding effectiveness from the research on

productivity, it must be remembered that the two terms are

not synonomous (Porter & Lawler, 1968). Productivity

refers to worker output and can usually be measured objec-

tively. Effectiveness, on the other hand, is a broader,

more subjective term and involves fulfillment of supervisory

criteria and expectations.

Effectiveness relates more to what Lofquist and Dawis

(1969) refer to as satisfactoriness. This is a broad term

which encompasses productivity, but its major thrust is

not necessarily measurable worker output. It is concerned

with an appropriate match or fit between individual and

job/work environment (Davis, 1977). This fit is referred

to as correspondence and is described as

a harmonious relationship between individual and
environment, suitability of the individual to the
environment and of the environment for the
individual.... In this relationship the individual
brings his requirements of the environment; the
environment likewise has its requirements of the
individual. In order to survive in an environment
the individual must achieve some degree of
correspondence. (Lofquist & Dawis, 1969, p.45)

Correspondence, then, is the degree of fit between indivi-

dual and organization. The greater the correspondence, the

more the individual fulfills the requirements of the

organization and the organization fulfills the requirements

of the individual. It is assumed that each individual

seeks to achieve and maintain correspondence within his or

her work environment (Lofquist & Dawis, 1969).

Extensive research in the area of work adjustment led

to a theory of satisfaction and satisfactoriness (Carlson,

Dawis, England & Lofquist, 1963; Dawis, England & Lofquist,

1964; Dawis, Lofquist & Weiss, 1968; Dawis, Weiss, Lofquist

& Betz, 1967). Basic tenets of this theory assume that

The stability of the correspondence between the
individual and the work environment is manifest
as tenure in the job. [Tenure here refers to
length of time accrued in one position rather
than to permanence of position.]

Tenure is a function of correspondence between
the individual and his work environment.

Satisfactoriness and satisfaction indicate
the correspondence between the individual and
his work environment.

Satisfactoriness is an external indicator of

Satisfaction is an internal indicator of

The levels of satisfactoriness and satisfaction
observed for a group of individuals with
substantial tenure in a specific work environment
establish the limits of satisfactoriness and
satisfaction from which tenure can be predicted
for other individuals.

The work personalities of individuals who fall
within the limits of satisfactoriness and satis-
faction for which substantial tenure can be
predicted may be inferred to be correspondent with
the specific work environment.

Work personality-work environment correspondence
can be used to predict satisfactoriness and

Work personality-work environment correspondence
can be used to predict tenure. (Lofquist & Dawis,
1969, pp.45-50)

Correspondence, then, between individual and work

environment is reflected in his or her job satisfaction and

satisfactoriness, or effectiveness. The individual measures

his or her satisfaction by how closely the organization

meets his or her needs and expectations. The organization,

on the other hand, measures the employee's satisfactoriness

by how well the individual meets the needs and expectations

of a particular job within the organization. If individual

and organization meet the minimum requirements and expec-

tations each has for the other, tenure accrues (Lofquist &

Dawis, 1969).

Lofquist and Dawis (1969) discuss the role of the

work personality to tenure and the importance of knowl-

edge of one's work personality and knowledge of the work

environment before being placed in a job. The work

personality is comprised of abilities, needs, and person-

ality characteristics. Likewise, the work environment

can be described in terms of abilities required for

satisfactory performance, and working conditions offered.

Such description makes it possible to evaluate
the correspondence of work personalities and
work environments. ... .Knowledge of the combined
levels of satisfactoriness and satisfaction makes
it possible to predict job tenure. (Lofquist &
Dawis, 1969, p.121)

In examining job satisfaction and worker effectiveness

in the light of the Lofquist-Dawis model, it can be seen

that satisfaction and effectiveness are related. This is

a dynamic relationship and a balance must be maintained

between the two in order to perpetuate tenure.

This idea is supported by Porter and Steers (1973)

who report that satisfied workers tend to be less prone

to turnover. They examined fifteen major studies published

between 1955 and 1972 and found a positive'relationship

between job satisfaction and turnover in all but one.

Thus the correspondence between the employee and job

is a large determining factor in satisfaction and satis-

factoriness which in turn, is the major determining factor

in tenure.



This section presents an overview of the literature

relating to worker effectiveness. It distinguishes

between effectiveness, performance, and productivity and

presents a brief overview of performance appraisal and its

functions. This is followed by a further explanation of

effectiveness as satisfactoriness and presents relevant

research in this area. A brief summary concludes this



For this study, effectiveness has been defined as the

extent to which an employee meets the role expectations of

the supervisor. These expectations encompass the super-

visor's degree of satisfaction with overall job performance

as well as degree of satisfaction with the quality of work

in specific areas of the job (Gruneberg, 1979).

It was noted in the section on Job Satisfaction and

Effectiveness that the term effectiveness is not synonymous

with productivity. Productivity refers to an objective

measure (units) of worker output per worker-machine hour

(Byars & Rue, 1979). Neither is effectiveness synonymous

with performance. However, productivity is, in some cases,

a part of performance and performance is one part of ef-

fectiveness. Performance, as it applies to effectiveness,

will be examined next.


Porter and Lawler (1968) have defined job performance

as "the net effect of a person's effort as modified by

his abilities and traits and by his role perceptions"

(p.28). That is, the effect of one's mental and physical

energy, plus the personal characteristics one brings to

the job, is tempered by his or her beliefs about what is

expected in the work situation. The outcome of energy,

personality, and perceived expectation equals performance.

Vroom (1964) adds motivation to this definition. He

states, "a worker's level of performance on his job is

dependent both on his ability and on his motivation"

(p.198). This definition is supported by Mace (1935) and

by Viteles (1953) who distinguish between the capacity to

work and the ability to work. Others (Gagne & Fleishman,

1959; Ginzberg, 1966; Maier, 1955) concur with this

definition of performance, as does Baldwin (1958) who

states that, "In order to achieve a high level of perform-

ance a person must have both the ability and the motivation

to perform effectively" (p.197).

Porter and Lawler (1968) emphasize the importance of

role perceptions in performance, for it is the role

perception which gives direction to the job performance.

Perception is the kind of activity one believes is

expected as part of the job. If an employee's "perceptions

of his role correspond to those of his superiors, . then

he will be applying his effort where it will count most

for successful performance as defined by the organization"

(Porter & Lawler, 1968, p.24). If an employee is to

attain a minimum level of acceptability then, he or she

should possess not only adequate abilities for the job,

but also motivation and an accurate role perception (Byars

& Rue, 1979).

Performance Appraisal

Evaluating worker performance is not new. Davis

(1977) reports that formal performance appraisal dates

back to 1800, and states that

performance appraisal will always exist and always
has. In any group a person's performance will be
judged in some way by others. Employees and
managers recognize differences among their peers,
and they expect their own differences likewise to
be recognized. (p.466)

Many reasons for evaluating performance exist.

Greenlaw and Biggs (1979) express one of the most basic

reasons with their statement that

humans represent open systems and must receive
feedback from their environment concerning the
appropriateness of their behavior if they are
to correct errors, improve their performance,
and continue to survive and grow. (p.181)

From the individual's standpoint, appraisals give valuable

feedback as well as criteria for future rewards. McGregor

(1972) outlines reasons for performance appraisals from

the organizational viewpoint. They are

To provide systematic judgments to back up salary
increases, promotions, transfers, and sometimes
demotions or terminations.

To provide a means of telling a subordinate how
he or she is doing, suggesting needed changes
in behavior, attitudes, skill, or job knowledge
and letting the employee know where he or she
stands with the boss.

To provide a basis for coaching and counseling of
the individual by the supervisor. (p.133)

Byars and Rue (1979) also point out that value of perform-

ance appraisal in goal setting, manpower and organizational

planning, and determining development and training needs.

The literature appears unanimous in its view that

performance appraisal is a useful tool for both employee

and administrator. However, one can discern little agree-

ment on the most effective evaluation procedure (Bass &

Barrett, 1974; Hackman, Lawler & Porter, 1977). Many

authors do agree that the most appropriate person to conduct

the evaluation is the employee's immediate supervisor

(Greenlaw & Biggs, 1979). Bass and Barrett (1974) state

that "by far the most frequently used summary criteria are

supervisor's ratings" (p.209), because

it is assumed that the supervisor has the greatest
opportunity to observe the subordinate's behavior.
It is also assumed that he or she is able to
interpret and analyze the subordinate's performance
in the light of organizational objectives. (p.209)

When the immediate supervisor evaluates subordinates'

performance, he or she can use several types of measures.

Examples of these techniques are ranking, forced-choice,

weighted checklist, the graphic rating scale, the Behavior-

ally Anchored Rating Scales,and Management by Objective.

These will be cited briefly.

Using the simple ranking technique, the supervisor

ranks a group of subordinates from highest to lowest,

based on overall performance rather than on several

different dimensions (Cummings & Schuab, 1973). This

approach is optimal when there are few employees to

evaluate (Greenlaw & Biggs, 1979). A second type of

ranking technique which evaluates overall performance is

the forced distribution method whereby the evaluator is

forced to assign employees to predetermined categories.

This method was used in the present study. Supervisors

were asked to rank one half of their subordinates as more

effective and the other half as less effective.

Forced-choice ranking (Bass & Barrett, 1974) and the

weighted checklist (Greenlaw & Biggs, 1979) both ask

superiors to divide a given list of statements according

to those which do or do not apply to the employee being

evaluated. Another method of evaluation, the graphic

rating scale, was also employed in this study. It is one

of the most widely used of all performance rating tech-

niques (Byars & Rue, 1979; Greenlaw & Biggs, 1979). As

used in this study, supervisors were given a list of five

job characteristics and asked to rate their subordinates

as most effective or less effective in each area.

Other rating scales which can be used as feedback

to employees for improving performance focus on specific

behavior. One such technique is called Behaviorally

Anchored Rating Scales (BARS). Management by Objective

(MBO) is another technique which provides the most

mutually interactive feedback and which has become quite

popular in recent years (Greenlaw & Biggs, 1979).

Performance appraisal, then, has been in existence

for a long time. In most organizations, the data


generated from regular appraisals not only provide vital

feedback to the employee, but are also a source of informa-

tion for human resource development and planning. The most

effective method of evaluation depends on the organization,

the evaluator, and the purpose for which the data are to be

used (Byars & Rue, 1979).

As previously stated, employee performance and its

evaluation are only a part of a larger concept, effectiveness.

Effectiveness as Satisfactoriness

In the section dealing with job satisfaction and ef-

fectiveness, it was pointed out that effectiveness equates

very closely to the Lofquist and Dawis (1969) model of sa-

tisfaction and satisfactoriness. As noted, satisfaction

occurs when there is an adequate match, or correspondence,

between employee and job/work environment, and when the em-

ployee's expectations of the work situation are met. Satis-

factoriness is satisfaction's counterpart. When the employee

meets the expectations of the supervisor and the organization,

a degree of correspondence and satisfactoriness results.

Satisfaction and satisfactoriness are explored further

here as a model for effectiveness.

Research of satisfactoriness and satisfaction began in

the early 1960's with the Work Adjustment Project at the

University of Minnesota. In 1969 Lufquist and Dawis published

the results of this research which supports a theory of work

adjustment. The basic tenets of this theory were presented

earlier and are briefly reviewed here. Lofquist and Dawis

(1969) state that their theory is based on the concept of


correspondence, or the fit between individual and work.

Another basic assumption is that individuals seek to

achieve and to maintain at least a minimal level of

correspondence in their work environment. Since indivi-

duals and environments are constantly changing, corres-

pondence is a dynamic and continuing process. Satisfaction

is the individual's measure of correspondence and satis-

factoriness is the organization's measure of the individual's


As in the case of effectiveness, measures of

satisfactoriness are obtained from sources other than the

individual employee, usually from the immediate supervisor.

In determining the level of satisfactoriness, the supervi-

sor considers employee skills, abilities, and work personal-

ity and the application of these to the fulfillment of role

expectations within the job. In a study of 787 employees

in five different occupations, Carlson, Dawis, England, and

Lofquist (1963) found that the level of satisfactoriness

could be predicted from a combination of knowledge of the

individual's abilities and the abilities required by the

work environment. This lends support for their proposition

that satisfactoriness is a function of the correspondence

between the individual's abilities and the ability re-

quirements of the work environment.

Carlson et al. (1963) also correlated abilities and

satisfactoriness in a study of 352 subjects in various

occupations. The groups were divided into high, middle,

and low satisfaction sub-groups for males and females.

They found that the prediction of satisfactoriness from

ability test scores was more accurate for groups of

employees with high satisfaction scores than for individuals

with low satisfaction scores. The male sub-group with high

satisfaction scores had correlations of .63 for producti-

vity and .69 for supervisor evaluation, while the female

sub-group with high satisfaction scores had correlations

of .26 for productivity and .27 for supervisor evaluation.

Even though correlation scores for both male and female

were statistically significant at the .05 level, it appears

that satisfactoriness can be predicted more readily from

ability test scores of men than of women.

Satisfactoriness, or effectiveness, then, is a dynamic

process of correspondence between individual and work

environment. It considers the abilities, needs, and work

personality of the individual and the interface of these

with the requirements of the job and the work environment.

The employee's supervisor usually measures satisfactoriness.

The evaluator determines the most effective method of

measurement in light of objectives for the measure and the

individual being evaluated.

The research of Lofquist and Dawis (1969) has shown

that if an individual's level of abilities are given along

with work requirements, satisfactoriness can be predicted.

Likewise, knowledge of satisfaction and satisfactoriness

can be used to predict tenure.

Schneider, Hall, and Nygren (1972) state that the time

to study satisfaction and satisfactoriness is during the

hiring process. Traditionally, organizational psychologists

have focused on worker satisfaction after the individual

has entered the organization, while personnel psychologists

have focused on the factors that bring workers and organi-

zations together in order to predict productivity, turnover,

and other factors. Porter (1966) points out that there has

been little attempt to integrate these approaches. Addi-

tionally, both groups have largely failed to consider the

impact of the larger environment on the organization and

the satisfactoriness he or she can offer the organization.


This final section integrates the major points from

the literature related to work behavior type, personality

function, job satisfaction, and effectiveness.

The major focus of this study was matching the right

person with the right job. The introductory chapter

presented the background establishing the need for more

information about research from divergent fields which

have laid the foundations for the study of work behavior

type and its application to personnel decisions and

management practices.

This previous work has shown that human beings are

complex individuals who bring their own set of behaviors,

skills, needs, and expectations into the work environment.

Also complex is the organization,which has its own

characteristics, needs, goals, and expectations. The

organization and the individual exist within a larger

environment which has its own set of rules and expectations.

Each of these factors affect the individual's work behavior,

level of satisfaction, and effectiveness within the organi-

zation. Figure 8 is adapted from ideas and illustrations

presented by Schneider (1976) related to staffing organi-

zations, and from Kast and Rosenzweig (1974) related to

organizational systems. It is not a theoretical represen-

tation but rather a means of presenting a synthesis of

theories and ideas which aid in the understanding of

elements involved in the on-going process of matching persons

and jobs. Presented are representative factors in each of

four areas which comprise the individual/work/larger environ-

ment complexity. The areas are the individual, the job

and its environment, the organization, and the larger

environment. The factors in each area merit consideration,

on some level, in all staffing decisions (Schneider, 1976).

These factors, according to Kast and Rosenzweig (1974) are

what hold social structures together. They emphasize that

"social systems are anchored in attitudes, perceptions,

beliefs, motivations, habits, and expectations of human

beings" (p.113). With this in mind, each sphere is


The center circle represents the individual and

includes personal facets which led the individual to the

particular job. Viewed in the light of theories presented

Figure 8 A Framework for Matching Persons and Jobs

in this chapter, these factors include self-concept and

self esteem as outlined by Super (1953); needs, desires,

and aspirations as presented by Maslow (1943) and Herzberg

et al. (1959); and personality as defined by Holland (1959),

Jung (1923), and Myers (1976). Additional factors are

skills, abilities, and interests shaped by education,

experience, and choice, emphasized by Ginzberg (1951),

and motivation as posited by Vroom (1964). All of these

factors play a part in the individual's work behavior type

(Bauch, 1981) derived from Marston (1928) and Geier (1979).

These factors which the individual brings to the job help

to determine the level of satisfactoriness which will be

offered to the job/work environment (Lofquist & Davis, 1969).

The next circle represents the job itself and includes

the immediate work environment. Conceptually, it is com-

prised of specific job tasks and responsibilities. Also

included here are supervisory styles and expectations and

general work atmosphere. Co-workers, with their own set

of norms and expectations, are part of this sphere. The

physical space within which the work takes place, as well

as norms regarding time, are important parts of this sphere,

also. These factors comprise the level of satisfaction

offered the individual by the job/work environment (Gruneberg,

1979; Lofquist & Dawis, 1969; Schneider, 1976).

The job exists within the next larger sphere, the

organization, which brings expectations, goals, procedures,

and general philosophy regarding the utilization of human

resources. Method and schedule of pay and other rewards,

evaluation system, training, and fringe benefits also

appear in this sphere. These factors, as well as those

from the job itself contribute to the overall satisfaction

of the employee (Schneider, 1976).

The outermost sphere is the larger environment. This

environment, within which the individual and the organi-

zation must exist, has yet another set of rules, expecta-

tions, and values (Kast & Rozenweig, 1974), and

encompasses society-at-large with its institutions, social

and economic conditions, governmental regulations, and

other cooperating and/or competing organizations. This

sphere multiplies the complexity of factors which affect

not only individual personality and work behavior but job

satisfaction and satisfactoriness as well.

In evaluating the correspondence between employee and

job, all of the above factors play a part. The total

contributions the individual brings to the job lead to his

or her satisfactoriness or effectiveness. All that the

job and the organization contribute to the individual

constitutes his or her satisfaction. When there is a

balance between satisfaction and satisfactoriness a good

match exists. This is more likely to occur when individuals

have a maximum amount of information regarding their own

personality and work behavior type, and all that the center

sphere encompasses, as well as a maximum amount of infor-

mation regarding job/work environment and its demands and

expectations. Likewise, the organization must have a

maximum amount of information regarding the specific job/

work environment and then attempt to match person and job

by considering all these factors as a whole.


This review of the literature outlined the theories

and research which led to the study of work behavior type.

Also covered were Jung's typology and its application to

personality function, theories of job satisfaction, and

effectiveness. This chapter concludes with a synthesis of

the literature illustrating how the individual's work

behavior type, personality function, job satisfaction, and

effectiveness are all related to his or her job, organi-

zation, and larger environment. The following chapter

outlines specifically how work behavior type, personality

function, job satisfaction, and effectiveness were explored

in this study.


Organization of the Chapter

The design and methodology of the study are described

in this chapter. It contains an explanation of procedures

which includes data source, data collection, instrumenta-

tion, and data treatment.


The problem of this study was to explore the relation-

ships among work behavior type, personality function, job

satisfaction, and effectiveness of vocational education

administrators. Specifically, the study sought answers

to the following questions:

1. Within each work behavior type, did
participants score higher on one personality
function than another?

2. Did participants' work behavior types relate
to overall job satisfaction?

3. Did scores in job satisfaction areas relate
to work behavior type?

4. Did participants' work behavior types relate
to their effectiveness ratings?

Data Source

The sample for this study consisted of all incumbent

regional vocational education program administrators of the

Vocational Division of the Florida Department of Education.

In the state of Florida, the Vocational Division has


established five geographical areas, each having a regional

office with seven program administrators who provide con-

sulting services and technical assistance to clients in

their vocational program area. These areas include

occupational programs in agri-business and natural resour-

ces, business, health and public services, home economics,

industrial arts education, industrial, and marketing and

distributive. These specialists wield considerable influ-

ence upon the structure, content,and quality of the nearly

7,000 occupational education programs offered in Florida's

67 school districts and 28 community colleges. More

specifically, each individual is responsible for the

development and implementation of strategies to provide

technical assistance and consultative service to school

districts, community colleges, universities, and other

educational and public agencies in the operation and im-

provement of vocational education programs, services and

activities within each Division of Vocational Education

geographical region. This position also is responsible

for assisting in the development of standards and guidelines

to assure quality of statewide programs.

Within the five regional offices, one position was

vacant, leaving 34 incumbents. All regional program

administrators who left their positions within the past

two years (12) were also identified for inclusion in the

administration of the survey instruments.

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs