THE SELECTION OF SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES IN BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY

Citation preview

IN FO R M A TIO N TO USERS

Th is d i s se r t a t i o n w as p r o d u c e d f r o m a mi cr of il m c o p y o f t h e original d o c u m e n t . While t h e m o s t a d v a n c e d t ec hn o lo g ic a l m e a n s t o p h o t o g r a p h a n d r e p r o d u c e t hi s d o c u m e n t have b e e n used, t h e q u a l i t y is heavily d e p e n d e n t u p o n t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e original s u b m i t t e d . The

f ol lo wi ng e x p l a n a t i o n o f t e c h n i q u e s is p r ov id e d t o h el p y o u

understand

ma r ki n g s o r p a t t e r n s w h i c h m a y a p p e a r o n this r e p r o d u c t i o n 1.

T h e sign o r " t a r g e t " f o r pages a p p a r e n t l y lacking f r o m t h e d o c u m e n t photographed

is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible t o o b t a i n t h e

missing page(s) o r s ect ion, t h e y are spliced i nto t h e film along w i t h a d j a c e n t pages. T h i s m a y have ne ce ss it a t e d c u t t i n g th r u an image a n d d u p l i c a t i n g a d j a c e n t pages t o insure y o u c o m p l e t e c o n t i n u i t y . 2.

W h e n an image o n t h e film is o b l i t e r a t e d wit h a large r o u n d b l a c k m a r k , it is a n i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s us p e c te d t h a t t h e copy

may

have m o v e d

d ur i ng e x p o s u r e a n d t h u s cause a b l u r r e d

image. Y o u will f in d a g o o d image o f t h e page in t h e a d j a c e n t f r a me . 3.

Wh e n a ma p , d r a w i n g o r c ha rt , etc., was par t o f t h e mat eri al be i ng photographed

the

photographer

" s e c t i o n i n g " t h e material.

followed

a

de fi ni te

method

in

It is c u s t o m a r y t o begin p h o t o i n g a t t h e

u p p e r left h a n d c o r n e r o f a large s h e et a n d t o c o n t i n u e p h o t o i n g f r o m left

to

right

in

equal s e c t i on s wi th a small overlap.

s e c t i o n i n g is c o n t i n u e d

If necessary,

again — beginning b e l o w t h e first r o w a n d

c o n t i n u i n g o n until c o m p l e t e . 4.

T h e m a j o r i t y o f users i ndi cat e t h a t t h e t ex t ua l c o n t e n t is of g r e at e s t value,

h o w ev e r,

made from dissertation.

a s o m e w h a t higher q u a l it y r e p r o d u c t i o n c o u l d

"photographs" Silver

prints

if essential of

be

to t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e

"photographs"

may

be

ordered

at

a d d i t i o n a l c ha r ge b y wr i ti ng t h e O r d e r D e p a r t m e n t , giving t h e c at al og n u m b e r , title, a u t h o r a n d specific pages y o u wish r e p r o du c e d .

University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 A Xerox Education Com pany

H 3 - 8 4 0 Z LD3907 .2 3 Achard, F r a n c i s Hermann, 18921942 The s e l e c t i o n o f s u p e r v i s o r y employ.A3 ees i n b u s i n e s s and i n d u s t r y . . . Hew York, 1942. x v i,3 3 7 typew ritten le a v e s, tables, d i a g r s f o r m s . 29cm. T h e s i s ( Ph. D. ) - New York u n i v e r s i t y , S c h o o l o f e d u c a t i o n , 1942. Bibliography: p . 299-301.

A89466 J

Xerox University Microfilms,

A nn Arbor, M i ch ig an 48106

T H I S D I S S E R T A T I O N HA S B EE N M I C R O F I L M E D E X A C T L Y AS R E C E I V E D .

8 3 6 Boulevard W e s tfie ld , New J e r se y O ctober 2, 19*+2

P r o fe ss o r Robert Hoppock School o f E d u cation Hew York U n iv e r s ity Washington Square, E a st Hew York, II Y Dear P r o fe s s o r Hoppock I have the honor to tra n sm it to you the com pleted copy in t r i p l i c a t e o f my d is s e r t a t io n , “The S e le c t io n o f S u p erv iso ry Employees in B u sin e ss and In d u stry ," th a t i s b ein g su bm itted in p a r t ia l f u l f i l l m e n t o f th e req u irem en ts f o r the degree o f D octor o f P h ilo so p h y in the School o f E d u ca tio n , New York U n iv e r s it y . T his d i s s e r t a t i o n i s b ein g p resen ted to you f o r the f i n a l ap­ p ro v a l o f the Committee so th a t i t may be f i l e d w ith th e R ecording O f f ic e . I have c a r e f u lly review ed the s u g g e s tio n s co n ta in ed in the memo­ randums from you and A s s o c ia te Dean P ic k e t t - P r o fe ss o r Skinner o ffe r e d no s u g g e s tio n s - and I b e lie v e th a t I have in p r in c ip le taken care o f a l l o f th e s u g g e s t io n s . Dean P ic k e t t su g g ested th a t the c a p i t a l i z a t i o n o f such terms a s J u n io r , S e n io r , Grammar S c h o o l, High S ch o o l, and o th e r s was perhaps used when the terms did n o t r e f e r to s p e c i f i c e n t i t i e s . These terms were used in c o n ju n c tio n w ith the word Subgroup to in d ic a t e v ery s p e c i f i c sub­ e n t i t i e s o f the p r in c ip a l groups th a t p a r t ic ip a t e d in t h is stu d y . When the terms were u sed g e n e r a lly , they w ere, to the b e s t o f my knowledge, used w ith low er c a se i n i t i a l l e t t e r s . The d e f i n i t i o n s o f th e se subgroups can be found on pages 135-138 o f the d is s e r t a t io n . Dean P ic k e t t o ffe r e d a very v a lu a b le s u g g e stio n : th a t I c a l l a t t e n t io n to the changing co n cep ts o f s u p e r v is io n . I have taken th e l i b e r t y o f p r o v id in g t h is r e fe r e n c e in a p la c e o th er than the one he sug­ g e s te d and o f p o in tin g out th a t the procedure d evelop ed in the stud y can be u sed f o r upgrading a group o f su p e r v iso r s when new ones a re to be s e le c t e d . T his r e fe r e n c e i s to be found on page 29*+. Dean P ic k e t t a ls o in d ic a te d on one p a g e, which i s no lo n g er in clu d ed in the d i s s e r t a t i o n , a p r e fe r e n c e fo r th e word r e la t io n s h ip ra th er than r e l a t io n in a sen ten ce such a s , “The r e l a t io n s ( h i p s ) between the p e r so n a l h is t o r y subgroups snd the t e s t s c o r e s are such th a t . . . . “ I fin d th a t, a cco rd in g to both Punk and W agnalls' and W eb ster's d ic t io n a ­ r i e s , the words r e la t io n and r e la t io n s h ip appear to be in terc h a n g ea b le in th i6 s e n s e , and a ls o th a t the word r e la t io n appears to be the p r in c ip a l word. Throughout the d is s e r t a t io n I have g e n e r a lly u sed the term r e l a t io n ­ s h ip , but th ere are a number o f p la c e s where r e l a t io n has been used in i t s

s te a d . I ven tu re to submit the d i s s e r t a t i o n w ith o u t changing th ese pages b ecause o f the c o n sid e r a b le amount o f tim e in v o lv e d in r e ty p in g them. L ast Monday when I was in your o f f i c e , you su g g este d th a t I make sure th a t the r e fe r e n c e I had made to the sta n d a r d iz in g group used by Johnson O'Connor fo r the E n g lis h V ocabulary T est met w ith h is a p p ro v a l. He gave me h is approval by telep h o n e on Tuesday, September 2 9 » 19*+2. Dean P ic k e t t has su g g este d th a t the t o t a l le n g th o f s e r v ic e m ight c o n c e iv a b ly have an e f f e c t upon su p e r v iso r y a b i l i t y , j u s t a s y ea rs o f ex p erien ce as a su p e r v iso r m ight h ave. When the y e a r s o f ex p erien ce a s a su p e rv iso ry employee were s tu d ie d , i t was fo r the purpose o f d eterm ining whether any p r a c t ic e e f f e c t through work in a su p e r v iso r y c a p a c ity could be found which would a f f e c t the t e s t s c o r e s . I was not lo o k in g fo r any e x te r n a l in flu e n c e s upon q u a lit y o f s u p e r v is io n , a lth o u g h th ere are many o th e r s , such a s the amount o f tr a in in g g iv e n to s u p e r v is o r s , the breadth o f e x p e r ie n c e , and e x p erien ce in o th e r o r g a n iz a tio n s , which might a ls o have an e f f e c t and could p r o f it a b ly be s tu d ie d . This d is s e r t a t io n concerns i t s e l f p r im a r ily w ith the r e la t io n s h ip betw een t e s t s and su p e rv iso ry e x c e l­ le n c e ; and o th er f a c t o r s th a t are brought in are brought in s o le l y to determ ine t h e ir e f f e c t upon the t e s t s c o r e s . The r e la t io n s h ip between age and the t e s t sco res was thought to co v er the e f f e c t o f g e n e r a l ex p erien ce upon t e s t s c o r e s s u f f i c i e n t l y fo r the p urposes o f t h is stu d y . You w i l l fin d an a d d it io n a l s e t o f acknowledgments in the P r e fa c e , which has been rety p ed . May I take t h is o p p o rtu n ity o f thanking you, Dean P ic k e t t , and P r o fe ss o r Skinner most h e a r t i l y fo r your generous co o p era tio n in reading the d is s e r t a t io n so prom ptly. S in c e r e ly yours

v^3> Thasi* accepted •

OCT 6

THE SELECTION OF SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES IN BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY i • 1 i t ' H - 1" •

1 1 V " ' v v ' V ?~1

'w ''' i FRANCIS H .' aCHARD "

Submitted, in p a r t i a l f u lf il lm e n t o f the req u irem en ts f o r the degree o f D octor o f P h ilo so p h y in the S ch ool o f E d u cation New York U n iv e r s ity

19U2

a «

P L E A S E NO TE :

S o m e p a g e s m a y hav e i n d i s t i n c t pr in t. F i l m e d as r e c e i v e d .

University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company

PREFACE

Ever s in c e th e in v e s t ig a t o r has "been engaged in in d u s t r ia l t r a in in g a c t i v i t i e s - some s ix t e e n y e a r s - he has been im pressed w ith th e paramount s ig n if ic a n c e to b u s in e s s and in d u str y o f th e problem s o f su p e rv iso ry t r a in ­ in g and o f determ inin g th e a b i l i t i e s and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s th a t d is t in g u is h good, bad, and in d if f e r e n t su p e r v iso r y em ployees from each o th e r .

Some o f

our in d u s t r ia l d is tu r b a n c e s can be tr a c e d t o in e p t management, o th e r s to in ep t la b o r le a d e r s h ip .

Many have t h e i r o r ig in in apparent t r i v i a l i t i e s

th a t occu r between an employee and h is " boss," and le a v e th e former w ith a ra n k lin g sen se o f i n j u s t i c e . The c a r e fu l t r a in in g o f s u p e r v is o r y em ployees has done much to reduce th e s e o c c u r r e n c e s.

In many in s t a n c e s , however, i t has been observed

th a t th e su p e rv iso ry em ployee, w i l l i n g a s he may b e, doeB not have th e a b i l i ­ t i e s and c h a r a c t e r is t ic s r e q u is it e to handle p erso n n el s it u a t io n s th a t in v o lv e p e r so n a l hopes and f e a r s , f r u s t r a t io n s , and f e e l i n g s o f i n j u s t i c e . A lto g e th e r to o l i t t l e i s known o f th e s e r e q u is it e a b i l i t i e s and c h a r a c t e r is t ic s .

The in v e s t ig a t o r undertook t h i s study a s a c o n tr ib u tio n

both to our body o f fundam ental p r in c i p l e s and to our sto ck o f p r a c t ic a l a p p lic a t io n s . In i t s developm ent, however, t h i s stud y has o f n e c e s s it y been a group p ro d u ct.

S ev era l hundred p e o p le have c o lla b o r a te d in i t e it h e r a c t i v e l y

or by le n d in g much needed encouragement and su p p ort.

To th e o f f i c e r s , manage­

ment, and en p lo y ees o f th e departm ents o f th e p u b lic u t i l i t y in which t h i s study was made f u l l thanks a re due.

I t i s hoped th a t th e c o n c lu s io n s reached

and th e p rod u cts o f th e stu d y w i l l be o f commensurate v a lu e t o th e company.

ii

A8 9 4 6 6

L ike th an ks are due to th e management o f th e p erso n n el department o f th e company.

T h eir co n sta n t encouragem ent, by word and by f a c i l i t i e s

made a v a ila b le , have been in v a lu a b le . For rev iew in g th e s e c t io n s o f th e rep ort w ith which th ey were concerned and f o r p r o v id in g s p e c ia l in fo rm a tio n , the in v e s t ig a t o r i s p a r t ic u la r ly g r a t e f u l to W alter V. Bingham, C h ief P s y c h o lo g is t , P erson n el P rocedures S e c tio n , P la n s and T ra in in g Branch, A djutant G e n e ra l's O f f ic e , War Department, W ashington, D. C .; Glen U. C leeto n , C arnegie I n s t i t u t e o f T echnology, P it ts b u r g , P en n a .; R. B. H ersey, The P en n sy lv a n ia R ailroad Company, P h ila d e lp h ia , P en n a.; L y le R. M ercer, Aluminum Company o f Am erica, New K ensin gton , P en n a.; Johnson O'Connor, Human E n gin eerin g L aboratory, Hoboken, N. J . ; V. G. S c h a e fe r , The P en n sy lv a n ia S ta te C o lle g e , S ta te C o lle g e , Penna.; and R. S. Uhrbrock, P r o c te r and Gamble Company, Iv o r y d a le , Ohio. Of s p e c ia l s ig n if ic a n c e has been th e e n t h u s ia s t ic and u n fla g g in g help and support rendered by th e in v e s t ig a t o r ' s immediate a s s o c ia t e s .

They

have worked lo n g and hard in co m p ilin g d a ta and in assem b lin g t h i s report accord in g to th e p r e s c r ib e d form.

A ll were k e e n ly in t e r e s t e d , c o n tr ib u te d

whenever th ey were needed, and should be m entioned by name even though th e c o n tr ib u tio n s o f a few were e s p e c ia l ly g rea t b ecau se o f t h e ir r e s p e c t iv e p o s it io n s .

W illiam G len d in n in g, Otto P is a n i, and Royal R. R eynolds a s s i s t e d

in a d m in iste r in g th e t e s t s and th e l a s t two su p e rv ised th e sc o r in g and, w ith W illiam H. B rien , handled th e arduous job o f making th e numerous c a lc u la t io n s from th e raw d a ta .

J o sep h in e T. F a ch i, Agnes E. Klami, V io la A. Duncan, and

E liz a b e th R. Burns d r a fte d and typ ed th e t a b le s and m anuscript, many tim e s under d i f f i c u l t circu m sta n ce s o f co m p o sitio n and urgency and gave o f t h e i r b est j u s t a s r e a d ily a t th e f i f t h d r a f t in g o f a sh eet a s a t t h e f i r s t . P e r le y review ed d r a f t s and made v a lu a b le s u g g e s tio n s .

iii

Frank G.

Dorothy D. Parks p rep ared

s e v e r a l t a b le s and John J . Dea fo llo w e d up th e p rep a ra tio n o f th e p h o t o s t a t s . A ll p a r t ic ip a t e d in th e p r o o f-r e a d in g .

F red erick W. F r e ita g c h e e r f u lly assumed

a double burden i n th e o f f i c e , ta k in g o v er th e d u t ie s o f o th er members o f th e s t a f f so th a t th e y co u ld g iv e t h e i r tim e t o th e p rep a ra tio n o f th e r e p o r t. S p e c ia l th an k s are due P e a r l P. Pardew, who review ed th e rep ort fo r grammar and co m p o sitio n , ch a lle n g e d u n s c i e n t i f i c sta te m e n ts, and saw to i t th a t th e rep ort was in th e p r e s c r ib e d form; and to th e i n v e s t ig a t o r ' s s e c r e ta r y , F lo ren ce H. C la rk e, who spent weary hours in ta k in g and r e ta k in g d ic t a t i o n , computing and p rep a rin g t a b le s - though "numbers" were anathema to her - ty p in g m anuscript, and a c t in g a s a "bureau o f inform ation" about th e stud y fo r th e o th e r c o lla b o r a t o r s . The h e lp f u l c o o p e r a tio n and encouragement o f th e F a cu lty Committee (P r o fe s s o r Robert Hoppock, A s s o c ia te Dean R. E. P i c k e t t , and P r o fe s s o r C. E. S k in n er), who gu id ed th e d e s t i n i e s o f t h i s r e p o r t, are d eep ly a p p r e c ia te d . To h is w if e and fa m ily , t o o , th e in v e s t ig a t o r owes a debt o f g r a t it u d e . They c h e e r f u lly assumed h is dom estic ch ores th a t he might have more tim e when tim e was so u r g e n tly needed. Without th e p er so n a l i n t e r e s t , encouragem ent, and h elp o f f r ie n d s , a s s o c ia t e s , F a cu lty Committee, and fa m ily , th e in v e s t ig a t o r would have spent y e a r s in s te a d o f months in co m p letin g t h i s study.

New York

F. H. Ac hard

table op contents

Page PREFACE

CHAPTER Is

SUMMARY AND INTERPRETATION OP CONCLUSIONS

PRODUCTS OP THE STUDY

1

PROPOSED PROCEDURE POR THE SELECTION OP SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES

2

CONCLUSIONS DRAWN PROM THE ANALYSES MADE IN THIS STUDY

3

INTERPRETATION OP THE CONCLUSIONS

4

CHAPTER I I :

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

PURPOSE OP THIS STUDY

9

THE NEED POR THIS STUDY

10

The Need fo r th e C arefu l S e le c t io n o f S u p erv iso ry Em ployees Customary Methods o f S e le c t in g S u p ervisory Employees Need fo r th e Development o f B e t t e r Methods o f S e le c t io n PREVIOUS EXPERIMENTS AND STUDIES

10 13 14 16

U n ited S t a t e s Army T e s ts (1 9 1 7 -1 9 ) (Y erk es, Robert M. et_ a l ) Bingham, ¥ . V. and D a v is, W. T. B i l l s , Marion A. O'Connor, Johnson Eeckman, R. 0 . and L ev in e, M ichael Uhrbrock, R. S. and R ichardson, M. V/. A c h ill e s , P. S. and S c h u ltz , R. S .; S c h u ltz , R. S. C le e to n , Glen U. and Mason, C h arles V/.; Mason, C. W. Sm ith, Mapheus and Nystrom, W. C. M itc h e ll, J . H. Aluminum Company o f America (M ercer, L y le R .) P en n sy lv a n ia R a ilro a d (H ersey, R. B .) U n ited S t a t e s Army, World War I I (1 9 4 0 - ?) (Bingham, W. V .) Summary and C r itiq u e o f P rev io u s E xperim ents and S tu d ie s

v

16 19 21 23 25 26 29 32 33 35 37 40 45 50

Page

A GENERAL ANALYSIS OF SUPERVISION The S u p e r v is o r 's Job S u p erv iso ry R e s p o n s ib ilit y P rod u ction O b je c tiv e s , C o n d itio n s, and C o n tr o ls P ro d u ctio n F a c i l i t i e s S u p erv iso ry F ie ld s o f A c t iv it y S u p erv iso ry F u n ction s The S u p e r v is o r 's Equipment and C h a r a c t e r is t ic s Mental A b i l i t i e s and H ab its P r a c t ic a l A b i l i t i e s and H ab its P h y s ic a l C h a r a c t e r is t ic s and H ab its Temperamental C h a r a c t e r is t ic s and H a b its I n te g r a tio n o f T otal P e r s o n a lit y Measures o f S u p e rv isio n Group P rod u ction and Perform ance P erso n n el C o n d itio n s w ith in th e Group C o n ta cts o u ts id e th e Group S p e c ia l A ssignm ents S u p erv iso ry F u n ction s Summary o f a General A n a ly s is o f S u p e r v isio n

51 52 52 52 54 55 55 56 57 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 65 66 66

67

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THIS STUDY

68

PROBLEMS AND LIMITATIONS INVOLVED IN THE STUDY

69

CHAPTER I I I :

RESEARCH PROCEDURE AND DATA

SELECTION OF SUPERVISORS - DEPARTMENT X The Problem The Approach to th e Problem The T ra in in g Course T est S e le c t io n and A d m in istra tio n The I n i t i a l Placement o f th e Foremen in 1937 Comparison o f T est R e su lts and Proposed R eassignm ents o f Foremen in 1940 Development o f a "Rating Based on T est Scores" Procedure Comparison o f T est R e s u lts and S ta tu s o f Employees in March, 1942 DEVELOPMENT OF A SUPERVISORY RATING SCALE S e le c t io n o f th e Type o f R atin g S c a le to be Used C o n stru ctio n o f th e R atin g S c a le Assem bly o f M aterial P re p a r a tio n and T e s tin g o f th e T r ia l Form P re p a r a tio n o f th e Working Form W eighting o f th e Item s The Procedure fo r W eighting th e Item s J u s t i f i c a t i o n o f th e Procedure f o r W eighting th e Item s

vi

71 72 73 73 74 77 80 91 96 99 99 102 102 103 105 107 108 115

Page

A n a ly s is o f th e R e l i a b i l i t y o f A d m in istr a tio n o f th e S u p erv iso ry R atin g S c a le Summary o f th e Development o f a S u p erv iso ry R atin g S c a le CONTINUATION OP THE STUDY - DEPARTMENTS Y AND Z Groups Included in th e Study - Departm ents Y and Z S e le c t io n and A d m in istra tio n o f T e s t s Departm ents Y and Z C r it e r ia o f S u p ervisory Perform ance Departm ents Y and Z Procedure fo r th e A n a ly sis o f T est S co res Departm ents Y and Z RELATION BETWEEN TEST SCORES AND PERSONAL HISTORY FACTORS - DEPARTMENTS Y AND Z D iv is io n o f th e S u p erv iso ry Employees in t o P erso n a l H isto ry Subgroups Comparisons betw een T est S co res and P e r so n a l H isto r y F a cto rs - Department Y, Group ABC I n t e l l e c t i v e Group o f T e s ts P e r s o n a lit y Group o f T e s ts V isu a l P er cep tio n Group o f T e s ts Comparisons betw een T est S co res and P e r so n a l H isto ry F a cto rs - Department Z, Group DEF I n t e l l e c t i v e Group o f T e s ts P e r s o n a lity Group o f T e s ts V isu a l P er cep tio n Group o f T e s ts Comparisons betw een T est S co res and P er so n a l H isto ry F a cto rs - Department Z, Group GHI I n t e l l e c t i v e Group o f T e s t s P e r s o n a lity Group o f T e s t s V isu a l P er cep tio n Group o f T e s ts Comparisons between T est S co res and P er so n a l H isto r y F a cto rs - Department Z, Group JKL I n t e l l e c t i v e Group o f T e s ts P e r s o n a lity Group o f T e s ts V isu a l P er cep tio n Group o f T e s ts Summary and A n a ly sis o f th e R e la tio n betw een T est S cores and P erson al H isto r y F a cto rs - D epartm ents Y and Z Department Y, Group ABC Department Z, Group DEF Department Z, Group GHI Department Z, Group JKL General Summary RELATION BETWEEN DEPARTMENTAL RATINGS AND PERSONAL HISTORY FACTORS - DEPARTMENTS Y AND Z D iv is io n o f S u pervisory Employees in t o R atin g and Q u estio n n a ire Score Subgroups Comparisons betw een Departm ental R a tin g s and P erso n a l H isto r y F a cto rs - Department Y, Group ABC

vii

117 120 122 122 125 129 131

135

135 138 138 138 140 140 142 142 143 143 143 145 146 147 147 149 150 150 150 152 153 154 155

156

156 158

Page

Comparisons "between D epartm ental fia tin g s and P erso n a l H isto ry F a cto r s - Department Z, Group DEF Comparisons between D epartm ental R a tin g s and P erso n a l H isto ry F a cto rs - Department Z, Group GHI Comparisons between D epartm ental R a tin g s and P erso n a l H isto r y F a cto r s - Department Z, Group JKL Summary, R e la tio n between D epartm ental R a tin g s and P erson a l H isto r y F a cto r s - Departm ents Y and Z RELATION BETWEEN DEPARTMENTAL RATINGS AND TEST SCORES - DEPARTMENTS Y AND Z Comparisons betw een th e T est S co res o f th e S u pervisory Perform ance Subgroups - Department Y, Group ABC Comparisons between th e T est S cores o f th e R ating Subgroups - Department Y, Group ABC Comparisons betv/een th e T est S co res o f th e Q u estio n n a ire Subgroups - Department Y, Group ABC Comparisons betw een th e T est S cores o f th e S u p ervisory Performance Subgroups - Department Z, Group DEF Comparisons between th e T est S co res o f th e R ating Subgroups - Department Z, Group DEF Comparisons between th e T est S cores o f th e Q u estio n n a ire Subgroups - Department Z, Group DEF Comparisons between th e T est S cores o f th e S u pervisory Perform ance Subgroups - Department Z, Group GHI Comparisons between th e T est S cores o f th e R ating Subgroups - Department Z, Group GHI Comparisons betw een th e T est S co res o f th e Q u estio n n a ire Subgroups - Department Z, Group GHI Comparisons betw een th e T est S cores o f th e S u p ervisory Perform ance Subgroups - Department Z, Group JKL Comparisons betw een th e T est S co res o f th e R ating Subgroups - Department Z, Group JKL Comparisons between th e T est S cores o f th e Q u estio n n a ire Subgroups - Department Z, Group JKL Summary - R e la tio n betw een D epartm ental R a tin g s and T est Scores - Departm ents Y and Z DEVELOPMENT AND ANALYSIS OF THE CFS SCALES BERNREOTER PERSONALITY INVENTORY AND STRONG VOCATIONAL INTEREST BLANK Development o f th e CFS S c a le s S e le c t io n and W eighting o f S ig n if ic a n t Item s R e l i a b i l i t y o f th e CFS S c a le s Comparisons betw een th e CFS T est S cores and th e P erso n a l H isto r y F a cto rs - Departm ents Y and Z Comparisons betw een th e Mean T est S co res in th e CFS S c a le s o f th e P erso n a l H isto r y Subgroups Department Y, Group ABC Comparisons betw een th e Mean T est S cores in th e CFS S c a le s o f th e P erso n a l H isto r y Subgroups Department Z, Group DEF

viii

159 160 161 163 164

164 164 167 169 169 171 172 173 175 176 178 179 181

184 184 185 186 190

190

192

Page

Comparisons "between th e Mean T est S cores in th e CPS S c a le s o f th e P erso n a l H isto r y Subgroups Department 2, Group GHI Comparisons betw een th e Mean T est S cores in th e CPS S c a le s o f th e P erso n a l H isto r y Subgroups Department Z, Group JKL Summary - Comparisons betw een th e CPS T est S cores and th e P erso n a l H isto r y F a cto rs - Departm ents Y and Z Comparisons betw een th e CPS S c a le s asd th e Departm ental R atin g s - Departm ents X, Y, and Z Comparisons betw een th e S u c c e s s fu l and th e U n su c c e ssfu l Subgroups o f Department X Comparisons betw een th e CFS S c a le s and Departm ental R a tin g s - Department Y, Group ABC Comparisons betw een th e CPS S c a le s and Departm ental R a tin g s - Department Z, Group DIP C onparisons betw een th e CPS S c a le s and Departm ental R a tin g s - Department Z, Group GHI C onparisons betw een th e CPS S c a le s and Departm ental R a tin g s - Department Z, Group JKL Summary - Development and A n a ly s is o f th e CPS S c a le s B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry and Strong V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t Blank RELATIONS Biff WEEN DEPARTMENTAL MEAN TEST SCORES AND PUBLISHED NORMS - DEPARTMENTS X, Y, AND Z Comparisons betw een D epartm ental Groups D epartm ents X, Y, and Z C onparisons betw een S u c c e s s f u l, 1 . 0 - 1 . 5 , and 4 8 -6 3 Subgroups - D epartm ents X, Y, and Z Comparisons betw een U n s u c c e s s fu l, 2 . 0 - 3 . 0 , and 0-47 Subgroups - Departm ents X, Y, and Z Comparisons betw een th e Mean T est S co res o f th e Departm ental Groups and th e P u b lish ed Norms D epartm ents X, Y, and Z Summary - R e la tio n s betw een D epartm ental Mean T est Scores and P u b lish ed Norms - Departm ents X, Y, and Z

CHAPTER IV;

192

193 194 194 196 196 198 200 201

203

205

205 208 210

213 216

DEVELOPMENT OP A ''RATING BASED ON TEST SCORES'1 PROCEDURE

APPLICATION OP THE ''RATING BASED ON TEST SCORES'1 PROCEDURE BASED ON DEPARTMENT X NORMS TO DEPARTMENTS Y AND Z Development o f th e "R ating Based on T est Scores" P rocedure, Based on Department X Norms A p p lic a tio n o f th e Procedure Based on Department X Norms to Department Y, Group ABC Comparisons betw een R a tin g s Based on T est S cores and G eneral Summary R a tin g s o f G eneral Value

ix

220

220 223 224

Page

Comparisons betw een E a tin g s Based, on Test S cores and Q u e stio n n a ir e S co res C r it ic a l E a tio s Based on Department X Norms A p p lic a tio n o f th e P rocedure Based on Department X Norms to Department Z, Group DEP C onparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est Scores and G eneral Summary E a tin g s o f G eneral Value Comparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est Scores and Q u estio n n a ire S co res C r it ic a l E a tio s Based on Department X Norms A p p lic a tio n o f th e Procedure Based on Department X Norms to Department Z, Group GHI C onparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est S cores and G eneral Summary E a tin g s o f General Value C onparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est S cores and Q u e stio n n a ir e S co res C r it ic a l E a tio s Based on Department X Norms A p p lic a tio n o f th e Procedure Based on Department X Norms to Department Z, Group JK1 Comparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est Scores and G eneral Summary E a tin g s o f General Value C onparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est Scores and Q u e stio n n a ir e S co res C r it ic a l E a t io s B ased on Department X Norms Summary and A n a ly s is , A p p lic a tio n o f th e "E ating Based on T est Scores" Procedure Based on Department X Norms to D epartm ents Y and Z DEVELOPMENT AND TEIAL OF DEPAEIMENTAL GROUP "EATING BASED ON TEST SCORES" PEOCEDURES DEPARTMENTS Y AND Z General Development o f th e Departm ental Group "Rating Based on T est Scores" P rocedures S e le c t io n o f T e s ts S e le c t io n o f T est Score Ranges and E a tin g s Development o f T est Group E a tin g s and E a tin g s Based on T est S co res Schedule o f T est S co res and E a tin g s A p p lic a tio n o f th e D epartm ental Group "R ating Based on T est Scores" P rocedure - Department Y, Group ABC Comparisons betw een R a tin g s Based on T est S cores and General Summary R a tin g s o f General Value Comparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est Scores and Q u e stio n n a ir e S co res A p p lic a tio n o f th e D epartm ental Group "Rating Based on T est Scores" P rocedure - Department Z, Group DEF Comparisons betw een R a tin g s Based on T est S cores and G eneral Summary E a tin g s o f General Value Comparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est Scores and Q u e stio n n a ir e S co res A p p lic a tio n o f th e D epartm ental Group "E ating Based on T est Scores" P rocedure - Department Z, Group GHI

x

226 227 229 229 231 233 233 233 235 237 237 237 240 241

241

244

244 245 246 247 248 248 248 252 254 254 258 259

Page

Comparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est S cores and General Summary E a tin g s o f General Value Comparisons betw een E a tin g s Based on T est S cores and Q u estio n n a ire S cores A p p lic a tio n o f th e D epartm ental Group "R ating Based on T est Scores" Procedure - Department Z, Group JKL Comparisons betw een R atin gs Based on T est S cores and G eneral Summary R a tin g s o f General Value Comparisons between R a tin g s Based on T est S cores and Q u estio n n a ire S co res Summary and A n a ly s is , A p p lic a tio n o f th e "Rating Based on T est Scores" P roced ure, Based on Departm ental Group Norms, to Departm ents Y and Z A p p lic a tio n o f th e R ev ised (D epartm ental Group) "Rating B ased .on T est Scores" Procedure to Department X

CHAPTER V:

260 263 264 267 268 269 271

GSNEHAL CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS

CONCLUSIONS TO BE DRAWN FROM THIS STUDY The S u p erv iso ry R atin g S c a le D if f e r e n t i a t i n g Powers o f th e T e s ts I n v e s tig a te d in t h i s Study The I n t e l l e c t i v e Group o f T e s ts The P e r s o n a lity Group o f T e s ts The V isu a l P e r c e p tio n Group o f T e s ts R e la tio n betw een P erso n a l H isto r y F a cto rs and T est S cores and D epartm ental R a tin g s R e la tio n o f Age and E ducation to T est S cores and D epartm ental R a tin g s R e la tio n o f S u p erv iso ry E x p erien ce to T est S cores and D epartm ental R a tin g s Comparisons betw een th e T est S cores o f th e Departm ental Groups and th e P u b lish ed Norms The "Rating Based on T est Scores" Procedure Need fo r th e Continued I n v e s t ig a t io n o f th e S ta tu s o f th e S u p erv iso ry Employees Included in t h i s Study Summary - C o n clu sio n s t o be Drawn from t h i s Study POSSIBLE APPLICATIONS OF THE PRODUCTS OF THE STUDY Use o f th e S u p erv iso ry R atin g S ca le The S e le c t io n o f S u p erv iso ry Employees LIKELY AREAS FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION P erson al H isto r y Item s R atin gs in P r e -su p e r v iso r y P o s it io n s Group and In d iv id u a l T e s ts o f Mental A b i lit y Group and P e r s o n a lit y T e s ts C r it e r ia o f S u p erv iso ry Competency The V alues o f Further I n v e s t ig a t io n

xi

278 278 279 279 280 281 282 282 282 283 284 288 288 290 290 291 295 295 296 296 297 298 298

Page BIBLIOGRAPHY

299

APPENDIX

302

I****************

PLATES

T itle R eproduction o f F igure 60 and T able 406 from Memoirs, N a tio n a l Academy o f S c ie n c e s , V o l. XV, p p . 85 5 , 856

18

R eproduction o f Page 424 o f Memoirs, N a tio n a l Academy o f S c ie n c e s, V ol. XV

20

Nomogram f o r th e D eterm in ation o f th e Prim ary Raw W eights - Department Y - Group ABC - S u p erv iso ry R atin g S ca le

110

TABLES

T itle Summary o f P s y c h o lo g ic a l Examining in U, S. Army A p r il 28, 1918 - January 31, 1919

17

Summary o f Scores Made by L if e Insurance Salesm en and A s s is t a n t Managers in T e s ts

30

S c a le T h eir a n ce, O ther

77

Used fo r th e R atin g o f Employees A ccord in g to R e la tiv e Standing in T e s t s , O p eratin g Perform ­ General Q u a lif ic a t io n s a s S u p e r v is o r s , and R a tin g s

I n i t i a l R atin gs D erived from T est S co res in 1937 Compared w ith th e I n i t i a l A ssignm ents to Duty in 1937 - Department X

79

R a tin g s by S u p erin ten d en ts in 1937 Compared w ith th e I n i t i a l A ssignm ents to Duty in 1937 - Department X

81

I n i t i a l R a tin g s D erived from T est S co res in 1937 Conpared w ith R eassignm ents to Duty Proposed in 1940 Department X

83

R a tin g s by S u p erin ten d en ts in 1937 Compared w ith R eassignm ent 8 to Duty Proposed in 1940 - Department X

84

xii

Title

Page

Comparisons o f th e Means and th e Standard D e v ia tio n s o f th e T est S cores o f S u p erv iso rs and N o n -S u p erv iso rs, C r it ic a l S co res, and E a tio s o f th e D iffe r e n c e betw een Means, and between P r o p o r tio n s, to th e Standard Error o f th e D iffe r e n c e Based on th e R eassignm ents Proposed in 1940 - Department X

86

Method o f S e le c t io n by C r it ic a l T est S cores Compared w ith R eassignm ents to Duty Proposed in 1940 Department X

89

Method o f S e le c t io n by C r it ic a l T est S co res Compared w ith R eassignm ents to Duty Proposed in 1940; Employees I n i t i a l l y A ssigned a s A s s is ta n t Foremen and Foremen in 1937 - Department X

90

Medians, Q u a r tile D e v ia tio n s , P ro b a b le Errors o f Medians, and R a tio s o f th e D if f e r e n c e betw een th e Medians to th e Probable Error o f th e D iffe r e n c e ; S cores o f N on-S u p ervisors and th e S u p e rv iso rs in Three L e v e ls in A ll T e s ts (E x c lu s iv e o f th e P u b lish ed S c a le s o f th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry ) - Department X

92

"Rating Based on T est Scores" P rocedure - Department X

94

R a tin g s Based on T est S co res Compared w ith R ea ssig n ­ ments to Duty Proposed in 1940 - Department X

95

R e l i a b i l i t y o f th e R a tin g s Based on T est S cores a s a Means fo r D if f e r e n t ia t in g betw een D if f e r e n t L e v e ls o f S u p e rv isio n Based on R atio o f D if f e r e n c e betw een P ro p o rtio n s to Standard Error o f D if f e r e n c e Department X

97

Comparison o f R atin gs Based on T est S co res in 1940 w ith R atin gs by S u p erio rs Made in March, 1942 Department X

98

D is t r ib u t io n o f Answers to Q u e stio n s, D eterm in a tio n o f T r ia l Answer V alu es; S u p erv iso ry R atin g S c a le , T r ia l Form Dated February 2 4 , 1942

106

Development o f Group Q u estio n n a ire W eights, D epart­ ment Y - Group ABC; V alu es o f Group Q u estio n n a ire W eights, Department Z - Groups DEF, GHI, JKL; S u p ervisory R atin g S c a le

111

Comparison o f Group Q u estio n n a ire S co res and General Summary R atin gs; S p e c ia l S c a le s o f Group Q u estio n n a ire W eights - Department Y - Group ABC; Department Z Groups DEF, GHI, JKL; S u p erv iso ry R atin g S ca le

112

Development o f Composite Q u e stio n n a ir e W eights; S u p ervisory R ating S c a le

114

xii i

Title

Comparison o f Quest io n n a ir e S cores and General Summary E a tin g s; S ca le o f Com posite Q u estio n n a ire W eights Department I - Group ABC; Department Z - Groups DEF, GHI, JKL; S u p erv iso ry R atin g S ca le

118

Q u estio n n a ire Score Ranges and A sso c ia te d General Summary R atin gs o f G eneral V alue; S u p ervisory R atin g S c a le

119

D is t r ib u t io n o f S u p e rv iso rs by V o ca tio n a l Subgroups, Age Subgroups, E d u cation Subgroups, and Date o f F ir s t Appointment a s a S u p erv iso r Subgroups - Departments Y and Z

136

Comparisons betw een T e st S cores and P erson al H isto r y F a cto r s - Department Y - Group ABC

139

Comparisons between T est S co res and P erson al H isto r y F a cto r s - Department Z - Group DEF

141

Comparisons betw een T est S cores and P erson al H isto r y F a cto r s - Department Z - Group GHI

144

Comparisons betw een T est S cores and P erson al H isto r y F a cto r s - Department Z - Group JKL

148

Summary o f D if f e r e n c e s betw een Mean Standard T est S co res o f P a ir s o f R ela ted P erso n a l H isto ry Sub­ groups and o f C o e f f ic i e n t s o f C o r r e la tio n (P earson U n corrected ) betw een Age and T est Scores - Departm ents Y and Z - Groups ABC, DEF, GHI, JKL

151

Comparisons betw een Departm ental R atin gs and P erso n a l H isto r y F a cto rs - Department Y - Group ABC; Department Z - Groups DEF, GHI, JKL

157

Comparisons betw een T est S co res and Departm ental E a tin g s - Department Y - Group ABC

165

Comparisons betw een T est S co res and Departm ental R a tin g s - Department Z - Group DEF

170

Comparisons betw een T est S co res and Departm ental R a tin g s - Department Z - Group GHI

174

Comparisons betw een T est S co res and Departm ental R a tin g s - Department Z - Group JKL

177

Development and R e l i a b i l i t y o f th e CFS S c a le , B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry ; Comparisons between th e CFS S c a le s , Bernreruter P e r s o n a lit y In ven tory and Strong V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t Blank (R eta in ed Item s Only)

xiv

Title

Development and R e l i a b i l i t y o f th e CPS S c a le ; Strong V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t Blank Form M and th e C orresponding Form A Q u estion s (R eta in ed Item s Only)

188

Comparisons between T est S co res and P erso n a l H isto r y F a cto r s - Department Y - Group ABC; Department Z Groups DBF, GHI, JKL; B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In ven tory and Strong V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t B lan k , CFS S c a le s

191

Comparisons between T est S co res and D epartm ental R a tin g s - Department X; Department Y - Group ABC; Department Z - Groups DEF, GHI, JKL; B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In ven tory and Strong V o c a tio n a l I n te r e s t B lank, CFS S c a le s

195

Comparisons between D epartm ental Groups - Department X; Department Y - Group ABC; Department Z - Groups DEF, GHI, JKL

206

Comparisons between S u c c e s s f u l, 1 . 0 - 1 . 5 , and 4 8-63 Subgroups - Department X; Department Y - Group ABC; Department Z - Groups DEF, GHI, JKL

209

C onparisons between U n s u c c e s s f\il, 2 . 0 - 3 . 0 , and 0-47 Subgroups - Department X; Department Y - Group ABC; Department Z - Groups DEF, GHI, JKL

211

C onparisons between Mean T est S co res o f D epartm ental Groups and P u b lish ed Norms - Department X; Department Y - Group ABC; Department Z - Groups DEF, GHI, JKL

214

"R ating Based on T est Scores" P rocedure - Departm ents Y and Z

221

Comparison o f R atin gs Based on T est S co res w ith Super­ in t e n d e n t s ’ General Summary R a tin g s o f General Value and Q u estio n n a ire S co res - Department Y - Group ABC

225

Comparison o f R atin gs Based on T est S co res w ith Managers' General Summary R a tin g s o f G eneral Value and Q u estio n n a ire S co res - Department Z - Group DEF

230

Comparison o f R atin gs Based on T est S co res w ith Managers' General Summary R a tin g s o f G eneral Value and Q u estio n n a ire S co res - Department Z - Group GHI

234

Comparison o f R a tin g s Based on T est S c o r e s w ith Managers' General Summary R a tin g s o f G eneral Value and Q u estio n n a ire S co res - Department Z - Group JKL

238

"R ating Based on T est Scores" P roced u re, Departm ental Group Norms - Department Y - Group ABC

249

xv

Number IV - 7

IV - 8

IV - 9

IV - 10

IV - 11

IV - 12

IV - 13

IV - 14

IV - 15

IV - 16

Title

Page

Comparison o f E a tin g s Based on T est S co res, D epart­ m ental Group Norms, w ith D epartm ental E a tin g s Department Y - Group ABC

250

"Eating Based on T est Scores" P roced ure, Departm ental Group Norms - Department Z - Group DEF

255

Comparison o f E a tin g s Based on T est S c o r e s, D epart­ m ental Group Norms, w ith D epartm ental E a tin g s Department Z - Group DEF

255

"Eating Based on T est Scores" P roced ure, Departm ental Group Norms - Department Z - Group GHI

261

Comparison o f E a tin g s Based on T est S co res, D epart­ m ental Group Norms, w ith D epartm ental E a tin g s Department Z - Group GHI

262

"Eating Based on T est Scores" P roced u re, Departm ental Group Norms - Department Z - Group JKL

265

Comparison o f E a tin g s Based on T est S c o res, D epart­ m ental Group Norms, w ith D epartm ental E a tin g s Department Z - Group JKL

266

"E ating Based on T est Scores" P roced ure, Departm ental Group Norms - Department X

272

Comparison o f E a tin g s B ased on T est S co res, Depart­ mental Group Norms, w ith E eassign m en ts to DutyProposed in 1940 - Department X

273

Comparison o f E a tin g s Based on T est S co res (E ev ised Department X Norms) w ith A ctu a l P lacem en ts and Departm ental E a tin g s , March, 1943 - Department X

275

xvi

CHAPTER I SUMMARY AND INTERPRETATION OF CONCLUSIONS

T his stu d y was u n dertak en to d eterm ine w hether c e r t a in p s y c h o lo g ic a l t e s t s and m easures d i f f e r e n t i a t e d betw een groups o f more and o f l e s s ca p a b le su p e r v iso r y em ployees o f v a r io u s ty p e s .

I f any o f them d id , a second

o b j e c t iv e was to o u t lin e th e developm ent o f a procedure f o r u s in g th e s e t e s t s in c o n ju n c tio n w ith methods now u sed to s e l e c t su p e r v iso r y em ployees so a s t o in c r e a s e th e r e l i a b i l i t y o f th e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s .

The stu d y was under­

tak en in a g a s and e l e c t r i c p u b lic u t i l i t y .

PRODUCTS OF- THE STUDY " The p ro d u cts o f th e stu d y in c lu d e : 1.

A r e l i a b l e s u p e r v iso r y r a tin g s c a le th a t can be u sed w ith v a r io u s ty p e s o f s u p e r v iso r y em ployees.

T h is s c a le i s so c o n str u c te d th a t

the a ccu ra cy o f th e r a tin g o f each em ployee can u s u a lly be ch eck ed . 2.

Two new s c a l e s f o r u se w ith th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry th a t d i f f e r e n t i a t e betw een groups o f more and o f l e s s ca p a b le su p e r v iso r y em ployees and which may be u s e f u l in a t e s t b a tte r y assem bled to s e l e c t su p e r v iso r y em ployees.

One s c a le - th e CEF*

s c a le - was found t o be e s p e c ia l ly u s e f u l w ith su p e r v iso r y em ployees in a g a s s e r v ic e d ep artm ent.

The second s c a le - the CFS* s c a le -

was found t o be g e n e r a lly u s e f u l w ith g a s and e l e c t r i c s e r v ic e , bookkeeping, c o l l e c t i o n and m eter rea d in g , and d i s t r i c t o f f i c e su p e r v iso r y em p loyees.

♦These l e t t e r s were code l e t t e r s used by th e in v e s t ig a t o r f o r co n v en ien ce in d e s ig n a tin g th e s c a le s and o th erw ise have no s ig n if ic a n c e .

2

3.

Two s c a le s (CEF and CFS), f o r u s e w ith th e Strong V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t Blank th a t a re a p p ro p ria te f o r th e same p u rp oses and under th e same c o n d itio n s a s th e corresp on d in g s c a le s d ev elo p ed f o r u s e w ith the B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lity In v en to ry .

4.

A procedure fo r com bining th e s c o r e s o f em ployees in a b a tte r y o f t e s t s in to a f iv e - p o in t s c a le o f r a t in g s based on t e s t sc o r e s th a t can be u sed f o r com parison o r s e l e c t i o n p u rp o se s.

T h is procedure

ta k e s in t o account th e d if f e r e n c e s t h a t e x i s t betw een o c c u p a tio n a l groups b o th in th e kind and in th e e x t e n t or l e v e l o f th e a b i l i t i e s and c h a r a c t e r is t ic s p o s s e s s e d by t h e i r members a s measured by th e t e s t s and m easures used in t h i s stu d y .

I t a ls o ta k e s in t o con­

s id e r a t io n th e e x te n t t o which th e v a r io u s t e s t s and m easures d i f f e r e n t i a t e d betw een th e more and th e l e s s ca p a b le su p e rv iso ry em ployees o f each o c c u p a tio n a l group. PROPOSED PROCEDURE FOR THE SELECTION OF SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES A procedure f o r th e s e l e c t i o n o f su p e r v is o r y em ployees i s proposed f o r i n v e s t ig a t i o n and ex p erim en ta l u se among th e groups in clu d ed in t h i s stu d y . 1.

I t co m p rises th e f o llo w in g s t e p s : S e le c t a number o f c a n d id a te s by th e c u r r e n tly u sed c r i t e r i a , admin­ i s t e r th e a p p ro p ria te t e s t b a t t e iy t o them, and d eterm in e th e r a tin g based on t e s t sc o r e s f o r each c a n d id a te .

2.

E lim in a te from c o n s id e r a tio n th o se whose r a tin g s based on t e s t s c o r e s are 3 .0 and 2 .5 (th e lo w e st two r a t in g s o f th e f iv e - p o in t s c a le ) u n le s s th ere are stro n g rea so n s f o r d o in g o th e r w is e , review a l l o f th e d a ta about th e rem ainder o f th e c a n d id a te s , and make th e f i n a l s e l e c t i o n on th e b a s is o f th e t o t a l d a ta o f ea ch c a n d id a te .

3

I f upgrading o f the su p e r v is o r y group i s d e s ir e d , th o se rated 2 .0 can a ls o be e lim in a te d . In s p e c ia l c a s e s , an em ployee who has an u n s a t is f a c t o r y r a tin g based on t e s t s c o r e s m ight be r e t e s t e d t o guard a g a in s t a r t i f i c i a l l y low t e s t s c o r e s . For an o c c u p a tio n a l group o th e r than th o se in clu d ed in t h is stu d y, a t e s t b a tte r y and a " ra tin g b ased on t e s t sco res" procedure would have to be d ev elo p ed by th e methods u sed in t h i s stu d y .

CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE ANALYSES MADE IN THIS STUDY The fo llo w in g c o n c lu s io n s can be drawn from th e a n a ly s e s made in t h i s stu d y: 1.

T h irteen o f the se v e n te e n t e s t s , m easu res, and s c a le s used in t h i s stud y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d a c c e p ta b ly betw een th e more and th e l e s s cap ab le su p e r v iso r y em ployees o f th e o c c u p a tio n a l groups in clu d ed in t h i s stu d y .

Some were found to be a p p ro p ria te fo r one or two

groups o n ly ; o th e r s , f o r a l l o f the g ro u p s. 2.

The o ld e r su p e r v iso r y em ployees in clu d ed in t h i s stu d y tended to have l e s s fa v o ra b le t e s t s c o r e s and a ls o l e s s fa v o ra b le r a tin g s from t h e ir d ep artm en tal managements th an t h e i r younger c o lle a g u e s .

3.

The b e t t e r ed u cated s u p e r v is o r y em ployees tended to have more fa v o ra b le t e s t s c o r e s and a ls o more fa v o r a b le d ep artm en tal r a tin g s than t h e i r l e s s w e ll ed u cated c o lle a g u e s .

4.

E xp erien ce in a s u p e r v is o r y c a p a c ity , a s rep re se n ted by the d a te o f f i r s t appointm ent a s a s u p e r v is o r y em ployee, bore r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e r e la tio n s h ip e i t h e r t o th e t e s t s c o r e s o r to th e d ep artm ental r a t in g s .

5.

The v a r io u s o c c u p a tio n a l groups d if f e r e d m a t e r ia lly among each o th e r

4

in E n g lish v o c a b u la r y , m ental a b i l i t y , m echanical com prehension, and a b i l i t y to check numbers and names f o r accuracy a s measured by th e t e s t s and m easures u sed in t h i s stu d y .

L ike d if f e r e n c e s e x is t e d

betw een th e more ca p a b le subgroups o f th e s e v e r a l o c c u p a tio n a l groups and a ls o betw een th e l e s s ca p a b le subgroups. 6.

In m ental a b i l i t y , m ech an ical com prehension, p e r s o n a lit y f a c t o r s , and a b i l i t y to compare p la n e g e o m e tr ic a l f ig u r e s , th e su p e r v iso r y em ployees o f t h i s stu d y , a s a t o t a l group, had about th e same a v erage t e s t s c o r e s and ranges o f a b i l i t y a s th e g en era l groups rep orted by th e a u th o rs o f th e t e s t s .

In E n g lish v o cab u lary, th e su p e rv iso ry

em ployees had a much lo w e r average a b i l i t y than th e g e n e r a l group reported by the a u th o r o f th e t e s t .

In a b i l i t y to compare numbers

and names, th ey had a much h ig h e r average a b i l i t y . 7.

The r a tin g s based on t e s t sc o r e s o f th e su p e rv iso ry em ployees in ­ clud ed in t h i s stu d y , e s t a b lis h e d by th e procedure f o r com bining th e t e s t sc o r e s d ev elo p ed in t h i s stu d y , agreed w ith th e dep artm en tal r a tin g s o f th e s e s u p e r v iso r y em ployees to an a c c e p ta b le and p r a c t ic a l e x te n t .

T h is agreem ent was not a f f e c t e d a p p recia b ly by a g e, e d u c a tio n ,

or le n g th o f s e r v ic e a s a su p e r v iso r y em ployee.

INTERPBETATIOH OF THE CONCLUSIONS Luring th e co u rse o f t h i s stud y s e v e r a l o f th e i n v e s t ig a t o r ’ s c o l ­ le a g u e s and c o lla b o r a to r s f r e q u e n tly asked th e v ery p e r tin e n t q u e stio n "What d o es i t a l l mean?"

An in t e r p r e t a t io n o f th e stu d y and the c o n c lu s io n s d e r iv e d

from i t appears to be in o rd er.

T h is in t e r p r e t a t io n i s e x p r e s s ly th e o p in io n

o f th e in v e s t ig a t o r and b o th i t s scope and e x te n t are co n seq u en tly s u b je c t to c h a lle n g e .

I t i s h ere in clu d ed a s a p o in t o f d ep artu re f o r fu r th e r d is c u s s io n .

5

The most im portant r e s u lt s o f th e stu d y are th e p ro d u cts - the su p e r v iso r y r a tin g s c a le , th e CEF and th e GFS s c a le s f o r th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In ven tory and th e Strong V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t B lan k , and th e p roced u re f o r com bining th e sc o r e s o f em ployees in a b a t t e r y o f t e s t s in to a f iv e - p o in t s c a le o f r a tin g s based on t e s t s c o r e s . The su p e r v iso r y r a tin g s c a le should be a u s e f u l means f o r reco rd in g p e r i o d i c a ll y th e s t a t u s o f each su p e rv iso ry employee in an o r g a n iz a tio n . Thus, h is developm ent o v er a p erio d o f y e a r s can be exam ined, a ls o from tim e to tim e h i s s u p e r io r s w i l l be encouraged to d is c u s s w ith him h is s t a t u s a s a su p e r v is o r y em ployee, to commend him when commendation i s d u e, and to su g g est to him ways in w hich he can improve h im s e lf . The CFS s c a le s d ev elo p ed f o r u se w ith th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry and th e Strong V o ca tio n a l I n t e r e s t Blank d i f f e r e n t i a t e d betw een th e more and th e l e s s cap ab le su p e rv iso ry em ployees o f th e o c c u p a tio n a l groups in clu d ed in t h i s stu d y g e n e r a lly b e t t e r than any o f th e o th e r t e s t s s tu d ie d . From th e nature o f th e t e s t s , th e se s c a le s p rob ab ly measure th e com posite c h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f su p e rv iso ry p e r s o n a lit y and o f su p e r v iso r y i n t e r e s t s , l i k e s , and d i s l i k e s r e s p e c t iv e ly .

I t would be i n t e r e s t i n g and p rob ab ly u s e f u l t o

d eterm in e w hether th e s e s c a le s , or o th ers prepared by s im ila r m ethods, would be e q u a lly u s e f u l f o r t e s t i n g su p e rv iso ry em ployees o f o c c u p a tio n a l groups o th e r than th e ones in clu d ed in t h i s stu d y . In t h i s stu d y , no s in g le s e t o f c r i t e r i a was found on which to b a se th e s e l e c t i o n o f su p e r v iso r y em ployees.

The su p e r v iso r y em ployees o f v a r io u s

o c c u p a tio n a l groups d if f e r e d markedly in v a r io u s s p e c i f i c a b i l i t i e s .

These

d if f e r e n c e s may be r e la te d to the d if f e r e n c e s in the kind o f work and in th e c h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f th e p erso n n el o f th e v a r io u s o c c u p a tio n a l g rou p s.

It

6

would, "be in t e r e s t in g to study th e r e la t io n s h ip s th a t e x i s t betw een the a b i l i t i e s and c h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f cap ab le su p e r v is o r y em ployees and o f th e em ployees whom th ey s u p e r v is e . A nother in t e r e s t in g p o in t i s th a t w h ile th e o ld e r su p e rv iso ry em­ p lo y e e s tended to have l e s s fa v o r a b le t e s t s c o r e s and dep artm en tal r a tin g s than t h e i r younger c o lle a g u e s th e r e i s no d i r e c t ev id en ce to in d ic a te th a t th e p r o c e s s o f growing o ld e r c r e a te d t h i s c o n d it io n .

In f a c t , v a rio u s

s t u d ie s such a s f f e c h s le r 's 1 in d ic a t e th a t v a r io u s m ental a b i l i t i e s d ecrea se w ith age from about age 23. typ e o f a b i l i t y .

The r a te o f d e c r e a se v a r ie s a cco rd in g to the

In no c a s e , however, d o es i t d e c r e a se a t a ra te commensu­

r a te w ith th e changes in s e v e r a l o f th e t e s t s c o r e s w ith age found in one o f th e o c c u p a tio n a l groups in clu d ed in t h i s stu d y .

In the in v e s t ig a t o r ' s

o p in io n i t i s p o s s i b l e , i f not p ro b a b le, th a t th e o ld e r su p e r v iso r y em ployes who had s u b s t a n t ia lly l e s s fa v o r a b le t e s t s c o r e s and d ep artm ental r a tin g s than t h e i r younger c o lle a g u e s were ch o sen from a l e s s ca p a b le group than t h e i r younger c o lle a g u e s were. Another p o in t i s th a t , a s a group, th e su p e rv iso ry em ployees g e n e r a lly were above average in t h e i r a b i l i t y t o compare numbers and names f o r accu racy.

T his a b i l i t y i s la b e le d " c l e r i c a l a b ili t y " by the au th ors o f

th e t e s t u sed in t h i s stu d y .

A c o n s id e r a b le amount o f tim e i s spent by

s u p e r v is o r y em ployees today in ch eck in g r e p o r ts o f v a r io u s k in d s and i t i s p erhaps l o g i c a l th a t they should req u ire a somewhat b e t t e r than average a b i l i t y in t h is d ir e c t io n .

1.

David W echsler, Measurement o f M u lt I n t e l l i g e n c e , Chapter 6 , pp. 56 f f .

7

The r e l a t i v e l y low a b i l i t y o f the su p e r v iso r y em ployees in E n g lish voca b u la ry i s , a t f i r s t s i g h t , somewhat s t a r t l i n g .

However, th e in v e s t ig a t o r

h as been informed o r a l ly by members o f th e s t a f f o f the Human E n gin eerin g Laboratory which prepared th e E n g lish vo ca b u la ry t e s t used in t h i s stu d y th a t th e p u b lish ed s c o r e s o f t h i s t e s t are p rob ab ly a r t i f i c i a l l y h ig h b ecause o f th e nature o f th e groups on which th ey were b a sed .

These groups in clu d ed a

la r g e p ro p o rtio n o f h ig h sc h o o l and c o l le g e g ra d u a tes and o f s u c c e s s f u l b u s in e s s men, a l l o f whom have been found to have r e l a t i v e l y la r g e vocabu­ l a r i e s compared to th e g e n e r a l p o p u la tio n .

In th e g e n e r a l ex p erien ce o f

th e in v e s t ig a t o r w ith t h i s t e s t , th e su p e r v iso r y em ployees in clu d ed in t h i s stu d y had, as a group, about an average v o ca b u la ry . The u se o f t e s t s f o r th e s e le c t io n o f su p e rv iso ry em ployees i s proposed a s a supplem ent t o , and e m p h a tica lly not a s a replacem ent o f, e x i s t i n g methods.

From an o r g a n iz a tio n a l p o in t o f v iew i t would be -unwise

t o remove from d ep artm en tal management th e r e s p o n s i b ili t y fo r s e le c t in g i t s su p e r v iso r y s t a f f .

I t i s , how ever, o n ly w ise to p rovid e d ep artm en tal manage­

ment w ith a ccu ra te and r e l i a b l e d a ta .

The u se o f t e s t s , as su g g e ste d , can

c o n c e iv a b ly p ro v id e d a ta th a t a re not r e a d ily o b ta in a b le by o th e r means. T his stud y n eed s t o be c o n tin u ed .

Many o th e r t e s t s should be

exam ined, o th er so u rces o f p e r t in e n t d a ta should be in v e s t ig a t e d . stu d y would be o f immense b e n e f it to b u s in e s s and in d u str y .

F u rth er

E f f ic ie n c y and

e f f e c t i v e n e s s in p ro d u ctio n and la b o r r e l a t io n s are t o a la r g e e x te n t in th e hands o f su p e r v iso r y em p lo y ees.

They can a c t co m p eten tly to the e x te n t

th a t th ey have th e n e c e s s a r y a b i l i t i e s and c h a r a c t e r is t ic s , are c a r e f u l ly tr a in e d , and are r e a l i s t i c a l l y su pp orted .

F u rth er resea r ch in t h i s f i e l d

8

w i l l h e lp in th e s e l e c t i o n o f su p e r v iso r y em ployees w ith th e n e c e ssa r y a b i l i t i e s and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

17

TABLE I I

-

1

Summary o f P s y c h o lo g ic a l Examining in U .S. Army1 A p r il 28, 1918 - January 31, 1919 Number Who Took Exam ination

Exam ination Taken

1 ,1 4 9 ,5 9 6 4 8 3 ,4 6 9 (9 0 ,0 6 5 ) 1 8 ,7 3 2 3 8 ,4 8 9 2 3 ,1 1 9

Alpha exam ination ( t o t a l ) B eta " " Both Alpha and B eta P o in t s c a le S ta n fo r d -B in et Perform ance s c a le

- The Alpha exam in ation was a group t e s t o f th e language or v e r b a l ty p e .

The B eta exam in ation was a n o n -v erb a l group t e s t .

The P oin t S c a le ,

S ta n fo r d -B in et ex am in ation , and Performance S c a le were in d iv id u a l t e s t s . A ll o f th e s e t e s t s were e s s e n t i a l l y measures o f m ental a b i l i t y or in te llig e n c e .

The s c o r e s on a l l t e s t s were reduced to comparable l i t e r a l

s c a le s c o n s is t in g o f sev en g r a d e s, i . e . , A, B, C+, C, C-, D, and D -.

Grade C

in clu d ed th e m iddle group o f th e w h ite d r a f t , and i s s u b s t a n t ia lly th e average o f th e e n t ir e group o f th o se t e s t e d . A c a r e f u l ly s e le c t e d sample o f the t e s t r e s u lt s was prepared f o r a n a ly s is . A study o f th e com parative i n t e l l i g e n c e r a tin g s o f the w h ite en­ l i s t e d men, w hite non-com m issioned o f f i c e r s , and w hite com m issioned o f f i c e r s a s shown in the t a b le and the f ig u r e 2 reproduced on P la te I (p . 1 8 ) - r e v e a ls some in t e r e s t in g d a ta . 1.

In th e s e t e s t s :

The com m issioned p erso n n el scored s u b s t a n t ia lly h ig h e r than the t o t a l e n l i s t e d group.

2.

The non-com m issioned o f f i c e r s - c o r p o r a ls and se r g e a n ts - sco red s u b s t a n t ia lly h ig h e r than th e p r iv a t e s .

1. 2.

3.

The se r g e a n ts sco red somewhat h ig h e r than the c o r p o r a ls .

4.

The p r iv a t e s scored h ig h e r than the w h ite d r a f t .

Yerkes, ojo. c i t . , ad.apted from Table 4 , p . 100. I b id . , p p . 855, 856.

18

CX

O' L*A«rvJ Vc-////W //A e c c*

Above Mojor 1

W ///A

1

a

1

Majors

m m

...........................................

r

“

i

Copfoi'na

m //m

1

o

1

cJS«J ?!

First Lieutenants

w /m

1

...

1

>

*-9

Second Lieutenants

W ///M

1

C 2

1

ta 1

tt

1

& 5 ft S

1

C«rpor«U 1

1

1

1

1

1

Privates i

1

....

1

$ g ft zc &

1

Recruits 1

1

1

Wk.t, Dmft 1

1

!

1

1

1

S ft

1 1

1

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

Fia. ML rercenis£ of variotu intelligence ratings n ude by different ranks of enlisted men, eicept officers of the MnlicaJ l>rpannient. Based on table* 400 and 407.

T a b le

406 .— Percentages o f intelligence ratings by rank fo r white draft, white en listed m en a n d w h ite officers. W hite draft.

Intelligence rating.

Recruit.

Private. Corporal. Sergeant.1

Second lieu­ tenant.

F irst lieu­ tenant.

Captain.

Major.

Above major.

A.......................................................... B .......................................................... C + ....................................................... C.......................................................... C - ....................................................... D.......................................................... D —......................................................

4.1 8.0 15.2 25.0 23.8 17.0 7.1 29. 7

7.4 11.1 14.7 20.7 21.1 15.6 9.5 28.0

9.3 14.6 21.2 25.8 16.1 9.7 3.9 14.3

16.1 26.2 27.7 19.3 8.7 1.8 0.6 2.7

24.0 28.5 25.4 16.8 5.8 1.5 0.5 1. 6

59.4 27.1 10.9 2.4 0.2

51.7 29.7 13.8 3.7 0.5

53.4 29.0 14.4 3.8 0.4 0.1

64.4 25.0 9.2 1.5 0.2

63.6 25.1 8.9 2.5

Number of cases...............................

94,004

620

15,647

1,482

1,863

5,590

5,908

3,023

517

159

1 The group of sergeants includes sergeants, sergeants first class, and sergeants malor.

/s'?

Oysyc/' /^ c /c s j/s y

s ^ /c r /^ e

IS

I t seems

s ig n if ic a n t th a t no more than 0 .1 p er c e n t, o f

o f th e commissioned, o f f i c e r s , who correspond to made a

any rank

e x e c u tiv e s in in d u str y ,

grade o f D (none l e s s ) , and few er than 5 p er c e n t, o f any commissioned

rank made a grade

o f l e s s than C+.

A lso few er than 5 p er c e n t , o f th e non-com m issioned o f f ic e r s , th a t is ,

c o r p o r a ls and s e r g e a n ts , who correspond to th e su p e r v iso r y ranks in

in d u str y , made a grade o f l e s s than C-.

Only 1 1 .1 p e r c e n t, o f the c o r p o r a ls

made a grade o f l e s s than C and o n ly 7 .8 p e r c e n t , o f th e se r g e a n ts o f a l l g ra d es made a grade o f l e s s than C.

In o th e r words, over 90 p e r c e n t, o f

th e su p e r v iso r y ranks in th e Army o f 1917-19 were average or above in i n t e l l i g e n c e as measured by th e s e t e s t s . These fin d in g s were reco g n ized to some e x te n t in th e Army and th e t e s t s c o r e s were recommended fo r c o n s id e r a tio n when e n li s t e d men were b ein g c o n sid e r e d fo r prom otion to non-com m issioned and com m issioned ranks.

A

sta tem en t prepared in th e O ffic e o f th e Surgeon General and forwarded to the v a r io u s tr a in in g camps in d ic a t e s th e c o n s id e r a tio n t o be g iv e n .

A cony o f

t h i s statem en t appears on P la te I I 1 ( p . 20 ) .

Bingham, v 7 . V. and D a v is, W. T.2 On August 4 , 1922, W. V. Bingham and V7. T. D avis a d m in istered a d e r iv a t iv e o f th e Army Alpha t e s t , known a s th e Bureau o f P erson n el Besearch (C arn egie I n s t i t u t e o f Technology) T est VI to a group o f b u sin e ss p eop le a tte n d in g th e Annual S t a t i s t i c a l C onference, Babson I n s t i t u t e , W ellesley H i l l s , Mass.

Of t h e s e , 73 a ls o fu rn ish ed

f o r u s e as c r i t e r i a o f b u sin e ss s u c c e s s :

d a ta on a p e r so n a l

h is t o r y blank

42 were b u sin e ss e x e c u t iv e s ,

20 were salesm en , and 11 were u n c l a s s i f i e d .

1. 2.

Y erkes, op. c i t . , p. 424. W. V. Bingham and W. T. D a v is, I n t e lli g e n c e T est S cores and B u sin ess S u ccess, Jou rn al o f A pp lied P sy ch o lo g y , V ol. V III (November 1, 1 924), pp. 1 -2 2 .

20 424

MEMOIRS NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

iv „ i. x v ,

3 . T o a s s i s t i n s e l e c t i n g m e n o f s u p e r i o r m e n t a l a b i l i t y , w h o s h o u l d b o c o n s i d e r e d f o r p r o m o t i o n , a n d for t a s k s o f s p e c ia l re s p o n s ib ility . 4 . T o a id in th e s e g re g a tio n o r e lim in a tio n o f th e m e n ta lly d e fe c tiv e . M e n p o s s e s s in g a m o d e r a te d e g r e e o f E n g lis h lite r a c y ta k e g r o u p e x a m in a tio n a lp h a ; th e illite r a te s a n d fo re ig n t a k e g r o u p e x a m i n a t i o n b e t a ; m e n o f e x c e p tio n a lly lo w in te llig e n c e la t e r a r e e x a m in e d in d iv id u a lly .

[Here followed a statement of the basis for assignment of letter grades.] G r a d e s A a n d B a r e t h e g r a d e s ty p ic a ljy o b ta in e d b y o ffic e rs ; ( ' g r a d e s b y p r iv a te s ; D g r a d e s b y m e n o f in f e r io r in te llig e n c e ; E g ra d e s b y d u ll la b o re rs a n d b y m e n c ith e r fe e b le -m in d e d o r b o rd e rin g u p o n fe e b le m in d e d n e s s . T h e s e t e s t s d o n o t m e a s u r e o c c u p a t i o n a l f i t n e s s n o r e d u c a t i o n a l a c q u i r e m e n t ; t h e y m e a s u r e intellectual ability. T h is la tte r h a s b e e n B h o w n to b e im p o r ta n t in e s tim a tin g m ilita r y v a lu e , s in c e m a n y th o u s a n d ra n k in g s o f m e n b y t h e ir o ffic e rs a g r e e v e r y c lo s e ly w ith th e r e s u lts o f th e te s ts . P s y c h o lo g ic a l r a tin g s h o u ld b e s u p p le m e n te d b y k n o w le d g e o f p e rs o n a l a p p e a r a n c e , e n e r g y , m ilita r y k n o w le d g e p o s s e s s e d , e tc ., if u s e d a s a b a s is o f p ro m o tio n .

Because of the uneven value of the explanatory circulars issued in the camps it was decided to provide a standard form for general use. The following statement was then accordingly prepared in the office of the Surgeon General and forwarded to the camps with the request that it be used, with such changes as special conditions in any given camp might necessitate. EX PLA N A T IO N

OF I N T E L L I G E N C E

GRADES.

The purpose of the psychological tests.— I n n o p r e v i o u s w a r h a s m i l i t a r y e f f i c i e n c y d e p e n d e d s o m u c h u p o n t h e p r o m p t a n d c o m p le te u tiliz a tio n o f th e in te llig e n c e o f th e in d iv id u a l s o ld ie r. T h e p u rp o s e o f th e p s y c h o lo g ic a l te s ts is to g iv e a q u ic k a n d f a ir ly a c c u r a te c la s s ific a tio n o f th e m e n a c c o rd in g to g e n e ra l in te llig e n c e . T h e y a i d : (a ) I n th e d is c o v e ry o f m e n w h o so s u p e rio r a b ility re c o m m e n d s th e ir a d v a n c e m e n t. (ft) I n t h e p r o m p t s e g r e g a tio n i n D e v e lo p m e n t B a tta lio n s o f i n t e l l e c t u a l l y i n f e r io r m e n w h o s e i n a p t i t u d e w o u ld re ta rd th e tra in in g o f th e u n it. (c) I n b u ild in g o rg a n iz a tio n s o f e q u a l o r a p p ro p ria te s tre n g th . (< f) I n s e l e c t i n g s u i t a b l e m e n f o r v a r i o u s a r m y o c c u p a t i o n s o r f o r s p e c i a l t r a i n i n g i n t e c h n i c a l s c h o o l s . ( e) I n e l i m i n a t i n g t h e f e e b l e - m i n d e d . What the tests measure.— T h e t e s t s g i v e a r e l i a b l e i n d e x o f a m a n ' s ability to h a m , to th in k quickly a n d accurately, to analyse situations, to maintain a state o f m ental alertness, and to comprehend instructions. T h e y d o n o t m e a s u r e l o y a l t y , b r a v e r y , d e p e n d a b i l i t y , o r t h e e m o t i o n a l t r a i t s t h a t m a k e a m a n “ c a r r y o n . ” A m a n 's v a l u e t o t h e s e r v i c e i s m e a s u r e d b y h i s intelligence, plus other necessary qualifications. What the grades mean.— A l l m e n a r e c l a s s i f i e d b y t h e t e s t s a s A , B , C - j - , C , C — , D , D D — , o r E , a s f o l l o w s : A. Very superior intelligence.— H i g h o f f i c e r t y p e w h e n b a c k e d b y o t h e r n e c e s s a r y q u a l i t i e s . B. Superior intelligence.-— C o m m i s s i o n e d o f f i c e r t y p e a n d s p l e n d i d s e r g e a n t m a t e r i a l . C + . High average intelligence.— G o o d N. C. O . m a t e r i a l w i t h o c c a s i o n a l l y a m a n w o r t h y o f h i g h e r r a n k . C. Average intelligence.— G o o d p r i v a t e t y p e , w i t h s o m e f a i r t o g o o d X . C . O . m a t e r i a l . C — . Low average intelligence. — O r d i n a r y p r i v a t e . D . Inferior intelligence.— L a r g e l y i l l i t e r a t e o r f o r e i g n . V s u a l l y f a i r s o l d i e r F . b u t o f t e n s l o w i n l e a r n i n g . D — . Very inferior intelligence, b u t c o n s i d e r e d f i t f o r r e g u l a r s e r v i c e . E. Mental inferiority, j u s t i f y i n g r e c o m m e n d a t i o n f o r D e v e l o p m e n t B a t t a l i o n , s p e c i a l s e r v i c e o r g a n i z a t i o n s , r e j e c ­ tio n o r d is c h a rg e . The grades should be consulted. — (a) I n t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c a n d i d a t e s f o r o f f i c e r s ' t r a i n i n g s c h o o l s ; ( f t ) i n t h e s e l e c t i o n o f a l l n o n c o m m i s s i o n e d o f f i c e r s ; (c) i n b a l a n c i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n s : (d) i n p i c k i n g m e n f o r s p e c i a l d e t a i l ; (c) i n t h e c l a s s i ­ f i c a t i o n a n d t r a i n i n g o f m e n i n D e v e l o p m e n t B a t t a l i o n s ; i f) i n c o u r t e a s e s ; (g) i n t h e b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f m e n w h o a r e i n a n y w a y p e c u l i a r o r e x c e p t i o n a l , (ft) t h e t e s t s h a v e a ls o b e e n u s e d e f f e c t i v e l y i n t h e s e l e c t i o n o f n u r s e s , Y . M . C . A . p e rs o n n e l, e tc . Im portant points.

1 . C o m m is s io n e d o ffic e r m a te r ia l is fo u n d c h ie f ly in t h e A a n d I! g r o u p s . M e n g r a d in g C - f s h o u ld b e a c c e p te d fo r O . T . C . o n ly a fte r c a re fu l s c ru tin y . 2 . T h e m a jo r ity o f n o n c o m m is s io n e d o ffic e rs r a te A , 11, o r ( '+ . M e n b e lo w C - f s h o u ld n o t b e e n tr u s te d w ith c o m p lic a te d p a p e r w o rk . 3 . D m e n a r e r a r e ly s u ite d fo r ta s k s re q u ir in g s p e c ia l s k ill, fo re th o u g h t, re s o u rc e fu ln e s s o r s u s ta in e d a le rtn e s s . 4 . I t is u n s a f e to e x p e c t D o r E m e n to re a d a n d u n d e r s ta n d w r itte n d ir e c tio n s . 5 . O n ly h ig h s c o ro m e n s h o u ld b e s e le c te d fo r ta s k s th a t r e q u ir e q u ic k le a rn in g a n d r a p id a d ju s tm e n ts . 0 . A m a n ’s v a l u e t o t h e s e r v i c e s h o u l d n o t b e j u d g e d b y h i s i n t e l l i g e n c e r a t i n g a l o n e . J t r / e c / z b '?

o f

/fT /s T y d /a fe s & s

21

The s c o r e s were t r a n s la t e d in t o e q u iv a le n t v a lu e s on th e Army A lpha s c a le :

54 p e r c e n t, o f th e group sco red A, 29 p e r c e n t, scored B, and 17

p e r c e n t, scored 0+ or C.

T h is d i s t r i b u t i o n was s u b s t a n t ia lly th e same as

th e d is t r ib u t io n o f the s c o r e s o f th e Army o f f i c e r p e r so n n e l.

However,

th e r e seemed to be no c o r r e la t io n betw een t e s t sc o r e s and degree o f b u s in e s s su ccess. The au th ors drew from t h i s experim ent th e im portant c o n c lu s io n th a t th e r e i s p o s s ib ly a c r i t i c a l l e v e l o f i n t e l l i g e n c e fo r b u s in e s s e x e c u t iv e s , and t h a t , to be s u c c e s s f u l a s a b u s in e s s e x e c u t iv e , a p erson should be a t or above t h i s l e v e l o f i n t e l l i g e n c e .

Above t h i s c r i t i c a l l e v e l , however, added

i n t e l l i g e n c e d oes not seem to c o n t r ib u t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o a h ig h e r d egree o f s u c c e s s as a b u sin e ss e x e c u t iv e . Bingham and D a v is co n clu d ed : B e tte r c r i t e r i a o f s u c c e s s a re r e q u ir e d , a s w e ll a s more sev ere a n d thorough i n t e l l i g e n c e ex a m in a tio n s, in order to measure w ith accuracy the share which m en tal a le r t n e s s c o n tr ib u te s to accom­ p lish m en t in b u s in e s s . But th e e v id e n c e in hand su g g e sts th a t s u p e r io r it y in i n t e l l i g e n c e , above a c e r t a in minimum, c o n tr ib u te s r e l a t i v e l y l e s s to b u s in e s s s u c c e s s than d o es s u p e r io r it y in s e v e r a l n o n - in t e lle c t u a l t r a i t s o f p e r s o n a lit y .1

B i l l s , Marion A.2 Marion A. B i l l s ( c ir c a 1925) made an in t e n s iv e com parative stud y o f two ch a in s to r e managers who were o p e r a tin g under s u b s t a n t ia lly li k e con­ d i t i o n s o f m erchandise, ty p e s and numbers o f cu stom ers, volume o f b u s in e s s , s i z e o f l o c a l i t y , employment p ro b lem s, and s u p e r v is io n . In g en era l i n t e l l i g e n c e , a s measured by th e Bureau o f P erso n n el R esearch (C arnegie I n s t i t u t e o f T echnology) T e st VI, Manager A scored in th e 8 th d e c i l e , Manager B in th e 4 t h d e c i l e .

1. 2.

Bingham and D a v is, op. c i t . , p . 22. Marion A. B i l l s , P r e d ic tin g M an agerial S u c c e ss, Journal o f P erson n el R esearch, V ol. 4 , No. 2 (J u n e, 1 9 2 5 ), pp. 4 6 -5 1 .

22

In a W ill P r o f ile t e s t (adapted by th e Bureau o f P erso n n el R esearch, C arnegie I n s t i t u t e o f T ech n o lo g y ), Manager A scored h ig h e r in freedom from i n e r t i a , speed o f movement, a ssu ra n ce , motor im p u lsio n , and freedom from s e lf - c o n s c io u s n e s s , w h ile Manager B scored h ig h e r in p e r s e v e r a tio n , speed o f d e c i s i o n , m otor in h ib it io n , care fo r d e t a i l , and f l e x i b i l i t y . Manager B was in th e 9 th d e c i le and A in the 1 s t d e c i l e .

In f l e x i b i l i t y ,

In a S o c ia l R ela­

t i o n s t e s t d e v is e d by M. J . Ream, Manager A sco red 33 out o f a p o s s ib le 50, and Manager B scored 18. Throughout h is h is t o r y Manager A showed h im s e lf to be th e exp an sive s o c i a l ty p e , known and lik e d by c o lle a g u e s and th e community, but very e r r a t ic in r e s p e c t to m a te r ia l p h ases o f management.

For exam ple, he would

c o n s i s t e n t l y be out o f c e r t a in l i n e s and s a le s would f lu c t u a t e e r r a t i c a l l y ; on th e o th e r hand, h is em ployees were fond o f him and would go to him w ith t h e i r t r o u b le s .

Manager B was h ig h ly c o n s e r v a tiv e , p a id c a r e f u l a t t e n t io n

to d e t a i l s , had a d i s t i n c t a b i l i t y to organ ize h is s to r e on a s t a t i s t i c a l b a s is so th a t he was never out o f sto c k nor o v e r sto c k e d .

On the o th er hand,

w h ile r e sp e c te d by th o se who knew him, he was not sought a f t e r and few p eo p le in th e community knew him.

H is em ployees had c o n fid e n c e in him but would

r a r e ly tak e t h e i r tr o u b le s to him. Both were rated by t h e ir su p e rio rs in th e 9 th d e c i l e in resp ect to g e n e r a l v a lu e to th e firm ; but in t r a i t s , A was rated s u b s t a n t ia ll y h ig h er than B, th e s e t r a i t s b ein g work h a b it s , i n t e l l i g e n c e , appearance and manner, i n i t i a t i v e , c h a r a c te r , a b i l i t y to d evelop men, and le a d e r s h ip .

These r a tin g s

were d i s t i n c t l y s u b je c tiv e and a c t u a lly in many o f them Manager B e x c e lle d Manager A, e s p e c i a l l y in p e r so n a l work h a b it s . Manager A was o f th e b r i l l i a n t , h ig h ly f lu c t u a t in g ty p e , ten d in g toward extrem es e i t h e r h ig h or low .

He would be u n d erstock ed in one

23

departm ent and o v ersto ck ed in a n o th er and h is n et p r o f i t s would f lu c t u a t e w id e ly , whereas Manager B was a stea d y man who had few , i f any, mark downs and who was r a r e ly u n d erstock ed or o v ersto ck ed . The g e n e r a l method o f o p e r a tio n o f th e s e two in d iv id u a ls might have been p r e d ic te d from t h e ir p sych ograp hs, which in d ic a te d th a t Manager B would show h im s e lf to be th e s t e a d ie r and more p r o f it a b le manager.

Such a p r e ­

d i c t i o n would have proved to be th e f a c t , as fou r y e a r s a f t e r th e study Manager B was showing b e t t e r n et p r o f i t s . Dr. B i l l s con clu d ed : The c a se method r e q u ir in g a s i t d oes e x h a u stiv e stud y o f a few in d iv id u a ls from a l l a n g le s r a th e r than th e stu d y o f a la r g e number o f in d iv id u a ls from a s in g le a n g le h a s, we b e li e v e , a u se in th e f i e l d o f a p p lie d normal p sy ch o lo g y j u s t a s i t has in th e f i e l d s o f abnormal p sy ch o lo g y and m e d ic in e .1

O'Connor, Johnson

p

Johnson O'Connor, w orking on a Wertheim F ello w sh ip fo r th e B etterm ent o f I n d u s tr ia l R e la tio n s h ip s a t Harvard U n iv e r s ity ( c i r c a 1 9 2 6 ), made an extended stud y o f e x e c u tiv e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

In t h i s study he u sed a number

o f t e s t s th a t he had d e v ise d or experim ented w ith w h ile w ith th e General E le c t r ic Company a t Lynn, M a ssa ch u setts.

The g e n e r a l c o n c lu s io n s th a t he

reached we r e : 1.

That range o f v o ca b u la ry appears to c o r r e la t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y w ith p o s it io n on th e e x e c u tiv e la d d e r .

Foremen have a la r g e r vo ca b u la ry

than o p e r a tiv e em p loyees; m anagers, than foremen; and e x e c u t iv e s than m anagers. 2.

1. 2.

S u c c e s s fu l e x e c u t iv e s seem to have many a p t it u d e s .

B i l l s , op. c i t . , p . 47. Johnson O'Connor, P sy ch o m etrics.

24

3.

S u c c e s s fu l e x e c u tiv e s have an o b j e c t iv e or ex trem ely o b j e c t iv e p e r s o n a lit y a s measured by a r e v is io n o f th e K en t-B o sa n o ff word r e a c tio n t e s t .

Salesm en in g e n e r a l are ex trem ely o b j e c t iv e ,

e x e c u t iv e s are o b j e c t iv e , p r o f e s s io n a l men are s u b j e c t iv e , and s c i e n t i s t s are ex trem ely s u b j e c t iv e .

Foremen, f o r exam ple, who

are o b j e c t iv e are more s u c c e s s f u l than foremen who are s u b j e c t iv e . On t h i s p o in t , O'Connor sa y s: T h is g e n e r a liz a t io n i s th e r e s u lt o f a la r g e number o f sep a ra te ex p erim en ts. One, which i t must s u f f i c e to d e s c r ib e h e r e , was to measure a group o f foremen in a fa c to r y where th e r e was an organ ized p la n o f employee r e p r e s e n ta tio n . The fo llo w in g p r a c t ic e was t y p ic a l : any worker who f e l t th a t a foreman had been u n f a ir in some d e c is io n co u ld appeal to a com m ittee o f s i x men and have th e forem an's d e c is io n r e -d e c id e d , e i t h e r in fa v o r o f th e worker or in fa v o r o f th e foreman. We d iv id e d th e forem en grou p , on th e b a s is o f th e p e r s o n a lit y t e s t r e s u lt s , in to an o b j e c t iv e and a s u b j e c t iv e group. On g o in g back over t h e i r record s a s foremen, we found th a t th e s u b j e c t iv e foremen had had on th e average tw ic e a s many co m p la in ts made a g a in s t t h e ir d e c is io n s a s had th e ob­ j e c t i v e group. Furtherm ore, when we look ed up each d e c is io n which had been made by th e committee o f s i x , we d is c o v e r e d th a t 80 p e r c e n t, o f th e d e c is io n s o f the s u b j e c t iv e forem en had been r e v e r se d , w h ile 70 p er c e n t, o f the d e c is io n s o f th e o b j e c t iv e foremen had been con firm ed. I t i s a p p a ren tly d i f f i c u l t f o r th e s u b j e c t iv e man i n s t i n c t i v e l y to put h im s e lf in th e p la c e o f a n o th er in d iv id u a l and make a d e c is io n which seems f a i r to him or to o th e r s , whereas th e o b je c tiv e man alm ost i n s t i n c t i v e l y s e e s a n o th e r 's p o in t o f v ie w .1 4.

S u c c e s s fu l e x e c u tiv e s seem to have an a p titu d e fo r a cco u n tin g as measured by a number com parison t e s t . a p tit u d e .

Even foremen need t h i s

O'Connor s a y s:

Even in la r g e o r g a n iz a tio n s where th ere a re s p e c ia liz e d p ro d u ctio n f o llo w e r s , s to c k c le r k s , and tim e -k e e p e r s, so much c l e r i c a l work s t i l l d e v o lv e s upon th e foreman th a t he i s l o s t w ith o u t some a p titu d e fo r i t . 2 5.

S u c c e s s fu l e x e c u tiv e s seem to have a d e cid e d a p titu d e fo r t h e ir f i r s t p o s it io n .

1. 2.

O'Connor, og. c i t . , pp. x x v i, x x v ii. I b i d ., p . xxx.

25

O'Connor co n clu d es th a t p s y c h o lo g ic a l t e s t s can toe o f d i s t i n c t h e lp in th e jo b o f s e l e c t i n g e x e c u tiv e p e o p le o f a l l ranks, a lth o u g h p e r s o n a l h is t o r y and th e judgment o f th e s e l e c t o r in e v it a b ly w i l l con­ t r ib u t e an im portant p a r t.

In th e ch o o sin g o f forem en, t e s t s should toe

e s p e c i a l l y u s e f u l: A second sphere in which t e s t s c o r e s o f in d iv id u a ls are u sed as a g u id e i s in th e s e l e c t i o n o f em ployees fo r prom otion. It is d i f f i c u l t t o p ic k from a group o f w orkers th a t p a r t ic u la r in d i­ v id u a l who should toe the e x e c u t iv e , f o r s u c c e s s in bench work or a t a m echanical jo b or in a c l e r i c a l p o s i t i o n d o es not alw ays foreshadow eq u al s u c c e s s in th e h a n d lin g o f e x e c u tiv e r e s p o n s i­ b i l i t i e s . An e x c e lle n t m echanic o f t e n makes a poor e x e c u t iv e ; and such a s k i l l e d craftsm an once t r ie d in an e x e c u tiv e c a p a c ity can n ever s a t i s f a c t o r i l y toe retu rn ed t o th e bench. One who f a i l s a s an e x e c u tiv e i s u s u a lly p erm an en tly l o s t a s a workman.1

Beckman, R. 0. and L ev in e, M ichael3 R. 0 . Beckman and M ichael L evine ( c i r c a 1 9 3 0 ), a t th e req u est o f th e C in c in n a ti C iv il S e r v ic e Commission, a d m in istered th e A llp o r t A-S R e a c tio n Study, th e Laird P er so n a l In v en to ry C-2 Study, and a " fo llo w in g d ir e c tio n s " t e s t to a group o f 29 e x e c u t iv e s in th e C ity government and to a group o f 31 w ater m eter rea d ers to d eterm in e w hether any o f th e s e d e v ic e s would d i f f e r e n t i a t e betw een th e two g ro u p s. The e x e c u tiv e s - c o n s is t in g o f bureau c h i e f s and departm ent heads were rated tw ic e toy th e c i t y manager ( c o e f f i c i e n t o f r e l i a b i l i t y o f r a tin g 0 .9 4 ).

The w ater m eter rea d ers were a l s o ra ted toy one p erso n . The A-S R ea ctio n Study a lo n e seemed to d i f f e r e n t i a t e betw een th e

two grou p s.

The d if f e r e n c e in mean s c o r e s was 1 8 .0 (sta n d a rd e r r o r o f

d if f e r e n c e 4 .6 ) and i s p robably s i g n i f i c a n t .

1. 2.

The e x e c u t iv e s scored h ig h e r -

O'Connor, 0£ . c i t . , pp. x x x i i , x x x i i i . R. 0. Beckman and M ichael L ev in e , S e le c t in g E x e c u tiv e s , P erson n el J o u r n a l, V ol. V III, Ho. 6 (A p r il, 1 9 3 0 ), pp. 4 1 5 -2 0 .

26

tow ards th e ascen d an t end o f th e s c a le .

The c o r r e la t io n betw een th e e f f i ­

c ie n c y r a tin g s and th e A-S E e a c tio n Study s c o r e s was 0 .4 1 .

Uhrbrock, E. S. and E ich ard son , M. W.1 E. S. Uhrbrock and M. W. E ichardson a d m in istered a b a tte r y o f n in e t e s t s - 820 item s - and a p e r s o n a l h is t o r y record t o 163 s u p e r v is o r s in two 2 -h o u r t e s t p e r io d s in an attem p t t o d ev elo p a method o f d is c o v e r in g s u it a b le su p e r v is o r y m a te r ia l among n o n -su p e r v iso r s. a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i.

The t e s t s a d m in istered w ere:

M o d ified Army Alpha (Bureau T est V I). S tr o n g 's V o c a tio n a l I n te r e s t B lank. M cC a ll's M u lti-M en tal T e s t, Form A. M innesota Paper Form Board T e s t, S e r ie s A. M innesota Paper Form Board T e s t, S e r ie s BS e le c te d item s from T h u rsto n e's P e r s o n a lit y S ch ed u le. M u ltip le -C h o ic e Company In form ation T e s t. T ru e-F a lse Company In form ation T e st. C om pletion Form, Company In form ation T e s t.

Each s u p e r v is o r was a l s o g iv e n a m ed ica l ex a m in a tio n c o n ta in in g ap p roxim ately 50 ite m s. T e n ta tiv e answers t o th r e e main q u e s tio n s were so u g h t: 1.

What a re th e p e r s o n a l h is t o r y item s th a t d i s t in g u is h th e "best" from th e "poor" su p e r v iso r s?

2.

Are th e r e s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e s in th e resp o n ses o f th e two groups t o th e t e s t m a teria l?

3.

Are th e r e s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e s in p h y s ic a l f i t n e s s betw een th e two groups? To o b ta in a c r i t e r i o n , each s u p e r v iso r was ra ted by th r e e methods

by fo u r su p e r in te n d e n ts or ju d g e s , each o f whom knew th e s u p e r v is o r s whom he rated w e ll enough t o r a te them on " su p ervisoxy a b i l i t y , " w hich was

1.

E. S Uhrbrock and M. W. E ich ard son , Item A n a ly s is , P er so n n el J o u r n a l, V ol. X II, No. 3 (O ctob er, 1 9 3 3 ), pp. 1 4 1 -5 4 . See a l s o , Stew art M. Lowiy, Which Men W ill Make th e B est Foremen?, American Management A s s o c ia t io n , P ro d u ctio n S e r i e s , No. 127, 1940, pp. 3 -1 2 .

27

d efin ed , a s "handling men and g e t t in g out th e work." names was prepared fo r each ju d g e.

A l i s t o f fo r ty -fiv e

The names o f f i v e s u p e r v is o r s - known

t o a l l th e ju d g es - appeared on a l l l i s t s so th a t th e r a t in g s o f a l l super­ v i s o r s co u ld he s u it a b ly ranked. The methods o f r a tin g were:

ord er o f m e r it, p a ire d com parison,

and a g ra p h ic r a tin g s c a le . In th e "order o f m erit" method, each ju d ge arranged h i s l i s t o f f o r t y - f i v e in an ord er o f r e l a t iv e m erit - from b e s t t o p o o r e s t. In th e "paired comparison" method th e l i s t f o r each ju d ge was d iv id e d in to fo u r groups o f te n su p e r v is o r s ea ch (grou p s A, B, C, D) and one group (K) o f f i v e (th e su p e r v iso r s known t o a l l j u d g e s ) .

W ithin each group

ea ch s u p e r v is o r was rated as b e t t e r or p o o rer than every o th e r s u p e r v is o r . A ls o each member o f each group A, B, C, and D was compared w ith each member o f group K - a t o t a l o f 390 p a ired com parisons f o r each ju d g e. In th e "graphic r a tin g sc a le " method, each ju d ge ra ted each super­ v i s o r o f h is l i s t

in resp ect to te n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s :

f l e x i b i l i t y , p o s s i­

b i l i t i e s fo r fu tu r e grow th, q u a lity in work o u tp u t, q u a n tity o f work, t r a in in g , p la n n in g a b i l i t y , a n a ly t ic a l a b i l i t y , le a d e r s h ip , c o o p e r a tiv e n e s s , and te a c h in g a b i l i t y . Each method was u sed in d ep en d en tly o f th e o th e r s . To combine th e r a tin g s a l l were reduced t o rank o rd er and the tw elv e ranks fo r each s u p e r v iso r were averaged t o show a c o n s o lid a te d rank. So th a t the r e l i a b i l i t y o f th e r a t in g s might be ch eck ed , th ey were d iv id e d in t o two grou p s, each r e p r e se n tin g h a l f th e ju d g e s . (P ea rso n u n co rrec ted ) was 0 .8 0 t 0 .0 2 .

The c o r r e la t io n

The c o r r e la t io n s betw een th e s e v e r a l

methods o f r a tin g were even h ig h er. The su p e r v is o r s were d iv id e d in to th r e e grou p s:

upper (48 super­

v i s o r s ) , m iddle (68 s u p e r v is o r s ), and lo w er (4 7 s u p e r v is o r s ) .

28

F if t e e n item s o f p e r s o n a l h is t o r y d ata were s tu d ie d .

Only fo u r o f

th e s e f i f t e e n item s were s i g n i f i c a n t in d is t in g u is h in g betw een th e low er group and th e medium and upper gro u p s.

These were:

y ea rs o f s c h o o lin g ,

a b i l i t y to read b lu e p r i n t s , a g e , and m ilit a r y s e r v ic e . C o lle g e t r a in in g showed no s ig n if ic a n t advantage o v er h ig h sc h o o l t r a in in g , but th o se w ith n in e or more y ea rs o f sc h o o lin g were d e f i n i t e l y b e t t e r than th o se w ith e ig h t or few er y e a r s . M ilita r y s e r v ic e and rank a t t a in e d were s i g n i f i c a n t . The b e t t e r s u p e r v is o r s were most l i k e l y to score fa v o ra b ly in s e v e r a l or a l l o f th e fo u r s i g n i f i c a n t p e r so n a l h is t o r y item s. Of th e 820 t e s t item s o n ly 85 were found to d i f f e r e n t i a t e d e f i n i t e l y betw een the upper, m id d le, and lo w er grou p s. D i f f i c u l t t e s t forms y ie ld e d more v a lid item s than ea sy form s, but i t was s u ita b le d i f f i c u l t y ,

not d i f f i c u l t y p er s e . th a t determ ined v a l i d i t y .

Company in fo rm a tio n m a te r ia l was more f r u i t f u l than purchased t e s t s . The c o r r e la t io n betw een th e t o t a l sco re o f a l l t e s t s (e x c e p t S tr o n g 's V o ca tio n a l I n t e r e s t Blank) and th e c r i t e r i o n ( r a t in g by ju d g es) was + 0 .4 9 1 0 .0 4 ; o f th e 85 s i g n i f i c a n t item s i t was + 0 .7 1 i o . 0 3 . The m ed ical ex a m in a tio n s were conducted by one p h y s ic ia n .

There

were no s ig n if ic a n t r e l a t io n s betw een th e v a r io u s p h y s ic a l item s and th e r a tin g but g e n e r a l p h y s ic a l c o n d it io n - w ith age h eld co n sta n t - showed a s l i g h t p o s it iv e c o r r e la t io n . Uhrbrock and E ich ard son con clu d e th a t 5 Company in fo rm a tio n m a t e r ia l, s p e c i a l l y prepared fo r th e pu rp oses o f t h i s stu d y, showed a g r e a t e r p ro p o rtio n o f v a lid item s than purchased t e s t s . This l a s t fin d in g le n d s c o n fir m a tio n to the b e l i e f th a t p s y c h o lo g ic a l t e s t i n g , i f i t i s to be s u c c e s s f u l in an in d u s t r ia l s i t u a t i o n , must

29

p roceed a lo n g th e l i n e s o f item a n a ly s is o f t e s t m a te r ia l in which s p e c i a l l y prepared company in fo rm a tio n d a ta p la y a le a d in g p a r t . 1 The stu d y r e s u lt e d in th e w r itin g o f c o n f id e n t ia l stan d ard s fo r th e fu tu r e d is c o v e r y o f men in th e ranks who are o f su p e rv iso ry c a l ib e r . P er so n a l h is t o r y , sco re on th e new ly d ev elo p ed "Test fo r th e S e le c t io n o f S u p e r v iso r s," and p h y s ic a l f i t n e s s w i l l be ta k en in to c o n s id e r a t io n .2

A c h i l l e s , P. S. and S c h u ltz , R. S . 3 S c h u ltz , R. S . 4 P. S. A c h ille s and R. S. S ch u ltz ( c i r c a 1933) a d m in istered a b a tte x y o f p e r s o n a lit y and i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t s t o 556 new a g e n ts and 115 a s s i s t a n t managers o f a l i f e in su ra n ce company. a. b. c.

d. e.

The b a tte r y c o n s is te d o f:

The Beckman R e v isio n fo r B u sin e ss Use o f th e A llp o r t A-SStudy. The sh o rt Root I n tr o v e r s io n -E x tr o v e r s io n t e s t . The Bureau T est VI f o r m ental a l e r t n e s s . The P r e sse y S en io r C l a s s i f i c a t i o n T e s t. The 0 ‘ Rourke Vocabulary T est ( t o some salesm en o n ly ). The Strong V o ca tio n a l I n t e r e s t A n a ly s is Blank. A s p e c i a l l y d e v is e d S a le s O b jectio n s t e s t ( t o somesalesm en o n ly ).

E x is t in g t e s t s were u sed in th e in v e s t ig a t i o n in p r e fe r e n c e to d e v e lo p in g s p e c ia l t e s t s , and th e s t a t i s t i c a l treatm en t o f th e d a ta was made a s sim p le a s p o s s i b l e .

C o n clu sio n s were based on c r i t i c a l sco re ran ges,

p e r c e n ta g e com parisons, and com parisons o f means.

C o r r e la tio n tech n iq u es

were d isc a r d e d a s b ein g u n s u it a b le . The a s s i s t a n t managers in v e s t ig a t e d were o f two ty p e s - th ose p r in c i p a l ly concerned w ith f i e l d t r a in in g and th o se concerned w ith s a le s

1. 2. 3.

4.

R. 3 Uhrbrock and M. W. R ichardson, Item A n a ly s is , P erso n n el J ou rn al. V o l. X II, No. 3 (O ctober, 1 9 3 3 ), p . 15 0 . I b id . , p . 154. P. S. A c h ill e s and R. S. S c h u ltz , C h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f L if e Insurance Salesm en, P erso n n el J o u r n a l, V o l. X II, No. 5 (February, 1 9 3 4 ), pp. 2 6 0 -6 3 . R. S. S c h u ltz , Stan dardized T e s ts & S t a t i s t i c a l P roced ures in S e le c t io n o f L ife In su ran ce S a le s P e r so n n e l, J o u rn a l o f .Applied P sych ology. V o l. XX, No. 5 (O ctober, 1 9 3 6 ), pp. 5 5 3 -6 6 .

30

prom otion and s u p e r v is io n .

The form er ( t r a in in g ) group sco red h ig h e r than

th e l a t t e r in g e n e r a l i n t e l l i g e n c e , and low er in ascendance. The a s s i s t a n t managers a s a group scored h ig h er in th e m ental a le r t n e s s t e s t and low er in th e A llp o r t A-S and Root I-E t e s t s than th e new a g e n ts d id .

The average s c o r e s are shown in Table II - 2. TABLE II - 2 Summary o f S co res Made by L ife In su ra n ce1 Salesm en and A s s is t a n t Managers in T ests Average S cores A-S Study __

Salesm en A s s ' t . Managers

4 .3 1 2 .1 2

I-E T est

Bureau T est VI

4 .6 1 1 .8 8

6 2 .9 7 3 .9

In the A-S and I-E t e s t s th e a s s i s t a n t managers as a group scored about the same as th e lo w -p ro d u ctio n s e c t io n o f th e new a g e n ts . A method o f p r o g r e s s iv e s e l e c t i o n o f a s s i s t a n t managers was develop ed which in v o lv e d a. number o f p r o g r e s s iv e s te p s or h u r d le s , th e s t e p s as a group r e s u lt in g in a p a tte r n o f q u a lif i c a t io n s .

The p e r so n a l in te r v ie w

was r eta in e d and th e v a r io u s d e v ic e s were used to g iv e more o b j e c t iv e d a ta to th e in te r v ie w e r . There seem to have been c e r t a in o u tsta n d in g fe a tu r e s in t h i s method: 1.

S u b je c tiv e elem en ts were m inim ized.

2.

Each in d iv id u a l was view ed in th e l i g h t o f h is e n t ir e background as w e ll as o f h is s p e c i f i c c h a r a c t e r is t ic s .

3.

F a ilu r e in any one s te p d id not n e c e s s a r ily r e s u lt in e lim in a t io n , but r a th e r was an in d ic a t io n f o r a need fo r developm ent and p o s s ib ly u t i l i z a t i o n in a more e f f e c t i v e s it u a t io n .

1.

Adapted from S c h u ltz , 0£ . c i t .

31

Among th e advantages o f such a method might he th e p r o v is io n o f s u g g e s tio n s and m a te r ia l fo r t r a in in g men and a more o b j e c t iv e and recog­ n iz e d a n a ly s is o f th e requirem ents o f th e job o f agen t or a s s i s t a n t manager and th e ways o f q u a lif y in g fo r such p o s it io n s . 1.

Such a method d o es not li m it th e u se o f o th e r m ethods o f s e le c t io n .

2.

The procedure aims to be h e lp f u l and c o n s t r u c t iv e to th e in d iv id ­ u a ls concerned.

3.

The r e q u is it e s may be m od ified w ith ou t a f f e c t i n g o th e r sta n d a rd s.

4.

Those who are l e a s t l i k e l y to su cceed may be more a c c u r a te ly e lim in a te d .

5.

A cu m u lative p a tte r n fo r each in d iv id u a l can be d e v e lo p e d . Dr. S c h u ltz summarized th e study as f o llo w s :

T e s ts fo r g e n e r a l i n t e l l i g e n c e , e x tr o v e r s io n , ascen d an ce and i n t e r e s t s were ad m in istered to 556 new a g e n ts and 115 a s s i s t a n t m anagers. Comparison o f r e s u lt s w ith jo b oerforraance r a tin g s and s a l e s p ro d u ctio n record s do not re v e a l d ir e c t l i n e a r r e la ­ t io n s h ip s . A method o f d eterm in in g fa v o ra b le sc o r e a r e a s shows s i g n i f i c a n t r e la t io n s n ip w ith v a r io u s c r i t e r i a o f s u c c e s s . 1 . (a) E x tr o v e r sio n and ascendance to a m oderate d eg ree and i n t e l l i g e n c e above th e tw e n tie th p e r c e n t ile are most p r e d ic t iv e o f su c c e s s in s e l l i n g . (b ) Age, ed u ca tio n e x p e r ie n c e , r a c ia l s to c k , and le n g th o f s e r v ic e do not show r e l i a b l e tr e n d s . 2 . (a) ?/ith a s s i s t a n t managers the i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t in combi­ n a tio n w ith a p e r so n a l d a ta sco re i s most s i g n i f i c a n t . (b) A method o f " p r o g r e ssiv e s e le c t io n ," d ev elo p ed in accord an ce w ith p roced u res o f c l i n i c a l p sy ch o lo g y , i s proposed as a p r a c t ic a l a id in s e l e c t i o n and t r a in in g o f a s s i s t a n t m a n agers.1

1.

S c h u ltz , 0£ . c i t . , p . 565.

32

C le e to n , Glen U. and Mason, C harles W. 1 Mason, C. W.2 C leeto n and Mason p r e se n te d c o n c lu s io n s th e y reached about th e measurement o f e x e c u tiv e a b i l i t y and th e developm ent o f a p r o g n o s tic t e s t o f such a b i l i t y .

They c a r e f u l ly d e fin e d th e e x e c u tiv e :

For our p u rp oses we must assume th a t an e x e c u t iv e i s a p erson who i s r e s p o n s ib le f o r th e e f f o r t s o f o t h e r s , makes d e c is io n s in q u e s tio n s b oth a s to p o lic y and p r a c t ic e , and e x e r c is e s a u th o r ity in s e e in g th a t d e c is io n s are c a r r ie d o u t. T h is d e f i ­ n i t i o n e lim in a te s th e s u p e r v is o r , who i s r e s p o n s ib le fo r th e e f f o r t s o f o th e r s , but who i s not p e r m itte d t o make d e c is io n s , and members o f th e Board o f D ir e c to r s who may d e c id e th e p o lic y , but who are w ithout a u th o r ity t o o v e r se e i t s e x e c u t io n .3 The c o n c lu s io n s were based p a r t ly on a number o f fragm entary s tu d ie s by W. P. Kimble, W. D. S c o t t , C. S. Yoakum, H. G. Kenagy, and B. 7 . Moore and la r g e ly on a stu d y made at th e U n iv e r s it y o f B u ffa lo by M ason.4 M ason's work seemed to le a d t o th e fo llo w in g r e s u lt s : 1.

C o lle g e stu d e n ts s e le c t e d f o r e x e c u tiv e a b i l i t y , when conpared w ith o th e r stu d e n ts s e le c t e d f o r s a l e s or t e c h n ic a l a b i l i t y and w ith an u n c l a s s i f i e d group o f c o l le g e s tu d e n ts , rank c o n s is t e n t ly above th e u n c l a s s i f i e d group in fo u r t e s t s - rea so n in g in a r ith m e tic , judgment in e s tim a tin g , sym bolic r e la t io n s h i p s , and word com parisons - and above th e s a le s and t e c h n ic a l groups in one or two t e s t s .

2.

The same " execu tive" stu d e n ts sco re much h ig h er than th e o th e r s in fo u r r a t in g s - h e a lth and d r iv e , judgment o f f a c t , r e a c tio n to human q u a l i t i e s , le a d e r sh ip - in c lu d in g a t o t a l o f 33 item s.

1. 3. 3. 4.

G len U. C leeto n and C harles W. Mason, E x e c u tiv e A b l lit y - I t s D isco v ery and D evelopm ent. C. W. Mason, The P o s s i b i l i t i e s o f an Execut iv e Apt itu d e T e s t . C le e to n and Mason, op. c i t . . pp. 3 , 4. Mason, op. c i t .

33

In consequence o f t h i s stu d y , a t e s t o f e x e c u tiv e a b i l i t y was d e v e l­ oped and a d m in istered to th r e e groups from e x e c u tiv e , s a le s , and t e c h n ic a l fie ld s . C leeto n and M ason's g e n e r a l c o n c lu s io n s seemed to be th a t e x e c u tiv e s a s a group a re s u p e r io r in m ental a b i l i t y , but a re not n e c e s s a r ily a s b r i l l i a n t as s p e c i a l i s t s might b e.

A ls o , th a t e x e c u t iv e s a re broad gauge p e o p le w ith a

wide range o f i n t e r e s t s and a b i l i t i e s . In 1935, C leeto n and Mason p u b lis h e d , a s a p r o g n o stic in stru m en t, a t e s t o f e x e c u tiv e a b i l i t y 1 b a sed on M ason's stu d y .

T h is t e s t d i f f e r s some­

what from th e one o r i g i n a l l y d ev elo p e d , and c o n ta in s th e f o llo w in g s u b t e s t s : T est " " " " " " "

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

General In fo rm a tio n T e s t. A r ith m e tic a l R easoning T e s t . Judgment in E stim a tin g . Sym bolic R e la t io n s h ip s . Reading Com prehension. V ocabulary. I n t e r e s t s T e s t. T y p ic a l R e a c tio n s T e s t . P erso n a l In fo rm a tio n B lank.

These au th ors have p rep ared t a b le s o f norms fo r g en era l e x e c u tiv e a p titu d e ; s a l e s a p titu d e ; e n g in e e r in g , r e se a r c h , and te c h n ic a l a p titu d e ; and a cco u n tin g a p titu d e . While C leeto n and Mason s p e c i f i c a l l y excluded s u p e r v iso r s from t h e i r stu d y i t i s p o s s i b l e th a t s u p e r v is o r s , who, in p a rt at l e a s t , are e x e c u tiv e s in th e making, may have c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s l i k e th o s e o f e x e c u tiv e s but in l e s s d eg ree.

Smith, Mapheus and Nystrom, W. C .3 Smith and Nystrom ( c i r c a 1937) in v e s t ig a t e d th e s o c ia l p a r t ic i p a t io n

1. 2.

D is t r ib u te d by th e P s y c h o lo g ic a l C orp oration , 522 F if t h Avenue, New York, N. Y. Mapheus Smith and W. C. Nystrom, A Study o f S o c ia l P a r t ic ip a t io n and o f L e isu r e Time o f L eaders and N on-Leaders, The Journal o f A pp lied P sy c h o lo g y . V o l. XXI, No. 3 (J u n e, 1 9 3 7 ), pp. 251-59.

34

and u se o f l e i s u r e tim e o f le a d e r s and n o n -lea d ers in th ree Kansas h ig h s c h o o ls . To choose th e l i s t s

o f le a d e r s and n o n -le a d e r s, each te a c h e r in the

s c h o o ls was asked to nom inate a number o f o u tsta n d in g le a d e r s and an eq u a l number o f n o n -le a d e r s , u s in g h is own c r i t e r i a and working in d ep en d en tly o f the o th e r te a c h e r s . lis t

Out o f th e s e nom inations a l i s t o f 40 le a d e r s and a

o f 40 n o n -le a d e r s were p rep a red .

Wo stu d en t on e i t h e r l i s t had been

nom inated fo r th e o th e r l i s t by any te a c h e r . Each stu d en t was g iv e n a q u e stio n n a ir e on th e u se o f h is tim e to f i l l o u t, and a ls o ample working tim e and any n ecessa ry a s s i s t a n c e . The r e s u l t s o f th e stu d y seem to have been as f o l l o w s : 1. L eaders were betw een th r e e and fou r tim es a s a c t iv e a s n o n -le a d e r s in p a r t ic i p a t in g in e x tr a c u r r ic u la .r a c t i v i t i e s , b o th in th e number o f a c t i v i t i e s p er p u p il and the number o f p u p ils p er a c t i v i t y . Leaders g a in ed s p e c ia l r e c o g n itio n in e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c t i v i t i e s on an a v era g e o f tw ice ea ch , aid s u b s t a n t ia lly no n o n -le a d e r s gain ed su ch r e c o g n it io n .

However, in d iv id u a l le a d e r s d id not r e ­

c e iv e s p e c ia l r e c o g n itio n in every a c t i v i t y th a t th ey u n d erto o k . While each le a d e r averaged p a r t ic ip a t io n in 6 .8 a c t i v i t i e s , no one le a d e r was e s p e c i a l l y rec o g n ized , as by h o ld in g o f f i c e , more th an f iv e t im e s , which in d ic a te d th at each le a d e r was a ls o e i t h e r a non­ le a d e r or a fo llo w e r in s e v e r a l a c t i v i t i e s . 2.

The le a d e r s ob tain ed s p e c ia l r e c o g n itio n more o fte n in i n t e l l e c t u a l and p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s than they d id in a c t i v i t i e s such a s a t h l e t i c s and m usic.

3.

The tim e sp en t in v a r io u s o u tsid e a c t i v i t i e s v a ried la r g e ly betw een th e le a d e r s and th e n o n -le a d e r s .

The two groups were s u b s t a n t ia ll y

35

a l i k e in the p ercen ta g e o f tim e spent in s le e p , stu d y , and work, but th e tim e spent in le i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s was tw ic e a s g r e a t fo r th e le a d e r s as fo r the n o n -le a d e r s.

A ll o th e r tim e was c o n sid ered

unaccounted f c r and in clud ed th e tim e spent in s c h o o ls and t h e ir m ea ls, t h is amount b ein g s l i g h t l y l e s s f o r le a d e r s th an f o r non­ le a d e r s . The in v e s t ig a t o r s con clud es The f a i l u r e of n o n -le a d e r s to report so much l e is u r e tim e as le a d e r s and th e g r e a t e r amount o f time u n rep orted by n o n -le a d e r s i s a l s o r e la te d to a h y p o th e sis con cern in g le a d e r s h ip . Perhaps th e f a c t th a t le a d e r s h ip r e s t s on p la n n in g , f o r e s ig h t , and a b i l i t y c l e a r ly to see the p r a c t ic a l r e la t io n s h ip s betw een ob­ j e c t s i s r e f le c t e d in a more o rd erly l i f e , a more o r d e r ly a r ­ rangement o f id e a s , and a b e t t e r memory fo r d e t a i l s . I t not o n ly seems l i k e l y th a t s u p e r io r it y in th e se t r a i t s may be an im portant f a c t o r in le a d e r s h ip , but th a t su c c e s s in le a d e r s h ip accom panies sharpening o f th e memory, makes th e arrangem ent o f id e a s more o r d e r ly , and makes the whole l i f e o r g a n iz a tio n more in te g r a t e d and e f f i c i e n t . E ith e r type o f r e la t io n s h ip would go f a r to account fo r th e d if f e r e n c e betw een le a d e r and non­ le a d e r re p o r ts on u se o f t im e .1 M itc h e ll, J . H.a J . H. M itc h e ll ( c i r c a. 1938) made a com parative i n v e s t ig a t i o n o f th r e e groups o f em ployees in the s p e c ia lt y s a le s f i e l d in England - managers, "London" s u p e r v is o r s , and salesm en . A p r e lim in a r y stud y o f s a le s managers in d ic a te d two broad c l a s s i ­ fic a tio n s :

th e f i e l d type and th e o f f ic e ty p e .

The f i e l d ty p e o f s a le s

manager was a ra th er g e n ia l , h ea rty chap who d is li k e d d e t a i l s , made poor r e p o r ts , lik e d to g e t out in the f i e l d w ith the "boys," and co u ld push p la n s th rough to e x e c u tio n .

1. 2.

The o f f i c e type was not p a r t ic u la r ly a t ea se w ith

Smith and Nystrom, op. c i t . , p . 353. J. E. M it c h e ll, An experim ent in the S e le c t io n o f S a le s Managers, N a tio n a l I n s t i t u t e o f I n d u s tr ia l P sych ology, O ccu pational P s y c h o lo g y , V ol. X II, Wo. 4 , 1938, pp. 3 0 8 -1 8 .

36

sa lesm en , p r e fe r r e d to sta y in s id e and a tten d to ro u tin e m a tte r s, subm itted e x c e lle n t r e p o r ts , and cou ld d e v is e good p la n s but found i t d i f f i c u l t to put them in to e x e c u tio n . Most o f th e s u c c e s s f u l managers were o f th e

fie ld

typ e and most o f th e u n su c c e ss fu l ones were o f th e o f f i c e ty p e. To d eterm ine the v a lu e s o f p erso n a l h is t o r y item s, d a ta were ob tain ed from 183 managers.

An a n a ly s is o f th e s e d a ta in d ic a te d th a t in form ation re­

l a t i n g to th e e d u c a tio n a l l e v e l s o f the a p p lic a n ts formed th e o n ly r e a lly s i g n i f i c a n t item s.

In g e n e r a l, i t was found th a t an elem en tary sch o o l edu­

c a t io n w ith some secondary s c h o o lin g , e i t h e r day or ev en in g , was a p r e r e q u is ite to m an agerial s u c c e s s . The h eig h t and w eight o f th e s e managers was in v e s t ig a t e d and i t was found th a t th e average w eight o f th e more s u c c e s s f u l was 173 pounds and o f th e l e s s s u c c e s s f u l 15S pounds.

The d if f e r e n c e betw een the averages was 14

pounds and th e probable er r o r o f th e d if f e r e n c e , 2 .7 pounds.

M itc h e ll adduced

as a p o s s ib le ex p la n a tio n K retschm er1s th eo ry th a t th e s o - c a lle d "pyknic" typ e to which th e h e a v ie r and more robust p eo p le b elon g a ls o are

more g e n e r a lly

o f th e "cyclothym ic" temperament and tend to be ch eery , e g o i s t i c , t a lk a t iv e , a d a p ta b le , s o c i a l ,

s k i l l f u l a t h a n d lin g men, and e m o tio n a lly w e ll d eveloped -

a l l in d ic a t i v e s o f c h a r a c t e r is t ic s which are h ig h ly d e s ir a b le among managers, p a r t ic u l a r ly managers o f salesm en in th e f i e l d . There was no c o r r e la t io n found between a m anager's s e l l i n g record and h is su c c e ss as a manager. A b a tte r y o f fo u r t e s t s - one o f which co n ta in ed f iv e s u b je c ts was in v e s t ig a t e d .

These were:

1.

N .I .I .P . Group T est 33 - A t e s t o f g e n e r a l i n t e l l i g e n c e .

2.

A V ocabulary T est - An E n g lish r e v is io n o f th e Johnson O'Connor vocab u lary t e s t .

3?

3.

Beckman’ s r e v i s i o n o f th e A-S R eaction T e s t.

4.

Surgency-D esurgency T est - A m od ified v e r s io n o f a t e s t d e v is e d "by R. B. C a t t e ll and c o n ta in in g f i v e s u b te s ts : a. b. c. d. e.

Word a s s o c ia t io n . C om pleting form s. Word s e r i e s . T o p ic s. Ink b l o t s .

*

These t e s t s were a d m in istered to a group o f s u c c e s s f u l d i s t r i c t s a le s managers, whose s u c c e s s and m anagerial a b i l i t y had been p roved through t r i a l and e r r o r , and t o a group o f salesm en .

The d if f e r e n c e betw een means

was s ig n if ic a n t in s i x o f th e e ig h t t e s t s and s u b t e s t s - each b e in g th r e e or more tim e s th e p ro b a b le e r r o r .

The Ascendance - Subm ission T est and th e

T op ics T est showed no d is c r im in a t io n . The e n t ir e b a t t e r y o f t e s t s was a d m in istered to a group o f "London" s u p e r v iso r s who c o n s t it u t e d an in te r m e d ia te group between th e managers and th e salesm en .

The mean s c o r e s o f th e s i x s ig n if ic a n t t e s t s were a ls o in an

in term e d ia te p o s i t i o n , w h ile th e mean sc o r e s o f th e two n o n - s ig n if ic a n t t e s t s d id not show any s i g n i f i c a n t r e la t io n s h ip . The s c o r e s on th e s i x s ig n if ic a n t t e s t s were a ssig n e d w eig h ts th rough s t a t i s t i c a l m easures ( t h e p roced u re was not s t a t e d ) and th e combined s c o r e s were determ ined f o r th e m anagers, th e London s u p e r v is o r s , and th e sa lesm en . These s c o r e s appeared to d i f f e r e n t i a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y between sa lesm en and managers and to p la c e th e s u p e r v is o r s d e f i n i t e l y above th e sa lesm en . Aluminum Company o f Am erica (M ercer, L y le R . ) 1 For many y e a r s , s e v e r a l e x e c u tiv e s o f th e New K en sin gton , P en n sy l­ v a n ia , p la n t o f th e Aluminum Company o f Am erica, have been u s in g t e s t s c o r e s

1.

L yle R. M ercer, An Experim ent in Group T ra in in g fo r P r o s p e c tiv e Foremen, American Management A s s o c ia t io n , P e r so n n e l, V ol. 17, No. 2 (November, 1 9 4 0 ), p p . 8 9 -9 6 .

38

a s a p a r t i a l "basis on which t o s e l e c t foremen from th e ranks-

The g e n e r a l

p roced u re has been th a t foremen o f v a r io u s gra d es have ob served th e em ployees who re p o r t t o them and have su g g este d ca n d id a te s f o r forem anship t o th e su p e r in te n d e n ts who a ls o have observed them.

L ik e ly c a n d id a te s have been

s e n t t o th e E d u ca tio n a l Departm ent, which has a d m in istered th r e e t e s t s - th e O tis SA H igher E xam ination, th e M innesota Paper Form Board R evised Form AA or BB, and th e B e m r e u te r P e r s o n a lit y In v en to r y .

The Department has recom­

mended th o s e who sc o r e average or b e t t e r on th e O tis and M innesota t e s t s and in th e l e s s n e u r o tic h a l f o f th e BI-N s c a le o f th e B e r n r e u te r .

The f i n a l

s e l e c t i o n has been made by th e su p erin ten d en t o f th e departm ent con cerned, who may d is r e g a r d th e recommendations o f th e E d u ca tio n a l Department i f he c h o o s e s , but who g e n e r a lly has co n sid ered them v ery c a r e f u l ly . I t h a s been found t h a t , a s a rough e s t im a t e , 80 p e r c e n t , o f th e forem en who have made good t e s t s c o r e s have been above th e d ep artm en tal average in forem anship q u a l i t i e s , w h ile 80 p e r c e n t , o f th e foremen who have b een a p p o in ted in s p i t e o f poor s c o r e s have been b elow a v era g e as foremen in th e d ep artm en t. B ecause o f a b e l i e f th a t th e average o f forem anship in th e p la n t has b een to o low in s p it e o f th e p r e se n t methods o f s e l e c t i o n , an experim ent was con d u cted in 1939 in c o lla b o r a t io n w ith th e E x te n sio n D iv is io n o f Penn­ s y lv a n ia S ta te C o lle g e .

A ll n o n -su p e r v iso r y and n o n - c o lle g ia t e male em ployees

were in v it e d t o p a r t ic i p a t e . S e v e n t y - f iv e em ployees were f i n a l l y s e le c t e d on th e b a s is o f sta n d in g in fo u r m easures - th e O tis SA H igher Exam ination ( c r i t i c a l sco re 4 4 ) , th e M innesota Paper Form Board R evised Form BB ( c r i t i c a l sc o r e 3 1 ) , th e B e m r e u te r P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry BI-N s c a le ( c r i t i c a l sc o r e - 9 0 ) , and th e Strong Voca­ t i o n a l I n t e r e s t Blank P rod u ction Manager S c a le ( c r i t i c a l sc o r e B) - th e f i n a l

39

s i f t i n g having been made on th e b a s is o f a com p osite scoi'e composed o f the t e s t s c o r e s th a t had been reduced to comparable ranges and th en w eigh ted O tis 40, B ern reu ter 3 0 , M innesota SO, and Strong 10. These em ployees were g iv e n a tw elv e weeks' cou rse in su p e r v iso r y p r in c i p l e s conducted by two p r o f e s s o r s from P en n sy lv a n ia S ta te C o lle g e . f i n a l r a tin g based on th e in s t r u c t o r s '

A

r a t in g , exam in ation s c o r e s , cla ssw o rk ,

n oteb ook s, and g ra d es on co u rse p r o j e c t s was g iv e n each em ployee.

A group

o f 37 was s e le c t e d f o r fu r th e r t r a in in g on th e b a s is o f th e s e r a t in g s , fo r e ­ m en's r a tin g s , and d ep artm en tal n eed s. In h i s a r t i c l e , Mercer con clud ed th a t c e r t a in b e n e f it s had a lr ea d y been d e r iv e d from t h i s new program: 1.

A pproxim ately 15 em ployees who p r e v io u s ly had not been co n sid ered as p o t e n t ia l foremen were fa v o r a b ly brought to th e a t t e n t io n o f th e sup e r in t end en t s .

2.

E igh t* em ployees who to o k th e co u rse were p la ce d as a c t in g foremen and t h e i r r e s p e c t iv e s u p e r in te n d e n ts perform ance.

rated them as showing su p e r io r

On th e o th e r hand, two em ployees who f a i l e d to a u a lif y

fo r th e co u rse a ls o were p la ce d as a c t in g foremen and one o f th e s e was showing su p e r io r perform ance and th e o th er, a perform ance th a t was somewhat above a v era g e. 3.

The su p e rin ten d en ts a l l rep o rted th a t th e em ployees f i n a l l y s e le c t e d fo r a d d it io n a l t r a in in g seemed t o show o u tsta n d in g prom ise a s fu tu r e foremen.

♦"Eight" was th e fig u r e m entioned in M ercer's a r t i c l e . t h i s fig u r e had been in c r e a se d t o 20.

By March, 1942,

40

4.

The g e n e r a l c o n c lu s io n s reached, were: a.

That n on -accep tan ce and poor perform ance in th e ex p erim en ta l co u rse i s an in d ic a t io n o f p ro b a b le, but not c e r t a in , i n e f f e c ­ t iv e n e s s as a su p e r v iso r .

b.

That su c c e s s in q u a lify in g f o r and co m p letin g th e ex p erim en ta l co u rse i s an in d ic a to r o f p o s s ib le s u c c e s s in a s u p e r v iso r y c a p a c ity , p rovided th a t th e em ployee has a ls o dem on strated the a b i l i t y to g e t alo n g w ith p e o p le , w hich, f o r th e moment, i s a s c e r t a in a b le o n ly through o b se r v a tio n d u rin g in te r v ie w s and on th e jo b .

P e n n sy lv a n ia R a ilro a d (E e r se y , R. B . ) x> 3 S ta r tin g in 1926, E ersey spent a y ea r in th e shops o f the P en n sy lv a n ia R a ilr o a d making a study3 o f a group o f manual w orkers to d is c o v e r what caused them to be b oth happy and e f f i c i e n t in t h e ir work.*

In 1934, Eersey"was in ­

v it e d t o stu d y th e g e n e r a l problem o f su p e r v iso r y e f f i c i e n c y and s e le c t io n f o r p rom otion on th e P en n sy lv a n ia R ailroad and t o su g g e st m easures lo o k in g toward a con tin u an ce o f i t s p a st record o f p r o g r e s s iv e improvement, in the l i g h t o f th e changing demands o f the tim e s ." 4 To do t h i s , E ersey made a c a r e fu l stud y o f th e c o n te n t o f v a rio u s su p e r v is o r y jo b s in a c e r t a in d iv is i o n o f th e company and d ev elo p ed four in s tr u m e n ts ! a. b. c. d.

1. 2.

3. 4. *

A t e s t i n g program. A r a tin g program. A g e n e r a l su p e rv iso ry t r a in in g program, e x c lu s iv e o f t e c h n ic a l t r a in in g on the jo b . A p r o g n o s tic in te r v ie w in g program.

R exford B. E ersey , Problems in S e le c t in g and T ra in in g S u p e r v is o r s , American Management A s s o c ia t io n , P erso n n el S e r i e s , Wo. 4 7 , 1941, pp. 2 0 -3 2 . E ersey , E xperim ental A p p lic a tio n o f P s y c h o lo g ic a l T e s ts and M erit Ba/tings t o S u p erv iso ry S e le c t io n , Advancement and T ra in in g on th e Penn. R.R., n a tio n a l I n d u s t r ia l Conference Board, I n c ., S tu d ie s in Personne l P o l ic y , Ho. 32 (March 11, 1 9 4 1 ), pp. 6 1 -6 9 . E e r se y , Workers* Emotions in Shop and Home. Problems in S e le c t in g and T ra in in g S u p e r v iso r s, p . 21. In 1 9 3 2 -3 3 , h r . E ersey made a s im ila r stud y f o r the German S t a t e R ailw ays, which was rep orted in " S eele Und G efuehl d es A r b e ite r s ," Konkordia. V erlag, L e ip z ig , 1935.

41

The jo b s t u d ie s o r a n a ly s e s were made by havin g each su p e r v iso r e x p la in h is own d u t ie s and th en tr y to work out th e s p e c i f i c m ental a b i l i t i e s th a t were needed to perform them.

E ersey a cted as an in t e r lo c u t o r in t h is

p r o c e s s and a ls o ap p raised what m en tal a b i l i t i e s co u ld be measured by t e s t s . Next a m ental t e s t - or r a th e r a b a tte r y o f t e s t s - c a lle d "The E x ecu tiv e A p titu d e Test" V7a.s d e v is e d to f i t th e item s d isc o v e r e d through th e job a n a ly s is .

Seven item s in th e f i e l d o f " c o n sc io u s-c o n c e n tr a te d reasoning"

were chosen fo r the t e s t item s! 1.

Genera- in fo rm a tio n - co n cern in g th e in d u str y .

£.

Language:

words - m eanings, u se in s o lv in g problem s.

3.

Language:

se n te n c e s - common se n se r e a so n in g s, com parative m eanings,

co n v ersio n o f se n te n c e s in t o o b j e c t iv e p ic t u r e s , com plex a n a ly s is and s y n th e s is . 4.

Power o f c o n c e n tr a tio n - a b i l i t y t o u n derstand in s t r u c t io n s , a b i l i t y to ca rry out in s t r u c t io n s n orm ally and under p r e ssu r e .

5.

M athematics - sim ple a r ith m e t ic , form ulae.

6.

O bjects or t h e i r rep ro d u ctio n - o b j e c t s , p ic t u r e s , o b se r v a tio n , s p a tia l r e la t io n s , b a s is o f m ech an ical and en g in e e r in g work.

7.

Speed - c h i e f l y o f p e r c e p tio n , a s 85 p e r c e n t , o f e x e c u tiv e d e c is io n s r e s t on accuracy and speed o f p e r c e p tio n , 5 p er c e n t, on snap judg­ ment, and 10 p e r c e n t, on more o r l e s s unhurried a n a ly s is and reaso n in g . A lso a "M editative-PLelaxed " item was co n sid ered im portant but was not

in clu d ed in th e b a tte r y a s i t was c o n sid e r e d t o be a " n o n -test f a c t o r but in d i­ ca ted by s o lu t io n s a f t e r or w h ile sleep in g ; on a problem , at p ic t u r e shows, e t c . 1

1.

H ersey, Problems in S e le c t in g and T ra in in g S u p e r v iso r s, p . 23.

42

Many o f th e item s in clu d ed in th e b a tte r y were d e r iv e d from th e Army Alpha and o th e r m ental a b i l i t y t e s t s , w h ile o th e r s were s p e c i a l l y d e v is e d f o r th e p u rp ose.

The t e s t b a tte r y was v a lid a t e d by a d m in iste r in g i t to f i v e

groups o f s u p e r v is o r s each c o n ta in in g tw elve or more p e o p le from a s in g le departm ent.

Each su p e r v is o r was ra ted on h is " gen eral m ental a b i l i t y to

u n derstan d and s o lv e r e a l i s t i c a l l y th e problem s r a is e d by h i s work and h is c a p a c ity to le a r n f o r prom otion in r e la t io n to o th e r s in h is same g r o u p ." 1 The r a tin g s o f th e s u p e r v is o r s in clu d ed in the v a li d a t i o n group were con­ curred in by two or more e x e c u t iv e s , many o th er s u p e r v is o r s h avin g been om itted from th e v a li d a t i o n groups becau se o f d isa g reem en ts in th e r a t in g s . C o r r e la tio n s (rank d if f e r e n c e ) betw een t e s t s c o r e s and r a tin g s were 0 .8 8 or b e t t e r in fou r o f th e f i v e g ro u p s.

The com parison in th e f i f t h group was

h e a v ily w eighted by two e x c e p tio n a l c a s e s . The t e s t was a d m in istered so th a t both tim ed and untim ed s c o r e s co u ld be ob tain ed in each s e c t io n .

The c o r r e la t io n s j u s t d e sc r ib e d were based on

untim ed s c o r e s . The r a tin g s c a le th a t was d ev ised * i s la r g e ly d ev elo p ed as a grap h ic s c a le and c o n ta in s such item s a s knowledge o f work, r e s u lt s o b ta in ed on work a s s ig n e d , q u a lit y o f w r it t e n work, m ental q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , p h y s ic a l q u a lif i c a ­ t io n s , judgm ent, c o o p e r a tio n , c h a r a c te r , and le a d e r sh ip and a d m in is tr a tiv e a b i l i t y , each o f w hich i s su b d iv id ed .

The s c a le a ls o c o n ta in s a b r i e f ques­

tio n n a ir e to co v er p o in t s not co v ered in th e s c a le and an a ffir m a tio n o f h on est r a tin g to be sig n e d by th e r a t e r .

1.

R exford B. H ersey, E xperim ental A p p lic a tio n o f P s y c h o lo g ic a l T e sts and M erit R a tin g s to S u p erv iso ry S e le c t io n , Advancement and T ra in in g on th e Penn. R.R., N a tio n a l I n d u s t r ia l C onference Board, I n c ., S tu d ie s in P erso n n el P o l i c y , No. 32 (March 1 1 , 1 9 4 1 ), p . 64. * P u b lish ed as th e T o ta l P e r s o n a lit y Measurement, E x ecu tiv e S e r i e s , No. 10, by Richmond H a r r is, I n c ., I n d u s t r ia l E n g in eers, New York, N. Y.

43

E ersey next d e v ise d a t r a in in g program i n which a l l su p e r v iso r s o f th e d i v i s i o n under t e s t were e n r o lle d and o th e r s might v o lu n te e r .

Groups o f

from 12 t o 25 em ployees were formed, g e n e r a lly homogeneous as to rank.

The

members o f each group went through a p r o c e s s o f a n a ly z in g p e r s o n a lit y charac­ t e r i s t i c s o f em p loyees, u sin g as exam ples c a s e s rep o rte d in H e rse y 's book "Workers* Emotions in Shop and Home," and th u s o b ta in in g p r a c t ic e in the u se o f th e r a tin g s c a l e s .

Then each o f them a n a ly zed th e co n ten t o f h is own jo b .

Next th e y to o k th e E x ecu tiv e A p titu d e T e s t. Each em ployee was rated on th e "T otal P e r s o n a lit y Measurement" by h is im m ediate su p e r io r , by th e l a t t e r ' s s u p e r io r , and by a n o th er foreman or o f f i c i a l o f eq u al or su p e rio r rank who knew him b u t had no j u r i s d i c t i o n over him.

D is c r e p a n c ie s in th e r a tin g s were e lim in a te d by a d d it io n a l r a tin g s or

by c o n fe r e n c e . The t e s t s c o r e s - b oth tim ed and untim ed - were a n a ly ze d , and c r i t i ­ c a l s c o r e s fo r each s u b - t e s t and fo r th e t o t a l t e s t were d ev elo p e d .

No method

o f com paring th e s e c r i t i c a l t e s t s c o r e s w ith th o s e o f o th e r m ental a b i l i t y t e s t s was su g g e ste d .

In g e n e r a l th e untim ed s c o r e s were most u s e f u l but in

s p e c i f i c in s ta n c e s speed s c o r e s seemed t o be i n d i c a t i v e .

The s u b - t e s t , "Gen­

e r a l In form atio n ," was found to be u s e f u l o n ly t o in tro d u ce th e t e s t s and to put th e em ployees a t e a s e . F in a lly , each employee was in te r v ie w e d and h is " t o ta l situ a tio n " was d is c u s s e d w ith him.

Ways o f im proving h is weak p o in t s were em phasized.

In no c a s e was any in form ation d iv u lg e d to en a b le an employee to determ ine how he ranked in th e t e s t s or r a t in g s r e l a t i v e t o o th e r em p loyees.

This

in te r v ie w was co n sid ered to be an e s s e n t i a l p a r t o f th e d evelopm en tal p ro cess. The t o t a l p r o c e ss was c a r r ie d on in two D iv is io n s o f th e R ailroad d u rin g 1936, 1937, and 1938.

In January, 1941, an a n a ly s is o f r e s u lt s was

44

made.

Of the 503 em ployees in clu d ed in th e exp erim en t, 77 were c o n sid ered

to be f u l l y q u a lif ie d fo r p rom otion, 48 t o he alm ost q u a lif i e d , 20 t o he l i k e l y c a n d id a te s, 21 t o he p o s s i b l e c a n d id a te s , and 337 to he u n s u it a b le . Of t h e s e , 8 in th e f i r s t fo u r groups were e v e n tu a lly demoted - 4 w h o lly or p a r t ly because o f h e a lt h ; and 8 in th e f i f t h group were promoted s u c c e s s f u l ly . Thus, as Hersey has a n a ly zed th e s i t u a t i o n , o n ly 16 in c o r r e c t p r e d ic t io n s out o f 503 were made. H ersey con clud ed th a t f i v e f a c t o r s should he c o n sid e r e d when men are t o he recommended fo r prom otion to su p e r v iso r y p o s it io n s : a. h. c. d. e.

M ental a b i l i t i e s and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , P h y s ic a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . P e r s o n a lit y t r a i t s . T ra in in g and e x p e r ie n c e , in c lu d in g s e n io r i t y . "XM f a c t o r s such a s a b i l i t y to ap p ly p a st e x p e r ie n c e , in h ere n t w eak n esses f o r liq u o r or women, c a p a c ity to grow and t o w ith ­ stand in c r e a se d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and t e n s io n , e t c .

He fu r th e r co n clu d ed :1 a. h. c. d.

e. f.

There i s no one sim p le method o f s e l e c t i n g and im proving th e s u p e r v is io n . Many m ethods must he co o rd in a ted in a w e ll fu n c tio n in g "whole." The id e a l i s t o s t r e s s th e g o a l - improvement o f ev ery in d iv id u a l s u p e r v is o r . The c o o rd in a ted u se o f th e methods d e sc r ib e d in t h i s stu d y has proved t h e i r a ccu ra cy . These in clu d ed th e m ental and p h y s ic a l ex a m in a tio n , c a r e f u l r a t in g , t r a in in g , and p r o g n o s tic in t e r v ie w s . These m ethods cu t th e tim e and expense o f a n a ly s is fo r prom otion to a f r a c t i o n o f th a t req u ired by th e form er m ethods. The r e s u l t s proved to be ov er 96^ a c c u r a te .

Although H ersey rec o g n ized th e im portance o f p e r s o n a lit y f a c t o r s , he d id not attem pt to u s e any t e s t s f o r them.

He has experim ented to

some e x te n t

w ith th e Bumm-Wadsworth Temperament T est but in t h i s experim ent he ch ose to d eterm ine th e p e r s o n a lit y f a c t o r s th rou gh th e r a tin g s c a le .

1.

E ersey , E xperim ental A p p lic a tio n o f P s y c h o lo g ic a l T e sts and M erit E a tin g s to S u p ervisory S e le c t io n , Advancement and T rainin g on th e Penn. R .F .., p . 69.

CHAPTER I I I RESEARCH PROCEDURE AND DATA

D uring th e co u rse o f t h i s study s u p e r v is o r s in th r e e departm ents o f a p u b lic u t i l i t y were examined by means o f th r e e ty p e s o f t e s t s and m easures - m easures o f i n t e l l e c t i v e a b i l i t y , in d ex es o f p e r s o n a lit y charac­ t e r i s t i c s , and m easures o f v is u a l p e r c e p tio n - and an attem pt was made to d eterm ine th e accuracy and r e l i a b i l i t y w ith which t h e s e t e s t s co u ld be u sed to d i f f e r e n t i a t e betw een s u c c e s s f u l and u n s u c c e s s fu l s u p e r v is o r s , and betw een s u p e r v is o r s o f s u b s t a n t ia lly d if f e r e n t t y p e s .

The study was co n fin ed

to male su p e r v iso r y em ployees. SELECTION OE SUPERVISORS DEPARTMENT X E arly in 19 3 7 , 98 foremen o f Department X in a p u b lic u t i l i t y were g iv e n a t r a in in g co u rse in su p e rv iso ry p r a c t ic e s and a b a tte r y o f t e s t s and m easures and th e n were i n i t i a l l y a s sig n e d to duty a s forem en, a s s i s t a n t fo r e ­ men, t h ir d men, in s p e c t o r s , and servicem en under a p la n o f r e o r g a n iz a tio n o f th e departm ent. was p ro p o sed .

In th e f a l l o f 1940 a d r a s t ic reassign m en t o f t h e s e em ployees The t e s t s c o r e s were stu d ie d in co n ju n c tio n w ith t h e proposed

rea ssig n m en ts and such a method o f u s in g th e s c o r e s fo r grad in g th e em ployees was d evelop ed t h a t , had i t been a v a ila b le and u sed in 1 9 3 7 , th e p r e d ic t io n o f su p e r v iso r y s u c c e s s - s u c c e s s b e in g in d ic a te d by th e rea ssig n m en ts proposed in 1940 - would have been 90 p er c e n t , a c c u r a te .

A fu r th e r rev iew o f th e

s t a t u s o f th e s e em ployees in th e w in ter o f 1942 in d ic a te d th a t t h e s e p r e d ic ­ t i o n s were s t i l l s u b s t a n t ia lly a c c u r a te , even though d r a s t ic changes in th e s t a t u s o f many o f t h e s e em ployees had been made b ecau se o f o p e r a tin g c o n d itio n s .

72

T h is p o rtio n , o f th e stu d y i s p r im a r ily o f h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t a s i t served to e s t a b l i s h a method and to s e t th e sta g e fo r th e subsequent p o r tio n s o f th e stu d y .

The Problem In 1937 Department X o f th e p u b lic u t i l i t y in which t h i s study was made merged s e v e r a l s e r v ic e shops and a m aintenance d i v i s i o n and sub­ d iv id e d th e r e s u lt i n g o r g a n iz a tio n in t o th r e e g eo g ra p h ica l s u b d iv is io n s . The fu n c tio n s o f t h e s e groups were to han dle a l l g a s s e r v ic e c a l l s , such as co m p la in ts from cu stom ers about, g a s p r e s s u r e , gas le a k s , and improper func­ t io n in g o f a p p lia n c e s ; to "turn-on" and " tu rn -o ff" gas s e r v ic e fo r a l l c l a s s e s o f custom ers; and to "turn-on" and " tu rn -o ff" e l e c t r i c s e r v ic e fo r r e s id e n t i a l cu stom ers o n ly . A major problem o f t h i s merger was to s e le c t from th e forem en and a s s i s t a n t foremen o f th e form er shops and d iv is io n th e em ployees who were b e s t f i t t e d to be s u p e r v is o r s i n th e merged grou p s.

Three c o n d it io n s com­

p lic a t e d t h i s problem : 1.

The foremen in th e shops were g e n e r a lly o ld e r and l e s s w e ll ed u cated than th e forem en in th e m aintenance d iv is io n .

2.

The foremen in th e shops had been d eveloped more a s p r o c to r s than as r e s p o n s ib le s u p e r v is o r s and th e su p erin ten d en ts to o k most o f th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r d e c is io n s even in such d e t a i l s a s th e a s s ig n ­ ment o f s p e c i f i c jo b s; w h ile th e foremen in th e m aintenance d iv is i o n had been g iv e n a c o n s id e r a b le d egree o f r e s p o n s i b ili t y , such a s th e assignm ent o f d u t ie s to m ech an ics, th e in v e s t ig a t io n o f co m p la in ts, and th e h a n d lin g o f d is c ip l in a r y m a tters.

73

3.

A system o f "forem an-dispatching" o f work and th e s u b d iv is io n o f th e a r e a in t o d i s t r i c t s , each w ith a foreman and an a s s i s t a n t fo r e ­ man in r e s p o n s ib le ch arge, had been d ev elo p ed in th e m aintenance d iv is io n .

T h is system req u ired a ty p e o f s u p e r v iso r y em ployee who

c o u ld and would a ccep t r e s p o n s i b ili t y and make d e c i s i o n s .

T h is

system was to be u sed in th e new o r g a n iz a tio n . The management o f th e department w ished t o a s s ig n th e b e s t q u a li­ f i e d em ployees t o th e su p e rv iso ry p o s it io n s in th e new o r g a n iz a tio n and at th e same tim e to r e c o g n iz e lo y a l and s a t is f a c t o r y s e r v ic e and s e n i o r i t y .

It

was f e l t th a t in many c a s e s th e you n ger, more a g g r e s s iv e , and b e t t e r educated em ployees might have an undue advantage over th e o t h e r s .

C onseq u en tly th e

management w ished to have an a u x ilia r y means o f s e l e c t i o n t o u se in conjunc­ t i o n w ith a rev iew o f th e perform ance reco rd s o f th e em ployees who were under c o n s id e r a tio n and th e o p in io n s o f th e su p e r in te n d e n ts. U in e t y - e ig h t em ployees were c o n sid ered i n th e problem . The Approach to th e Problem As an i n i t i a l approach to th e problem a t r a in i n g co u rse " P r a c tic a l S u p ervision " was d ev elo p ed f o r th e em ployees, a b a t t e r y o f t e s t s and m easures was a d m in is te r e d , and a t e n t a t iv e method o f s e l e c t i o n b a sed on t e s t s and m easures was d e v e lo p e d .

The T r a in in g Course The t r a in in g co u rse c o n s is t e d o f two p a r t s .

O n e-h a lf o f th e cou rse

was spent in a d is c u s s io n o f th e fo rem a n -d isp a tch in g p roced u re and o f v a rio u s o p e r a tin g prob lem s; th e o th e r h a l f , in a d is c u s s io n o f s u p e r v iso r y p r in c ip le s and in th e a d m in is tr a tio n o f a b a tte r y o f t e s t s and m easures and a f i n a l exam in ation in su p e r v iso r y p r in c i p l e s .

The co u rse was con d u cted in 12 t h r e e -

hour p e r io d s , two p e r io d s a week, on company tim e .

S ix groups were o rg a n ized

74

among th e 98 em ployees from whom th e s e l e c t i o n s were to be made.

Except

a s a v e h ic le through which t h e foremen were assem bled f o r th e a d m in istra ­ t i o n o f th e t e s t s and m easures, th e t r a in in g co u rse d id not e n te r in to t h i s stu d y .

T est S e le c t io n and A d m in istra tio n S ix t e s t s and m easures were a d m in istered in t h i s p art o f th e study* a. b* c. d. e. f.

R evised Alpha Exam ination Eorm 6 , Short Form .1 M innesota V o ca tio n a l T est f o r C le r ic a l Workers, T est 1 and T est 2 . 2 R evised M innesota Paper Eorm Board T e s t , S e r ie s AA.3 The P e r s o n a lity I n v e n to r y .4 V o ca tio n a l I n t e r e s t Blank f o r Men ( R e v is e d ), Form A .5 F in a l exam ination in th e c o u r se " P r a c tic a l S u p erv isio n ."

T hese t e s t s and m easures were s e le c t e d p a r t ly on th e b a s is o f r ea so n a b le c o n je c tu r e ; p a r t ly , o f f a m i l i a r i t y w ith th e forms u sed ; and p a r t ly , o f la c k o f f a m il ia r it y w ith o th er form s: 1.

I t seemed rea so n a b le t o presume th a t in t h i s paper and p e n c i l , a s w e ll a s m echanical a g e , a minimum d eg ree o f v e r b a l i n t e l l i ­ gen ce should be ex p ected o f s u p e r v iso r y em p loyees, e s p e c ia l ly a s

1. 2.

3. 4.

5.

C op yrigh t, 1933, The P s y c h o lo g ic a l C o rp o ra tio n , 522 F i f t h Avenue, New York, N. Y. Arranged by Dorothy M. Andrew under th e d ir e c t io n o f Donald G. P a terso n and Howard P . L o n g s ta ff. C op yrigh t, 19 3 3 , The P s y c h o lo g ic a l C orporation 522 F i f t h Avenue, New York, N. Y. Prepared by R. L ik ert and Wm. H. Qjuasha, New York U n iv e r s ity . Copyright 1 9 3 4 , R en sis L ikert and Wm. H. Qjiasha. A ddress in q u ir ie s to W illiam H. Quasha, 11 West 42nd S t r e e t , New York, N. Y. By Robert G. B ern reu ter. P u b lish ed by S tan ford U n iv e r s ity P r e s s , S tan ford U n iv e r s ity , C a lif o r n ia . C o p y rig h t, 1 9 3 5 , Board o f T r u ste e s o f th e Leland Stan ford Ju n ior U n iv e r s it y . By Edward K. Strong, J r . C o p yrigh t, 1927, U n iv e r s ity P r e s s , P u b lis h e r s , Stan ford U n iv e r s ity , C a lif o r n ia .

th e y fu n c tio n e d la r g e ly through o r a l and w r itte n com m unications and a n a ly s e s . Much o f th e work o f th e foremen in v o lv e d th e rea d in g and ch eck in g o f numbers and names. I t was hoped th a t th e M innesota Paper Form Board might p ro v id e some c lu e to th e m echanical a b i l i t y th a t was presumed to be need ed . P e r s o n a lit y was reco g n ized a s an e s s e n t i a l elem ent and th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In ven tory seemed to be th e b e s t and most com prehensive instrum ent a v a ila b le fo r u se in group adminietrela­ t io n . I t seemed rea so n a b le to presume th a t th e r e might be a p a tte r n o f su p e rv iso ry i n t e r e s t s th a t cou ld be d isc o v e r e d w ith th e a id o f a com prehensive in v en to ry l i k e th e Strong V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t B lank. I t was b e lie v e d th a t th e su p e rv iso rs should each have a rea so n a b le knowledge o f su p e rv iso ry p r in c ip le s such a s were d evelop ed in th e co u rse " P r a c tic a l S u p erv isio n ." While many o th e r t e s t s o f l i k e ten o r were a v a ila b le , th e i n v e s t i ­ g a to r had been experim enting, w ith th e a d m in is tr a tio n o f th e t e s t s th a t were s e le c t e d , and i n i t i a l l y had ch o sen them fo r g e n e r a l ex­ p erim en ta l p u rp oses a f t e r havin g examined o th e r t e s t s and h avin g d is c u s s e d th e g en era l problem s o f t e s t s e l e c t i o n and a d m in istr a tio n w ith members o f th e P s y c h o lo g ic a l C orp oration . I t was b e lie v e d th a t th e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f com m ercially p u b lish e d t e s t s sh ould be exp lored b e fo r e a ttem p ts to d ev elo p s p e c ia l t e s t s

76

were made.

Com m ercially p u b lis h e d t e s t s were u sed in p r e fe r e n c e

to s p e c ia l ly d ev elo p ed t e s t s so th a t f u l l advantage co u ld he tak en o f th e work done by o th e r in v e s t ig a t o r s in d eterm ining th e r e l i a ­ b i l i t y o f th e t e s t item s and t h e p u b lish ed s c a le s .

I t was c o n sid ered

th a t th e p u rp oses o f t h i s stud y would be b e st served i f a b a tte r y o f com m ercially p u b lish e d t e s t s cou ld be found th a t would, w ith rea so n a b le a ccu ra cy , d is t in g u is h betw een th e more and th e l e s s s a t is f a c t o r y s u p e r v is o r s .

For moBt b u sin e ss and in d u s t r ia l o rg a n i­

z a tio n s th e work o f s ta n d a r d iz in g a t e s t i s arduous enough w ithout adding to i t th e work o f c o n s tr u c tio n . A ll o f th e t e s t s u sed in th e stu d y had been c a r e f u lly sta n d a rd ized by t h e i r r e s p e c t iv e a u th o rs and th e t e c h n ic a l li t e r a t u r e i s r e p le t e w ith d is c u s s io n s pro and con o f t h e ir u s e f u ln e s s under a v a r ie t y o f c o n d itio n s . One o f th e t e s t s was a d m in istered at each o f f i v e o f t h e m eetin gs during which th e em ployees d is c u s s e d su p e r v iso r y p r in c ip le s *

The standard

in s t r u c t io n s fo r a d m in is tr a tio n , p ro v id ed w ith th e t e s t s , were fo llo w e d in each ca se except t h a t , in ta k in g th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lity In ven tory and th e Strong V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t B lank t e s t s , th e em ployees were ca u tio n ed not to c o n sid e r any o f th e q u e s tio n s f o r to o lo n g a tim e and were asked t o in d i­ c a te t h e ir " f i r s t im p u lsiv e an sw ers."

To s tim u la te them t o f o llo w t h i s

in s t r u c t io n , th ey were asked t o com p lete each o f th e s e b lan k s in 20 m in u tes. Most o f th e em ployees f in is h e d th e B ern reuter P e r s o n a lity In ven tory w ith in th e tim e lim it s p e c if ie d ; a few to o k a s lo n g a s 30 m in u tes.

Most o f th e

em ployees f in is h e d th e Strong V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t Blank w ith in 35 m inutes ( a more reaso n a b le tim e li m it than th e 20 m inutes s p e c if ie d ) w h ile a few

77

took 50 m in u tes.

The slo w er em ployees were q u ite o b v io u s ly r eta r d e d by la n ­

guage d i f f i c u l t i e s and a l l o f th e p a p ers were a c c e p te d .

A ls o , a s o n ly a few

o f th e em ployees had a tten d ed h ig h s c h o o l, a l l were p erm itte d t o respond to P art 3 o f th e Stron g V o ca tio n a l I n te r e s t Blank - l i k e s and d i s l i k e s o f sch o o l s u b je c ts - on th e b a s is o f t h e i r p r e se n t l i k e s and d i s l i k e s .

The I n i t i a l Placem ent o f th e Foremen in 1937 At th e c o n c lu s io n o f each t e s t i n g p e r io d , each em ployee was a ssig n e d an i n i t i a l r a t in g d e r iv e d from h i s t e s t s c o r e s , th e r a t in g b e in g based on a f iv e - p o in t r a t in g s c a l e .

The d e s c r ip t iv e e q u iv a le n ts o f th e p o in t s on t h i s

s c a le a re shown in T a b le I I I - 1 . TABLE III - 1 S c a le Used f o r th e E a tin g o f Employees A ccording to T h e ir R e la t iv e Standing in T e s t s , O perating Perform ance, G eneral Q u a lif ic a t io n s a s S u p e r v iso r s, and Other R a tin g s

E x cep tio n a l 1 .0

________ S a t is f a c t o r y _______ Very Good Average F a ir 1 .5

2 .0

2 .5

U n s a t is f a c t o r y 3 .0

T h is r a t in g s c a le was a ls o u sed whenever c ircu m sta n ce s req u ired a r a tin g o f t h e s e o r o th e r em p loyees, th e in t e r p r e t a t io n o f v a r io u s grad es b e in g in term s o f th e p a r t ic u la r purpose fo r which th e em ployees were b ein g r a te d . The i n i t i a l r a t in g s d eriv ed from th e t e s t s c o r e s were not based upon a m athem atical a v era g e or c o n s o lid a t io n o f th e v a r io u s s c o r e s , but in s te a d upon th e g e n e r a l p a t t e r n o f each em p loyee's sc o r e s reduced to stand ard sc o r e v a lu e s .

T h is method o f d e r iv in g th e r a t in g s from th e t e s t s c o r e s was found

to be r e l a t i v e l y u n r e lia b le and was l a t e r d isc a r d e d . Each su p erin ten d en t was asked to r a te th e em ployees known t o him, u s in g th e r a t in g s c a le d e sc r ib e d in T ab le I I I - 1 , on th e b a s is o f h is

78

knowledge o f t h e ir work, h i s o b s e r v a tio n o f them d u rin g th e t r a in in g p e r io d , and h i s e s tim a te o f t h e ir p ro b a b le f i t n e s s a s forem en i n th e new organiza^tio n .

T hese r a t in g s were p u r e ly summary r a t in g s and were not supported by

p a st r a t in g s nor by any record ed supplem entary d a ta . The i n i t i a l a ssig n m en ts to duty were made by th e manager o f th e department in c o n s u lt a t io n w ith th e s u p e r in te n d e n ts.

The i n i t i a l r a t in g s

d e r iv e d from th e t e s t s c o r e s were c o n sid e r e d o n ly when a d d itio n a l d a ta were n eeded.

Of th e 98 em ployees con cerned in t h i s p o r tio n

i n i t i a l l y a s sig n e d a s foremen or a s s i s t a n t forem en, 11

o f th e stu d y ,

86 were

were a s sig n e d t o nonr-

su p e r v iso r y p o s i t i o n s , and 1 was t r a n s f e r r e d t o a n o th er departm ent.

The

r e l a t io n betw een th e i n i t i a l r a t in g s d e r iv e d from th e t e s t s c o r e s and th e a ssig n m en ts to duty in 1937 i s shown in T able I I I - 2. The ex ten t to which th e i n i t i a l r a t in g s d e r iv e d from th e t e s t s c o r e s and th e i n i t i a l a ssig n m en ts to d u ty in 1937 agreed can be gauged in two ways: 1.

By th e p erce n ta g e c o r r e c t ly p la c e d .

2.

By th e c r i t i c a l r a t i o s . I f , on th e one hand, i n i t i a l r a t in g s d e r iv e d from t e s t sc o r e s o f

1 . 0 , 1 . 5 , and 2 .0 a re c o n sid ered to be a c c e p ta b le and r a t in g s o f 2 .5 and 3 .0 are c o n sid e r e d t o be in a c c e p ta b le , 60 o f th e em ployees (6 3 $ ) were c o r r e c t ly p la c e d by th e i n i t i a l r a t in g s d e r iv e d from th e t e s t

scores.

The two em­

p lo y e e s who were not ra ted and th e one em ployee who was tr a n s fe r r e d were exclu d ed from c o n s id e r a t io n . I f an i n i t i a l r a t in g d e r iv e d from t e s t s c o r e s o f 2 .5 i s c o n sid ered t o be a c c e p t a b le , ( 2 . 5 i s , in f a c t , a m arginal r a t i n g ) , 76 em ployees (8 0 $ ) were c o r r e c t ly p la c e d by th e i n i t i a l r a t in g s d e r iv e d from t e s t s c o r e s . The c r i t i c a l r a t i o s can be u se d to d eterm in e th e s ig n if ic a n c e o f th e p la cem en t.

T h is c r i t i c a l r a t io i s e s s e n t i a l l y th e r a t io o f d if f e r e n c e o f th e

79 TABLE III - 2 Initial Ratings Derived From Test Scores in 1937 Compared With the Initial Assignments to Duty in 1937

DEPARTMENT X I n i t i a l A ssign m en ts to Duty in 1937

I n i t i a l R a tin g s D erived From T est S co res in 1937 T o ta l Not Rated 2 .5 1 .5 3 .0 2 .0 1 .0

Foremen* A sst Foremen T hird Men I n sp e c to r s Servicem en T sfd from Dept T o ta l

-

7 5 2 1

10 8 1 1

-

-

-

-

-

-

1 1

2

15

20

26

-

10 8 1 1 -

45 41 5 4 2 1

15

20

98

7 6 1 1

11 13 -

—

* I n c lu d e s one em ployee a s sig n e d a s in s t r u c t o r ** T est r e s u l t s not a v a ila b le when i n i t i a l r a t in g s were made • • • S o t enough t e s t s

Su b tab le A D ata Rearranged fo r th e C a lc u la tio n o f th e P e r cen ta g es C o r r e c tly P la c e d and th e R a tio s o f th e D if f e r e n c e in P r o p o r tio n s to th e Standard E rror o f th e D if f e r e n c e S u p e r v iso r s v s N on -S u p ervisors A ccep ta b le I n i t i a l R a tin g s v s Not A ccep ta b le I n i t i a l R a tin g s I n i t i a l A ssignm ents to Duty in 1937 Foremen and A sst Foremen ( x) N on -S u p ervisors ( s ) T o ta l

(o)

I n i t i a l R atin g s D erived From T est S c o r e s in 1937 T o ta l 2. 5 2 .0 , 1 . 5 . 1 .0 3. 0 n n n n iL 1. i_ 12 _3

1 4 .1 3 0 .0

18 _2

2 1 .2 2 0 .0

55 _5

6 4 .7 5 0 .0

85 10

15

1 5 .8

20

2 1 .0

60

6 3 .2

95

S u b tab le E D eterm in ation o f P e r c e n ta g e s C o r r e c tly P laced and C r it ic a l R a tio s _______I n i t i a l R a tin g s Not A ccen ta b le A ccep ta b le 3 .0 , 3 .0

2 .5

P er cen ta g es C o rrectly P la c e d

2 .0 , 1 . 5 , 1 .0 2 . 5 , 2 .0 , 1 .15.,5 , 1 .0

xDia = P i - pa ;

XXD0 i = P i - PoJ e 0 i

63 80

h i< h + Pa 92 n3 ni Ipo 9 o

U3

n0

ni

__ C r i t i c a l R a tio s ^ i s / ^ i 3 x ^ o i/^ o i 0 .8 8 1 .0 6

0 .8 8 1 .3 2

80

means to th e standard erro r o f th e d if f e r e n c e , th e d a ta b e in g reduced to a 2 x 2 t a b l e , and can b e determ ined from two p o in t s o f view ;

th e r e la t io n

betw een th e s u p e r v iso r s ( a s s i s t a n t forem en and forem en) and th e non­ s u p e r v is o r s in accordance w ith th e a c c e p t a b i l i t y and n o n - a c c e p t a b ilit y o f t h e i r r a t in g s ; and a ls o th e r e la t io n betw een th e s u p e r v is o r s and th e t o t a l group. These c r i t i c a l r a t io s and th e d a ta from which th e y were d eriv ed are shown in T able I I I - 2 . I t i s g e n e r a lly a cce p te d th a t a and,

p r e fe r a b ly , 3 .0 fo r

c r i t i c a l r a t io sh ould exceed 2 ,5

a d if f e r e n c e o f means to be s i g n i f i c a n t .

A ccording to th e c r i t i c a l r a t i o s t h e s e i n i t i a l r a t in g s based on t e s t s c o r e s d id not d i f f e r e n t i a t e a c c e p ta b ly betw een th e em ployees a ssig n e d t o s u p e r v iso r y p o s it io n s and th e em ployees not a s sig n e d to su p e rv iso ry p o s i­ tio n s . The r e la t io n betw een th e r a t in g s made by th e su p e rin ten d en ts in 1937

and th e a ssig n m en ts to duty in 1937

i s shown in Table I I I - 3 .

I f th e s e d a ta are in te r p r e te d i n th e same way a s th e d ata from T ab le I I I - 2 , 65 (8 0 $ ) o f th e 81 em ployees r a te d by th e su p erin ten d en ts were c o r r e c t ly p la c e d .

The c r i t i c a l r a t io s w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t .

A c tu a lly , th e

p r o c e s s o f making th e a ssig n m en ts to d uty was b ased to a c o n s id e r a b le degree upon th e j o in t o p in io n s o f th e s u p e r in te n d e n ts.

Comparison o f T est R e s u lts and Proposed R eassignm ents o f Foremen in 1940 From th e F a ll o f 1937 to th e F a l l o f 19 4 0 , th e su p e rin ten d en ts c a r e f u l ly ob served th e em ployees in clu d ed in t h i s p o r tio n o f th e study and, on th e b a s is o f perform ance, a t v a r io u s tim e s r e a s s ig n e d them by making pro­ m o tio n s, d em otion s, r e tir e m e n ts, and t r a n s f e r s .

In th e F a ll o f 1940, a

81

TABLE I I I - 3 R a tin g s by S u p erin ten d en ts in 1937 Compared With th e I n i t i a l A ssignm ents t o Duty in 1937 DEPARTMENT X I n i t i a l A ssig n m e n ts t o D u ty i n 1937

Not Rated

Foremen A s s t Foremen Third Men In sp ectors S e r v icem en T sfa from Dept

E a t i n g s by S u p e r in t e n d e n t s i n 1937 3 .0 2 .5 2 .0 1 .0 1 .5

7 3

6 9 3 1

3 1 -

T otal

16

8 18

24 6

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1 -

-

-

-

-

45 41 5 4 2 1

27

5

30

98

-

-

-

1

-

__

20

T otal

5

S u b ta b le A D a ta R earranged f o r t h e C a l c u l a t i o n o f t h e P e r c e n t a g e C o r r e c t l y P l a c e d and t h e R a d io s o f the D i f f e r e n c e i n P r o p o r t io n s t o t h e Standard E r r o r o f t h e D i f f e r e n c e S u p e r v i s o r s v s N o n -S u p e r v is o r s A c c e p t a b le S u p e r i n t e n d e n t s ' R a t in g s v s Not A c c e p t a b le S u p e r i n t e n d e n t s ' I n i t i a l A ssig n m e n ts t o Duty in 1937 E x c l u s i v e o f Empl f s f d Foremen and A sst Foremen Non- Sup e rv i s 0 r s T otal

E a t in g

n a t i n g s by S u p e r in t e n d e n t s i n 1937 3. 0

&. 5 £ L

n

0/.

( 1) (2 )

15 _4

1 9 .7 8 0 .0

_—

(0 )

19

23. 5

-

2 .0

_y

, 1 .5 , 1 .0 n

±

T otal n

61 _1

8 0 .3 2 0 .0

76

62

7 6 .5

81

5

S u b ta b le B D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f P e r c e n t a g e C o r r e c t l y P la c e d and C r i t i c a l R a t i o s R a t in g s by S u p e r i n t e n d e n t s * Not A c c e p t a b le 3 .0

A c c e p t a b le 2 .0 , 1 .5 ,

*No R a t i n g s o f 2 . 5 G iven

1 .0

Percentage C o r r e c tly P la ced 80

Cri t i c a l R a t i o s ^12/^12 3 .3

^0 1 /^ 0 1 2 .9

82

c o n s o lid a t io n o f groups, w ith a f u r t h e r reassign m en t o f th e s e em ployees, was p lan n ed .

Under t h i s p la n 65 em p lo y ees, o f whom 62 were in clu d ed in

t h i s p o r tio n o f th e stu d y , were to h e a s s ig n e d a s s p e c ia l su p e r v iso r s, s e n io r forem en, foremen, and a s s i s t a n t forem en.

Of th e rem aining 36 em­

p lo y e e s who were in clu d ed i n t h i s p o r tio n o f t h e stu d y , 4 had heen tr a n s­ fe r r e d , and 32 were to he a s sig n e d t o n o n -su p e r v iso r y p o s it io n s . The r e la t io n betw een th e i n i t i a l r a t in g s d eriv ed from th e teB t s c o r e s in 1937 and th e rea ssig n m en ts p rop osed in 1940 i s shown in T ahle I I I - 4 . B ecause th e p ercen ta g e c o r r e c t ly p la c e d was not much b e t t e r than chance and th e c r i t i c a l r a t io s were l e s s than 2 . 5 , th e i n i t i a l r a tin g s b ased on t e s t sco res d id not p rove to b e r e l i a b l e in p r e d ic tin g su p e rv iso ry su ccess. The r e la t io n betw een th e r a t in g s made by th e su p erin ten d en ts and th e proposed reassign m en ts in 1940 i s shown in T ab le I I I - 5 . The p ercen ta g e c o r r e t ly p la c e d and th e c r i t i c a l r a t io s were u n s a t is ­ f a c t o r i l y low and in d ic a te d th a t th e su p e rin ten d en ts* r a tin g s were no b e t t e r in p r e d ic t in g su p erv iso ry s u c c e s s th a n th e i n i t i a l r a t in g s d eriv ed from t e s t sco res. The a c tu a l i n i t i a l a ssig n m en ts t o duty made in 1937, which were based upon th e combined o p in io n s o f th e manager and th e su p e r in te n d e n ts, in ­ clu d ed a l l excep t one o f th e em ployees who were proposed fo r assignm ent to su p e rv iso ry p o s it io n s in 1 9 4 0 .

However, o n ly 72 p e r c e n t, o f th o se i n i t i a l l y

a s sig n e d to su p erv iso ry p o s it io n s in 1937 were p rop osed fo r assignm ent a s s u p e r v is o r s in 1940, and th e q u e s tio n o f w hether th e rem aining em ployees were e lim in a te d b ecau se th ey were in ca p a b le o r sim p ly b eca u se th ey were l e s s ca p a b le th an th o s e f i n a l l y s e le c t e d cannot be determ ined by t h i s p a r t ic u la r se t o f c o n c lu s io n s .

83 TABLE III - 4 Initial Eatings Derived From Test Scores in 1937 Compared With Eeassignments to Duty Proposed in 1940

DEPABTMENT X I n i t i a l E a tin g s D erived From T est S co res in 1937

T sfd

1 .0 1 .5 2 .0 2 .5 3 .0 Not B ated’*'*

1 1 2 **

1 1 2 **

4

4

—

T o ta l

Out o f Co

E eassignm ents t o Duty P roposed in 1940 Fore and* Serv A sst Fore A sst S e n io r S p e c ia l men a t Large Fore Super Fore Fore 2 1 2 -

6 6 8 3 3 _1

4 2 3 5 3

4 2 6 2

***

3 5 8 6 _1

5

23

27

17

14

...

2 1

Totj 20 15 26 20 15 _2

—

1 4

98

* C onsidered a s N o n -S u p erv iso rs **Not enough t e s t s

S u b ta b le A D ata Bearranged f o r th e C a lc u la tio n o f th e P e r c e n ta g e s C o r r e c tly P la ced and th e E a tio s o f th e D if f e r e n c e in P r o p o r tio n s t o th e Standard E rror o f th e D iffe r e n c e S u p e r v iso r s v s N on-S u p ervisors A ccep ta b le I n i t i a l E a tin g s v s Not A ccep tab le I n i t i a l E a tin g s Reassignm ent s Proposed in 1940 E x c lu s iv e o f Empls T sfd

I n i t i a l R a tin g s D erived From T e st S co res in 1937 E x c lu s iv e o f Employees Not Bated 3.,0 2.,5 2 . 0 . 1 . 5 . 1 .0 n n n JL £ £

S u p erv iso rs N on -S u p ervisors and Out o f Company

U)

7

1 1 .5

10

1 6 .4

44

7 2 .1

61

(a )

_8

2 5 .8

_8

2 5 .8

15

4 8 .4

31

(o )

15

1 6 .3

18

1 9 .6

59

6 4 .1

92

T otal

T o ta l n

S u b tab le B D eterm in ation o f P e r c e n ta g e s C o r r e c tly P laced and C r i t i c a l E a tio s ______ I n i t i a l E a tin g s Not A ccep ta b le A ccep ta b le 3.0* 2 .5 3 .0

2 . 0 , 1 . 5 , 1 .0 2 . 5 , 2 . 0 , 1 . 5 , 1 .0

P ercen ta g es C o rrectly P la ced 65 67

C r i t i c a l E a tio s ^ 1 2 /^ ia Dn l / € 01 2 .2 1 .6

2 .2 1 .8

84 TABLE I I I - 5 Ratings by Superintendents in 1937 Compared With Reassignments to Duty Proposed in 1940

X

department

R a tin g s by S u p erin t endent s in 1937 1 .0 1 .5 2 .0 C$+O 3 .0 Not Rated T o ta l

T sfd

Out o f Co

1

1 -

2 _1

3

4

4

R eassignm ents to Duty Proposed in 1940 Fore and* S en io r S p e c ia l Serv A sst Fore A sst Super Fore Fore a t Large Fore men

T o ta l

3

3 10

7 4 8

9 2

8 1 3

30 5 27

_2

6 _4

5 _3

3 _3

_2

1 JL

20 16

5

23

27

17

14

4

98

2 M K -

♦C onsidered a s N on -S u p ervisors

S u b tab le A D ata Rearranged fo r th e C a lc u la tio n o f th e P ercen ta g e C o r r e c tly P la ced and th e R a tio s o f th e D if f e r e n c e in P r o p o r tio n s to th e Standard E rror o f th e D iffe r e n c e S u p e rv iso rs v s N o n -S u p erv iso rs A ccep ta b le R a tin g s by S u p erin ten d en ts vs Not A ccep ta b le R a tin g s by S u p e rin ten d en ts Reassignm ent s Proposed in 1940 E x c lu s iv e o f Enpls T sfd S u p e rv iso rs Non—S u p e rv iso rs and Out o f Company T o ta l

R a tin g s by S u p erin ten d en ts in 1937 E x c lu s iv e o f Employees Not Rated

3.0 _R i_

(i)

9

17.0

(2 )

9

34.6

(0 )

18

22.8

2.0. 1.5. 1.0

2.5 a

£

-

_

—

T o ta l n

n

44

83.0

53

17

65.4

26

61

77.2

79

S u b tab le B D eterm in a tio n o f P ercen ta g e C o r r e c tly P la c e d and C r it ic a l R a tio s R a tin g s by S u p erin ten d en ts in 1937 Not A ccep ta b le A ccep ta b le 3 .0

2 . 0 , 1 . 5 , 1 .0

C r i t i c a l R a tio s P q i / ^ q T~

P er cen ta g e C o r r e c tly P la ced

P 1 2 /^13

67

1 .7

1.3

85

The q u e s tio n a ro se o f whether i t might have b een p o s s i b l e to r e f in e th e in t e r p r e t a t io n o f th e t e s t s and to d evelop a method th a t would p la c e th e em ployees more r e l ia b ly than was done by th e i n i t i a l r a t in g s d e r iv e d from t e s t s c o r e s and th e su p e r in te n d e n ts' r a t in g s made in 1 9 3 7 .

To answer t h i s

q u e s tio n , th e t e s t s c o r e s were compared w ith th e rea ssig n m en ts p rop osed in 1940.

The em ployees who had been tr a n s fe r r e d from th e departm ent b e fo r e th e

F a ll o f 1940 and a ls o th e em ployees who had not ta k en a l l o f th e t e s t s in 1937 were ex clu d ed from t h i s a n a ly s is and th e r e s t were c o n sid e r e d in two groups - s u p e r v is o r s and n o n -su p e r v iso r s.

The group o f s u p e r v is o r s c o n s is t e d

o f th o s e who in 1940 were to be a ssig n e d to th e p o s i t i o n s o f a s s i s t a n t fo r e ­ men, forem en, s e n io r forem en, or s p e c ia l s u p e r v is o r s .

The group o f non­

s u p e r v is o r s in c lu d e d th o s e who were to be a s sig n e d a s a s s i s t a n t foremen at la r g e , forem en a t la r g e , or servicem en , and th o se who had l e f t th e company. The r a t i o s o f th e d if f e r e n c e betw een th e means o f th e t e s t s c o r e s o f th e two groups - s u p e r v is o r s and n o iv -su p erv iso rs - t o th e standard er r o r o f t h i s d if f e r e n c e were computed f o r th e f i n a l ex a m in a tio n , th e Alpha F-6 Exam­ in a t io n , th e M innesota V o ca tio n a l T est f o r C le r ic a l Workers - T e s t s 1 and 2, and th e M innesota Paper Form Board.

In each c a s e t h i s r a t io was 2 .5 or b e t t e r ,

and th e d if f e r e n c e s betw een th e means o f th e two groups in th e s e t e s t s were p rob ab ly s i g n i f i c a n t .

These d a ta are shown in T able I I I - 6 .

In a s im ila r way th e r a t io s o f th e d if f e r e n c e o f th e means to th e standard e r r o r o f th e d if f e r e n c e o f th e means fo r th e s i x p u b lish e d s c a le s o f th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry were computed.

In each c a s e , th e r a t io

was l e s s th an 1 . 5 , which in d ic a t e s th a t th e d if f e r e n c e s betw een th e means o f th e s e s c a l e s were p rob ab ly not s i g n i f i c a n t .

T hese d a ta a r e shown in

T ab le I I I - 6 . An item a n a ly s is In v en to ry and a ls o to

was made o f th e answers t o th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lity

th e Strong V o ca tio n a l I n t e r e s t B la n k , w eig h ts were

Conparisons of the Means and the Standard Deviations of the Test Soores of Supervisors end Kon-Supervisors, Critical Scores, and Ratios of the Difference Between Means, and Between Proportions, to the Standard Error of the Difference Based on the Reassignnents Proposed in 1940

86

4>

&

06

o t- o

O O r-j

tO t- N

W t-

S| ®i

K r i U3 O

a>cj io

• « < Ov )H ©o

«+ •

© U3 * ♦ ^

•* to IO o bo

V + m w> o

«i v *o

87

a s s ig n e d to th e v a r io u s item s to form a s c a le f o r each m easure, la b e le d 'ICES’ S c a le ," * th e forms were sco red , and th e r a t io o f th e d if f e r e n c e between th e means o f th e s e s c o r e s o f th e two groups t o th e standard err o r o f t h i s d if f e r e n c e was computed f o r each o f t h e s e new s c a l e s .

The r a t io fo r th e

B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry CEP s c a le was 9 .5 and th a t fo r th e Strong V o c a tio n a l I n te r e s t Blank CEP s c a le was 1 4 .3 .

T hese r a t i o s in d ic a t e th at

th e d if f e r e n c e s betw een th e means were q u it e p ro b a b ly s i g n i f i c a n t .

The d a ta

a re shown in Table I I I - 6 . When th e Strong V o ca tio n a l I n t e r e s t Blank was sco red , th e Form M B lank had ju s t been p u b lish e d and, a s i t was to be u sed in e x te n s io n s o f t h i s stu d y, th e Form A Blank u sed in t h i s p o r t io n o f th e study was scored as though i t were a Form M B lank.

The d if f e r e n c e betw een th e two forms i s r e l ­

a t i v e l y sm all; 20 item s in th e Form A Blank were o m itted from th e Form M, s u b s t it u t io n s were made in two ite m s , and one item was tr a n s fe r r e d from P art IV to P art I I o f th e B lank.

As Form M co m p rises 400 ite m s, th e s e

ch an ges were r e l a t i v e l y i n s i g n i f i c a n t .

As a p o in t o f i n t e r e s t , th e Blank was

a ls o scored in i t s o r ig in a l form and th e c o r r e la t io n betw een th e two sc o r e s was .9 9 and a f r a c t io n , a s was e x p e c te d .

The p u rp ose o f th e s c o r in g o f th e

B lank a s Form M was to e s t a b lis h norms which co u ld be compared w ith o th er norms o b ta in ed in o th e r p o r tio n s o f t h i s stu d y . C r it ic a l s c o r e s were th e n determ ined f o r each o f th e t e s t s and fo r th e CEF s c a le s o f th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry and th e Strong V o c a tio n a l I n t e r e s t Blank such th a t th e g r e a t e s t number o f n o n -su p erv iso ry em ployees and th e l e a s t number o f su p e r v iso r y em p lo y ees, a cco rd in g to th e r ea ssig n m en ts to d u ty , proposed in 1 9 4 0 , would f a l l below th e c r i t i c a l s c o r e s .

*See pp. 108ff. fo r th e method by which th e s e w e ig h ts were d ev elo p ed .

88

Then f o u r f o ld t a b le s were co n stru cted and th e c r i t i c a l r a t i o s betw een th e s u p e r v is o r s and th e n o n -su p erv iso r s and a ls o b etw een th e s u p e r v is o r s and the t o t a l group were d eterm ined.

These c r i t i c a l r a t i o s ranged from 1 .6 to 1 7 .7 ,

o n ly 4 b ein g b elow 2 . 5 , so th a t th e t e s t s and e s p e c i a l l y th e two CHI' s c a le s o f th e b la n k s were p robably s e l e c t i v e .

The d a ta a r e shown in T ab le I I I - 6.

A method o f " S e le c tio n by C r it ic a l T e st Scores" was d ev elo p ed where­ by an em ployee would be r e j e c t e d or c o n sid ered u n s u it a b le fo r a su p erv iso ry p o s i t i o n i f he f a i l e d to exceed the c r i t i c a l s c o r e s in b o th th e Strong V o ca tio n a l I n t e r e s t Blank and th e B ern reu ter P e r s o n a lit y In v en to ry CEF s c a l e s , or i f he f a i l e d in th e Alpha F-6 t e s t and in one o th e r t e s t , th e f in a l exam in ation in " P r a c tic a l Supervision" b ein g e x clu d e d from c o n s id e r a tio n ; and th e s e l e c t i o n o f em ployees by t h i s method was s tu d ie d in i t s r e l a t io n to the rea ssig n m en ts t o d u ty proposed in 1940.

The p e r c e n ta g e c o r r e c t ly p la c e d

(9 1 $ ) and th e c r i t i c a l r a t io s between t h e s u p e r v is o r s and th e n o n -su p e r v iso r s, and a ls o betw een th e s u p e r v is o r s and th e t o t a l group ( 1 1 .6 and 7 .8 resp ec­ t i v e l y ) were such th a t t h i s method o f s e l e c t i o n was p ro b a b ly r e l i a b l e to the e x te n t th a t a p r o c e s s developed ex p o st fa c to can be s a id t o be r e l i a b l e . D ata a r e shown i n T ab le I I I - 7 . The em ployees who had been i n i t i a l l y a s s ig n e d to duty in 1937 as a s s i s t a n t forem en and foremen were a ls o s tu d ie d as a group by a com parison o f t h e i r s e l e c t i o n by c r i t i c a l t e s t s c o r e s w ith t h e i r p rop osed reassign m en ts in 1 9 4 0 .

D ata a r e shown in Table I I I - 8 . The p e r c e n ta g e c o r r e c t ly p la c e d (90$) and th e c r i t i c a l r a t i o s (8 .9

f o r s u p e r v is o r s t o n o n -su p erv iso r s and 6 .9 fo r s u p e r v is o r s to t o t a l group) were such th a t t h e em ployees who were not proposed f o r reassign m en t to super­ v is o r y p o s i t i o n s were p robably l e s s ca p a b le , i n so f a r a s t h e s e t e s t s measure c a p a b i l i t y , th a n th e em ployees who were proposed f o r reassign m en t t o super­ v is o r y p o s i t i o n s .

89

TABLE III - 7

Method o f S e le c t io n hy C r i t i c a l T est ScoreB Compared With R eassignm ents t o Duty Proposed in 1940 DEPARTMENT X

S e le c t io n by C r it ic a l T est S cores

T sfd

A ccepted R ejected Omitted Prom A n a ly s is T otal

R eassignm ents to Duty Proposed in 1940 Pore and* Out Serv A sst Pore A sst S en ior S p e c ia l Pore Pore Pore Super a t Large o f Co men

2 2

4

5

4 17

25 1

—

—

—

_2

JL

4

4

5

23

27

15 2

17

14

3 1

63 32

—

—

_3

14

4

98

♦C onsidered a s N on -S u p ervisors

S u b ta b le A Data Rearranged f o r th e C a lc u la tio n o f th e P ercen ta g e C o rrectly P laced and th e R a t io s o f th e D iffe r e n c e in P ro p o rtio n s to th e Standard E rror o f th e D iffe r e n c e S u p erv iso rs v s N o n -S u p erv iso rs A ccep ted v s R ejected R eassignm ents Proposed in 194C E x c lu s iv e o f Enrols T sfd

S e le c t io n by C r it ic a l T est Scores E x c lu s iv e o f Employees Not Rated Tots A ccepted R e je c te d n JL L JL JL

S u p erv iso rs N on-S u p ervisors

(i) (2)

4 26

6 .6 8 6 .7

57 _4

9 3 .4 1 3 .3

61 30

(o)

30

3 3 .0

61

6 7 .0

91

T otal

P ercen ta g e C o r r e c tly P la ced

91

C r it ic a l R a tio s D12/ £ 12

1 1 .6

Doi/^oi

’'’•®

90

TABLE III - 8

Method o f S e le c t io n "by C r it ic a l T est S co res Compared With R eassignm ents to Duty Proposed in 1940 Employees I n i t i a l l y A ssig n ed as A s s is t a n t Foremen and Foremen in 19S7 DEPARTMENT X S e le c t io n hy C r it ic a l T e st S cores A ccep ted R e je c te d O m itted From A n a ly s is T o ta l

_____________ R eassignm ents to Duty P roposed in 1940____________ __ Fore and* Out S erv A sst Fore A sst S en io r S p e c ia l T sfd o f Co men a t Large Fore Fore Fore Super T otal 1 -

3

-

-

1

3

4 14

24 1

-

1

1

-

2

19

26

17

2

15

14 -

2

14

3 1

p

4

86

S u btahle A D ata Rearranged fo r th e C a lc u la tio n o f th e P ercen ta g e C o r r e c tly P la c e d and th e R a tio s o f th e D if f e r e n c e in P r o p o r tio n s to th e Standard E rror o f th e D iffe r e n c e S u p erv iso rs vs Non—S u p erv iso rs A ccepted vs R ejected

S u p e rv iso rs ( 1) N on -S u p ervisors and Out o f Company (3 ) T otal

(0)

S e le c t io n hy C r it ic a l T est S co res E x c lu s iv e o f Employees Not R ated R ejected A ccep ted T o ta l n ^ 4 n n £ 4

6 .7

56

9 3 .3

60

19

8 2 .6

_4

1 7 .4

23

23

2 7 .7

60

7 2 .3

83

P ercen tage C o rrectly P la ced Cri t i c a l R a tio s

90 8 .9

N o i/^ o i

6 .9

3

-

♦C onsidered as N on-S u p ervisors

R eassignm ents Proposed in 1940 E x c lu s iv e o f Empls T sfd

61 2

91

A s im ila r a n a ly s is was made o f th e 18 em ployees who in 1937 were not i n i t i a l l y a s sig n e d to su p e r v iso r y p o s i t i o n s .

Of t h e s e , th r e e had been

tr a n s fe r r e d b e fo r e th e rea ssig n m en ts and one was o m itted from th e a n a ly s is b ecau se o f i n s u f f i c i e n t t e s t s .

Of th e rem aining e i g h t , one was a cce p te d by

th e method o f s e l e c t i o n by c r i t i c a l t e s t s c o r e s and was a ls o p rop osed f o r reassignm ent a s an a s s i s t a n t foreman; w h ile th e o th e r seven were r e j e c t e d by t h i s method o f s e l e c t i o n and a ls o were proposed fo r reassign m en t to nonsu p ervi8ory p o s it io n s or had l e f t th e company.

The p e r c e n ta g e c o r r e c t ly

p la c e d by t h i s method (lOO^fc) was such a s to in d ic a t e a g a in th a t t h i s method o f s e l e c t i o n was p o s s ib ly r e l i a b l e ; but th e number in clu d ed was so sm all th a t to o g r e a t dependence cannot be p la c e d upon t h i s c o n c lu s io n a lo n e .

Development o f a "E ating Based on T est Scores" Procedure While a t e s t b a tte r y th a t co u ld be u sed to p r e d ic t p ro b a b le s u c c e ss o r f a i l u r e in a g iv e n o ccu p a tio n was thought to be o f v a lu e , i t was b e lie v e d th a t th e b a tte r y would be o f even g r e a t e r v a lu e i f i t co u ld a ls o be u sed to p r e d ic t th e p ro b a b le term in a l l e v e l o f s u c c e s s .

C onsequently th e t e s t s u sed

in t h i s p o r tio n o f th e stu d y were a n a ly zed fo r p o s s ib le s ig n if ic a n t d i f f e r ­ en ces betw een th e s c o r e s o f th e v a r io u s l e v e l s o f s u p e r v is io n , th e s e l e v e l s b ein g based on th e rea ssig n m en ts p rop osed in 1940.

B ecause o f th e r e l a t i v e l y

sm all number o f em ployees in each group th e a n a ly s is was based on a compari­ son o f th e medians o f th e s c o r e s in each t e s t o f th e s e v e r a l gro u p s.

The

d a ta are shown in T a b le I I I - 9 . A lthough in most in s ta n c e s th e t e s t s d is tin g u is h e d f a i r l y s i g n i f i ­ c a n t ly betw een th e n o n -su p e r v iso r s on th e one hand and th e s u p e r v is o r s o f each l e v e l on th e o th e r , th e d a ta in T able I I I - 9 in d ic a t e th a t th e t e s t s d id not d is t in g u is h w ith any r ea so n a b le s ig n if ic a n c e betw een th e v a r io u s l e v e l s o f th e s u p e r v is o r s .

However, w ith f i v e e x c e p tio n s , th e r a t i o s o f th e

92 TABLE III - 9

M edians, Q p a r tile D e v ia tio n s , P robable E rrors o f M edians, and R a tio s o f th e D iff e r e n c e Between th e Medians t o th e P rob ab le E rror o f th e D iffe r e n c e S c o r e s o f N on -S u p ervisors and th e S u p e rv iso rs in Three L e v e ls in A ll T e sts (E x c lu s iv e o f th e P u b lish ed S c a le s o f th e B ern re u te r P e r s o n a lit y In ventory) DEPARTMENT X N

T est/G rou p s F in a l Exam Sr Fore & Sp Sup Foremen A sst Foremen N on -S u p ervisors

18 16 24 28

Md

SB

9 1 .5 9 1 .5 8 8 .1 8 5 .5

7 .6 8 .2 5 .4 5 .6

PEMd

2 .2 4 2 .6 3 1 .3 8 1 .3 3

Alpha F-6 Exam Sr Fore & Sp Sup Foremen A sst Foremen N on -S u p ervisors

18 1? 27 SI

6 8 .5 5 1 .6 5 9 .8 4 3 .0

1 4 .3 1 6 .2 1 2 .1 1 2 .8

18 17 27 31

1 0 2 .0 9 2 .0 9 8 .9 8 7 .6

1 3 .7 1 4 .4 1 0 .9 1 5 .4

4 .0 5 4 .3 8 2 .6 3 3 .4 6

9 2 .5 8 8 .8 8 1 .3 7 4 .0

2 0 .8 2 0 .3 1 1 .7 1 3 .7

6 .1 4 6 .1 7 2 .8 2 3 .0 8

18 17 27 31

3 8 .9 3 3 .2 3 2 .9 2 8 .0

7 .9 6 .9 6 .1 7 .4

2 .3 3 2 .1 0 1 .4 7 1 .6 6

Minn P aper F B Sr Fore & Sp Sup Foremen A sst Foremen N on -S u p ervisors

3 .4 6 .0

(M di- Md2 )/P E (Mdi - Md3 ) 2 .7 0 0 .6 4 1 .6 8 ,, 0 .7 9 - 1 .3 5 ^ 2 .6 0 — - 6 .9 4 .4 (Mdi - Md2 )

18 17 27 31

B ern re u te r P I Sr Fore & Sp Sup Foremen A sst Fore N on -S u p ervisors

18 17 27 31

1 4 6 .3 15 0 .8 1 4 6 .0 11 3 .6

7 .2 7 .3 8 .7 1 2 .2

2 .1 3 2 .2 2 2 .1 0 2 .7 5

S tron g V I Blank Sr Fore & Sp Sup Foremen A sst Foremen N on -S u p ervisors

18 17 26 30

4 7 0 .5 4 5 8 .0 4 8 0 .5 3 5 6 .5

3 6 .2 2 5 .8 1 8 .4 2 4 .6

1 0 .6 8 7 .8 4 4 .5 2 5 .6 3

(Mdx- Md2 )/P E (Mdi - Mda) 2 .6 9 1 .6 6 0 .4 3 2 .1 4 1 .1 0 1 .7 4 ^ — 7 .5 ^ — ’ 7 .3 1 4 .8 (Mdi - Mda) (M d!- Md2 )/P E (Mdr- Mda) 3 .8 0 2 .1 7 1 .9 4 0 .1 2 ^ 2 .2 0 — 4 .9 (M di- Md2 ) (M di- Md2 )/P E (Mdi.-

Sr Fore Sp Super

0

4 .2 3 4 .9 3 2 .9 2 2 .8 8

Minn C l-T e st 2 Sr Fore & Sp Sup Foremen A sst Foremen N on -S u p ervisors

2 .3 0 1.2.9 2 .0 6 1*67. 1 .3 6 ---- 2 .6 (Mdj_ - Mdg )

(Mdx - Mda )/P E (Mdi - Mda) 4 .9 9 1 .7 3 2 .6 1 1 .5 1 - 1 .4 3 ------4 .1 0 ^ - 8 .2 8 .6 ---- " 1 6 .8 (Md! - Mda )

Minn C l-T e st 1 Sr Fore & Sp Sup Foremen A sst Foremen N o n -S u p erv iso rs

NonA sst Super Fore Fore (M di- Mdg)/PE(Mdi - Mda )

0 3 .4 6 .0

1 6 .9 8 .7 2 5 .5

1 0 .0 3 .1 1 4 .4

3 .7 1 1 .2 1 8 .5

1 .8 0 ^ 0 .3 5 .2

5 .7 6 .0 1 0 .9

Mda) - 1 .4 7

9 .4 2 0 .1 0 1 0 .5 4 1 .5 1 9 . 3 8 _______ 4 .8 ^ ^ - - ■ ■ '- '3 2 .4 3 7 .2 (Mdx - Mda ) (M di- Md3)/P E (Mdl. Mda) 0 .9 4 9 .4 4 - 0 .8 6 1 0 .5 7 -2 .4 9 _ 1 7 .1 8 ■22.5 --------1 2 4 .0 1 0 1 .5 (Mdi - Mdjj)

- 4 .5 0 .3 3 2 .7

1 2 .5 - 1 0 .0 1 1 4 .0

93

d if fe r e n c e betw een th e m edians to th e p rob ab le erro r o f th e d if f e r e n c e are p o s i t i v e , i f th e s e d if f e r e n c e s were taken acco rd in g to a d escen d in g ord er o f l e v e l s o f s u p e r v is io n .

T h e r e fo r e , i t was f e l t th a t some method o f com bining

t e s t s c o r e s in t o a r a t in g might be u s e f u l l y d eveloped to meet th e d e s ir e d o b j e c t iv e o f d eterm in in g th e p rob ab le term in a l l e v e l o f su p e r v iso r y c a p a c ity p o s s e s s e d by a p erso n who had been t e s t e d w ith th e b a tte r y o f t e s t s u sed in t h i s p o r tio n o f th e stu d y .

A "Rating Based on T est Scores" p rocedure was

developed fo r t h i s p u rp o se. The fundam ental b a s is o f t h i s procedure was th a t fo r each r a tin g based on t e s t s c o r e s a p erso n must exceed a c e r t a in c r i t i c a l raw sc o r e in each o f th e t e s t s and th a t a ls o he must m aintain a minimum sum o f t e s t sco re r a t in g s in v a r io u s co m b in a tio n s.

T h is method was adopted in ord er to perm it

a reason ab le c r o s s com pensation f o r d e f i c i e n c i e s in t e s t s c o r e s w ithout p er­ m ittin g t h i s com pensation to reach extrem e l i m i t s .

The d e t a i l s o f t h i s

procedure are d e sc r ib e d in T able I I I - 1 0 . A ll o f th e em ployees in c lu d e d in t h i s p o r tio n o f th e stu d y f o r whom th e r e were s u f f i c i e n t t e s t s c o r e s were r a te d by t h i s p ro ced u re.

The d i s t r i ­

b u tio n o f th e s e r a tin g s in com parison w ith th e rea ssig n m en ts to duty p rop osed in 1940 i s shown in Table I I I - 1 1 .

Two minimum a c c e p ta b le r a t in g s based on

t e s t sc o r e s were c o n sid e r e d - 2 .0 and 2 .5 - and th e p ercen ta g e c o r r e c t ly p la c e d and th e r a t io s o f th e d if f e r e n c e in p ro p o rtio n s to th e standard er r o r o f th e d if f e r e n c e were c a lc u la t e d fo r each .

The p e r c e n ta g e s c o r r e c t ly p la c e d

and th e c r i t i c a l r a t io s in d ic a t e th a t t h i s method o f a s s ig n in g r a t in g s b ased on t e s t sc o r e s d i f f e r e n t i a t e d sh a rp ly betw een th e su p e r v iso r s and th e nons u p e r v is o r s . A fu r th e r a n a ly s is was made to determ ine how sh a rp ly t h i s method o f a s s ig n in g r a t in g s based on t e s t s c o r e s d if f e r e n t i a t e d betw een th e s e v e r a l l e v e l s o f su p e r v is io n and a ls o w hether h ig h er c r i t i c a l r a t in g s based on t e s t

94 TABLE III . 10 "Rating Based on Test Scores" Procedure DEPARTMENT X Subtable A Raw Test Score Ranges for Each Test Score Rating Test Score Bating*

Test Score Ranges Alpha F-6

Mina Cl T-l

Mian Cl T-£

Minn P F B

Bern P I CSF

Strong V CSF

7£-up 58-71 44-67

100-up 87-99 75-86

83-up 68-8£ 53-67

40-up 33-39 «5>—3^

159-up 145-158 131-144

517-up 477-51S 436-476

43.5 30-43 0-£9

74.5 63-74 0-6£

5£. 5 38-5£ 0-37

£4.5 17-£4 0-16

130.6 117-130 0-116

435.5 395-435 0-394

1.0 1.5 £.0 Critical Scores £.5 3.0

Range of TeBt Scores for each rating equals 2/3 SD

Subtable B Limiting (Maximum) Values for Each Rating Based on Test Scores _____ of Bach Test Score Rating and Combinations of Them_____ Ratings Maximum Values of Test Score Ratings B a s e d ______________for Bach Rating Based on Test Scores________________ On Test Bern P I Strong V I Scores Alpha F-6 Minn Cl T-l Minn Cl T-2 Minn P F B CHF _ 1.0

£.0

£.0

2.0 Sum 5.0

2.0

£.5 Sum 6.0

£.5

3.0 Sura 7.0

3.0

3.0 Sura 8.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

£.0

£.0 Sura 3.5

Sum 6.5 £.6

1.5

£.5

£.5

£.5 Sum 4.0

Sum 7.5 £.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0 Sum 4.5

Sum 8.5 3.0

£.6

3.0

3.0

1 1 jo jvrj

3.0

Sura

Sum 9.5 3.0

3.0

3.0 No Limit 8

3.0

3.0

To determine Rating Based on Test Scores 1. Convert Raw Test Scores into Test Score Ratings by using values shown In Subtable A, "Raw Test Score Ranges for Each Test Score Rating." 2. Compare the Test Score Ratings with the limiting values shown la Subt&ble B.

Subtable C _____ Examples of Determination of Ratings Based on Test Scores_____ Bern P I Strong V I Alpha F-6 Minn Cl T-l Minn Cl T-2 Minn P f j :EF CSF Example 1 Raw Test Scores Test Score Ratings

65

103

81

23

142

460

1.5

1.0

1.5

2.5

£.0

1.5

Rating Based on Test Scores

1.5

Example 2 Raw Test Scores Test Score Ratings

29

76

65

31

165

434

3.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

1.0

2.5

Rating Based on Test Scores

2.5

95 TABLE III - 11 Ratings Based on Test Scores Compared With Reassignments to Duty Proposed in 1940

DEPARTMENT X

P in a l R a tin g s Based on T est S cores

T sfd

R eassignm ents to Duty Proposed in 1940 Pore and* S e n io r S p e c ia l S erv A sst Pore A sst Out At Large Pore Pore Super Pore o f Co men mm

.

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

-

-

2 1 1

-

1 3 -

No R atin g T o ta l

4

4

T o ta l

3

—

-

—

—

1

-

-

-

28 16 16 8 27 3

17

14

4

98

8

8

9

3

-

1 1

11

2

-

1 4

3

1 —

-

16 2

2 4 1 2

1

5

23

27

6

♦C onsidered as N on -S u p ervisors

S u b ta b le A D ata Rearranged f o r th e C a lc u la tio n o f the P ercen ta g es C o r r e c tly P la c e d and th e R a tio s o f th e D iffe r e n c e in P ro p o rtio n s to th e Standard E rror o f th e D iffe r e n c e S u p e rv iso rs vs N on-Supervisors A c cep ta b le P in a l R a tin g s vs Not A ccep tab le P in a l R atin gs R eassignm ents Proposed in 1940 E x c lu s iv e o f Empls T sfd

r

5.0

n S u p erv iso rs U) N on-S u p ervisors and Out o f Company (a ) T o ta l

(o )

i

R atin gs Based on T e s t S co res E x c lu s iv e o f Employees Not R ated 2.5 2 .0 . 1 . 5 , 1 .0 n “ J — n i

Total n

3

4 .9

2

3 .3

56

9 1 .8

61

23

7 6 .6

_5

1 6 .7

_2

6 .7

30

26

2 8 .6

7

7 .7

58

6 3 .7

91

S u b ta b le B D eterm in a tio n o f P er cen ta g es C o r r e c tly P la ced and C r it ic a l R a tio s R atin gs Based on T e s t S co res Not A ccep ta b le 3*0, 2 ,5 3-0

A ccep ta b le 2 , 0 , 1 , 5 , 1 ,0 2 . 5 , 2 , 0 , 1 . 5 , 1 .0

P ercen tages C o rrectly P la ced 92 89

„ . — ^ tic a l x = --------- 7 ------------------ — 13/^12 ^ q i/C q i 1 4 ,8 8 .8

8 ,3 7a

96

sc o r e s co u ld be a ssig n e d to th e h ig h er l e v e l s o f s u p e r v is io n .

The r e s u lt s

o f t h i s a n a ly s is , shown in T able I I I - 1 3 , in d ic a t e th a t from a s t a t i s t i c a l p o in t o f view no p r o g r e s s iv e s e r i e s o f c r i t i c a l r a t in g s based on t e s t sc o r e s can s a f e ly be a ssig n e d to s u c c e s s iv e l e v e l s o f s u p e r v is io n in so fa r a s t h i s p a r t ic u la r s e t o f d a ta are con cerned.

For exam ple, i t does not appear th a t

i t would be v a li d to req u ir e th a t an em ployee should have a r a tin g based on t e s t s c o r e s o f 1 .5 or b e t t e r to be a s s ig n e d a s a s e n io r foreman, or a r a tin g o f 2 .0 or b e t t e r to be a ssig n e d a s a forem an, becau se em ployees are fu n c tio n ­ in g s a t i s f a c t o r i l y a t th e s e su p e rv iso ry l e v e l s even though th ey have low er r a tin g s based on t e s t sc o r e s .

However, c r i t i c a l r a t in g s o f 2 .0 and o f 2 .5

appear to g iv e comparably s ig n if ic a n t r e s u l t s fo r th e purpose o f d i f f e r e n t i ­ a t in g betw een n o n -su p erv iso r s and s u p e r v is o r s . Comparison o f T est R e s u lts and S ta tu s o f Employees in March, 1942 In March, 1942, th e s t a t u s o f t h e s e em ployees was examined.

Of them,

45 were su p e r v iso r s and r a tin g s o f th e s e were o b ta in ed from t h e ir su p e r io r s, who u sed th e su p e rv iso ry r a tin g s c a le ( s e e p p . 99

i f . ) ; 35 were n o n -su p e r v iso r s,

and 17 had l e f t th e department or th e company. The r a tin g s o f th e 45 s u p e r v is o r s were compared w ith t h e ir r a tin g s based on t e s t sc o r e s made in 1940.

I f a d if f e r e n c e o f one d iv is io n ( 0 .5 )

betw een r a tin g s i s p e r m is s ib le , th e r a t in g s o f 37 em ployees (8 2 $ ) were w ith in th e range o f p e r m is s ib le agreem ent.

The q u e s tio n n a ir e s c o r e s ( s e e p . 113 ) were

o b ta in ed fo r 42 o f th e su p e r v iso r s and o f th e s e 28 (6 7 $ ) were c o n s is t e n t w ith th e r a t in g s based on t e s t sc o r e s made in 1940 and o n ly 3 were in c o n s is t e n t by more than one d iv is io n on th e r a t in g s c a l e . Of th e 27 em ployees who, in 19 4 0 , had r a t in g s o f 3 .0 , 19 were nons u p e r v is o r s and 3 were s u p e r v is o r s .

The l a t t e r were ra te d in March, 1942, by

t h e ir s u p e r io r s , one each as 1 .5 (Very G ood), 2 .0 (A v era g e), and 2 .5 ( F a ir ) . A com parison o f th e r a t in g s b a sed on t e s t s c o r e s in 1940 w ith th e r a t in g s made by su p e r io r s in March, 1942, i s shown in T able I I I - 1 3 .

97

TABLE III - 12

R e l i a b i l i t y o f the R a tin g s Based on T e st S co res as a Means f o r D i f f e r e n t i a t i n g Between D if f e r e n t L e v e ls o f S u p e r v isio n B ased on R atio o f D iffe r e n c e Between P ro p o rtio n s to Standard E rror o f D iffe r e n c e DEPARTMENT X

Croups o f Employees Ctspared Sr

ore & Sp Supv vs A ll O thers

Sr Fore & Sp Supv vs A ll O thers

P in a l R atin gs Based on T est S co res Rot A ccep ta b le A ccep ta b le

3 . 0 , 2 .5 , 2 .0

3 .0 , 2 .5

1 . 5 , 1 .0

P er cen ta g es C o r r e c tly P la ced

C r it ic a l R a tios ^1 2 / ^ 1 3 '

^0 1 / ^ 0 1 '

6 2 .6

3 ,2

2 .8

2 . 0 , 1 .5 , 1 .0

5 3 .9

6 .1

3 .1

1 . 5 , 1 .0

4 5 .9

0 .9

0 .8

Sr Fore & Sp Supv vs A sst Fore & Fore

3 . 0 , 2 .5 , 2 .0

Sr Fore & Sp Supv vs A sst Fore & Fore

3 .0 , 2 .5

2 . 0 , 1 .5 , 1 .0

3 4 .4

0 .5

0 .5

Fore vs A s s t Fore & Non-Sup v s

3 .0 , 2 .5

2 . 0 , 1 . 5 , 1 .0

5 8 .9

3 .0

2 .5

Fore vs A ss t Fore & Non-Sup vs

3 .0

5 2 .1

2 .9

2 .2

Fore vs A s s t Fore

3 .0 , 2 .5

3 4 .9

- 1 .4

- 1 .5

Fore vs A sst Fore

3 .0

3 4 .9

- 1 .5

- 1 .8

A sst Fore vs NonSupvs

3 .0 , 2 .5

9 4 .7

1 5 .2

6 .7

A sst Fore vs NonSupvs

3 .0

9 .9

5 .8

2 .5 -

1 .0

2 . 0 , 1 . 5 , 1 .0

2 .5 -

1 .0

2 . 0 , 1 ,5 , 1 .0

2 .5 - 1 .0

8 7 .6

98

TABLE III - 13

Comparison o f R atin gs Based on T est Scores - 1940 With R a tin g s by S u p erio rs made in March 1942 DEPARTMENT X R atin gs by S u periors March 1942

3 .0

1.0 1 .5 2.0 2 .5 3 .0 T o ta l N on-S u p ervisors

F in a l R atin gs Based on T est S co res - 1940 2 .5 2.0 1 .5 N. R. 1.0 Total 2 1 5

6 11 6

8 15 18 4

9

8

23

45

4

8

3

36

1 1 1

1 1

2

3

2

19

2

2

5

R atin gs Not A v a ila b le Out o f Company Leave o f Absence D eceased R e tir e d Not Enough T e s ts

T otal

17

27

16

16

28

98

S u b tab le A Comparison o f R a tin g s Based on T est Scores - 1940 With R a tin g Q u estio n n a ire S cores by Superiors - March 1942 R atin g Q u estio n n a ire S cores by S u periors March 1942

3 .0

48-63 32-47 16-31 0-15

— 2 —

Total

2

P in a l R a tin g s Based On 'Pest. 2 .5 2 .0 1 .5

Rflnraa _

1 .0

T o ta l

1 _1

2 3 1 _1

3 3 2 —

16 4 3 ~

21 10 9 __ 2

2

7

8

23

42

99

DEVELOPMENT OP A SUPERVISORY RATING SCALE The study made in Department X produced r e s u lt s o f s u f f i c i e n t s i g ­ n if ic a n c e to make i t c o n sid ered d e s ir a b le to study o th er ty p e s o f su p e rv iso ry em ployees by th e same or a s im ila r p r o c e s s .

As c o n c lu s io n s were wanted more

q u ic k ly , however, than was p o s s i b l e under th e c o n d itio n s o f th e p rev io u s stu d y , i t was n ecessa ry t o d ev elo p some measure o f s u p e r v isio n w ith which th e t e s t s c o r e s co u ld be compared more q u ic k ly than w ith perform ance and s u r v iv a l over a p e r io d o f y e a r s , a lth o u g h th e l a t t e r were bound to be th e u ltim a te c r ite r ia .

A r a tin g s c a le was s e le c t e d a s th e most l i k e l y in stru m en t, a t r i a l

form was c o n stru cted and t e s t e d , and a working form was prepared and u sed in th e b a la n ce o f t h i s stu d y .

S e le c t io n o f th e Type o f R atin g S c a le to be Used The ty p e o f r a t in g s c a le to be u sed f o r th e remainder o f t h i s study was s e le c t e d w ith regard to two c o n s id e r a t io n s : 1.

That i t must be v a l i d , r e l i a b l e , econom ical o f a d m in is tr a tio n , and a c c e p ta b le to th o s e who u s e i t .

2.

That i t must sample th e s u p e r v is o r * s perform ance o f h is fou r func­ t io n s - o b serv a tio n and a n a l y s i s , p la n n in g and developm ent, e x e c u tin g and ch eck in g, and e v a lu a tin g and r e p o r tin g - a s he perform s them in h is four f i e l d s o f a c t i v i t y - group p ro d u ctio n perform ance, group p erso n n el c o n d it io n s , r e l a t io n s w ith c o lle a g u e s , e t c . , and s p e c ia l assig n m en ts. G a r rett1 has sa id :

"The v a l i d i t y o f a t e s t , or o th er m easuring in ­

strum ent, depends upon th e f i d e l i t y w ith which i t measures whatever i t p u rp o rts to measure."

1.

Henry E. G a r rett, S t a t i s t i c s in P sy ch o lo g y and E d u cation , p . 324.

100 Two f a c t o r s o f v a l i d i t y were c o n sid ered to be o f e s p e c ia l im portance: 1.

Each item had to be r e c o g n iz a b ly s i g n i f i c a n t , th a t i s , i t had to be d e f i n i t e l y and r e l ia b ly r e la t e d to su p e rv iso ry fu n c tio n s .

2.

Each item had t o be s e l e c t i v e , th a t i s , i t had to d i f f e r e n t i a t e betw een s u p e r v is o r s o f d if f e r e n t l e v e l s o f e x c e lle n c e . Bingham has s a id :

c o n s is t e n c y ." 1

"The r e l i a b i l i t y o f a measure i s i t s s e l f -

The r a t in g s c a le had to be one th a t co u ld be r e a d ily t e s t e d

f o r r e l i a b i l i t y , and i t s r e l i a b i l i t y had to be a c c e p ta b ly h ig h - i f p o s s i b l e , by s t a t i s t i c a l a n a ly s is . The economy o f a r a t in g s c a le i s d eterm ined by th e tim e and e f f o r t th a t must be tak en by th o s e who u s e i t to r a te em p loyees.

When a r a t in g s c a le

i s b e in g c o n s tr u c te d th e r e i s a c o n f l i c t betw een th e need fo r economy and th e need fo r v a l i d i t y .

E x e c u tiv e s o fte n demand a r a t in g s c a le th a t w i l l “tak e

o n ly a m inute o r two to f i l l ou t"; whereas v a l i d i t y and a ls o r e l i a b i l i t y demand th a t c a r e f u l c o n s id e r a tio n be g iv en to th e c h a r a c t e r is t ic s and perform ­ ance o f an em ployee when he i s b ein g ra te d , and t h i s p r o c e s s r e q u ir e s m inutes r a th e r than seco n d s.

The s c a le had to be a s econom ical o f a d m in is tr a tio n a s

p o s s ib le w ith ou t undue in t e r f e r e n c e w ith v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y . U n le ss th o s e who a re to u s e a r a tin g s c a le w i l l a ccep t i t a s a rea so n a b le and a c c u r a te in stru m en t, th ey may e it h e r r e fu s e to u se i t o r , i f th ey are fo r c e d to u s e i t , th ey may - though not p u rp o se ly so - u s e i t c a r e ­ le s s ly .

E xp erien ce seems to in d ic a t e th a t th e a c c e p t a b il it y o f a r a t in g s c a le

i s a d ir e c t fu n c tio n o f th e u s e r 's b e l i e f in i t s a ccu ra cy , w o rth w h ilen ess, and r e l a t i v e s im p lic it y .

T h is b e l i e f can be f o s t e r e d by g a in in g th e p a r t ic ip a t io n

o f th e u ltim a t e u s e r s in th e c o n s tr u c tio n o f th e s c a le so th a t i t w i l l not be look ed upon a s an "arm chair p ro d u ctio n ."

1.

W alter V. Bingham, A p titu d e s and A p titu d e T e s t in g , p . 214.

101 A r a t in g s c a le i s e s s e n t i a l l y a means whereby th e a c t i v i t i e s and c h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f an em ployee can be sampled and d e sc r ib e d in such a way th a t th e v e r b a l p ic t u r e so formed w i l l bear a d is t in g u is h a b le resem blance to th e em ployee.

The N a tio n a l I n d u s t r ia l C onference Board has s t a t e d :

A lthough i t i s som etim es d i f f i c u l t to draw th e l i n e betw een them, employee r a tin g p la n s may be s a id t o f a l l in t o two broad c a t e g o r ie s th o s e which in v o lv e some s o r t o f com parative ranking or grad in g o f em ployees, and th o s e which in v o lv e con p arin g each man's a c tu a l p e iv formance w ith pred eterm in ed sta n d a rd s o f perform ance, or d e f i n i t i o n s o f s a t is f a c t o r y p erform ance, which have b een drawn up fo r each job elem en t. The f i r s t ty p e o f p la n i s d esig n ed p r im a r ily to e v a lu a te employee worth or e f f i c i e n c y f o r th e p u rp o ses o f making wage a d ju s t­ m ents, l a y - o f f s , p ro m o tio n s, and s im ila r p erso n n el t r a n s a c t io n s ; th e secon d , to improve th e perform ance o f workers on t h e ir p r e se n t jo b s and u s u a lly th e perform ance o f t h e i r s u p e r v is o r s a s w e ll, through p e r io d ic d is c u s s io n s betw een th e tw o. N early a l l r a t in g p la n s serv e both p u rp o ses to some d e g r e e .1 There are many form s o f r a t in g s c a le s such a s th e S co tt Man-to-Man E a tin g S c a le , th e Graphic S c a le , th e q u e s tio n n a ir e ty p e as r e p r e se n te d by th e P rob st R atin g S c a le , th e rank o rd er or th e grouping method o f r a t in g , and th e p u r e ly summary form o f s c a le in which an employee i s ra ted "good," "bad,11 or " i n d i f f e r e n t ,11 i n r e sp e c t t o two or th r e e item s and in r esp ect t o h is t o t a l perform ance. For t h i s stud y a com bination o f q u e s tio n n a ir e and summary form o f su p e r v iso r y r a t in g s c a le w ith a p r o v is io n fo r su p p ortin g remarks was ad opted. T h is form o f s c a le was chosen b eca u se p a s t ex p e r ie n c e w ith i t had in d ic a te d th a t i t co u ld be c o n s tr u c te d w ith a h ig h d eg ree o f v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y th a t co u ld b e dem onstrated to th e laym an, and b eca u se i t co u ld be made a c c e p t­ a b le in s p it e o f th e f a c t th a t i t req u ired more tim e to u s e than th e more u su a l forms o f r a tin g s c a l e s .

1.

N a tio n a l I n d u s t r ia l C onference Board, Employee E a tin g , S tu d ie s in P erso n n el P o l i c y . No. 3 9 , 1 9 4 2 , p . 5 .

102 C o n stru ctio n o f th e E a tin g S cale The c o n s tr u c tio n o f th e r a tin g s c a le in v o lv e d fo u r s t e p s :

assem bly

o f m a te r ia l, p r e p a r a tio n and t r i a l o f a p r elim in a ry d r a f t , p r e p a r a tio n o f th e w orking form, and e v a lu a tio n o f th e item s.

Assem bly o f M a teria l The k ey to th e c o n s tr u c tio n o f a v a lid and r e l i a b l e q u e s tio n n a ir e form o f r a t in g s c a le l i e s in th e s e le c t io n o f th e q u e s tio n s .

C erta in

c r i t e r i a were e s t a b lis h e d fo r each q u estio n : 1.

I t had to be o b j e c t iv e , or a s o b j e c t iv e a s p o s s i b l e , and be based upon a c t io n s in s te a d o f c a p a c i t i e s .

"By t h e i r f r u i t s ye s h a ll

know them," i s th e soundest p o s s ib le g u id e to th e c o n s tr u c to r o f a r a t in g s c a le .

To a ch ie v e o b j e c t i v i t y , each q u e s tio n ch osen fo r th e

s c a le had to be d ir e c te d a t gauging s p e c i f i c perform ance ra th e r th an a t e s tim a tin g q u a l i t i e s or c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

Bach q u e stio n had

t o ask or im ply "Does he?" ra th er th a n " Is he?" 2.

I t had to be s i g n i f i c a n t , th a t i s , i t had t o r e l a t e o b v io u s ly to some one o f th e fo u r fu n c tio n s o f th e s u p e r v is o r in some one o f h ie fo u r f i e l d s o f a c t i v i t y .

3.

I t had to be r e s t r i c t i v e , th a t i s , i t had to a p p ly a s fa r a s p o s s i b l e to one and o n ly one a c t i v i t y w ith in one o f th e s u p e r v is o r ’ s fo u r f u n c t io n s , a lth ou gh i t might spread over two or more f i e l d s o f a c tiv ity .

4.

I t had to d i f f e r e n t i a t e between su p erio r and in f e r i o r s u p e r v is o r s . As a measure o f d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g v a lu e th e c r i t e r i o n was e s t a b lis h e d th a t fo u r out o f f i v e su p e rio r s u p e r v iso r s would r e c e iv e a fa v o r a b le answer in i t , w h ile th r e e out o f f i v e i n f e r i o r s u p e r v is o r s would have an u n fa v o ra b le answer in i t .

103

About 200 q u e s tio n s , d is t r ib u t e d so a s to sample th e s u p e r v is o r 's four fu n c tio n s in h is fo u r f i e l d s o f a c t i v i t y , were prepared and su b m itted to s i x managers o f in te r m e d ia te rank whose su b ord in ate s u p e r v iso r s were par­ t i c i p a t i n g in t h i s stu d y .

As fa r a s p o s s i b l e , each q u estio n was p h rased in

laym an's language and was o f a ty p e commonly u sed by managers when d e s c r ib in g th e q u a lif i c a t io n s and a c t io n s o f s u p e r v is o r s . r a te each q u estio n :

Each manager was asked to

"1" - u s e f u l ; "2" - q u e s tio n a b le ; or "3" - not u s e f u l .

P rep aratio n and T e s tin g o f th e T r ia l Form The managers agreed to ap p roxim ately 40 o f th e s e q u e s tio n s and in d ic a te d w ith some d isagreem ent th a t an oth er 20 might be u s e f u l .

Obvious

d u p lic a tio n s were th en e lim in a te d , a few o f th e q u e s tio n s were rephrased to make them more c o n c is e , and a p r e lim in a r y d r a ft c o n s is t in g o f 35 q u e s tio n s was prepared. q u e s tio n s .

In corp orated in t h i s p r e lim in a r y d r a ft a ls o were f i v e summary

Four were d esig n ed to summarize th e s u p e r v is o r 's perform ance in

h is fou r fu n c tio n s o f o b serv in g and a n a ly z in g , p la n n in g and d e v e lo p in g , e x e c u tin g and ch eck in g , and e v a lu a tin g and r e p o r tin g ; and th e f i f t h q u e s tio n was a g en era l summary r a t in g o f th e em p loyee's g en era l v a lu e a s a su p e r v iso r y em ployee.

Answers to th e 35 q u e s tio n s were req u ested on e it h e r o f two b a s e s ,

which were s u b s t a n t ia lly in te r c h a n g e a b le : 1.

A "Yes," "?," "No" b a s is ,

by means o f which th e r a te r was ex p ected

to in d ic a t e whether th e s u p e r v iso r d id or d id not conform to th e q u e s tio n s . 2.

A "1," "2," "3" b a s i s , in

which "1" was in ten d ed to convey a

fa v o ra b le r e sp o n se , "2" a n e u tr a l re sp o n se , and "3" an u n fa v o ra b le r esp o n se. The "Yes" answers to some q u e s tio n s were fa v o r a b le , w h ile in o th e r s th e "No" answers were fa v o r a b le .

T h erefo r e, when th e form was p r in te d th e

104

"1, 2 , 3" s c a le was p r in te d a f t e r each q u e s tio n , th e " l ,Ms b ein g p la c e d in th e "Yes" or th e "No" column, a cco r d in g to whether th e "Yes" or th e "No" answer was fa v o r a b le . The f i v e summary q u e s tio n s were arranged in th e form o f a r a t in g s c a le c o n ta in in g sp aces f o r in d ic a t in g f i v e d e g r e e s o f e x c e lle n c e .

For

record p u r p o se s, th e d eg ree s o f e x c e lle n c e were a s sig n e d th e num erical d e s ig ­ n a tio n s th a t have been d e sc r ib e d in T ab le I I I - 1 ( p . 7 7 ) . The t r i a l form was then mimeographed, and c o p ie s , to g e th e r w ith i n s t r u c t io n s f o r i t s u s e , were sen t to s i x o f th e p a r t ic ip a t in g managers w ith th e req u est th a t each r a te two s u p e r io r s u p e r v is o r s , two in f e r i o r s u p e r v is o r s , and two o f average perform ance.

A copy o f t h i s t r i a l form and o f th e in ­

s t r u c t io n s f o r i t s u se i s in th e Appendix to t h i s r e p o r t. When th e t r i a l form s were retu rn ed th e q u e s tio n s th a t d id not have d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g v a lu e a cco rd in g to th e c r i t e r i o n th a t had been e s t a b lis h e d were determ ined and elim in a te d by th e f o llo w in g p roced u re; 1.

The answers o f t h e s u p e r io r , a v era g e , and in f e r i o r t r i a l groups o f su p e r v is o r s were ta b u la te d , and fo r each group and q u e stio n th e numbers o f "Yes," "?," and "No" answ ers were d eterm ined.

2.

The d if f e r e n c e s in resp o n se s f o r each q u e s tio n were determ ined by s u b tr a c tin g th e numbers o f "Yes,"

and "No" answers o f th e in ­

f e r i o r group from th e numbers o f l i k e answ ers o f th e su p e rio r group; and th e r e s u lt in g n e g a tiv e numbers in each q u e s tio n were c le a r e d by adding to each o f th e th r e e d if f e r e n c e s a p o s i t i v e number equal n u m erica lly to th e la r g e s t n e g a tiv e d if f e r e n c e , th u s form ing t r i a l answer v a lu e s fo r each q u e s tio n , th e la r g e s t v a lu e o f a q u e stio n b e in g i t s d if f e r e n t i a t i n g v a lu e .

T h is p r o c e s s was e s s e n t i a l l y th e

same a s th e p r o c e s s o f w e ig h tin g th e item s o f th e f in a l form (p. 108).

105

3.

Each q u e s tio n th a t had a d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g v a lu e o f 8 or l e s s was e lim in a te d . A t a b u la t io n o f th e t r i a l resp o n ses and th e d e t a i l s o f th e fo reg o in g

p roced u re are shown in T ab le I I I - 14. Trifiil q u e s tio n s 1 , 14, sind 21 were e lim in a te d b ecau se th e y had. d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g v a lu e s o f 8 or l e s s . N ex t, th e q u e s tio n s were examined fo r d u p lic a t io n answers

o f each q u e s tio n w ith th o se o f th e

by compearing th e

o th e r q u e s tio n s t o d eterm ine

whether th e answer p a t t e r n s o f any two were a l i k e .

T r ia l q u e s tio n 11 was

d e le te d b eca u se i t s answer p a tte r n was to o much l i k e th a t o f q u e s tio n 6.

P r e p a r a tio n o f th e Working Eorm A f i n a l s c a le was prepared and c o n s is t e d o f th e fo llo w in g : On th e fro n t o f th e form: 1.

A space fo r th e name o f th e employee to be r a te d and fo r o th e r company in fo r m a tio n .

2.

A req u est f o r th e r a te r to review th e "Procedure f o r Use" b e fo r e u s in g th e form.

3.

A sp ace f o r d e s c r ib in g th e em p lo y ee's p r e se n t d u t ie s i f th e y d id not fibres w ith h i s p resen t t i t l e , and a req u est t o "HATE t h i s em ployee on h is PRESENT DUTIES."

4.

The 31 q u e s tio n s arranged w ith columns fo r "Yes,"

and "No"

r e s p o n s e s , and w ith th e "1," "2," and "3" r e sp o n se s p r in te d a f t e r ea ch q u e s tio n ; th e "1" resp o n se s b e in g p r in te d in th e "Yes" or th e "No" colum n, in accordance w ith th e fa v o r a b le an sw ers. 5.

The fo u r summary q u e stio n s th a t a p p lie d to th e s u p e r v is o r 's fou r p r in c ip a l f u n c t io n s , to g e th e r w ith th e f i v e - p o i n t r a t in g s c a le p r e v io u s ly d e s c r ib e d .

106

E

3

O O

O iO t O O W

f J O > 0 0 0

O O t- O

W

N 0 V

V) f e 9

S ‘d

v

m o o w

U T3

V a lu es

©• O C MC D * 4»t* H r* t*- t— N .M^ I

ic ci oi pj ifi i i i i

I

of

4) » ® ! *-l

D eteraination

£

cj

a; • H ^J ^ C o _ w £• o as

2£ (-• & 5

lit

(fl

t~ t- < 7j ®00

t- r~ r- a>

t-- ao f- to cm

II

It

II

§•^3 ‘a ht-n ' tn OI w— io w m H

*—I

I I I

e 3

»—I

I

O fljNHio

t r-iH l

to io n n n

r-l

>-H

r~


to as

s°

W t - *0 f -

of

Answers

to

Q u e s tio n s ,

t» qn

D is t r i b - i t i o n

cm t*. r-i

*o

m a) n

n 41 h n v u>to to 1 *j* cO m 10 o> co

llO t-m

I

r-4 ®

*0 n

n

I *-l h

0 4 to v>

to h

N PJ N to N

I N ® O

I

n

h

t

I

I »

n

ik »

I ^

tfi K) O

E h

n

n

«o to

I-IN H I H

£ sSPl

I I N H N r-1H H I I

® r* H ^ ffi

I

I H

I

I

I N

I I I

r t co to f

m

I

• IO H

I IO H

I CJ I I

id m o

at o

0 1 to n

c£> ^

tO I IO 1 C M in N to H N

NN I H I

53 £|