Task Engagement

byMichael B. London

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Thesis Advisor: Suresh Srivastva

Department of Organizational BehaviorCase Western Reserve UniversityMay 14, 1989

Task Engagement

Abstract

byMichael B. London

The research discussed in this thesis concerns a study in which business students and managers were surveyed, interviewed and observed in an effort to understand an individual's potential and behavior in task situations. Two samples were studied, one focusing on scale construction and reliability and the other on changes in the individual's disposition over time. From this research a theory of Task Engagement was formed and a Task Engagement Style Inventory was developed.

Task Engagement concerns the personal and cultural attributions that give meaning to a task situation, and an individual's frame of mind as he does his work. An individual's proficiency and demeanor in task situations is seen as a function of three major factors; task, environment and Task Engagement Style. A synergy of these factors increases the probability that a desired level ofperformance and quality of work experience can be achieved.

It is proposed that there are four Task Engagement Styles; Functional, Creative, Social and Intentional, which can be viewed in either a general or situational context. These are derived from two dimensions in the Task Engagement model: task disposition, which can be viewed as a continuum between purposive and expressive; and environmental disposition, a continuum betweenanticipating and adapting. The statistical analysis of results from version 3 of the Task Engagement Style Inventory revealed a five item task disposition scale (expressive/purposive), and 2 environmental disposition scales (anticipating/adapting) of five and eleven items.

Results indicated that undergraduate grade point average is related to Task Engagement Style. This was supported by a significant correlation between grade point average and a purposive task disposition, and a moderately significant relationship between grade point average and an adapting environmental disposition. The results suggest that institutions of undergraduate education may favor students that adopt a functional approach to their studies. It is inferred that the emphasis on achievement and conformity in formal education may be encouraging students to engage their studies in a way that runs counter to creative learning and thinking.

Acknowledgements

This dissertation was accomplished with the help and love of many outstanding friends and scholars. I wish to acknowledge some of the people that have guided, supported, and engaged in seemingly endless dialogue with me about the ideas that fill these pages.

I wish to acknowledge the help of my dissertation chairman first. Suresh Srivastva has been and will be a friend of the first order.He has had immeasurable influence on my development, and has taught me that being a teacher means having the courage to take a position and see the truth even when it is difficult. From him I learned to look for underlying themes and issues, and to combine the best of the head and the heart. His scholarship, concentration, insight and gift for dialogue serve as an enduring inspiration.

I also wish to acknowledge Richard Boyatzis for the major contribution he has made to this work. Also a true friend, he helped teach me the art and rigor of research, and that academics can be more than ivory tower dreamers. He serves as an inspiration for me to be a grounded, competent, professional. He believed in me before my ideas were fully formed, helped to shape them, and invested himself in the process throughout.

This work is a reflection of a scholarly environment that I have been fortunate enough to be surrounded by. It is an environment that values significant relationships, kindness, creativity, ideasand a quest to improve the human condition. These priorities are implicit to this research. Several people in particular have encouraged me in this work. Bill Pasmore has been a source of sanity, humor and intellectual rigor since the very first year of my Ph.D program, and this has continued during this new transitionfrom graduate student to professional. His feedback has been invaluable in this effort. The contribution of David Kolb must also be mentioned. He enthusiastically discussed and supported myideas, while the richness of his Learning Style Inventory served as an inspiration for the development of my own instrument.

Several friendships have also been instrumental in developing

this thesis. Bruce Hanson was an enthusiastic and highly competent partner in the data manipulation, methodology and analysis that were so essential to this study. We learned about research together. Frank Barrett, a scholar and friend has been aspiritual partner in the development of these ideas. He inspired me to make this thesis an expression of my values and to approach it with integrity. Darlyne Bailey, Barbara Bird, Tom Blue, Ron Fry, RuthAnne Goldberg, Carol Hoffman, Jeffery London, Leslie London, Sheila London, Asbjorn Osland, Dan Ruben, Susan Taft and the people of Robert H. Schaffer and Associates also deserve recognition for their important contributions. All have been goodfriends and have served as sources of nurturance, friendship and family. I also wish to thank my parents for their immeasurable influence in preparing me for this work. My mother, Annette London, encouraged me to reflect on human nature and understand the underlying causes of behavior. She taught me to be empathic, creative, expressive and sincere. My father Leon London helped sustain me and taught me to be rigorous in my work, professional in my standards, and kind, generous and respectful to others.

Lastly and perhaps most importantly I must thank Anne Renio. She inspired me to strengthen my values, improve my writing and raise my intellectual standards. Throughout the dissertation process she selflessly involved herself in my work, providing constant feedback and support. Through many hours of dialogue with her this construct of Task Engagement became much clearer and succinct.

Table Of Contents

Chapter PageAbstract iiAcknowledgements ivPreface xii

ONE - Literature Review / Theory 1Potential and Action 2Involvement 6Task Engagement Model 8Imagery 9Task Engagement and Inquiry 14Level of Analysis 17Dimensions of the Model 18The Will 21Task Disposition 25The Expressive Dimension 27The Purposive Dimension 29A Constraint Relationship 31A Need For Integration 34Environmental Disposition 38Anticipating 42Adapting 43Freire's Perspective 44Research Questions 46Final Comments 48

Two - Methodology 49Initial Development of the Survey Instrument 49Time Series Study 51Reliability Study 52Hypotheses 54Overview of Experimental Design 55

Three - Results & Discussion 56Results Of Factor Analysis 58Scale Construction 64Comparison With The Locus Of Control Scale 68

Relationship Between Task Engagement And Grades 71Demographic Data 72Results of the Time Series Study 73Summary 79

Four - FURTHER Discussion OF THE CONCEPT 82Functional Task Engagement Style 82Creative Task Engagement Style 85Social Task Engagement Style 86Intentional Task Engagement Style 87Synergy Between Style, Task and Environment 88Is there a place for expressiveness in organizational life?92 Integration 97Dispositional Shifts 98Implications For Supervision 101Final Comments 104

Bibliography 106

APPENDIX 114A. Task Engagement Style Inventory (Version 3) 115B. Revised Task Engagement Style Inventory Booklet 118C. Preliminary Version (The P.D.T.A. Inventory) 133D. Locus Of Control Instrument (Rotter, 1966) 135E. Demographic Survey 140F. Demographic Data Results 142G. Time Series Analysis of Individual Teams 145H. Styles Of Engagement With A Task (chart) 147I. Strategies For Working With People Of Various Styles 148

List of Figures

Figure Page1. Task Engagement Model 92. Level Of Analysis 193. Dimensions of the Task Engagement model 204. Continuum between purposive and expressive 255. Continuum between anticipating and adapting 40

6. Time Series 757. Environmental Demand Model 808. Two By Two Task Engagement Model 839. Task Engagement Styles Grid 8910. Demographic Data Results - gender 14211. Demographic Data Results - U.G. degree 14212. Demographic Data Results - ethnic group 14313. D.D.R. - years of managerial experience 14314. D.D.R. - years of work experience 14415. D.D.R. - date of birth 14416. Time Series Analysis - (Individual Teams) 14517. Styles Of Engagement With A Task (chart) 147

List of Tables

Table Page1. Characteristics of Purposive and Expressive Dimensions

262. Characteristics of Anticipating and Adapting Dimensions

393. Task Engagement Scales 564. Principle Components Factor Analysis with Varimax Rotation

605. Principle Components Factor Analysis with Oblique Rotation.

626. Restricted Factor Analysis Models using LISREL 657. Reliability/Validity Matrix 698. Environmental Disposition Scale used in time series analysis

749. Anova / T-Test Results From 2/26 to 4/1 77

Preface

Interest in Task Engagement began with a personal inquiry into processes of learning, and this author's own experiences as student and teacher. After seventeen years of formal education, Iwas employed as executive director of the S.O.S. Crisis Center of Ypsilanti, Michigan. Being away from academia led me to reflect upon my many years of formal education. In these reflections I was struck by the preoccupation with grades that I had occasionally observed in my peers and myself. While some formal education experiences were a catalyst for enlightening and significant learning experiences that enriched our lives, many others were not. In the lessor of these experiences it seemed that rather than pursue those areas that might prove intellectually or professionally enriching, we wasted the opportunity to learn and grow.

In reflecting upon these observations and experiences I wondered why intelligent human beings would choose to conduct a significantportion of their education in this manner. At times we seemed so absorbed by the performance appraisal aspect of our education, that our own intellectual interests seemed to be almost a distraction from the quest to earn high marks. Perhaps the lure of earning a positive evaluation was so powerful that we were distracted from caring about the very content of the material we were studying.

While contemplating these experiences brought insight it was not at all clear how or why we had chosen to waste these potential learning experiences. It was not as if we were blind to what was going on. On some level we had awareness of the opportunities forsignificant learning and growth that we were not utilizing. Stillwe forged ahead in pursuit of positive evaluations, and expressed this growing knowledge about our process in the context of cynicism, satire and humor. Somehow awareness was not enough.

Nevertheless, we had considerable pride in our scholastic work. The development of grade earning abilities had come through rigorous training, and we were proud of them. What is more, we

were certain that our teachers, parents, peers and potential employers were impressed by them as well. It was made very clear to us that an excellent grade point average was an important ingredient in laying the foundation for a successful career. However, when earning an "A" grade in a course, in which we realized that very little that was personally meaningful had been learned, we were left with something of an empty feeling. We knewwe had achieved - but what had been achieved? After graduating with honors we were left with the question, what had really been accomplished?

After graduating, during the years at the crisis center I noticed what seemed to be a very different way of approaching work. Though feedback was given on a regular basis people seemed more interested in the actual work than the performance appraisal that followed. Few of the center's employees appeared to be driven by meeting the requirements of their jobs, measuring up to external standards, or achieving a positive evaluation. This way of engaging with work seemed very different from the way I rememberedmy fellow students approaching their studies at school. In tryingto account for the disparity in my observations I wondered if it was the nature of the task, the work environment or something elsethat was causing work to be engaged in a different way.

After three years at the Crisis Center I returned to academia. Inentering a Ph.D. program at Case Western Reserve University I was determined to learn as much as possible and avoid the distraction of grades. I hoped that somehow I could approach my studies with the same integrity and quality that had characterized my work at the crisis center. I entered the program with other students, andjoined a community of many other colleagues all of whom were in the process of pursuing a Ph.D. While in some ways each person inthis community was confronted with a similar learning environment,I observed that they did not necessarily approach the task of getting a doctorate in the same fashion. There seemed to be something fundamentally different about how these individuals regarded their task. Some students seemed most interested in learning for learning's sake while others appeared to view learning as the means to a degree. Some seemed most concerned

with performing to the standards set by their professors, while others placed their emphasis on developing close relationships. Some became caught up in their own fascination with the material they encountered, while others took a reactive approach in responding to the requirements of the curriculum. In struggling to make sense of these observations I noticed that the individual differences I observed in my colleagues went beyond questions of how motivated these persons were. The differences I was observinghad more to do with how they experienced their Ph.D. education andthe particular kind of personal meaning they endowed it with. There appeared to be individual differences that was causing thesestudents to approach a similar set of circumstances in very different ways.

As I advanced in the program I took on the role of Instructor at anearby university. In working with and observing groups of undergraduate and masters students involved in various courses I perceived the same phenomenon that I had seen in my peers. I noticed patterns that suggested that individuals approach their work in very different ways. I was determined to understand more about how and why these phenomena were occurring.

CHAPTER ONELITERATURE REVIEW / THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Task Engagement is a psychic concept that describes how an individual goes about doing a task. It concerns the personal and cultural decisions that are made about the meaning of a task, a person's frame of mind as he works, and how individual differencesrelate to the way the task situation is approached. Task Engagement also embraces larger issues such as: world view; ideology; relationship to one's environment; self-concept; and themeaning of work. In this chapter the literature related to this concept will be examined, and a theory of Task Engagement will be presented.

'Task' is defined as a body of work requiring mental and/or physical activity (Garland, H., 1985). The source for a task can be the immediate physical environment, an ongoing or recent interest of the individual, or, as is usually the case in formal organizations, an individual's role responsibilities. Some jobs are comprised of a single task that is repeated throughout the workday, while many others are more complex and include a variety of activities.

High performance is rarely uniform. On any given day an individual performs hundreds of tasks, yet he does not engage witheach of them in the same way. He may invest his heart and soul insome, and do only the minimum necessary to meet a required goal inothers. Some of these activities seem to get the best he can offer, while other's seemingly get his worst.

Even the most competent worker has some parts of his job that for one reason or another tend to get shortchanged. Some are taken onwholeheartedly with the highest standards, while others are done with little care. When involved in some assignments he may refuseto be interrupted for anything other than a major event, while in others he seems all too happy to be called away for the smallest of reasons. Why do people devote their voluntary discretionary time to some tasks, while perfunctorily doing the minimum on

others? It is clear that the potential exists for either approach.

Potential & Action

Many competent people in organizations feel under-utilized. Some are in plateaued positions, unable to advance due to organizational constraints. Others are in jobs that do not fit their particular interests and talents. Still others have supervisors that do not inspire them or make good use of their strengths. In most organizations there is a tremendous untapped reservoir of potential, or what Ashkenas and Schaffer have termed the "hidden reserve" (1982).

It is often assumed that if a person has the ability and knowledgeto do a job that he will then do it competently. Knowledge, however, does not always translate into action or skill. An individual's talents are often regarded as commodities, yet ability does not always result in high performance. In some taskspotential is converted into action while in others it remains dormant. The concept of task engagement is proposed as a conceptual bridge between potential and action.

Social scientists have had a difficult time accounting for the relationship between potential and action. Porpora, a post-Wittgensteinian philosopher argued that the prevailing concept of action as behavior that is accompanied by a subjective motive or purpose is mistaken (1983). He asserted that an adequate conception of action must involve a reference to mental states - i.e, the actor's wants, beliefs, and intentions. Similarly, Bandura wrote that "knowledge, transformational operations, and component skills are necessary but insufficient for accomplished performances. Indeed, people often do not behave optimally, even though they know full well what to do" (1982, p.122). In a related vein Boyatzis distinguished between traits and skills, observing that the former does not always lead to the latter (1982).

To combat the difficulty and unpredictability of translating potential into action, organizations annually invest millions of

dollars in supervision, training, team building etc. - hoping thatpeople will choose to do their work well and go above and beyond the call of duty. They make this investment in their human resources because it is clear then that there is more to supporting high performance than assigning tasks. Edwin Locke observed:

It is not enough to know that an order or request was made; one has to know whether or not the individual heard it and understood it, how he appraised it, and what he decided to do about it beforeits effects on his behavior can be predicted and explained (Locke, et al., 1968, p. 174).

On a daily basis the average individual must constantly choose how he will delegate his attention - choosing which tasks get filed away until everything else is done, and which will be attended to as soon as possible. Given that time is fixed, attention may be an individual's most precious commodity, and to focus on one thing can often preclude focusing on another. If Task Engagement is to be understood then one must contend with howattention is focused, because in the quick pace of today's workplace an individual has many choices about what to attend to.

With varying degrees of input from the environment, the individualdecides how much to discipline himself, which tasks get filed awayuntil everything else is done, and which will be attended to as soon as possible. When doing some tasks he may refuse to break his concentration, while in others he allows himself to be easily distracted. In choosing which activities he will devote his limited attention toward, he assigns priority to those that seem most meaningful at the time, though he may have no conscious awareness of doing so.

In most situations there are many options for how attention is allocated. This relates to Garland's notion of task conflict; a situation in which two or more tasks compete for an individual's attention (1985). Though the choice of what to focus attention onis sometimes made purposively, it is often made at an unconscious level.

Given a fixed set of abilities or competencies, an individual makes his own personal choice concerning the extent to which he will devote them to a particular task situation. Garland (1985) suggested that individuals develop expectancies for reaching many different levels of performance, not just that level represented by some task goal. He defined performance expectancy as a composite of an individual's subjective probabilities for reachingeach of a number of different performance levels over a range of performances that might be considered. Since many directives do not specify the standards that must be achieved, it is up to the individual to select the level of performance he will be satisfiedwith. For most tasks there are a range of performance standards that can be adopted - from doing the minimum to attempting perfection.

Scholars have often been frustrated in their attempts to account for individual differences in relation to task accomplishment. McCaskey called for more research in this area stating that, "We need to learn more about the influence of personal differences andpreferences in planning and other organizational-environmental processes"(1974, p. 288). While the literature concerning task and environmental factors is extensive, research on the relationship between individual differences and task accomplishment has lacked consistency.

The importance ascribed to individual differences has varied considerably amongst scholars. B. F. Skinner (1971) and other behaviorists have proposed that the major instigators of behavior lie outside the individual and stem from the environment. These theorists see stimuli, reinforcement, social norms, and environmental pressures as the main determinants of task behavior,and therefore view individual differences as largely irrelevant.

Taking a different view are individual personality theorists, psychodynamic therapists, trait theorists and humanists who see individual differences as consistent and enduring. They view general patterns of thinking, behaving and self-actualizing as important for understanding the full range of dynamics that affecttask performance.

Involvement

Whether a person is preparing food, grading papers, defining a strategic plan, or conducting a meeting he must become involved with his work and establish some way to get it done. An individual's level of involvement in a task situation has been addressed in the literature by the related concepts of job involvement and work involvement. These concepts are differentiated from Task Engagement in that they attempt to quantify the extent of an individual's involvement, rather than describe its qualities.

Job Involvement is a psychological construct that has been conceptualized by theorists in two different ways (Kanungo, 1982).One view of job involvement looks at how an individual's performance on the job affects their self-esteem (French and Kahn 1962; Vroom 1962). Other psychologists have viewed job involvement in terms of the extent an individual identifies with his job (Lodahl and Kejner 1965; Lawler and Hall 1970; Maurer 1969).

Among the originators of the job involvement construct were Lodahland Kejner who created a questionnaire designed to measure both its meanings. More recently research has been conducted in this area by Reddy and Rhaman (1984), Rimmerman, Portowicz, and Ehlich (1985), Jans (1985), Verma and Upadhyay (1986), and Blau (1987). These studies have sought to measure the extent of job involvementin relation to a variety of factors including: locus of control; emotional exhaustion; self-expression; job satisfaction; and person-environment fit. The concept of work involvement refers to the level of significance an individual attaches to his work. Beliefs about the importance of work in relation to other areas of a person's life inform what can be termed his level of work involvement. As a construct work involvement is value based. One's level of work involvement can be viewed as a reflection of values instilled by the culture or religion in which he was raised.

In this area of work involvement studies have been conducted by Kanungo (1981), Newton and Kennan (1983), Reddy and Rhaman (1984),and Morrison (1985). Research in this area has explored the concept in relation to variables including: alienation; locus of control; personal characteristics; environmental properties; and interactions between person and environment.

The concept of Task Engagement shares a common domain with the concepts of job involvement and work involvement in exploring an individual's relationship to his work. However, Task Engagement is not concerned so much with the quantity of involvement the individual brings to his work, but the way he allocates energy to different tasks that compete for his attention . Task Engagement then refers to the many ways that people become engaged in their work, and the qualities of their involvement.

Task Engagement Model

The theory of Task Engagement is based on the premise that how a person engages with a task is a function of: task; environment; and task engagement style. This premise is illustrated in the Task Engagement Model in Figure 1. Conceptually this model is an extension of ones proposed by Steers and Porter (1974) in regard to performance under goal-setting conditions, and Boyatzis regarding effective job performance (1982). Additionally, it is grounded in findings by Blau (1987) who in a study of nurses at anurban hospital found that a person-environment fit model was predictive of job involvement.

Recruiters and supervisors often talk about "fit" when consideringa candidate for a position, but what do they really mean? What isit that makes a person appropriate for a particular position or work environment? It is proposed that a good fit between task, environment and the individual's Task Engagement Style enables himto achieve optimal performance. It is also suggested that a majorcause of talent that lays dormant is a mismatch between these factors. Only when an individual's Task Engagement Style is aligned with the task and the task environment, can his fullest potential be realized and translated into the highest possible results. A synergy of these factors increases the probability

that a desired level of performance and quality of work experiencecan be achieved.

Figure 1

Imagery

To understand an individual's patterns in regard to task engagement, one can examine the imagery he uses in constructing the meaning of his task. Imagery is a process of perception, which includes the interpretation of objects, symbols, and people in the light of pertinent experiences (Gibson et al, 1988). Images an individual has of the task and task environment inform amental set that is then adopted toward the task. Bills and Brown (1929) reported the effects of mental set as follows:

One of the most important factors determining the level of efficiency which an individual may attain in ... work is the attitude or set with which he enters upon the task....But more effort has been directed toward studying it for its own sake. As a result little is known regarding the...influence of set in ...work. (p.301).

When a person thinks about doing a task, it exists (not as an action), but as an idea, image or construct. Even while performing the task he retains some image of what it is that he isdoing and the meaning he ascribes to it. This imagery comprises the individual's mental set. As a task is carried out, his imagery of it may change and grow, and after it has been completedthese images may remain as a remembrance or record of the experience. Task Engagement Style is indicative of the imagery anindividual tends to construct before, during and after engaging with a task.

An individual constructs his experience of a task in much the sameway as he constructs the meaning of an object. Kelly (1955) in his theory of personal constructs asserted that acts and events must be categorized to become meaningful, that people tend to construct the meaning of their own lives, and that individual

differences cause them to differ in how they interpret reality. Similarly when one engages with a task he views it through a paradigm that assigns a particular meaning to it. Bandura's comments support this assertion:

Most of the things people enjoy doing for their own sake originally had little or no interest for them. But under appropriate learning experiences, almost any activity, however silly it may appear to many observers, can become imbued with consuming significance (Bandura, 1982, p. 133). Man's conscious ideas affect what he does, in that one of the (biological) functions of consciousness is the regulation of action (Locke, 1968). The imagery a person constructs of a task situation has a profound impact on how he engages with it. When the individual considers doing a task, he constructs a mental image of it. He then consciously or unconsciously imagines what performing the task might be like while constructing an image of the personal meaning and relevance it represents. Kolb, Rubin andMcIntyre further describe how people construct reality:

We are not cameras or tape recorders. We do not take in, with oureyes, exactly what is "out there." We constantly respond to cues that have meaning for us. We see what we want or need to see to define ourselves or to advance our aims. We do not see people as they are, we see them for what they mean to us. (Kolb, Rubin, McIntyre, 1984 p.214)

While perception relies on the external senses and apparatuses, the image is purely a mental representation. Images are connectedwith past perceptions, and are elaborations of memory traces (Arieti, S., 1976). The imagery an individual constructs of task and environment have a profound impact on how he engages with thattask situation, and could be said to be his cognitive map. Krech,Crutchfield and Ballachey discuss this concept further:

The cognitive map of the individual is not, then a photographic representation of the physical world; it is, rather, a partial, personal construction in which certain objects, selected out by

the individual for a major role, are perceived in an individual manner. Every perceiver is, as it were, to some degree a nonrepresentational artist, painting a picture of the world that expresses his individual view of reality. (1962, p. 20)

The following example is provided to illustrate this concept in the context of supervision. Suppose that Jim King, a manager at Acme Insurance is thinking about a task he will undertake tomorrowin his office. He is imagining a meeting in which he must confront Sam Smith, who has an on-going tardiness problem. As Mr.King sits on his sofa at home he thinks about tomorrow's task. Though Sam is not present, images of the upcoming confrontation are with him. The images are based on the memory traces of previous interactions he has had with Sam, other times he has confronted people, times he has been confronted himself, meetings he has had in his office, and an assertiveness training workshop he attended last year. Because Mr. King has an image of this task, it acquires a psychological reality that he experiences eventhough he is not presently in the act of doing the task.

In this illustration Mr. King's imagery of his task causes him to adopt a disposition toward it that is a reflection of what it means to him. This imagery is not static. As the meeting is carried out, his conception of what he is doing may change and grow. For example he may begin the interaction with an intention of altering Sam Smith's tardiness behavior. However, if while explaining his tardiness Sam were to divulge that he is worried that he may be developing a drug dependency problem, Mr. King might soon change his disposition to one of concern for a friend. In this case Mr. King's image of what he was doing was reframed ashe carried out his task. As in this example there are an infinitenumber of images that can be constructed of a task situation, and how the individual engages with that situation is indicative of the meaning he ascribes to it.

After a task has been completed an image of it may remain as a remembrance or record of the experience. What the person remembers about doing a task may be a potent indicator of what waspersonally meaningful about it. This is exemplified by a case in

which four friends pooled their resources to hold a garage sale one summer weekend. When the sale ended each went away with a different image of the experience. The first left with images of how hard they had worked. The second remembered the weekend as a time when they made $200 dollars. The third recalled how the fourof them had bonded together when a customer became irate, while the fourth left thinking about ideas for doing a bigger and bettergarage sale next summer. In this illustration each of the four individuals involved were part of the same task, yet the experience held a different meaning for each.

Task Engagement & Inquiry

As a person engages with a task, he is simultaneously in a processof doing and a process of learning. While he carries out the task, he consciously or unconsciously asks questions and inquires;gathering information relevant to what he is doing. Newell proposed that though considerable theorizing and research have centered on issues concerning either acquisition of knowledge or execution of response patterns, the processes governing the interrelationship between knowledge and action have been largely neglected (1978). While it is tacitly recognized that some knowledge gets converted into action while other knowledge does not, the amorphous nature of this relationship has made it difficult for social scientists to grapple with. As a result thisinterrelationship has been more the domain of philosophers, who have attempted to account for it with the concept of Will. This concept shall be explored later in this chapter.

What an individual chooses to learn about, and the kind of questions he asks as he inquires are a reflection of his Task Engagement Style. This is a view of learning, not as an academic event, but rather as an ongoing process of inquiry that is conducted as an individual pursues interests and attempts to uncover information relevant to those interests. This view is drawn from the philosophical notions of "movement toward something", and "meaning as an intention of the mind" (Arendt on Husserl, 1978). When a person engages with a task, the meaning that he ascribes to doing it and/or the outcome he hopes to

accomplish suggests movement in a particular direction. His Task Engagement Style then, suggests that he will advance in a direction that is congruent with the meaning he ascribes to the task situation. As an individual pursues his interests, he naturally inquires in that same direction - in that only those questions that are relevant to what is most meaningful and relevant to that person at that moment are posed.

Task Engagement is then indicative of what an individual inquires about and ultimately attends to. This is illustrated in the following example. On Miss Johnson's desk sits a computer. If she has an interest in writing some thoughts for a report she has been working on then she sees the computer in terms of its flexibility in manipulating words. Her inquiry is then directed toward learning how to best utilize the many features of the word processor. If Miss Johnson's interest is in using the computer for the very first time, she may view it in terms of a complex andintimidating array of buttons and knobs. In this case her inquirymight be directed toward ways to acquire resources that might lessen her anxiety about approaching this confusing and unfamiliarmachine. If she has been considering the idea of getting a bettercomputer, she may attend to the computer's flaws and all the features it lacks that the superior computer she covets might have. In this event her inquiry might be directed toward planninghow she might get the best possible trade in value on her present computer toward the one she wants. If she has a strong sensitivity to interior design then perhaps she focuses on the color of the computer and how it fits in with the decor of the room. In this instance she might pose internal questions about what might be placed next to the computer to make the best visual statement. In each of the above cases Miss Johnson is responding to the same computer, yet inquires in very different directions.

The relationship between Task Engagement and inquiry is further illustrated in a second example. This case concerns Mr. Samson, abank teller at First National. On a particularly trying day during which he has repeatedly dealt with irate customers his mental set might best be described as "trying to make it through the day". With this frame of mind, the questions he internally

poses include: "What time is it now?"; "How much time is there left?; "Is there anyone watching me?"; "How can I avoid this rude customer"; and "Do I look busy enough?". These questions are indicative of what Mr. Samson is inquiring about on this difficultday. Questions like; "How can I best please this customer?", or "How can we improve our process for handling new accounts?" do notoccur to Mr. Samson on this particular day because they seem irrelevant given his frame of mind.

In contrast is Mr. Peters, who has a very different Task EngagementStyle. Mr. Peters is a manager who is trying hard to sell a new idea to his board of directors. He has a clear goal in mind and will do almost anything within his power to achieve it. With thismental set he inquires by posing the following questions: "How isthe Chairman going to vote?", "What can I offer to get his support?", "How will I respond to potential confrontations?"; and "What should I wear to the board meeting that will inspire confidence in me?"

In each illustration the actor's Task Engagement Style suggested aparticular kind of inquiry. Both Mr. Samson and Mr. Peters inquired by asking those questions that would enable them to proceed in the direction implicit to the particular meaning they constructed of their task.

When the ups and downs of particular days and events are factored out, a pattern emerges that generalizes how an individual tends toapproach task situations. It is this pattern that is referred to as his Task Engagement Style. Task Engagement Style is suggestiveof the way an individual relates to his work and is indicative of what he tends to inquire about in relation to task situations. Itrefers to the kind of data he tends to seek, and ultimately then, the kind of information that is internalized and incorporated.

Level Of Analysis

In applying the concept of Task Engagement, the level of analysis must be specified. Despite the variance between an individual's approach toward various tasks, he can be said to have a historical

pattern of how he has tended to approach his work. In the broadestsense he can then be said to have a General Task Engagement Style (GTES). This describes the mental set he most often adopts in thecontext of doing a task. General style suggests a pattern and a tendency, but does not preclude the individual from adopting a different approach toward any particular activity. For purposes of clarity we will term the more situation specific usage of the concept, Situational Task Engagement Style (STES). These various levels of analysis are illustrated in Figure 2.

Dimensions Of The Model

A task in and of itself is devoid of meaning. It's meaning comes via the environment and the individual(s) performing it. These sources of meaning are represented in Figure 3 as two dimensions in the Task Engagement model: task disposition, which can be pictured as a continuum between purposive and expressive; and environmental disposition, a continuum between anticipating and adapting. The origins of these dimensions are explored in the following section.

From the literature we have explored thus far it is clear that there is more to high performance than knowledge, competence and skill. Today's employee increasingly makes his own voluntary choice regarding how much he personally invests in the tasks that comprise his organizational role (Berlew, 1984). Organizations often try to motivate their employees, but despite various motivespeople still have the option of behaving or not behaving in a certain fashion. Scientists and scholars have tried to understandhuman action with the concept of motivation, but all-encompass ingtheories based on concepts such as instinct, drive, and conditioning have not succeeded in explaining how and why people apply themselves to their work (Locke, 1981). What is it that allows one to do his best in a task situation? Social scientists have experienced difficulty with the amorphous quality of this question, so we will turn to the philosophers for their point of view.

Figure 2

TASK ENGAGEMENT LEVELS OF ANALYSIS

Figure 3 Dimensions Of The Task Engagement Model

EXPRESSIVE PURPOSIVE-imaginative -steady and accountable- excited about doing the task - concerned with production- fully experiences the moment - converging efforts to achievegoals- discovering - pursuing/striving- feeling oriented - goal oriented- playful - systematic development of strategies- personally involved - rational assessment- growing/developing - achieving

ANTICIPATING ADAPTING- preparing - responding- long-term focus - short-term focus- explores alternatives - cooperative- changes social norms - accepts social norms- redefines problems - deals with problems- considers new procedures - implements procedures- envisions alternatives - fits into the organization- removes constraints - recognizes constraints

The Will

From a philosophical stance the responsible mover in a task situation is "the Will" (Yalom, 1980). The Will refers to an aspect of the human spirit by which the individual guides, directs

and determines his own destiny (Watson and Tharp, 1972). Another aspect of the Will is that it is dynamic. Duns Scotus asserted that it is the freedom of the Will mentally to take a position (Arendt, 1978). When the individual goes beyond the requirements of his job it is his Will that enables him to do so. Conversely, when he does not bring the vitality and power of his Will to a task situation, he is unlikely to have the energy to go beyond theminimum satisficing of the job required.

Task disposition does not describe the strength of Will an individual devotes to a task, but the outcomes and/or state of being that his Will is creating movement toward. As in the philosophical notion of "movement toward something", and Lewin's concept of "valence" (1951), task disposition looks at how the Will is directed and toward what.

Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus saw the Will as that which commandsthe intellect to understand (Arendt, 1978). In this paradigm, theintellect is a subservient faculty that needs the Will to direct its attention or it has no reason to function. Though not behaviorally observable, this viewpoint helps to further our understanding about the relationship between knowledge and action.If the intellect is unable to function without the Will, then perhaps processes of training, supervision and education have misdirected their focus, and should shift their emphasis from the intellect to the Will.

Philosophers have often described the Will as having two sides. The spirited side of the Will has been termed "the wish" while thedisciplined side has been referred to as "willpower" (May, 1969). This distinction provides a theoretical grounding for the purposive and expressive dimensions of task disposition. The purposive dimension refers to a predilection for will power. Watson and Tharp give some insight into the way the concept of will power is generally used:

In everyday language, will power often means self-restraint; 'I had the will power not to eat too much. Sometimes will power means a force that enables one to pass some immediate gratification in favor of a long-range goal or in favor of

personal values. Sometimes will power is used to explain doing something one expects to be unpleasant. At other times the word is used to explain doing something that is very difficult or that requires a long wait for positive reinforcement. (Watson and Tharp, 1972, p.248)

At its best, will power utilizes personal manipulation for the constructive, effortful, critical application to the productive end. Will power gives an individual the capacity for self-control, discipline, and diligence so he is not at the mercy of his every whim and urge. Maslow discussed will power's contribution to the total person:

There are several meanings of self-control, or of inhibition, and some of them are quite desirable and healthy, even apart from whatis necessary for dealing with the outside world. Control need notmean frustration or renunciation of basic need gratifications. What I would call the 'Apollonizing controls' do not call the gratification of needs into question at all; they make them more rather than less enjoyable by suitable delay (as in sex), by gracefulness (as in dancing or swimming), by aestheticizing (as with food and drink), by stylizing (as in sonnets), by ceremonializing, sacralizing, dignifying, by doing something well rather than just doing it. (Maslow, A., 1987, p. 68)

The exercise of will power then does not always refer to delaying gratification. When an individual approaches a task situation with a purposive disposition he may be repressing one desire in favor of realizing another that he values more highly. Additionally, Sahakian (1965) proposed that if the ego has successfully resisted a temptation to do something that would be objectionable to the superego, it feels its self-respect raised and its pride increased. Will power in this sense could be said to be serving the immediate needs of the individual who is expressing a desire for order, achievement, comfort or approval inthe act of resisting temptation. In this case it might take more will power for the individual to let go of inhibition then it would to repress his desires.

The more expressive side of the Will is often called "the wish". This conceptualization provides a foundation for the expressive dimension of task disposition. The immediate nature, high desirability and excitement of "the wish" exhibits a sort of clarity and desire that transcends logic and rationality. This clarity helps the individual to avoid the paralyzing affect of competing alternatives (James, 1896). In a similar vein May asserted that, "when a wish is conscious, and addresses a presently felt need it is the point when every act of Will starts"(1969). This viewpoint is akin to Freud's notion that nothing but a wish can set the mental apparatus in motion. Therefore this dimension of the will is important when consideringthe beginning or initiation of any activity.

When a work environment feels unimaginative, uncreative, and lacking in enthusiasm it is an environment characterized by suppression. If an organizational culture is such that it tends to dampen the expressive side of an employee's will rather than allowing and/or inspiring him to devote it toward his job, then that culture is likely to lack energy, creativity, and vitality. The suppression of expressiveness involves an active holding back that can detract from an individual's attentiveness to a task. Tothe extent that he must devote energy and attention to suppressinghis Will, the task he is doing is depleted of energy and attention.

Though it is much steadier and more accountable, will power is a slower and less dynamic source of energy. When a person relies too heavily on will power, he may tend to tire quickly. Conversely when he relies too heavily on the expressive side of the Will performance can often be undisciplined and erratic. The Will needs balance because difficulties arise when either of its poles are acutely overemphasized.

Many individuals are at times lacking in will power. When this side of the Will is under-emphasized the result can be a lack of discipline, an inability to follow direction, and/or burn-out. However, when the expressive side of the Will is under-emphasized the result can be personal neglect leading to self-alienation, estrangement, and low energy; lacking in creativity, excitement

and imagination. While balance is the ideal, it is made more difficult by the constraint nature of their relationship.

TASK DISPOSITIONFigure 4

Task disposition is illustrated in Figure 4 as a continuum betweenpurposive and expressive dimensions. To understand an individual's disposition toward a task situation, the following questions must be considered: How much discipline and will power does a person bring to the task?; What does it take for him to getstarted on the task?; What personal meaning does he ascribe to doing the task?; and, How does he manage his time and attention?

Table 1

Characteristics - Purposive Dimension Of Task Disposition

self control delayed gratificationstrong superego desire for orderachievement suppression of expressivenesssteady and accountable seeking trying to make things happen instrumentalrational assessment control of the self coping with pressure converging of efforts striving will power concern with production meaning in relation to outcome planning oriented active attending

Characteristics - Expressive Dimension Of Task Disposition

passive attending eupraxiaserendipity growingmaturing not striving immediate nature minimum of suppressionbeing self-actualizationcreative drop controls and defensesexcitement imaginationthe wish transcends logic and rationalityid finding

fully experiences the moment invests self

Drawbacks When Purposiveness Is Over-Emphasized

danger of work becoming dry and uncreative may miss opportunities for creative discovery less likely to discover a wholly new goal or opportunity possible alienation from self

Drawbacks When Expressiveness Is Over-Emphasized

lack of discipline, an inability to follow direction may be prone to procrastination danger of over-involvement and/or burn-out behavior may at times be unpredictable and erratic

The distinction between the purposive and expressive dimensions oftask disposition is rooted in the philosophical notion of the Willhaving two poles. It is also similar to one used by Hare (1976) who utilized a serious versus expressive dimension in his researchon social-emotional behavior. This distinction is also rooted in Maslow, who differentiated between "striving": doing, achieving, trying, and purposiveness, and "being": existing, expressiveness,growing, and self-actualization. Maslow distinguished between the expressive (noninstrumental) and the coping (instrumental, functional, purposive) components of behavior. He provided inspiration for this research when he suggested that this distinction had not yet been properly exploited in the literature (1987). Characteristics of the purposive and expressive dimensions are implied by the literature,and are compiled in Table 1.

The Expressive DimensionThe concept of an expressive disposition is rooted in "the wish". Employing an expressive disposition toward a task involves maximizing the pursuit of that task in a way that is an immediate expression of the meaning that the individual finds in it. To

approach a task in this manner requires that a minimum of effort and attention be devoted to the suppression of the Will. When theexpressive dimension of task disposition is emphasized a person's energy and attention is not split and his total being can then be directed toward doing the task. Without expressiveness, a person's energy for an activity must come exclusively from will power.

The concept of an expressive disposition is also grounded in Aristotle's concept of eupraxia. "There is such a thing as eupraxia, action well done, and the doing of something well, regardless of its consequences" (Arendt, H. 1978). This is the adult at his most expressive, and is distinguished from a concern with production or results, where the act has an end other than itself. The distinction is illustrated in the difference between an expressive flute-player, who plays only to play, for whom the playing is an end itself, and a purposive, goal-oriented flute-player, who with rigorous discipline attempts to play each note toperfection. In the first example, action is itself an end and theflute-player's disposition is one of letting go and following his desire to play, while in the second example his disposition requires a holding back of immediate desires in the service of bringing about a perfectly constructed piece of music. It cannot be objectively stated that either approach would necessarily be better than the other, as this would be a matter of personal taste. Some jazz music lovers might prefer a flute player that played with the freedom and creativity of an expressive disposition, while many classical music lovers would prefer the perfection of the masterly sounds made by a purposive disposition.However it should be noted that an emphasis on either of these dimensions of task disposition would lead to a very different quality of experience and output.

There is some evidence in the literature that an expressive disposition can lead to higher job involvement. Results of a study by Jans (1985) testing the distinctiveness of job and specialization involvement as constructs have linked self-expression with job involvement. In a study of Australian Army

officer results Jans found that job involvement was associated primarily with self-expression.

The Purposive Dimension

When an individual has a purposive task disposition, he tends to rely on processes of goal setting and planning to achieve desired results. The disciplined nature of a purposive tendency is tied to means behavior, the end being need gratification, threat reduction or a valued outcome. An emphasis on a purposive approach enables the individual to better control his work and cope with pressure.

Management as a practice is usually a highly purposive discipline.In Theodore Levitt's description of a managerial culture he implied what is termed a purposive disposition:

Management consists of the rational assessment of a situation and systematic selection of goals and purposes (what is to be done?); the systematic development of strategies to achieve these goals; the marshalling of the required resources; the rational design, organization, direction, and control of the activities required toattain the selected purposes; and, finally, the motivation and rewarding of people to do the work. (Levitt, T., 1976, p.73)

In most organizations a purposive disposition is the predominant disposition of choice and social desirability. In the belief systems of these organizational cultures it is often assumed that the best work is done by setting goals and then trying to achieve them in a given time frame.

When the individual's task disposition emphasizes the purposive dimension he can often make good use of goal setting technologies to guide his work. McCaskey discussed the contribution that goal setting can make when successfully utilized:

If people are committed to the goals, there can be a forceful converging of efforts to meet deadlines and to achieve goals. People given such plans spend less time exploring alternative futures because they know what they need to accomplish. After

plans have been made, people can take the goals as a given, which provides a measure of stability and can supply a sense of purpose.This helps individuals structure their life space, decide what activities should be carried out, and how time should be spent. (McCaskey, M. B. 1974: p. 282)

Under certain conditions then goal setting can be a potent device for focusing attention and organizing effort. Locke et al in discussing the utility of goal setting added, "Goals affect performance by directing attention, mobilizing effort, increasing persistence, and motivating strategy development" (1981 p. 125).

Locke also noted that studies on individual differences in goal setting have lacked consistency (1981), but there is reason to suspect that utilization of goal setting techniques would appear to be more congruent with a purposive disposition than an expressive one. If the task disposition of the individual involved is expressive, a goal setting framework may prove inappropriate for that task. Zaleznik stated , "Managers tend to adopt impersonal, if not passive, attitudes toward goals. Managerial goals arise out of necessities rather than desires" (1977, p. 70). This supports the notion that the pursuit of goalsprimarily draws upon the purposive dimension of task disposition. The very nature of setting goals and trying to meet them is a purposive act. The widespread usage of these techniques in organizational life then encourages a person to approach his work purposively rather than the expressively.

A Constraint Relationship

It is proposed that a constraint relationship exists between the purposive and expressive dimensions of task disposition. To be purposive means to control the self, delay pleasure, while to be expressive means to forgo controls, inhibitions, and defenses. Therefore by definition the two poles of this dimension cannot occur in their purest forms at the same time. A task disposition characterized by the purposive dimension views tasks as instrumental to the desired outcome or goal, while a task disposition characterized by the expressive dimension sees the actof doing the task itself to be most meaningful.

Maslow suggested that the expressive behaviors do not occur duringpurposive activity:The expressive behaviors tend to occur when people are being themselves, developing, growing and maturing, not going anywhere (in the sense, e.g., of social climbing), not striving in the ordinary sense of staining and trying for a state of affairs otherthat in which they are. (1987, p. 70)

An emphasis on one dimension of task disposition deemphasizes the other. For example, if a presenter is improvising in a question and answer session he cannot at the same time meticulously monitorwhat he is saying, as expressiveness by its very nature requires acertain unguarded quality. Similarly, if a presenter is delivering a tightly structured written speech, he cannot at the same time carry on a glib dialogue with his audience. His disposition would not be oriented that way at that particular time. Even a highly skilled speaker would be unable to maintain both dispositions simultaneously unless he was in a very exceptional state that will be described later in this thesis. Ina general sense the purposive and expressive dimensions work against each other, with the dominant pole constraining the other.

This notion is also supported in the goal setting literature. Research has shown a tendency for task behavior to become valued largely for its instrumentality in reaching task goals rather thanfor any intrinsically satisfying qualities when tasks are undertaken as a means for attaining a specific end (Locke, Cartledge, & Knerr, 1970). Reductions in subsequent intrinsic motivation and expressiveness could be expected to occur under such conditions.

When an individual approaches a task with a purposive disposition,his focus on the end product of his actions may preclude him from fully experiencing the satisfying qualities of the actions themselves. Therefore, as tasks are undertaken purposively, there is likely tobe a reduction in perceived opportunities to satisfy needs for expression (Lawler, 1973). This is further supported by Mossholder who stated that, "Assigning specific difficult goals on

an interesting task may reduce subsequent intrinsic motivation with respect to the task" (1980, p. 207). In this way it appears that the purposive and expressive dimensions of task disposition have a constraint relationship because they serve as a distractionto one another.

The constraining nature of this relationship between purposive andexpressive is similar to Hesse's conception of the relationship between seeking and finding: i.e., to be goal oriented and seeking may preclude one from serendipity or finding. Hesse alludes to this conceptualization in the following passage:

When someone is seeking it happens quite easily that he only sees the thing that he is seeking; that he is unable to find anything, unable to absorb anything, because he is only thinking of the thing he is seeking, because he has a goal, because he is obsessedwith his goal. Seeking means: to have a goal; but finding means to be free, to be receptive, to have no goal. You, O worthy one, are perhaps indeed a seeker for in striving toward your goal, you do not see many things that are under your nose. (Hesse, 1951, p.113)

In this passage Hesse illustrated how seeking precludes finding. Finding is an expressive state where the individual is genuinely open to discovery. If an individual had no history or values, then finding would be nothing but an aimless drifting. However, since many of his values, life purposes etc. are internalized, without actively seeking, he may be naturally drawn to a particular direction without trying to accomplish anything. In particular he may be drawn to learning, to questioning, to seeing,even when he is not in that moment consciously seeking to do so.

For example many problem solvers have reported that after a frustrating period of looking for a solution and failing, the solution comes to them later in a moment of rest. In this case the purposive act of seeking a solution can blind the individual to new information. Because the problem solver is seeking a particular solution, he sees only what he is looking for; what he already knows. During the period of rest, a more creative

solution may dawn on him because he is more open to new possibilities without the distraction of the convergent quality ofseeking.

A Need For Integration

Given the need for both dimensions if a person is to function in society, questions concerning which pole of this dimension is better are largely irrelevant. The discussion then should not be,"which dimension is better, purposive or expressive"? There are strengths and weaknesses associated with each dimension, and both are clearly important.

There are problems inherent in an overemphasis of either dimension. Without the will power of the purposive dimension the individual that does not feel inspired may be prone to procrastination. He will need to "feel his spirit" in his work, or he may not have the discipline to get it done. If his disposition is strongly oriented toward expressiveness there also may be a danger of over-involvement. The effects of too much personal involvement in work were examined by Rimmerman, Portowicz, and Ehlich (1985) in studying burnout among paraprofessional rehabilitation workers. They found that the degree of personal involvement experienced by a worker was directly and positively related to the degree of emotional exhaustion he experienced.

While an expressive disposition can help a person to remain open to discovery, it is not often sufficient for task accomplishment. An individual would seldom take on a task if he did not seek some desired outcome. Additionally, if his task disposition were weighted too heavily toward the expressive dimension, he may not have the discipline and diligence required to develop the skills and do the work necessary to complete many necessary but intrinsically unsatisfying tasks. Without the ability to be purposive he would be unable to survive in most organizations where the ability to set a goal and meet it is essential for membership.

There are problems inherent in an overemphasis of the purposive dimension as well. While this orientation enables an individual to strive toward goals, if the expressive element is largely absent, there is a danger of work becoming dry and uncreative. Additionally if the person attends to only what he is seeking, he may miss opportunities for creative discovery. Maslow discussed this danger:

..it is possible to discern in the attending responses the difference between fresh, idiosyncratic attending to the unique event, and stereotyped, categorized recognition in theoutside world of a set of categories that already exist in the mind of the attending person. That is, attending may be no more than a recognition or discovery in the world of what we ourselves have already put there - a sort of prejudging ofexperience before it happens. (1987, p. 195)

Freud also alluded to an overemphasis of the purposive dimension in his distinction between active and passive attending. He saw that inherent in active attending is an imposing of one's own set of expectations upon what is perceived (1924). While this act helps the individual to order and make sense of his world, the danger is that when he experiences the world in this way, he will never finding anything but what is already known.

Only when an individual is not in the act of trying to make something in particular occur, is his mind free, open and willing to reframe the situation, explore new options and question basic assumptions. Active attending implies a purposive disposition that is in movement toward a goal. McCaskey discussed this phenomenon in relation to planning:Given man's limited cognitive abilities and energies, less time isavailable for finding new possibilities outside those connected tothe goal or goal path........ Planners using this process, therefore, are less likely to discover a wholly new goal or opportunity. (1974, p 283)

It is not suggested that behaviors are exclusively expressive or purposive. In discussing the relationship between expressiveness and coping Maslow noted that most acts of behavior have a component of each, for example, walking has simultaneously a purpose and a style. He also recognized the theoretical possibility of practically pure expressive acts, such as sauntering instead of walking; blushing; gracefulness; poor posture; whistling; a child laughing in glee; private, noncommunicative artistic activity; pure self-actualization, and so on (1987, p. 63). Given the need for both dimensions of task disposition, the dialectic between purposive and expressive shouldbe viewed as one of emphasis, rather than the total absence of oneor the other. An individual must have the capacity and opportunity for both if he is to reach his potential.

The constraint nature of the relationship between the purposive and expressive dimensions of task disposition makes integration difficult. However a person's approach to a task situation could perhaps be characterized by a back and forth motion - in which he spends some period being purposive and then another period being expressive, and then goes back to being purposive. While the possibility of a back and forth quality between these two dimensions of task disposition is noted, it is not clear how and when these dispositional shifts might occur.

Environmental Disposition

The task environment is the physical and psychological space in which a task takes place. Much of what a task means to the individual is derived from this social context, and how he sees himself in relation to it. Studies by Lewin (1948), Berger and Luckmann (1967), and Geertz (1973) support the notion that what anindividual chooses to attend to is to a large extent determined byhis interaction with the environment.

Related to Jacques notions of cognitive complexity (1982), when a person engages with a task he also adopts a time stance toward it,and a time span of discretion. An individual may do a task in response to a short term demand from his environment or at the other extreme, as a means for working toward a long-term effect.

The extent to which he adopts either a short or long term approachinfluences both his experience of doing the task and the outcomes realized. When the individual performs a task he and his environment endow it with meaning. A task in and of itself is meaningless - the meaning comes via the task environment and the individual(s) performing it. In ascribing meaning to a task environment the individual's conceptual system simplifies, orders, and makes senseof experiences. His constructions of the task environment largelydetermine: the personal meaning he attaches to social norms; the extent to which he extrapolates on what is given; the degree to which he looks to others for direction and task definition; whether he is drawn to fit in or instigate change, and the extent to which he bases his performance expectations on his own standards or takes on those of his environment.

Table 2

Characteristics - Anticipating Dimension Of Environmental Disposition

preparing long-term focusexploring options changing social normsredefining problems considering new proceduresopen to alternatives removing constraints individualism proposing new ideasquestioning envisioning preparing for possible contingencies

Characteristics - Adapting Dimension Of Environmental Disposition

recognizing constraints fitting into the organizationimplementing procedures dealing with problemsaccepting social norms cooperatingshort-term focus respondingadjusting to external pressure conformingflexible good team playerreducing possibility of error aligning contributions with others

Drawbacks When Anticipating Is Over-Emphasized

danger of work becoming irrelevant to one's environment difficulty in meeting short-term quotas and deadlines may not comply with organizational norms and directives inability to satisfy requirements for membership

Drawbacks When Adapting Is Over-Emphasized

may not develop own ideas fosters dependency relationship may be unprepared for future failure to recognize options and alternatives

Figure 5

Environmental disposition is illustrated in Table 2 and Figure 5 as a continuum between anticipating and adapting. This distinction was suggested by Botkin in regard to anticipatory learning (1979). Whereas adapting suggests a tendency to respond and adjust to external pressure, anticipating implies an orientation that prepares for possible contingencies and considerslong-range future alternatives. When an individual engages with atask, he adopts an environmental disposition toward it.

While the sociology literature suggests that all members of a society must conduct themselves according to the rules of their environment in order to be accepted, Becker noted that not everyone follows social norms to the same extent (1971). The emphasis an individual places on meeting social norms can greatly influence how he goes about doing a task. A person's Environmental disposition refers to his relationship with organizational norms and values. Edgar Schein distinguished between two types of norms:

Most organizations attach differing amounts of importance to different norms and values. Some are pivotal. Any member of a business organization who does not believe in the value of gettinga job done will not survive long. Other pivotal values in most business organizations might be belief in a reasonable profit, belief in the free enterprise system and competition, belief in a hierarchy of authority as a good way to get things done, and so on.

Other values or norms are what may be called relevant. These are norms which it is not absolutely necessary to accept as the price of membership, but which are considered desirable and good to accept. Many of these norms pertain to standards of dress and decorum, not being publicly disloyal to the company, living in theright neighborhood and belonging to the right political party and clubs. (Schein, 1984)

Schein (1984) also described 3 basic responses to norms and values. Type 1 is Rebellion. This signifies a rejection of all values and norms. Type 2 is Creative Individualism. This includes acceptance only of pivotal values and norms, and rejection of all others. Type 3 is Conformity. This refers to acceptance of all values and norms.

Type 2 would indicate a preference for the anticipating dimension of environmental disposition, while types 1 and 3 would most oftenbe concerned with the adapting dimension. Whether a person conforms or rebels, his environmental disposition could be said tobe primarily concerned with responding to input from his surroundings. However in some exceptional cases he could choose to conform or rebel due to a personal decision that given a set ofcircumstances it would be in his best long-term interests to do so. In this case his environmental disposition could be said to exhibit a preference for anticipating over adapting, even though he is conforming.

Anticipating

An Environmental disposition that is oriented toward anticipating supports the individual in thinking about or proposing new ideas,

and in recognizing new ways of regarding a problem or goal. Anticipating can also mean developing a new definition of a problem, or considering how an idea or suggestion would work out if adopted.

Anticipating may also take the form of considering new procedures or organizing for the task ahead. It is made more difficult when environments exert pressure on an employee to meet short-term quotas and deadlines. As a result, long range concerns can easilybe put aside unless he has an orientation that emphasizes the anticipating dimension. Even then there may be a tendency for himto change his disposition to one more congruent with his environment.

Inherent in this dimension is a concern for the present in relation to the future. In the context of doing a task, anticipating what comes next fills the present with possibilities and opportunities. An emphasis on this quality of environmental disposition enables a person to focus on his long range objectivesand explore options and alternatives. It also inspires him to envision alternative ways to do a task, consider how an idea wouldwork out if adopted, and think about the potential implications ofwhat is presently happening.

An overemphasis on the anticipating dimension of environmental disposition can be dysfunctional. Without influence from the adapting dimension, a person may not give adequate attention to fitting in with his environment. A strong preference for anticipating over adapting may also make it more difficult for himto comply with organizational norms and be responsive to directives from his organization. An environmental disposition that looks to comply with regulations may be fundamentally different and incongruent with one that looks to explore options and alternatives, so when a person's attention is involved in anticipating his concern for adapting may diminish. Therefore, anoveremphasis on the anticipating dimension gives the individual a frame of mind that may make it difficult for him to survive in an organization over time.

Adapting

An Environmental disposition that is oriented toward adapting can support the individual in fitting into an organization as a helpful and amenable force. Adapting suggests a willingness to beflexible and cooperate with others in the task environment. This tendency can enable him to be a good team player.

The adapting dimension enables the individual to be attuned to hisenvironment, recognize constraints, and be attentive to social norms and regulations. The conservative nature of adapting helps reduce the possibility of error and aligns the contributions of the individual with those desired by his environment. The individual that emphasizes adaptation is often rewarded with job security by his organization.

A preference for adapting over anticipating may indicate a philosophical position of external control (Rotter, 1966) if the individual chooses to adapt because he views himself as controlledby outside forces. When an individual believes that external factors are powerful and pervasive, it is most natural for him to adopt an orientation where he looks to adjust and fit in. However, in choosing to adapt a person could presumably exercise abelief in an internal locus of control. In this case he might adapt to a situation because he wants to support a cause, or because he expects it will help him to achieve some desired state or goal.

Freire's Perspective On Environmental Disposition

In formal education students are often taught to value adapting over anticipating. This is implied in the work of Paulo Freire (1970). Freire discussed contemporary methods of education, and some of its more serious problems:

Instead of communication, the teacher issues communiques and makesdeposits which the students patiently receive, memorize and repeat.. This is the 'banking' concept of education, in which thescope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits. (Freire, 1970, p. 58)

Freire observed that formal processes of education often suffer from "narration sickness". He described a pattern in which the teacher serves as narrator, leading the students to memorize mechanically the narrated content. The student role then resembles that of a 'container', or 'receptacle' to be filled by the teacher. In Freire's model, the student becomes a "container"when he is taught to passively write down whatever the teacher says without anticipation or initiative. In this 'banking' systemhe learns to adapt and attend to the purposes of the teacher. In this cynical and frightening view of formal education, if the student is intellectually stimulated by anything the teacher says,with his mind mobilized to its own process of inquiry, he risks missing out on the next bit of information the teacher is giving, which he is penalized for on tests that measure only how well he is adapting. The student learns by experience that to stray from adaptation can be costly in the credentialing process.

The banking concept, as Freire described it, exemplifies the way in which an adapting disposition is often encouraged and an anticipating disposition discouraged in many so-called learning environments. The result is that a natural love for learning is lost and learning instead becomes an effortful task; an attempt toadapt to other's needs, rather than an exciting drive to meet one's own.

Teachers, of course have little interest in teaching banking concept students. In Freire's model they too, are victims of a spiraling loop, that punishes teachers that dare to expect higher forms of education. The teacher that attempts to break the cycle meets students that have been conditioned to expect a banking concept approach, and may be initially distrustful and uncomfortable with a different approach.

From the Freire perspective one could argue that it is the environment that is the cause of this situation. Perhaps anyone thrust into a 'banking system' would logically resort to this typeof approach. However, it is observed that not all students and teachers fall prey to the 'banking system' to an equal degree. There appear to be individual differences in people that can

counteract even the worst learning environments. What is it that allows some students and teachers to make the educational process meaningful, while others succumb to the 'banking system'? This inquiry is an attempt to provide some clarity on these matters.

Research Questions

This exploratory study probes for answers to the following questions:

1. What is the affect of Task Engagement Style on grades?

It is hypothesized that grade point average is related to Task Engagement Style. It would be expected that students approaching their education with a style consistent with that preferred by their evaluators would tend to earn higher grades. Freire has noted that pressure is often placed on students to adapt to the ground rules established by their teachers. If Freire's perspective is correct then it would be expected that higher grades would tend to be achieved with a task disposition that is more purposive than expressive, and an environmental disposition that is more adapting than anticipating.

2. Does an individual's Task Engagement Style change over time?

It is hypothesized that Task Engagement Style will vary given changes in the task environment. It is suggested that an individual will alter his approach, deviating from his trait-leveldominant style as his construction of the task situation changes. It would therefore be expected that as a task situation comes to mean different things to a person his Task Engagement Style would naturally evolve to reflect that new meaning.

3. Can Task Engagement Style be reliably measured?

It is expected that the theory of Task Engagement is such that scales can be constructed to measure it's two dimensions. The ability to reliably measure Task Engagement would be seen as a confirmation of the concept. If this theory has substance then it

should be possible to develop reliable scales measuring task disposition (purposive/expressive), and environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting).

Final CommentsIn this chapter literature relevant to a proposed theory of

Task Engagement has been explored. In doing so, two dimensions have been identified; purposive/expressive and anticipating/adapting. In the next chapter the methodology for studying these dimensions is discussed.

Chapter 2 - Methodology

This chapter reports on the methodology employed in this study. It begins with a rationale for the development of a Task Engagement Style Inventory, which is explored along with a historyof the initial development of the instrument. Next, the methodology for both the time series and reliability studies that inform this research are described, and expected results are hypothesized. Lastly an overview of the experimental design is presented.

Initial Development of the Survey Instrument

The research questions stated in chapter one cannot begin to be tested without a reliable instrument. Therefore, a major thrust of this study is to begin the development of reliable scales for the measurement of Task Engagement. The initial phase of this effort was an exploratory study of the dimensions of Task Engagement that were identified in the literature review, and is seen as the first step in building a valid instrument. A Task Engagement Style Questionnaire was constructed reflecting these dimensions. This preliminary version (TESI 1) of the questionnaire was constructed through interviews with students in undergraduate and masters level classes, and later administered tostudents. It can be located in Appendix C.

The sample utilized in the preliminary study was comprised of two classes at a local University, with 25 students in each. Interviews were conducted with 10 students to clarify the Task Engagement concept, determine face validity and begin development of an inventory. The interview protocol was designed with a qualitative, action research design with the intention of facilitating a co-inquiry into understanding both the external andinternal factors that determine the subject's Task Engagement Style. This process had a secondary purpose of testing the utilization of the Task Engagement model as a framework and tool to enhance the supervision process by providing a catalyst and

framework for dialogue. Concurrently, observational data from theclassroom was utilized for face validation of results from the instrument and interviews.

In the 1 hour interviews, students were asked to complete the inventory several times, applying it toward a range of situationalcontexts: general style; our class; the part of their job they like best; their least favorite part of their job, and how they would like to approach their job 5 years from now. In comparing the scores from the various contexts both a general overall picture of their style emerged, in addition to various potentials each student had that were more context specific. The gap betweentheir least favorite part of their job and how they would like to approach their job 5 years from now was particularly fruitful in clarifying a developmental agenda for the student. It was also confirming that the inventory results for general Task Engagement Style tended to match the student's own self-perception.

In this preliminary study students completed version 1 of the TaskEngagement Style Inventory in a time series approximately every 10days. This had a dual purpose of furthering this research and providing a barometer for how the class was going from the student's perspective. The surveys proved to be a fruitful feedback mechanism and a forum for student input concerning the class. This positive experience using the first version of the Task Engagement Style Inventory provided inspiration for continuing this line of research and the potential utility of a reliable instrument for encouraging dialogue and assessing how people approach their work.

Time Series Study

Further refinements in the concept and instrument occurred during a management development program the author was involved in administering to XYZ Inc., a major chemical company. Among its major lines of products are a line of plastic materials. At the time of this study, the major thrust of the company was to become more market driven, in order to maintain or improve market position over time. The program began in response to the company President's assertion that XYZ Inc.'s culture needed to become

more long-range oriented and less reliant on it's present product line. During the period of administration six project teams were selected by the top management group. The projects were then focused and implemented by the participants. Each team had the task of developing a marketing strategy for a product XYZ Inc. might pursue.

The data collection period was conducted in the midst of this management development process. The subjects were male managers with a technical background, and were studied as they learned and applied marketing techniques. This sample of 25 managers was administered a 10 variable version of the Task Engagement Style Inventory (TESI version 2) in a time series design regarding theirSituational Task Engagement Style toward their market project. This version of the instrument located in Appendix B, includes 10 sets of contrasting statements.

To test the effect of time on Task Engagement Style, a 9 month longitudinal study was conducted. Participants completed the survey after each of five project workshops that were held off-site in reference to their market projects. Additionally 5 participants were interviewed before the project began and projectteam 1 was observed on a monthly basis to detect changes in the participants approach to their task.

The Reliability Study

After analysis of the questionnaires from the time series study 14additional sets of contrasting statements were added for administration to the larger sample used in the reliability study.These additional sets were constructed from interview data of the managers in the XYZ Inc. sample and students at 2 universities. The new questions were tested in a pilot study that included the administration and analysis of 32 pairs of contrasting statements administered to 60 graduate students in business at a local university.

The instrument utilized in the reliability study is the Task Engagement Style Inventory version 3, which can be located in Appendix A. This version of the instrument is composed of 24 sets

of contrasting statements and designed with an ipsitic forced choice format in which each respondent chooses statements that reflect his general Task Engagement Style. Twelve of the sets contain contrasting statements descriptive of task disposition (expressive/purposive), and the other twelve sets are comprised ofcontrasting statements reflecting environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting). In this report, items V1 through V12 represent the expressive/purposive dimension and items V13 throughV24, the anticipating/adapting dimension. These items were created from quotations gleaned from interviews in a preliminary study and extrapolations based on attributes suggested by the literature.

The analysis of version 3 of the Task Engagement Style Inventory is the primary source of data for this thesis. In this study 104 questionnaires were completed by MBA students. In most cases the instrument was administered and collected on site while the subjects were in an organizational behavior class. It is recognized that the sample size is rather small for an instrument of 24 items compared to the recommended sample size of 5 to 10 times the number of items (Peters, 1979). However, since the instrument was actually composed of two separate 12 item scales, the sample size can be considered adequate. Hypotheses

It was hypothesized that grade point average would be dependent upon Task Engagement Style and that it would change over time in relation to external factors. Additionally, it was expected that Task Engagement Style might be related hours per month reading non-required job related material. In testing these hypotheses the following factors were utilized as a control: ethnicity; age;sex; social class; educational background; years of work experience; and years of managerial work experience. The demographic survey that was administered is exhibited in Appendix E.

The threats to validity are many in this study because of the importance of the level of generality. Therefore an attempt to establish convergent validity was made by comparing the anticipating/adapting dimension to Rotter's Locus of Control

measure (1966). It was expected that the environmental disposition dimension might bear some similarity to Rotter's locusof control scale. Rotter's instrument examines whether an individual is more internally or externally controlled. It was hypothesized that if an individual is more externally oriented he would also show a preference for adapting over anticipating. It was also expected that if he was more internally oriented he wouldshow a preference for anticipating over adapting. This premise isbased on the assumption that in order to anticipate a person also needs to assume a measure of control over a task environment.

Overview Of The Experimental Design

Preliminary Study Sample - 2 groups of M.B.A students (n=45)1. Interviews and observation 2. Create TESI 13. Administer TESI 1 bi-weekly 5 times4. Interviews with and observation of survey recipients5. Preliminary analysis of instrument6. Refine instrument

Time Series Study Sample - 25 managers at XYZ Chemical Inc.1. Administer TESI 2in a time series (T1 -T5)

T1 - 2/19/88, T2 - 2/26/88, T3 - 4/1/88, T4 - 5/5/88, T5 - 6/27/882. Observation of sample at developmental workshops.3. Observation of 6 managers from sample at regular meetings

Reliability StudySample - 104 M.B.A. students1. 24 questions added to those in TESI 2 2. Administer TESI 3 3. Administer Locus Of Control Instrument and demographic survey

Chapter 3 - Results and Discussion

In this chapter the results of the reliability and time series studies will be examined and explained. The statistical analysis of results from the Task Engagement Style Inventory revealed a five item task disposition scale (expressive/purposive)and five and eleven item environmental disposition scales (anticipating/adapting). These scales are illustrated in Table 3. Table 3 - TASK ENGAGEMENT SCALES ENVIRONMENTAL DISPOSITION SCALE(ANTICIPATING / ADAPTING) sample = 90

Mode Goodness of Fit Root Reliability (Alpha)5 item .89 .07 .6911 item .71 .11 .77--------------------------------------------------------------V15 ____9. I look to others for a way to do the task

____10. I envision alternative ways to do the task--------------------------------------------------------------V16 ____15. I focus on long range objectives

____16. I focus on the immediate situation--------------------------------------------------------------V17 ____17. I am concerned with changing my environment

____18. I am concerned with adapting to my environment--------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------V18 ____23. I explore options and alternatives

____24. I focus on the immediate situation--------------------------------------------------------------V22 ____37. I comply with rules and regulations

____38. I think about the implications of what is happening

-------------------------------------------------------The following items are added to comprise an 11 item environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting) scale:-------------------------------------------------------

V20 ____31. I envision alternative ways to do the task____32. I follow the recommended procedures

--------------------------------------------------------------V13 ____3. I am inclined to comply with rules and regulations

____4. I am inclined to explore options and alternatives --------------------------------------------------------------V14 ____5. I think about the implications of what is happening

____6. I think about how to fit in with what is happening--------------------------------------------------------------V21 ____33. I look to my supervisor or teacher for direction

____34. I anticipate the many alternatives I could choose from--------------------------------------------------------------V23 ____41. I consider how an idea would work out if adopted

____42. I rely on experts for procedures and guidelines--------------------------------------------------------------V24 ____45. I often experiment with new ways to do a task

____46. I try to reduce the possibility of costly errors--------------------------------------------------------------

TASK DISPOSITION SCALE(PURPOSIVE / EXPRESSIVE) sample = 90

Mode Goodness of Fit Root Reliability (Alpha)5 item .89 .08 .70 V5 ____19. I allocate specific times each week to work on the project

____20. I work on the project when I feel like it--------------------------------------------------------------V6 ____21. I express my creativity

____22. I try to meet my goals--------------------------------------------------------------V8 ____29. I make a plan and stick to it

____30. I do what feels most important--------------------------------------------------------------V11 ____43. I prefer a less structured approach

____44 I am goal and planning oriented --------------------------------------------------------------V12 ____47. I express my creativity

____48. I make a plan and stick to it

Results Of Factor Analysis

At this early stage in the development of the Task Engagement Style Inventory the primary concern is with the verification of the underlying structure of the anticipating/adapting and purposive/expressive scales and the evaluation of the individual items. Because the two dimensions of the Task Engagement Style model are hypothesized to be relatively independent, it was expected that there would not be a significant relationship between them. Therefore a Principal Components factor analysis was selected to view their dimensionality (Singh, 1987). It was expected that a Varimax rotation would offer the best representation of these scales because of their independence.

Next, alternative models of the reflexive relationship between theitems and each dimension in separate models were tested using restrictive Maximum Likelihood FA in LISREL, based on bi-serial correlations. This test was chosen because the items are forced choice, dichotomous variables. In evaluating the items it is of interest to identify shorter versions of each scale, if possible,

so that it might be applied to the various contexts and task situations in a survey respondent's life. Table 4 displays the Principal Components Factor Analysis with a Varimax Rotation. As illustrated in this table, most of the itemsloaded on the factor that was hypothesized. The first factor was primarily comprised of environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting) items. However, a number of items originally presumed to represent task disposition (expressive/purposive) also loaded on the first factor. In contrast, only seven items clearly loaded on the second factor.

In examining the results of the reliability study it is clear thatthe 14 additional sets of items that were added to the second version of the instrument that was used in the time series study, greatly improved the scale. Only one of the original version 2 items loaded clearly on the expressive/purposive dimension. Several of the items expected to load on this dimension actually loaded on the anticipating/adaptive Table 4Principle Components Factor Analysis with Varimax Rotation

Variable Factor 1(A/A) Factor 2(P/E)V16 (A/A) .62 -.11V15 (A/A) .59 .10V22 (A/A) .58 .29V17 (A/A) .55 -.02V18 (A/A) .50 .29V7 (P/E) .50 -.03V23 (A/A) .48 .12V20 (A/A) .45 .42V14 (A/A) .45 -.06V21 (A/A) .45 .25V24 (A/A) .44 .41V4 (P/E) .41 .04V13 (A/A) .40 .31V2 (P/E) .23 -.12V19 (A/A) .17 .06V10 (P/E) .17 -.02

V1 (P/E) .07 .05

V11 (P/E) -.12 .67V12 (P/E) .03 .66V6 (P/E) .18 .64V8 (P/E) -.23 .63V5 (P/E) -.36 .56V9 (P/E) .30 .48V3 (P/E) .21 . 28

dimension, with items 4 and 7 being the most extreme cases. It appears that the contrasting statements in those items are somehowmore related to the anticipating/adaptive dimension.

Items 20 and 24 from the environmental disposition scale had particularly strong crossloadings on the task disposition factor, with loadings of .50 and .44 and crossloadings of .42 and .41 respectively. Other Environmental items that crossloaded at a marginally interesting level were 22, 18, 21 and 13. However theyloaded at only the .3 level and therefore cannot be considered to be significant.

A reflexive relationship between the two scales would have been expected if the questions in the instrument had been written to focus on Task Engagement Style directly. Instead they focused on the two scales that provide the foundation for the model. The data reflected this expectation, with a low correlation between the 2 scales of .03. The data then suggests that the two scales form a composite known as Task Engagement Style rather than being empirically derived from Task Engagement Style. Because the scales were not derived from a singular underlying concept the usual search for the number of factors is in this case inappropriate. At this level of analysis there is a constraint toonly 2 factors, however further factors may be present within eachscale for future analysis.

From the correlation matrix of the items, it was seen that there was a mixture of plus and minus values of generally low magnitude,

ranging from .0 to .49. This indicates that there is much independence among the

Table 5Principle Components Factor Analysis with Oblique Rotation.

Variables Factor 1 (A/A) Factor 2 (P/E)V22(A/A) .63 .21V15(A/A) .60 .02V16(A/A) .58 -.20V18(A/A) .56 .22V20(A/A) .54 .35V17(A/A) .53 -.10V24(A/A) .52 .35V21(A/A) .49 .19V23(A/A) .49 .05V7(P/E) .48 -.09V13(A/A) .46 .26V14(A/A) .42 -.12V4(P/E) .41 -.02V3(P/E) .27 .25V2(P/E) .19 -.15V19(A/A) .18 .04V10(P/E) .16 -.04V1(P/E) .08 .05

V11(P/E) .04 .68V8(P/E) -.07 .66V12(P/E) .18 .65V6(P/E) .33 .61V5(P/E) -.22 .61V9(P/E) .41 .43

items and therefore, a common underlying latent factor would not be expected. Bartlett's test of sphericity was .0 also indicatingthat there was a significant amount of independence in the matrix.The communality estimates displayed in the factor analysis exhibited a considerable range among the items. They ranged from only .01 to .45 again indicating the lack of an underlying generalfactor.

Table 5 displays the oblique rotation of the Principal Components extraction. This rotation produced somewhat clearer results than the Varimax rotation. Here, the items in the environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting) scale more clearly loaded on factor one. Additionally there was a clearer loading of the task disposition (purposive/expressive) items on the second factor.

Three factors solutions were also examined utilizing the principlecomponents extraction method to see if the resulting loadings could find a more complex factor structure. When three factors were extracted the results were not clear, with the items largely intermixed among the factors. The three factor analysis does not appear to help in regard to understanding the underlying structureof the instrument. This substantiates the contention that the model is most clearly explained with two factors. This was expected since the questions were developed along two dimensions.

Scale Construction

In the restricted factor analysis, twelve item models were analyzed for both scales, however the poorer items caused procedural difficulties with non-positive definitive correlation matrices. Several models were examined in an exploratory fashion to obtain task disposition and environmental disposition scales of5 items each. The shorter form of the scales is desirable to enhance their inclusion in various surveys and encourage their usein a variety of situational contexts. The Principal Components Factor Analysis originally suggested thatthere were six items in the task disposition scale, however, when a six item model was analyzed the resulting fit was considerably poorer than in the five item model. This was due to the weakness of item 9 (see Table 6). Therefore the five item model is a better representation of the scale.

The environmental disposition scale had more items loading significantly, thus more work was needed to hone the scale down toa five item solution. In the end this five item model had the best overall fit of any of the models for this dimension. The principal components factor analysis suggested an 11 item

environmental disposition model. This model had an acceptable goodness of fit reading, but overall the goodness of fit improved as the number of items decreased. A revised 5 item environmentaldisposition scale actually resulted from the reevaluation of the unrestricted factor loadings in light of restricted

Table 6 - Restricted Factor Analysis Models using LISRELMode Chi2 df Prob. GOF Root6 item e/p 92.83 9 .00 .74 .135 item e/p 28.52 5 .00 .89 .0811 item a/a 326.99 44 .00 .71 .115 item a/a 62.60 5 .00 .81 .116 item a/a 81.73 9 .00 .80 .11revised 5 itema/a 31.73 5 .00 .89 .07 factor results. The first model that was run used the first five items that originally loaded onto the factor. However, in lookingat a restricted factor analysis model that used the first 6 items it was noticed that item 20 loaded quite poorly in combination with the other items. Therefore another model was analyzed deleting item 20 and substituting item 17. The resulting combination of variables appeared to provide a far better fit. Asa result the goodness of fit increased from .81 to .89. In general a goodness of fit value of .90 is indicative of a sound scale. Both of the five item models came very close to this. Overall, both 5 item scales showed similar indications of reliability.

Results from the restricted factor analysis for the 5 item task disposition scale showed that the bi-serial correlation matrix items 5 and 6 had the lowest correlation at .21, while items 8 and11 had the highest at .65. Overall, item 6 displayed the lowest correlation with the other items.

The communality of the items as seen in the squared multiple correlations showed all of the items to be near .4 except for item11, which was dramatically higher at .83. Item 11 then is indicated to be a variable more central than the others with regard to this dimension.

Normalized residuals were also examined in an attempt to recreate the correlation matrix, thereby testing the relative strength of the factors. The normalized residuals were highest for the relationships between items 5 and 6 at -1.56, and between items 6 and 12 at 1.86. This suggests that these correlations contain unique variance which is not reflected in the overall model. The final standardized loadings were .61, .63, .69, .91 and .68 for items 5, 6, 8, 11, and 12 respectively. This indicates that item 11 was by far the strongest loading item in this item combination as could be seen throughout the output. Item six is perhaps the weakest or most unique item in the dimension but shares some of this uniqueness with item 5.

The correlation matrix of the 5 items in the environmental disposition scale was reasonably even in coefficient values averaging about .4 or .5. Here, the highest correlation was between items 16 and 18 at .67, while the lowest correlation was between items 16 and 22 at .29. The most unique variance of the five variables was in item 22 and is reflected in a communality ofonly .37 compared to the other values which ranged between 4 and 6for all other values. The T-values for the this scale were all low ranging from 4.91 to 5.91 indicating that statistically significant model parameter estimates can be made. The highest normalized residual value is for the relationship between items 16and 22. As was seen earlier, the relationship between these two items is the most unique of any two items and consequently fits the model most poorly.

The final factor loadings were .68, .75, .69, .77, and .61 for items 15, 16, 17, 18, and 22 respectively. Being relatively even,this range of loadings was narrower than for the 5 item task disposition scale. Overall these results appear quite reasonable and indicate an even pattern of influence among the items.

In conclusion, the goodness of fit measures indicate a reasonable fit for both the 5 item task disposition (purposive/expressive) model and the (revised) 5 item environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting) model. The reliability of the scales is reflected in alphas of .70 and .69 respectively indicating a

reasonable reliability for this stage in scale development (Nunnally, 1979). The 11 item environmental disposition scale hada relatively higher reliability at .77 and in this respect could also be used. However, though the alpha is higher, the fit of themodel was not as good as in the 5 item version. Reliabilities were greatly improved by shortening the scales from the original 12 item models which had reliabilities of .52 and .76 respectively. Using Nunnally's method for estimating the increased reliability if more items were added, the task disposition scale reliability could be increased to .82 if the number of items where doubled with the same degree of correlation among the items. The scale reliability of the environmental disposition scale could likewise increase to .82 if its number of items was doubled. If the number of items could be tripled these reliabilities could increase to about .87 (Nunnally, 1979).

Comparison With Locus Of Control Scale

In comparing the correlations of the scales with Rotter's Locus ofControl scale, it is clear that Rotter's scale is not closely related to the environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting) scale as had been expected (see Table 7). While the two scales are correlated at the .05 alpha level of significance, the magnitude (-.20) is very small. Therefore, no convergent validitycan be identified. It is interesting to note that the direction of the relationship is in the opposite of the hypothesized direction. Though not at a level of magnitude, apparently the anticipating dimension is actually more related to Rotter's external locus of control than is the adapting dimension.

This finding can be understood if one considers the anticipating/ adaptive dimension to more closely measure the willingness of an individual to anticipate or adapt in relation to his environment, rather than the control issue that is addressed in the locus of control instrument. While Rotter's scale focuses on values and beliefs in relation to fate and control, it does not include the time orientation that is implicit in the anticipating/adapting scale.

It can be inferred from the data that a belief in external controlis apparently not a necessary condition for an adapting disposition. Some people may choose to adapt to their environmentin order to maintain control over their lives. Similarly, a belief in an internal locus of control may not be a necessary condition for an anticipating disposition. An individual may anticipate rather than adapt to offset the pervasive impact of theenvironment.

This finding is similar to that found in a study by Reddy and Rhaman (1984) examining the relevance of job involvement and work involvement of managers and blue-collar workers to their locus of control. Their results similarly showed that job involvement and work involvement were not dependent upon Locus of Control.

Table 7 - Reliability/Validity Correlation Matrix (**alpha < .01; *alpha < .05, N=90, except for LOC: N=77)

Model 12 p/e 5 p/e 12 a/a 11 a/a 5 a/a 5 item p/e .77** 12 item a/a .44** .19* 11 item a/a .41** .16 .98** 5 item a/a .30** .07 .86** .90** LOC -.14 -.08 -.19* -.21* -.22*

The statistical analysis revealed that as the scales were refined they became increasingly independent. Table 7 compares the Pearson Product Moment Correlations of the various scale models. Items marked with an asterisk are significant when significance isassumed at an alpha level < .05. Items marked with a double asterisk are significant at an alpha level < .01. In comparing the correlations among the various models, the refined 5 item purposive/expressive model is minimally correlated with the original 12 item anticipating/adapting scale, but not with the refined 11 or 5 item versions. The correlation between the initial 12 item purposive/expressive and anticipating/adapting scales was relatively higher at .44, however when the weak items were deleted from the purposive/expressive scale, this correlationdropped considerably.

In contrasting the items that loaded best and worst in the factor analysis, it became clear that the better statements had strong and clear verbs as their second word in the statement: "I _____". For example: I allocate; I work; I express; I try; I make; I anticipate; I think; and I envision. Items with weaker verbs did not load as strongly. These included: I often; I have; To get; Agood; and I could. Additionally, when the second word was the same in the two contrasting statements there was less of a resulting contrast and therefore the data showed these responses to be more ambiguous. Perhaps this format could be used to develop lengthier and more reliable versions of the anticipating/adapting and purposive/expressive scales. If so, then the 11 item A/A scale may be more appropriate than the 5 itemA/A scale for use in cases where scale brevity is not necessary.

Relationship Between Task Engagement And Grades

A significant finding of this study is the correlation between undergraduate grade point average and Task Engagement Style. As hypothesized results showed a significant correlation between grades and the purposive dimension of task disposition and a moderately significant correlation between grades and the adaptingdimension of environmental disposition.

Pearson's correlation coefficients showed there to be a significant correlation between grades and the 5-item purposive/expressive scale [.21 (p=.03, n=77)]. The more purposive the individual the higher his grades, and the more expressive the individual, the lower his grades. A similar relationship was noted in regard to Environmental disposition. The data suggests a correlation between grades and the 5 item anticipating/adapting scale that is moderately significant [.17(p=.07, n=77)]. In this case, the more the student adapts, the higher his grades, while the more he anticipates, the lower his grades.

It can be inferred from the data that formal education may be encouraging students to approach their studies with a Task Engagement Style characterized by purposiveness and adapting.

Students taking a functional approach to their studies would likely do best in regard to grades. This can be explained in thatboth grades and Task Engagement Style are social constructs that appear to be interactive within the cognitive frame of the individual. Grades are a societally accepted measure of student performance. The student perceives which Task Engagement Style will lead to higher grades when he is positively reinforced for using a particular style, and punished for using other styles. Ifevery time he employs a particular approach he receives a high grade, then the student learns to adopt this style in the context of formal education. Therefore the correlation between grades andTask Engagement Style is not surprising. Students describing their style as similar to that which is most rewarded by formal education, would be expected to have a higher grade point average than students with other styles. Alternatively, a future study could look at measures of intelligence and learning style as intervening variables that might explain the relationship between Task Engagement Style and grades.

Demographic Data

The median age of the sample of MBA students is between 25 and 26 years old. The median time since they received their bachelors degree is between two and three years, and the majority have over two years of full-time work experience. Over 44.3 percent have one year or more of work experience. As a group they are predominantly male (65.9%) and Caucasian (80.0%). Limitations of this sample must be noted. The similarity of the respondents makeit difficult to generalize the results to more diverse populations. Additional demographic information is available in Appendix G. Relationships between demographic variables and the Task Engagement scales were found to be non-significant. No significant correlations were found between the scales and degree of satisfaction in the relationship with the respondent's most recent supervisor, average number of hours per month reading non-required career related material, or the percentage of potential

talent used in their current job. This suggests that neither scaleis dependent upon these factors.

The variables used as a control also did not explain the variance in the data. The items controlled for were; year of birth, year of undergraduate degree, number of years of work experience, number of years of managerial work experience, gender and socio-economic class. No significant correlations were found between these controls and the Task Engagement scales. Results of the Time Series Study

The time series study described in chapter 2 concerned a group of 25 managers and technical personal at XYZ Inc. Version 2 of the Task Engagement Style Inventory (see Appendix B) which consists ofthe first 20 items of the version 3 instrument was administered atfive different times in the course of the project. Utilizing items from the environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting) scale that were found reliable in the larger study, a shorter scale of those items available for analysis was constructed. Thisscale is shorter than the 11 item scale discussed earlier because many of those items were not administered in the version 2 instrument utilized for the time series study. The scale items used are exhibited in Table 8.

TABLE 8 Environmental Disposition Scale used for time series analysis

V13 ____3. I am inclined to comply with rules and regulations____4. I am inclined to explore options and alternatives

--------------------------------------------------------------V14 ____5. I think about the implications of what is happening

____6. I think about how to fit in with what is happening--------------------------------------------------------------V15 ____9. I look to others for a way to do the task

____10. I envision alternative ways to do the task--------------------------------------------------------------V16 ____15. I focus on long range objectives

____16. I focus on the immediate situation

--------------------------------------------------------------V17 ____17. I am concerned with changing my environment

____18. I am concerned with adapting to my environment--------------------------------------------------------------

The chart at the top of Figure 6 illustrates the overall time series results. The data exhibited a significant fluctuation in environmental disposition over the length of the study (from 2/19/88 to 6/27/88), and reflected the patterns that were observedin Team 1. Time series results for this 5 person group are illustrated in the chart at the bottom.

Interviews with members of Team 1 suggested that they formed with a hope that positive change might occur. This was also reflected in an anticipating scale score of 4.2. In the second week of the project at the off-site meeting on 2/26 the group through a process of brainstorming in choosing and defining a project. Their emphasis on anticipating over adapting remained strong, staying at the 4.2 level. However, anticipating dropped significantly from 4.2 to 2.7 during the period between 2/26 and 4/1 in a shift away from anticipating and toward adapting.

There are several possible explanations for this shift. Perhaps as the project got under way the reality of having no release timeto work on it became pervasive. The project was to be done in addition to their regular duties. At the same time it was realized that the project chosen by the group would take an immense amount of work and might offer no higher payoff than several ideas that were already awaiting attention. There also was at this time a drop-off in visibility, participation and contact with the top management group in regard to the market development process. Another explanation is that perhaps at this time the novelty of the project had worn off and the relative interest and enthusiasm for change of the various individuals involved began to be expressed. Lastly there is a possibility that this shift in environmental disposition is a natural curve that would be expected to happen as a part of the development of any project team.

Anticipating continued to fall further between 4/1 and 5/5, and then rose slightly between 5/5 and 6/27. At this time the team became aware that their project would be ending and they began to prepare for the next round of the market development process in which some of their subordinates would be involved.

Table 9 - Anova / T-Test Results From 2/26 to 4/1

The changes observed in group 1 were similar to changes reported by the other staff involved in the administration of the program as well. The data in the overall sample indicates that the most significant change occurred between 2/26 and 4/1. Anova and T-Test results revealed the change in environmental disposition to be significant as illustrated in Table 9 above. During this time period the mean anticipating score fell from 4.31 to 3.43, while the standard deviation rose from .79 to 1.41 and reflects a movement toward adapting and away from anticipating. The change in standard deviation suggests that this change was probably localized to particular individuals and/or groups at an even more significant rate.

Given the large standard deviation it was proposed that the shift from anticipating toward adapting might be localized to one or twoof the project teams. It was unclear if the raise in standard deviation that accompanied the significant fall in anticipating was a reflection of increased individual variation or more relatedto experiences in the project teams. To look more closely a time series was analyzed for each group, with the results displayed in Appendix G. While the sample in individual teams is too small to be statistically accurate, the results infer that since each of the groups followed a similar pattern with varying degrees that the effect was probably an individual, organizational, or natural phenomenon rather than one that was team specific.

It appears then that the environmental disposition aspect of Task Engagement Style may change over time as hypothesized. An additional study utilizing the refined scales found in the reliability analysis would be necessary to reconfirm this result and determine if task disposition changes over time as well.

While Task Engagement Style can be viewed at the trait level as a personality characteristic or dominant tendency, it can also be viewed as a situational construct. This approach is found in other personality constructs as well. For example Kolb's LearningStyle Inventory (1981) measures four styles of learning, but does not assume that an individual always employs his dominant style. In the Learning Style construct it is assumed that an individual whose trait level style is Accommodator will occasionally act as Converger, Diverger and Assimilator though perhaps not as regularly or as comfortably. The Task Engagement Style construct is similar in that an individual's style is viewed as a general tendency that may change given particular circumstances.

Summary

The major thrust of this study has been to develop a theory of Task Engagement and to develop an inventory to measure it. From the statistical analysis presented in in this chapter it appears that overall the modified instrument displays reasonable reliability. Another round of testing is needed to prepare for confirmatory analysis and to establish validity. In Churchill's scale development method (1979), this instrument is in the early stages. Therefore it is premature to begin norming the scale. Itwill be important in the norming of this scale to include significant samples of people from different task environments.

Issues of task environment variability could not be adequately addressed in the present study. It is an area which needs to be clarified by future research with significant samples over a widerrange of task environments. Additional refinements to the scales would greatly enhance this process. In addition, it will be important to establish the convergent and discriminate validity ofthese scales by finding other constructs which might be similar toTask Engagement Style. Also needed are methods for measuring thefit between environment, task and individual. One future study could examine the flexibility of environments in changing and/or designing jobs to best fit the style of the individual.

Another study could look at the Task Engagement Styles that tend to be encouraged or demanded by particular task environments.

Figure 7 illustrates the domain of an Environmental Demand Model. The style demanded by a task environment may be an important consideration in understanding the broader set of factors that comprise Task Engagement. This is supported in a study conducted by Newton and Kennan (1983) designed to measure personal characteristics, environmental properties, and interactions between person and environmental variables. Using self-report scales they found that in a sample of 798 undergraduate engineers that work environment is a more important determinant for work involvement than are personal variables. In this study a theory about Task Engagement has been formed. Further developmentof this construct might illuminate the impact of environmental factors as they interface with individual differences, and glean results that may prove useful in a variety of applications. Managers, teachers and consultants may find this theory to be of help in better understanding their subordinates, students and clients. Human resource professionals may find it relevant to processes of job analysis, placement, and career pathing. It is this author's hope that this line of research can be continued, and that it may make a contribution to both practitioners and the literature.

Chapter 4 Further Discussion Of The Concept

This research has explored and studied a theory of Task Engagement and its two dimensions: task disposition (purposive/expressive) and environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting). Constructing a two by two table from these dimensions results in four Task Engagement Styles; Functional, Creative, Social and Intentional. These styles are illustrated in Figure 8, and can be considered in either a general or situationallevel of analysis. Characteristics of the four Task Engagement Stylesare inferred from observations, interviews, personal experience, the literature, and by conceptually combining the two dispositional scales. Observations of participants in this studysuggest that these descriptions exhibit a face validity. In

interviews participants with scores indicating a particular style reported identifying with the descriptions. Additionally, when discussing their experience in various task situations, subjects have tended to use similar words to describe their thoughts and feelings. A future study should be conducted to further establishempirical validity.

Functional Style of Task EngagementPeople with a Functional Task Engagement Style would tend to

approach tasks with an orientation that could be characterized as purposive rather than expressive, and adapting rather than anticipating. Their basic approach would be to aim toward getting the job done, and look to their environment for help in establishing priorities.

Figure 8

A Functional Style of Task Engagement supports the ability to stick to a task, cope with pressure, comply with rules and regulations, and stay within the boundaries of an assignment. This style would enable an individual to do well in traditional hierarchical corporations, as these organizations often assume that work is approached with this style. A person doing a job with this approach would tend to work toward organizational goals,and be responsive to direction from others regarding guidelines and standards. He would tend to place a high value on job security and expect to be well rewarded for his efforts.

It is expected that a Functional Style of Task Engagement would help a person to fit in with his work environment and to survive in an organization over time. Very attuned to social norms, this individual might find meaning in satisfying those norms that are pivotal to his environment because job security is a major drivingforce for him. With this style a person could make good use of self-management techniques to discipline himself and diligently dowhat is required. Therefore a person with this style has the ability to be content in difficult conditions where others would find it more difficult to cope.

It is apparent that many corporations are organized around the assumption that their members approach work with a Functional TaskEngagement Style. It is also a style that many motivation and incentive programs are geared toward. Often, when social scientists leave out personal differences from their models they seem to make the assumption that people go about their work in this way. In a self-fulfilling prophesy, by relating to the individual as if he has a Functional Task Engagement Style, he mayfeel a pull to adopt it in a situational sense even though his General Style may be different.

The Functional Task Engagement Style is similar in nature to Douglas McGregor's notion of a "Theory X" perspective (1962). This individual would likely place a higher priority on accomplishing his desired result or goal than on pursuing personalfulfillment from the process of doing the task. Predictable and steady, even in difficult working conditions, an individual with this style would tend to be adept at coping with pressure, accomplishing what needs to be done and performing his duties. Creative Style of Task Engagement

If a person had a Creative Style of Task Engagement his participation would be characterized as expressive rather than purposive, and anticipating rather than adapting. At his best he would bring personal commitment, enthusiasm, excitement and vibrancy to the workplace. When an individual with this style is inspired he would likely be able to engage his work with a total involvement. When so engaged he would experience little anxiety, distraction or alienation from self.

It is characteristic of the Creative Style of Task Engagement thatthe act of doing and not the attainment of goals gives meaning to an activity. Though relatively unconcerned with striving to produce, this individual might attain high levels of effectiveness. The personal nature of his involvement in a task could provide him with great natural energy at his disposal. However since he is not oriented toward self-discipline this individual's output may tend to be unpredictable, and therefore might have difficulty sticking to goals and deadlines.

There are parallels between the Creative Task Engagement Style andresearch on the conditions for creativity. Factors identified as key include: receptivity and immersion (Henle, 1962); flexibility,spontaneity, originality, and redefinition (Arieti, 1976); and elaboration (Berger, Guilford, and Christensen 1959). These conditions for creativity require both an expressive disposition toward a task and an anticipating disposition toward the environment.

Putting one's "heart and soul" into a task personalizes the experience and increases the likelihood that one will attempt to deal with the dissonance that is experienced through inquiry. Therefore approaching an activity with a Creative Style of Task Engagement would typically offer opportunities for personal growth.

An individual approaching his work in this way tends to find little meaning in approval, attainment of goals, or any extrinsic reward. Therefore he would likely be relatively unconcerned with authority relationships. While this might make his performance unpredictable and at times erratic, his output could potentially be very creative.

Social Style of Task Engagement

When approaching a task situation with a Social Style of Task Engagement an individual's participation could be characterized asexpressive rather than purposive, and adapting rather than anticipating. People with a Social Style of Task Engagement are relationship oriented. Often intuitive and empathic, they would tend to favor informality and be comfortable communicating at an emotional level.

A Social Style of Task Engagement is characterized by a high need for inclusion and a willingness to respond to others. It is expected that a person with this style would have a relationship to authority that is highly charged; whether it be devoted and supportive, or rebellious and counterdependent. He would expect personal fulfillment from his work and look to others for

inspiration and support toward getting it. This individual would also have the capacity to be a good team player, enriching his environment by inspiring and supporting others.

People with this Social Task Engagement Style would tend to be very involved in the informal system of their department or organization. They would likely place a high value on affiliationwith their co-workers and be particularly attentive to what othersdo and say. While this could enable them to build key relationships, it might at times serve as a distraction from attending to the task at hand. Additionally, since this person isnot driven by self-discipline, there might be a danger that when not inspired by his environment he may be prone to procrastination.

Intentional Style of Task Engagement

Some individuals may approach their work with an Intentional Styleof Task Engagement Style. If a person had an Intentional Style his participation could be characterized as purposive rather than expressive, and anticipating rather than adapting. What he bringsto the task situation is a mental set that finds its greatest meaning in achievement.

People with an Intentional Style of Task Engagement would tend to be clear, specific and to the point. Often "Type A" personalities(Friedman & Rosenman, 1974), individuals with this style might be characterized as being aggressive and competitive, setting high standards, and putting themselves under constant time pressure.

When a person has an Intentional Task Engagement Style he tends to be results oriented and can plan and accomplish goals. This style allows for the diligent establishment of objectives anda willingness to work hard, and it enables the individual to have the discipline and will power to plan for a desired outcome and accomplish it.

Often good managers, individuals with this style would tend to motivate and persuade others by concentrating on goals and objectives. While this intense focus on output can limit tolerance for the ambiguity and serendipity necessary for high

levels of creativity and originality, it supports people in being productive, consistent and efficient.

Synergy of Style, Task and Environment General Task Engagement Style describes an individual's historicalpattern or tendency. This level of analysis may be useful for capturing an individual's predilections at the trait level, however the situational application of this theory may eventually prove to be more useful in application. Regardless of his GeneralTask Engagement Style, in a particular context a task may be approached with a different Situational Task Engagement Style. Given the apparent importance of context it is suggested that a comparative analysis be conducted regarding how an individual's Task Engagement Style varies between various situations. In comparing various contexts it may be beneficial to produce two relatively short scales so that a variety of task environments maybe more easily measured.

While certain styles might be a better fit for particular situations, it is not suggested here that any of the four Task Engagement Styles is best or would universally lead to more satisfactory results in regard to performance and/or satisfaction.The four styles and some of their key characteristics are illustrated in Figure 9. While it is tempting see Task Engagementas a normative and evaluative concept, the importance of fit between task,environment and Task Engagement Style in this model must be recognized. Without this synergy any of the styles could lead to poor productivity and dissatisfaction.

Four cases illustrate how each of the Task Engagement Styles can potentially lead to poor performance when they do not match the task situation. Picture an individual with a Creative Task Engagement Style working in a conservative bank that places a highvalue on perfection and predictability. In this event there wouldlikely be a mismatch that could lead to frustration for both the individual and his organization. With his passion and independence this person would likely feel stifled, while the organization in question would probably view his performance as haphazard.

In the second case imagine a person with a Social Task Engagement Style in a technical position where he works alone most of the time. Given his style, the isolation of this work environment would likely make him feel alienated, making it difficult for him to find meaning in his work. This would likely harm both his performance and satisfaction.

In a third example suppose an individual had a Functional Task Engagement Style and worked in a sales organization that placed a high value on self-initiative and an entrepreneurial spirit. Herethe mismatch between this person's adapting environmental disposition and a job that is oriented toward anticipating, would likely result in the employee feeling unappreciated and producing unsatisfactory results.

In the fourth case picture an individual with an Intentional Task Engagement Style working in a utility company where career advancement is based on seniority. The lack of opportunities for advancement based on performance might become very frustrating forthis person, and he would likely find his job to be unchallenging and uninspiring.

In each of the above cases a mismatch between the individual's Task Engagement Style and the task or environment would likely lead to undesirable results. For each situation a different stylewould have served both the person and organization better. Each of the four Task Engagement Styles suggests a different approach toward the plethora of situations that are encountered in organizational life. It might be predictable how an individual with each style might react to diverse situations like: a job that has been plateaued; working in either a highly disciplined orundisciplined environment; having a large part of one's job in a team context; or a position with highly repetitive tasks.

While it appears that Task Engagement varies with respect to particular task situations, it is not clear to what extent a person can consciously choose the style he will adopt. It wouldmake for an interesting study to look at how, why and when some people are able to change their style to fit a particular situation. It seems plausible that an individual's style might be

modified by new challenges in his life such as entry into the working world or starting a family. While often times he may approach these responsibilities with some variation to the way he may have approached them in the past, perhaps given the awareness,a person could consciously choose to adopt a situational Task Engagement Style to suit a particular context. However the influence of an individual's environment may so pervasive that becomes difficult for him to choose a style that it does not favor. To do so may mean encountering disaffirmation from his environment on a regular basis. More research is needed to study the factors affecting an individual's willingness and ability to do so.

Is There a Place for Expressiveness In Organizational Life?

A person's disposition toward a task situation is not only an individual phenomena but a cultural one as well. Deep-seated cultural values regarding the meaning of work have a strong influence over how people learn to engage with tasks.

Expressiveness seems to be under attack as American culture approaches the 1990's. This culture is dominated by a pragmatic spirit which emphasizes work, accomplishment, and purposiveness. Illustrations of this phenomenon abound. Even seemingly expressive acts like vacationing can take on a purposive tone. Lewis and Brissett (1981) in examining vacation literature concluded that the contemporary vacation is dominated by a purposive disposition. They found that vacation brochures graphically orient the vacationer telling him both why he needs a vacation and what his experience will be like when he arrives at his destination. In this contemporary view of vacations circumstances are defined as much as possible with little left to chance. Other examples of this culture's predilection toward purposiveness are current trends toward the quantifiable measurement of scholastic and artistic merit, social scientists emulating physicists, freshmen entering universities who already know their majors, M.B.O. reports, 'yuppie' social climbing, leaner organizations, the fall of the liberal arts degree, and an obsession with goals and work planning.

Block (1987) discussed the need for self-expression in entrepreneurship and suggested that traditional manager-employee contracts have a tendency to deny self-expression. Greely in a similar vein suggested that while cultural acceptability often requires the pretense of a purposive disposition that the best work can at times come form a more expressive disposition.

We have observed that the most creative of our colleagues do not seem to work according to the strict rules of the scientific method. They form explicit hypotheses only when they are ready towrite up the account of their work, and generally they worry aboutspecifying their formal theory only as they try to figure out how to begin their article. I am not suggesting that theories or nullhypotheses are absent from their works but that theories, hypotheses, scholarly footnotes, and familiarity with the literature are present in implicit and fundamentally unimportant fashion. What the creative scholars are doing when they are working in a project has nothing to do with anything that fits in the neat paradigm of scientific method. What they are doing is dreaming, speculating, playing with the variables in the model, following their hunches and instincts, and puttering with their raw materials. None of these activities get into sociological reports because they are not "science." However neat and precise the professional tone of articles, papers, and monographs, are they really honest descriptions about how our colleagues went about their work? No, they are using the approved literary form for communicating with each other and can escape the charge of dishonesty with the plea that nobody really believes that the analytic process described in an article is in fact the one that went into its preparation. ........I think the day may come when men are astonished that there was a generation of scholars that rigorously excluded wit from their work.. These scholars of the future will simply not be able to comprehend why wit, such a marvelous attribute of the human personality, was considered unscientific and unprofessional. I am arguing that the sociological act is an exercise in artistic playfulness and that sociologists have all entered into a mammoth conspiracy to hide the fact. Our papers are obscure, our journal articles are dull

and frequently unintelligible , and our meetings are sluggish and wearisome. (Greeley, A., M., 1971, p. 224)

Greely suggests that because of the social desirability and convention of the purposive disposition that people pretend to approach their work in this manner even when their disposition is an expressive one. The emphasis on purposiveness in the academic community is so great that scholars systematically try to remove the appearance of expressiveness from their work so it will be accepted and valued by the academic community. Maslow offered a similar commentary in discussing contemporary psychology:

Because contemporary psychology is overly pragmatic, it abdicates from certain areas that should be of great concern to it. In its preoccupation with practical results, with technology and means, it has notoriously little to say, for example, about beauty, fun play, wonder, awe, joy, love, happiness, and other "useless" reactions and end experiences. It is therefore of little or no service to the artist, the musician, the poet, the novelist, to the humanist, the connoisseur, the axioligist, the theologian, or to other end-or enjoyment-oriented individuals. (Maslow, A., 1987, p. 63)

Results from this study also support the notion that a Task Engagement Style that accentuates purposiveness and to a lesser extent adapting is favored by educational institutions. In particular, the relationship found in this study between high purposiveness and high grades suggests that students must adopt a purposive disposition if they are to be recognized in the way manyeducational institutions evaluate excellence. That a preference for adapting over anticipating is also moderately correlated with grades supports Freire's propositions that educational institutions teach students to adapt to the world rather than change it.

It appears then that while many individual academics may have values to the contrary, that academia as a culture places its highest value on the Functional Task Engagement Style. In many institutions of formal education a good student is seen as one who

learns what he is told to learn - when he is told to learn it. Students that do otherwise are penalized in the form of a lower grade point average. While late 1980's American culture exhibits a strong preference for a purposive disposition there appears to be at the same time alonging for the qualities that are characteristic of an expressivedisposition. An undercurrent seems to exist that yearns for expressive qualities like: peace of mind; new and inspiring art and music; true scholarship and new ideas; inspiring leadership; and a sense of shared values and pride in the culture. It may be that these qualities of life will not be realized until there is afundamental shift in this culture toward placing a higher value onexpressiveness. Berlew (1984) has observed that today's individual seeks a more total, value-based involvement with his organization and its work. LaBier has similarly noted that the latest generation of managers expect more from themselves and their companies than did their predecessors. He sees these managers as increasingly wanting personal fulfillment, together with fun and pleasure from life. For this new management generation, career and self-identity are inextricably tied (1986).Additionally there are indications that a shift in values from career to family is underway. If these observations are generalizable then perhaps as the turn of the century approaches acultural shift can be anticipated that places a higher value on expressiveness.

Integration

It would seem then that one mark of an individual functioning at peak performance, is the ability to somehow integrate all of the dimensions of Task Engagement. Maslow discussed the need for integration:

...healthy persons are not only expressive. They must be able to let themselves go. They must be able to drop controls, inhibitions, defenses when they deem this desirable. But equally they must have the ability to controlthemselves, to delay their pleasure, to be polite, be able tobe either Dionysian or Apollonian, Stoci or Epicurean,

expressive or coping, controlled or uncontrolled, self-disclosing or self-concealing, able to have fun and able to give up fun, able to think of the future as well as the present. (Maslow, A., 1987, p. 68)

At times one's purposes can be internalized to where they operate at a tacit level (Polanyi, 1966). When this occurs they function not as goals to achieve, but as values. When an individual expresses himself these tacit purposes and values naturally come into play as a representation of his inner most self, and require little conscious attention, discipline, or striving. Perhaps thisdeeper internalization and clarity of purpose is a developmental state that allows one to overcome the constraint relationships between purposive and expressive, and anticipating and adapting. Without values and internalized life purposes, expressiveness would amount to nothing more than aimless drifting or childish selfishness. When the individual internalizes and is clear about the broad and continuing purposes in his life, he perhaps can be freed from a day to day preoccupation with goals, for they are so well known to him they are a given. If he is clear where he is heading then perhaps he can choicefully adapt to his environment without giving up the facility for creating change and consideringalternatives.

Dispositional Shifts

Another implication from this study of considerable interest concerns the dispositional shift phenomenon. It appears that an individual's purposes can be experienced in different ways that exert great influence on the quality of his work. It is suggestedthat a shift from "purposes as objectives or goals" to "purposes as values" may allow a person to overcome the constraint nature ofthe relationship between purposive and expressive discussed in Chapter 1. This is important because this constraint must be overcome if an individual is to be both efficient and creative at once.

When purposes take on the characteristics of values their personalrelevance and importance becomes clear and internalized.

Therefore they do not require the attention or self-management that the achievement of goals and objectives would usually require. When engaging with a task in this way the individual's frame of mind is not one of actively seeking a specific desired outcome. Because he is so familiar with what is important to him that he does not need to systematically try to make it happen. Hewill naturally proceed in the direction of his internalized purposes without actively trying to do so. For example an individual whose purpose is to achieve world peace does not need to write reminders in his calendar to do so. If he has really internalized this purpose he will be working toward world peace ineverything that he does. In this case his participation in the task is an expression of his internalized purpose - which then influences his behavior as a value.

As the shift from purposes as objectives to purposes as values occurs the individual's purposes are clear, but he does not need to operate out of a mental set of self-discipline to achieve them.With little repression or estrangement from self, he opens himselfto finding new possibilities, and thereby a higher level of originality and creativity. In doing so he approaches the task situation with a mental set of grounded expressiveness and internalized purposiveness. By freeing the psyche from the burdenof self-management and repression it is enlivened and thereby can attain great heights of creativity without losing the ability for diligence.

An example of internalized purpose is what Csikszentmihalyi has coined the flow experience. A "flow experience" refers to a stateof being that enables a person to become one with what they are doing; i.e.,. the rock climber who feels and senses every aspect of the rock and who for the moment experiences no angst, anxiety or diversion from attention (1976). When in flow the individual gets totally immersed and thereby loses his sense of time and the distractions that surround the domain of his task or activity. What follows is an intense centering of attention on the activity.Individuals in flow do not need to try in order to concentrate, because their concentration comes automatically. In flow there isa sensation of total involvement in the task.

A special instance of Task Engagement is when an individual first sits down to work. Tasks are rarely begun in flow. For example many of my colleagues report that they once they get going on a writing project they write well and effortlessly, but until then, they find it difficult to get started. They find it frustrating to purposively begin an expressive task like writing, because whenthey first sit down to write, they find that the expressive element is missing. Once in motion the mental apparatus can rely on an intrinsic interest in the task or a desire to finish to stayin motion. However, before the writer is engaged with the topic he is writing about, there may be little desire to express his thoughts about it. Therefore many writers report that the only way to get started is through an act of discipline. This works well for some, especially in tasks that do not require much personal investment. However, in tasks that require a large measure of creativity like many writing projects, trying to be express the self through an act of discipline is futile.

The constraint nature of the relationship between purposive and expressive makes it difficult to exercise discipline and be expressive at the same time. Hence when the writer sits down to begin writing, if he approaches his task with discipline and findsthe creative ideas will not come. Similarly, if he approached thetask with an expressive disposition he might be easily distracted and soon find himself responding to a stimulus that better corresponds with his immediate wishes. The problem of how to bestget started on a task is not easily solved. Some people report that a shifting occurs when they begin a task. They may force themselves to sit at their typewriter and begin, but soon through an act of unconscious forgetting, they lose their disciplined awareness and find that an expressive disposition has supplanted the purposive one they began with.

The ability to shift back and forth between purposive and expressive is something of a mystery. An individual might have toforce himself to begin working, but as he becomes more interested in what he is doing, he mysteriously finds that his disposition has changed. Or he might begin a task with a light, playful attitude, but then unknowingly becomes more disciplined as time

pressure increases. It remains unclear as to how, why, and when these dispositional shifts occur and whether they can be influenced through external or self control. More work is needed to better understand this phenomena.

Implications For Supervision

An area of particular interest in this inquiry is the way in whichthe process of supervision interacts with and shapes an individual's Task Engagement Style. A pragmatic potential of thisline of research is to make a contribution in the form of a framework to assist in the supervision process. Huseman et. al. highlighted the importance of the supervisory relationship:

Two of the major relationships in our lives are those with our superior and with our subordinates. These relationships can determine our commitment to an organization, our willingness to continue working at a particular place, and our desire to go to work from day to day. (1988, p.31)

By better understanding how people engage with the multitude of tasks that comprise their organizational role, a supervisor may bebetter prepared to understand his employees, address their needs, and tap into their natural excitement about work. An understanding of Task Engagement may help them to reduce their ownlevel of frustration through a better understanding of the people they are dealing with, untap hidden resources and hold onto their best people over time. If managers can better understand why and how individuals perform as they do, then perhaps they will be better equipped to supervise, coach and support them in a way thatbest causes a synergy of Task Engagement Style, environment and task.

By the very nature of his job the supervisor is concerned with setting the mental apparatus of the employee into motion. A supervisor's job includes supporting attitudes and behaviors in his subordinate that are conducive to the accomplishment of organizational goals. He is also concerned with the outcomes his subordinate produces, and the priorities to which he attends. It

is not enough that the employee be alert and engaged with his work- he must attend to those tasks that are of most relevance to the organization. Therefore a primary responsibility of a supervisor is to build bridges between the will of his employees and the collective will of the organization. An employee may put forth great effort, but if that effort is only directed toward his favorite tasks, while ignoring other aspects of his job more important to the organization, then even though he is expending considerable effort he may not be working toward the best interests of his organization.

In studying successful managers Gabarro and Kotter (1980) have observed that a mutual understanding of strengths, weaknesses and work styles is an essential factor in a good supervisory relationship. Hopefully the Task Engagement Style Inventory can be a tool to promote this kind of understanding. It provides a language that could help a supervisor to dialogue with an employeeabout the way in which he is applying his knowledge and talent to his job. By better understanding The Task Engagement Styles of his people, a supervisor may be better prepared to select the mostappropriate supervision method for each employee.

There is a tremendous opportunity in the supervisory relationship for a supervisor to tap into an individual's natural excitement about work and influence and support him to engage with tasks in amutually beneficial way. Unfortunately this opportunity is often wasted. It is hoped that this line of research can work toward maximizing these relationships and provide a useful tool to bettertake into account the broader set of factors that influence performance and give meaning to the experience of work. There is no intention here of providing a tool for manipulating people or a"how to" guide for motivating.

Final Comments

A major thrust of this research has been to construct scales to measure an individual's Task Engagement Style. It is hoped that beyond the furthering of knowledge that a potential result of thisresearch could be to increase the awareness of individuals regarding their own work patterns. This awareness might be

helpful in choosing work environments that are more likely to bring out an individual's best, or to reshape existing work environments to better mesh with his style.

The hope of this study has been to develop a framework that could inspire some thinking, dialogue, and creative consideration about some issues that are important but perhaps difficult to openly address. Task Engagement may be a relevant concept for many applied disciplines including: performance appraisal; counseling;job design; career pathing; personal growth; education; supervision; and productivity improvement. The following are somestrategies for getting the most out of your Task Engagement Style.

1. Awareness

Increase awareness of your natural strengths and tendencies, and your own unique approach to task situations. Understanding your style can help you to understand why some tasks are particularly easy or difficult for you. This can be very helpful in making more informed choices.

2. Profiting

Look for situations that will bring out your best and enable you to make use of your natural strengths and tendencies.

3. Tempering

Avoid overusing your Task Engagement Style. Be aware of your patterns in approaching task situations and the costs and benefitsassociated with them.

4. Augmenting

Provide a balance to your own style by collaborating with people that have different Task Engagement Styles from your own. Appendix I offers some common sense suggestions for getting the most out of working with people of different styles. Hopefully future studies will focus on empirically testing these notions.

5. Stretching

Expand your approach to task situations by utilizing the strengthsand perspectives associated with other Task Engagement Styles. Make conscious choices to employ a different style when a particular situation calls for a different approach than your usual style

Bibliography

Arieti, S. (1976). Creativity: The Magic Synthesis., Basic Books, New York. Arendt, H. (1978). Life Of The Mind., Vol 1, 2. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Ashkenas, R.; Schaffer, R.A. (1982). Managers Can Avoid Wasting Time. Harvard Business Review, Vol 60, 3.

Bills, A. G.; Brown, C. (1929). The Quantitative Set, Journal ofExperimental Psychology. 12, 301-323.

Bandura, A. (1982). Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency. American Psychologist, 1982, 37, 122-147.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory: Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Becker, E (1971). The Birth and Death of Meaning, 2nd ed. New York: Free Press.

Berger, P. L.; Luckmann, T. (1967) The Social Construction of Reality. New York: Doubleday.

Berlew, D., E. (1984). Leadership and Organizational Excitement., Organizational Psychology, Kolb, Rubin, McIntyre Eds., Prentice Hall.

Blau, B.J. (1987). Using a person-environment fit model to predict job involvement and organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior; Jun Vol 30(3) 240-257.

Block, P. (1987). Empowering employees, Training and DevelopmentJournal; Apr Vol 41 (4), 34-39.

Botkin, J. W. (1979). No Limits To Learning, New York: PergamonPress.

Boyatzis, R. (1982). The Competent Manager, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Churchill, G. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs," Journal of Marketing Research,

Vol.16, Feb., 64-73.

Condry, J. (1977). Enemies of exploration: Self-initiated versus other initiated learning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977, 35, 459-477.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety, Jossey-Bass, 1976.

DeCharms, R. (1969). Origins, Pawns, and Educational Practice, in

G. S. Lessor (ed.) Psychology and the Educational Process. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman and Co.

Deci, E. L. (1972). Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Reinforcement and Inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22:

113 -120.

Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum.

Deci, E. L. (1980). The Psychology of Self-determination. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.

Drasgow, F.; Miller, H. (1982). Psychometric and Substantive Issues in Scale Construction and Validation," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 67, No. 3, 268-279.

Foulkes, F. K. (1969). Creating More Meaningful Work. American Management Association.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: The Continuum Publishing Company.

French; Kahn. (1962). A Programmatic Approach to Studying the Industrial Environment and Mental Health. Journal of Social

Issues 18: 1-47.

Freud, S. (1959, 1911). Formulations Regarding the Two Principles in Mental Functioning. In Collected papers (Vol.

4). New York: Basic Books.

Freud , S. (1924). Collected papers, Vol. II, London: Hogarth Press.

Friedman, M.; Rosenman, R. (1974). Type A behavior and Your Heart. New York: Knopf.

Furlong, W.B. (1976). The Fun In Fun., Psychology Today, June.

Gabarro, J. J.; Kosher, J. P. (1980). Managing Your Boss., Harvard Business Review.

Garland, H. (1985). A Cognitive Mediation Theory of Task Goals and Human Performance, Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 9, No. 4.

Geertz, Clifford (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Greely, A. M. (1971). Sociology As An Art Form., The American Sociologist,Vol. 6 (August): 223-225.

Hare, A. P. (1976). A Category System for Dramaturgical Analysis. Group Psychotherapy, Psychodrama And

Sociometry; 29, 1-14.

Henle, M. (1962). The Birth and Death of Ideas. In Gruber, H. E., Terrell, G., and Wertheimer, M. (eds.), Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking. New York: Atherton Press.

Hesse, H. (1951). Siddhartha. New York: New Directions Publishing Corporation.

Hollenbeck, J. R.; Klein, H. J. Goal Commitment and the Goal-Setting Process: Problems, Prospects, and Proposals for Future Research. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 72, No. 2, 212-220.

Huseman; Lahiff; Penrose (1988). Business Communication Strategies and Skills, Dryden Press.

Jacques, E. (1982). The Form of Time. New York: Crane Rusak.

James, W. (1896). Will to Believe. Massachusetts: The PlimptonPress.

Janis, I. L. (1984). Group Think, Organizational Psychology, Kolb, Rubin, McIntyre Eds., Prentice Hall, 1984.

Jans, S.A. (1985). Organizational Factors and Work Involvement. Organizational Behavior and Work Involvement; Jun Vol 35 (3) 382-396.

Kanungo, R. (1982). Work Alienation. New York: Praeger Publishers

Kanungo, R. (1981). Work Alienation and Involvement: Problems and Prospects. Review Internationale de Psychologie

Appliquee / International Review of Applied Psychology; 30, 1, Jan, 1-15.

Kelley, G. A. (1955). A Theory of Personality: The Psychology of Personal Constructs. New York: Norton and Company.

Keniston, K. (1968). The Psychology of Alienated Students., The Self In Social Interaction, Vol. 1., C. Gordon and K. J. Gergen, Eds. N.Y. Wiley and Sons.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Krech, D.; Crutchfield, R. S. , Ballachey, E. L. (1962). Individual Society. New York: McGraw-Hill.

LaBier, D. (1986). Madness Stalks the Ladder Climbers. Fortune,September 1, 78-84.

Latham, G. P.; Baldes, J. J. (1975). The Proactical Significance: of Locke's Theory of Goal Setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 122-124.

Lawler, E. E.; D. T. Hall. (1970). Relationship of Job Characteristics to Job Involvement, Satisfaction, and

Intrinsic Motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology 54

Levitt, T. (1976). Management and the Post Industrial Society. The Public Interest, Summer.

Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory In Social Science. New York: Harper.

Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on Group Dynamics. New York: Harper and Brothers.

Lewis, L.S.; Brissett, D. Paradise on Demand. (1981). Society:18, 5(133), July-Aug, 85-90.

Locke, E. A. (1968). Toward a Theory of Task Performance and Incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189.

Locke, E. A.; Cartledge, N.; Knerr, C. S. (1970). Studies of theRelationship Between Satisfaction, Goal Setting and

Performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 5, 135-158.

Locke, E. A.; Shaw, K. N.; Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal Setting and Task Performance: 1968-1980. PsychologicalBulletin, 90, 125-152.

Lodahl, T. M.; Kejner, M. (1965). The Definition and Measurement of Job Involvement. Journal of Applied

Psychology, Vol. 49

McGregor, D. (1962). The Human Side of Enterprise

Maslow, A. (1983, 1971). The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, New York: Penguin Books Ltd.

Maslow, A. (1987). Motivation and Personality, New York: Harper& Row.

Matsui, T.; Okada, A.; Mizuguchikk R. (1981). Expectancy TheoryPrediction of the Goal Theory Postulate, "The Harder the

Goal, the Higher the Performance" Journal of Applied Psychology, 66: 54-58.

Maurer, J. (1969). Work Role Involvement of Industrial Supervisors. East Lansing: Michigan State University, Business Studies.

May, R. (1969). Love and Will, New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

McCaskey, M. B. (1974). A Contingency Approach to Planning: Planning With Goals and Planning Without Goals. Academy of Management Journal: Vol. 17. #2. (pp. 281-291)

Mischel, W. (1974). Process In Delay of Gratification. in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances In Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 7). New York: Academic Press.

Mischel, W., (1979). On the Interface of Cognition and Personality, American Psychologist, p.740-754).

Mischel, W.; Baker, N. (1975). Cognitive Appraisals and Transformations in Delay Behavior. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 31, 254-261.

Morrison, T.L. (1985). Personal and Professional Boundary Attitudes and Effective Group Leadership in Classrooms.

Journal of Psychology; Mar Vol 119(2) 101-111.

Mossholder, K. W. (1980). Effects of Externally Mediated Goal Setting on Intrinsic Motivation: A Laboratory Experiment, Journal of Applied Psychology Vol. 65. No. 2. 202-210.

Newell, K. M. (1978). Some Issues on Action Plans. In G. E. Stelmach (Ed.), Information Processing in Motor Control and Learning. New York: Academic Press.

Newton, T. H.; Kennan, A. (1983). Is Work Involvement an Attribute of the Person or the Environment? Journal of Occupational Behaviour; Jul Vol 4 (3) 169-178.

Nunnally, J. (1979). Psychometric Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension, New York: Doubleday

Porpora, D.V. (1983). On the Post-Wittgensteinian Critique of theConcept of Action in Sociology. Journal for the Theory of

Social Behaviour; 13, 2, July, 129-146.

Reddy, N. Y.; Rahman, M. A. (1984). Relevance Of Job Involvementand Work Involvement of Managerial Employees and Blue-Collar Workers to their Locus of Control. Journal of Human-Ergology;

Sep Vol 13(1) 15-22.

Rimmerman, A; Portowicz, D. J.; Ehrlich, N. (1985). An Analysis of Factors Pertaining to Burnout Among Paraprofessional

Rehabilitation Workers in Israel. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research; Vol 8(4) 455-458.

Robinson; John P.; Shaver, Phillip R. (1973). Measure of Social Psychological Attitudes, Institute of Social Research,

University of Michigan.

Rogers, C. R. (1961). On Becoming a Person. Boston, Mass.: Houghton-Mifflin.

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized Expectancies for Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcement, Psychological Monographs., 1980.

Ryan, T. S. (1958). Drives, Tasks and Initiation of Behavior. American Journal of Psychology, 71, 74-93.

Shalley, C. E.; Oldham, G. R. (1985). Effects of Goal Difficultyand Expected External Evaluation On Intrinsic Motivation: A Laboratory Study. Academy of Management Journal, 28: 628-

640.

Schein, E. H. (1984). Organizational Socialization and the Profession of Management., Organizational Psychology, Kolb, Rubin, McIntyre Eds., Prentice Hall.

Singh, J. (1987). Measurement Approaches for Consumer Behavior Constructs: A Multidimensional Perspective. Advances in Consumer Research, ed. Michael Houston, Volume XV.

Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond Freedom And Dignity. New York: Knopf.

Stedry, A. C. (1960). Budget Control and Cost Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Steers, R. M., Porter, L. W. (1987). Motivation and Work Behavior,

New York: Mcgraw-Hill.

Steiner, George A. (1969). Top Management Planning New York: MacMillan.

Srivastva, S. (1983). The Executive Mind., San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Torbert, W. R. (1972). Learning From Experience - Toward Consciousness. New York: Columbia Press.

Tough, Allen. (1971). The Adult's Learning Project. Ontario: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

Verma, O. P.; Upadhyay, S. N. (1986). Organizational Commitment, Job Involvement and Job Satisfaction. Indian Journal of Current Psychological Research; Vol 1 (1) 24-31.

Vroom, V. H. (1962). Ego Involvement, Job Satisfaction, and Job Performance. Personnel Psychology 15: 159-177

Weick, K. E. (1969). The Social Psychology of Organizing. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and Leaders: Are They Different?, Harvard Business Review, May-June.

Appendix A THE TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE INVENTORY (V3)

The Task Engagement Style Inventory describes the way you engage with tasks in day to day situations in your life. You will be given several pairs of statements. For each pair mark a check bythe statement that you think most accurately describes how you would usually go about doing a task. Try to recall some recent situations where you did a task, perhaps in your job or at school.Please do not make ties.

____1. To get started I must impose discipline on myself ____2. To get started requires little or no discipline ---------------------------------------------------------------____3. I am inclined to comply with rules and regulations____4. I am inclined to explore options and alternatives ---------------------------------------------------------------____5. I think about the implications of what is happening____6. I think about how to fit in with what is happening--------------------------------------------------------------- ____7. I look forward to the end product of the project____8. I look forward to the doing of the project--------------------------------------------------------------- ____9. I look to others for a way to do the task____10. I envision alternative ways to do the task---------------------------------------------------------------____11. I am inclined to express my ideas and feelings____12. I am inclined to clarify what needs to be done---------------------------------------------------------------____13. I could be described as trying, coping, and striving ____14. I could be described as inquiring, growing, and being involved --------------------------------------------------------------____15. I focus on long range objectives ____16. I focus on the immediate situation

--------------------------------------------------------------____17. I am concerned with changing my environment ____18. I am concerned with adapting to my environment---------------------------------------------------------------____19. I allocate specific times each week to work on the project ____20. I work on the project when I feel like it--------------------------------------------------------------____21. I express my creativity____22. I try to meet my goals____23. I explore options and alternatives____24. I focus on the immediate situation-------------------------------------------------------------- ____25. I have to discipline myself to stay on task____26. I find a way to make the task interesting--------------------------------------------------------------____27. A good supervisor makes it clear to me what my job is____28. A good supervisor expects me to decide what to do---------------------------------------------------------------____29. I make a plan and stick to it____30. I do what feels most important---------------------------------------------------------------____31. I envision alternative ways to do the task____32. I follow the recommended procedures---------------------------------------------------------------____33. I look to my supervisor or teacher for direction____34. I anticipate the many alternatives I could choose from---------------------------------------------------------------____35. I take an efficient approach____36. I take a creative approach---------------------------------------------------------------____37. I comply with rules and regulations____38. I think about the implications of what is happening---------------------------------------------------------------____39. I get into the flow of the task____40. I put out the effort to do what must be done---------------------------------------------------------------____41. I consider how an idea would work out if adopted____42. I rely on experts for procedures and guidelines

---------------------------------------------------------------____43. I prefer a less structured approach____44 I am goal and planning oriented ---------------------------------------------------------------____45. I often experiment with new ways to do a task ____46. I try to reduce the possibility of costly errors---------------------------------------------------------------____47. I express my creativity____48. I make a plan and stick to itScoring The Task Engagement Inventory

add one point for each statement checked

Expressive Purposive Adaptive Anticipating

2. ___ 1. ___ 3 . ___ 4. ___

8. ___ 7. ___ 6 . ___ 5. ___

11. ___ 12. ___ 9. ___ 10. ___

14. ___ 13. ___ 16. ___ 15. ___

20. ___ 19. ___ 18. ___ 17. ___

21. ___ 22. ___ 24. ___ 23. ___ 26. ___ 25. ___ 28. ___ 27. ___

30. ___ 29. ___ 31. ___ 32. ___

36. ___ 35. ___ 33. ___ 34. ___

39. ___ 40. ___ 37. ___ 38. ___ 43. ___ 44. ___ 42. ___ 41. ___

47. ___ 48. ___ 46. ___ 45. ___

total _____ total _____ total _____ total _____Expressive Purposive Adaptive Anticipatingscore score score scoreAppendix B

Task Engagement Style Inventory

with self scoring booklet

by

Michael B. LondonWhat Is Task Engagement Assessment & Training?

- Confirm who you are, identify your personal strengths, and understand the unique contribution you make.

- Discover the factors that help you be most creative, and learn ways to take boring, mundane tasks and make them more interesting.

- Understand the factors that enable you to be most effective.

- Find out why goal-setting may or may not work for you.

- Learn to better manage your time and attention.

- Identify the parts of your job where you need more self control,and where exercising less discipline might increase your creativeoutput.

- Deal more effectively with procrastination, alienation, guilt and burn-out.

- Learn strategies for developing new ideas, goals, alternatives and opportunities.

- Know your Task Engagement Style and how particular careers are more suited to it than others, and choose a career path that

brings out the best of your natural abilities.

- Get in sync with the Task Engagement Style of your boss and learn strategies for improving your relationship.

- Learn strategies for working more effectively with team members that may have Task Engagement Styles different from your own.

- Diagnose systems and people for productive and creative potential.

- Discover the unique mix of strengths among your subordinates andhow to tailor your management strategies to bring out the most from their individual styles.

- Understand why usually competent employees perform poorly on some tasks.

- Be a catalyst for on-going dialogue about creative ideas and potential improvements.

TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE WORKSHEET

Choose an example from your own life that best fits each situation, and briefly describe it in the space provided. Please do not list the same task twice.________________________________________________________A. A task at work in which you are highly competent.

________________________________________________________B. A task at work in which you need to improve.

________________________________________________________C. A situation at work with time pressure.

________________________________________________________D. A time you learned something new.

________________________________________________________E. A task you often delay doing.

________________________________________________________F. A task you do as part of a team.

________________________________________________________G. A time you were involved in causing change.

________________________________________________________H. A meeting you often attend.I. How you generally approach most task situations. J. How you would like to approach your job in 5 years

THE TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE INVENTORY

The Task Engagement Style Inventory describes the way you engage with tasks in day to day situations in your life. You will be given several pairs of statements. For each pair mark a check bythe statement that you think most accurately describes how you would usually go about doing the task you described for each situation listed in the worksheet. Give a response for each of the 4 task situations represented here by columns A - D. Please do not make ties.

A B C D

1. I look to others for a way to do the task ____ ____ ____ ____2. I envision alternative ways to do the task ____ ____ ____

____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3. I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____ ____ ____4. I do what feels most important ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5. I focus on long range objectives ____ ____ ____ ____6. I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7. I express my creativity ____ ____ ____ ____8. I try to meet my goals ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9. I am concerned with changing my environment ____ ____

____ ____10. I am concerned with adapting to my environment ____

____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11. I allocate specific times each week to work on the project____ ____ ____ ____12. I work on the project when I feel like it ____ ____

____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13. I explore options and alternatives ____ ____ ____ ____14. I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15. I prefer a less structured approach ____ ____ ____

____16. I am goal and planning oriented ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17. I comply with rules and regulations ____ ____ ____

____18. I think about the implications of what is happening ____

____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19. I express my creativity ____ ____ ____ ____20. I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____ ____ ____

THE TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE INVENTORY (page 2)

For each pair mark a check by the statement that you think most accurately describes how you would usually go about doing the taskyou described for each situation listed in the worksheet. Give a response for each of the 4 task situations represented here by columns E - H. Please do not make ties.

E F G H

1. I look to others for a way to do the task ____ ____ ____ ____2. I envision alternative ways to do the task ____ ____ ____

____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3. I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____ ____ ____4. I do what feels most important ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5. I focus on long range objectives ____ ____ ____ ____6. I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7. I express my creativity ____ ____ ____ ____8. I try to meet my goals ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9. I am concerned with changing my environment ____ ____

____ ____10. I am concerned with adapting to my environment ____

____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11. I allocate specific times each week to work on the project____ ____ ____ ____12. I work on the project when I feel like it ____ ____

____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13. I explore options and alternatives ____ ____ ____ ____14. I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15. I prefer a less structured approach ____ ____ ____

____16. I am goal and planning oriented ____ ____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17. I comply with rules and regulations ____ ____ ____

____18. I think about the implications of what is happening ____

____ ____ ____---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19. I express my creativity ____ ____ ____ ____20.I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____ ____ ____ THE TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE INVENTORY (page 3)

For each pair mark a check by the statement that you think most accurately describes how you would usually go about doing the taskyou described for each situation listed in the worksheet. Give a response for each of the task situations represented here by columns I - J. Please do not make ties.

I J

1. I look to others for a way to do the task ____ ____ 2. I envision alternative ways to do the task ____ ____-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____4. I do what feels most important ____ ____-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5. I focus on long range objectives ____ ____6. I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7. I express my creativity ____ ____8. I try to meet my goals ____ ____-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9. I am concerned with changing my environment ____

____10. I am concerned with adapting to my environment ____

____-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11. I allocate specific times each week to work on the project ____ ____12. I work on the project when I feel like it ____ ____-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13. I explore options and alternatives ____ ____14. I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15. I prefer a less structured approach ____ ____16. I am goal and planning oriented ____ ____-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17. I comply with rules and regulations ____ ____18. I think about the implications of what is happening ____

____-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19. I express my creativity ____ ____20. I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____

Scoring The Task Engagement Inventory

add one point for each statement checked

Expressive ScaleA B C D E F G H I J

4. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

7. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

12. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

15. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 19. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ A B C D E F G H I Jexpressive totals

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Purposive ScaleA B C D E F G H I J

3. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

8. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

11. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

16. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 20. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ A B C D E F G H I Jpurposive totals

Anticipating ScaleA B C D E F G H I J

2. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

5. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

9. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

13. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 18. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ A B C D E F G H I Janticipating scale totals

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adapting ScaleA B C D E F G H I J

1. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

6. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

10. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

14. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 17. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ A B C D E F G H I J

adapting totals

Plot Your Expressive/Purposive Scores

Expressive - Purposive = Task Disposition scoreA. A task at work in which you are highly competent. ____ - ____ = ____B. A task at work in which you need to improve. ____ - ____ = ____ C. A situation at work with time pressure. ____ - ____ = ____D. A time you learned something new. ____ - ____ =____E. A task you often delay doing. ____ - ____ = ____F. A task you do as part of a team. ____ - ____ =____G. A time you were involved in causing change. ____ - ____ = ____H. A meeting you often attend. ____ - ____ = ____I. How you generally approach most task situations. ____ - ____ = ____J. How you would like to approach your job in 5 years. ____ - ____ = ____

Reacting To Your Task Disposition Scores

A positive Task Disposition score indicates an emphasis on expressiveness. A negative Task Disposition score indicates an emphasis on purposiveness. Answer the following questions to determine how your Task Disposition affects your work in the various situations you identified.1. In which 2 situations are you most expressive (+ score)? __________________________________________________________________

2. In which 2 situations are you most purposive (- score)?__________________________________________________________________

3. What factors make you more purposive or expressive in particular situations? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4. In which situations would being more purposive make you more effective?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. In which situations would being more expressive make you more effective?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Plot Your Anticipating/Adapting Scores

Anticipating - Adapting = Environmental Disposition scoreA. A task at work in which you are highly competent. ____ - ____ = ____B. A task at work in which you need to improve. ____ - ____ = ____ C. A situation at work with time pressure. ____ - ____ = ____D. A time you learned something new. ____ - ____ =____E. A task you often delay doing. ____ - ____ = ____F. A task you do as part of a team. ____ - ____ =____G. A time you were involved in causing change. ____ - ____ = ____H. A meeting you often attend. ____ - ____ = ____

I. How you generally approach most task situations. ____ - ____ = ____J. How you would like to approach your job in 5 years. ____ - ____ = ____

Reacting To Your Environmental Disposition Scores

A positive Environmental Disposition score indicates an emphasis on anticipating. A negative score indicates a preference for adapting. Answer the following questions to determine how your Environmental Disposition affects your work in the various situations you identified.1. In which 2 situations are you most anticipating (+ score)? __________________________________________________________________2. In which 2 situations are you most adapting (- score)?__________________________________________________________________3. What factors make you more anticipating or adapting in particular situations? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________4. In which situations would being more adapting make you more effective?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________5. In which situations would being more anticipating make you more effective?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE GRID

Plot a letter (A - J) on the Task Engagement Style Grid to represent each of your contextual scores. To find the point for each letter take your scores for each of the dimensions of Task

Engagement, expressive, purposive, anticipating and adapting, and subtract as follows to get two combination scores:

Expressive - Purposive = Task Disposition score Anticipating - Adapting = Environmental Disposition score

Reacting To My Task Engagement Style Scores

1. What I like about my Task Engagement Style.______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. What I dislike about my Task Engagement Style.______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. Refer to the Task Engagement Grid. In which contexts and tasksituations does you Task Engagement Style best serve you in terms of performance and satisfaction.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4. Refer to the Task Engagement Grid. In which contexts and tasksituations does your Task Engagement Style most limit you in termsof performance and satisfaction.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________5. For each context listed in #4 suggest a different Task Engagement Style that might lead to better results in that particular situation.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

6. What do you think Task Engagement Style of your boss is? How does this influence the way he/she manages and supervises you and your peers? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

7. Given your Task Engagement Style, what do you think is the unique contribution you make to your organization?______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

8. What do you think are the Task Engagement Styles of each personyou regularly deal with at work? How might you deal with each of them differently if you were to take their styles into account?______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix D - Locus Of Control Survey (Rotter, 1966)

For each pair of statements place a check by the item you most agree with:

____1. a. Children get into trouble because their parents punish them too much.____ b. The trouble with most children nowadays is that their parents are too easy with them.

____2. a. Many of the unhappy things in people's lives are partly due to bad luck.____ b. People's misfortunes result from the mistakes they make.

____3. a. One of the major reasons why we have wars is because people don't take enough interest in politics.____ b. There will always be wars no matter how hard peopletry to prevent them.

____4. a. In the long run people get the respect they deserve in this world.____ b. Unfortunately, an individual's worth often passes unrecognized no matter how hard he tries.

____5. a. The idea that teachers are unfair to students is nonsense.____ b. Most students don't realize the extent to which their grades are influenced by accidental happenings.

____6. a. Without the right breaks one cannot be an effective leader.____ b. Capable people who fail to become leaders have not taken advantage of their opportunities.

____7. a. No matter how hard you try some people just don't like you.____ b. People who can't get others to like them don't understand how to get along with others.

____ 8. a. Heredity plays the major role in determining one's personality.____ b. It is one's experiences in life which determine what one is like.

____ 9. a. I have often found that what is going to happen will happen.____ b. Trusting to fate has never turned out as well for me as making a decision to take a definite course of action.

____10. a. In the case of the well prepared student there is rarely if ever such a thing as an unfair test.

____ b. Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to course work that studying is really useless.

____11. a. Becoming a success is a matter of hard work, luck has little or nothing to do with it.____ b. Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the right place at the right time.

____12. a. The average citizen can have an influence in government decisions.____ b. This world is run by the few people in power, and there is not much the little guy can do about it.

____13. a. When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can make them work.____ b. It is not always wise to plan too far ahead becausemany things turn out to be a matter of good or bad fortune anyhow.

____14. a. There are certain people who are just no good.____ b. There is some good in everybody.

____15. a. In my case getting what I want has little or nothing to do with luck.____ b. Many times we might just as well decide what to do by flipping a coin.

____16. a. Who gets to be the boss often depends on who was lucky enough to be in the right place first.____ b. Getting people to do the right thing depends upon ability, luck has little or nothing to do with it.

____17. a. As far as world affairs are concerned, most of us are the victims of forces we can neither understand, not control.____ b. By taking an active part in political and social affairs the people can control world events.

____18. a. Most people don't realize the extent to which theirlives are controlled by accidental happenings.____ b. There really is no such thing as "luck".

____19. a. One should always be willing to admit mistakes.____ b. It is usually best to cover up one's mistakes.

____20. a. It is hard to know whether or not a person really likes you.____ b. How many friends you have depends on how nice a person you are.

____21. a. In the long run the bad things that happen to us are balanced by the good ones.____ b. Most misfortunes are the result of lack of ability,ignorance, laziness, or all three.

____22. a. With enough effort we can wipe out political corruption.____ b. It is difficult for people to have much control over the things politicians do in office.

____23. a. Sometimes I can't understand how teachers arrive atthe grades they give.____ b. There is a direct connection between how hard I study and the grades I get.

____24. a. A good leader expects people to decide for themselves what they should do.____ b. A good leader makes it clear to everybody what their jobs are.

____25. a. Many times I feel that I have little influence overthe things that happen to me.____ b. It is impossible for me to believe that chance or luck plays an important role in my life.

____26. a. People are lonely because they don't try to be friendly.

____ b. There's not much use in trying too hard to please people, if they like you, they like you.

____27. a. There is too much emphasis on athletics in high school.____ b. Team sports are an excellent way to build character.

____28. a. What happens to me is my own doing.____ b. Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control over the direction my life is taking. .____29. a. Most of the time I can't understand why politiciansbehave the way they do.____ b. In the long run the people are responsible for bad government on a national as well as on a local level.

Appendix E - Demographic Survey

1. Date of birth ____________________

2. Current position ____________________

3. Average hours per month reading non-required career related material ______

For each item place a check by the phrase that best describes you:

4. Ethnic group: caucasian___ black___ hispanic___ asian___ other___

5. Sex: ____male ____female

6. What % of your potential talent do you think is utilized in your current job?

10%___ 20%___ 30%___ 40%___ 50%___ 60%___ 70%___ 80%___ 90%___ 100%___

7. In which of these socio-economic classes would you say your parents belonged:

upper_____ upper-middle_____ middle-middle_____ lower middle_____ working_____

8. Your working relationship with your current supervisor could best be described as: excellent___ good___ fair___ strained___ very poor___

In the blank spaces to the left of each item, fill in the numbers 4, 3, 2 and 1, according to the characteristics that are usually most important to you in a job (4) and least important to you in ajob (1).

9. a.____Security (Being reasonably sure that the job is fairly permanent)

b.____Originality (Working with new ideas--being original--using initiative)

c.____Good personal relations (Being with people who are congenial--easy to work with)

d.____Getting ahead professionally (Furthering one's career--being with people who can help one get ahead)

10a.____Work enjoyment (Enjoying one's assigned work)

b.____Getting ahead in the organization (Having a chance to get a better job in the organization) c.____Opportunity to learn (Developing new skills and knowledge of personal relevance)

d.____Salary (Getting the job done and earning enough money for a good living)DEMOGRAPHIC DATA RESULTS - Appendix F

APPENDIX G - TIME SERIES ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL TEAMS

samples in subgroups (N=5) is too small for significance

Appendix I Strategies For Working With People Of Various Styles

Working With A Person Who Has A Creative Task Engagement Style

- How To Influence And Motivate- Appeal To Principles- Provide opportunities for learning- Allow to be a catalyst for change- Emphasize self-development- Encourage him/her to exercise leadership

- An Effective Boss For A Person With A Creative Style- Gives room to be creative

- Helps in getting started on tasks- Allows mistakes and follow up on 'half-baked' ideas- Doesn't expect too much self-discipline- Selectively provides discipline and focus where

needed

- When Working For A Boss With A Creative Style- Discover what this person values and appeal to it- Understand what interests this person about his/her

work- Be supportive of his/her leadership- Understand the changes he/she is trying to instigate

and help- Be enthusiastic when this person helps you to grow- Be self reliant - Don't expect him/her to manage your

work closely

- Most Effective Environment- Where individuality is respected- Informal- Where creativity is valued

- Least Effective Environment- Tightly controlled- Time pressure- Conservative

Working With A Person Who Has A Social Task Engagement Style

- How To Influence And Motivate- Show loyalty- Help to feel part of a team- Inspire by offering ideas to consider- Collaborate

- An Effective Boss For A Person With A Social Style- Creates a team atmosphere- Assigns work to be done in pairs or groups- Develops a close personal supervisory relationship

- Is empathic- Gives very clear direction to prevent procrastination- Shows how work fits in with employee's values, goals

- When Working For A Boss With A Social Style- Demonstrate your loyalty- Give attention - be responsive and empathic- Become close friends- Work along with them- Be open - express your values and feelings

- Most Effective Environment- Respecting- Supportive- Reassuring- Informal

- Least Effective Environment- Distrusting- Formal- Demanding initiative- Lack of support

Working With A Person Who Has A Functional Task Engagement Style

- How To Influence And Motivate- Be very clear- Offer direction- Explicitly state rules and regulations - Give positive or negative reinforcement based on

results

- An Effective Boss For A Person With A Functional Style- Discovers which rewards he/she finds meaningful- Reduces stress- Is detail oriented- Asks for exactly what is needed- Closely monitors results

- Is fair and consistent

- When Working For A Boss With A Functional Style- Respond to directives with results- Don't challenge - Look for inspiration elsewhere- Do your work- Be consistent and meticulous- Demonstrate competence

- Most Effective Environment- Clear rules, regulations- Predictable reward structures- Practical- Conservative

- Least Effective Environment- Constantly changing rules and policies- High demand for initiative and creativity- Unstable

Working With A Person Who Has An Intentional Task Engagement Style

- How To Influence And Motivate- Delegate as much responsibility as possible- Offer challenges- Provide resources to allow achievement- Appeal to this person's own view of success- Define opportunities

- An Effective Boss For A Person With An Intentional Style- Gives recognition for work well done- Utilizes goal-setting techniques- Makes sure their view of success is in sync with your

own- When creative output is required helps them to loosen

up- Provides autonomy- Appreciates initiative

- When Working For A Boss With An Intentional Style- Make sure you understand their goals- Demonstrate how you can be supportive of his/her

goals - Help them to expand their influence- Be systematic- Use logic

- Most Effective Environment- Demanding- Challenging- Risk-Taking- Fast-Paced

- Least Effective Environment- Low-pressure- Promotion based on seniority- Highly emotional