c AOJ E.yeF'rzT_ 5Y57TM ADM - DTIC

SECURITY CL ASSIFICAT ION OF THIS PAE(When D tered)FL c ,

flflII&~LIA~lfLI AGEREAD INSTRUCTIONS* REPORT DOJC.UpIEflhILFPAG BEFORE COMPLETING FOR M'1RPOTNUMBER .GOTACSINO.3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

TIT LE (and Subtitle) 5. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERFO

AOJ E.yeF'rzT_ 5Y57TM ADM LL 0f F lli''i

00 0(LGCJjZA:loj10 L CLjMA.TE Al_ 6. PERFORM.NG ORtG. RET0R- NUMRA(I;

AU THOR(st goMN3) S. CONTRACT OR GRANI NUMBER(-)

P4 LMi 3 R CHA fLO f+ OLTr

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PrtOJECT* TASK

AFITSTUDNT A: Q AH 3RTE ~iV~~s)AREA & WORK UNIT IIMBERS

~E CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

198813. NUMBER OF PAGES

02~4. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(II different from Controlling Office) 15. SECURITY CLASS. (of thl. report)

AFIT/NRWright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-6583 UCASFE

IS.. DECL ASSI FICATION/ DOWN GRADI1NGSCHEDULE

6. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

DISTRIBUTED UNLIMITED: APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE DI

17. DISTRIBUTIONI, STATEMENT (of the abstract entered in Block 20, If different from Report)

SAME AS REPORT

IS.SUPLEMNTAY NTES Approved for Publi*Rles A F 9-18.SUPLEMNTAY NTES LYNN E. WOLAVER Rla 3 A F 9-

Dean for Research indrfsii Developmen*Air Force Instit u of TechnologiyWriaht-Patterson AFB OH 45433-6 83

19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse side if necessary and Identify by block number)

20 A SPS AC1 ((>,rile on reverse side It necessary and Identify by block number)

* ATTACHED

DD n I j AN, '7 1473 EDITI ON OF I NOV 65 IS OBSOLETE LrcAsI~ ____

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE ("~len Data Entered)

*V

AN EXPERT SYSTEM IODEL OF ORGANIZATIONJAL

CLIMATE AND PERFORMANCE

A Dissertation

by

JAMES RICHIARD HOLT

Submitted to the Graduate College ofTexas A&> University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PIIILOSOPHY

"copAugust 1937

Major Subject: Industridl Engineering Acce.'U~ For" ".,' NTIS )iA&I-. - iL) T l r, " .: _ J

I - , )

-.S ,

' o °. . .....

° 1

ABSTRACT

An Expert System !odel of Organizational Climate and Performance.

(August 1987)

James Richard Holt, B.S., Utah State University;

M.S., Air Force Institute of Technology

Chairman of Advisory Comnqittee: Dr. James K. Hennigan

Application of computer technology has greatly increased the

manager's ability to make informed decisions about inanimate

resources (e.g., money, materials, equipment, space and time).

However, very little has been done to automate decisions involving

human behavior because of the complexities involved.

This research uses a third generation expert system development

shell to create a prototype management consultant for behavioral

issues. The frame-based, object-oriented expert system represents

individuals and organizations in a decision support system. The

expert system allows managers to make real time inquiries about the

effect of changes in individual attitudes in specific organizations

upon organizational performance.

A survey questionnaire is developed to measure 133 individual

attitudes. Selected organizational behavior and group dynamics

findings are translated into 52 production rules. The rules are

written as methods which are activated by the system following the

structure of current behavioral rodels to predict performance.

. ..-... ......-. - .,.... -. .- , ,., - ; . ., -. - - ,

SThle systeii is validated by situational analysis. individual

attitudes are adjusted using fuzzy logic algorithms in 18 different

.., situations, and the changes in calculated performlance are compared

IS

.," with managers' predictions. Statistical analysis shows it ispossible to predict changes in performance due to changes in

., ~ ~~attitude and circumstanc-es. [, ,: ,/, . ..

04-%

J.."

'

S-"

.'.o

4' ihmngrs rdcin. Sttsia nlyi hw tI

posbet rdc cagsi efracedet hne .

4: atiuean icmsacsl~iii:;:" """"" "" " "'''' ' J'" ""' "" " " " "'"""""' "' < '' "' '" '- ")'* oO- ~ r A

ACKNJOLLEF)GEMENTS

I want to acknowledge the contribution of Grant E. Secrist, Lt.

Col. USAF Ret., in this research. The fervor of his quest for

knowledge, the quality of his research and his dedication to

principle was inspiring. He helped me understand ,:ieaningful

behavior issues and expanded cay research horizon. The ti; ie he

donated from his busy schedule throughout the research and his

cogent fatherly advice are greatly appreciated.

• The mienbers of my graduate comittee have been particularly

p helpful.

James K. llennigan is a terrific coach who won't stani for arty

discouragement. lie knew from the beginning the value of the

consultant when other management and computer specialists said

it could not be done. I appreciated his help even through his

serious illness.

Milden J. Fox has eternal patience. His de.ionstratud technical

writing skill improved the quality of this dissertation.

Alberto Garcia-Diaz' s accuracy and precision hel ped conconitrate

the evaluation and statistical analysis.

St phen 14. Morijan directed i-.y programiing efforts to i creative

global view which I had not achieved before. lie saved iie from

"drowning in detail."

0%-.0:

• , -°

vi

Craig McKinnley, from the Forestry Science Departtient of Texas

A&M, was an effective, interested editor who showed me how it

should be done.

Newton Ellis, a latecomer to the connittee, proved to be an

absorbing student of expert systems as well as a solid support

in behavioral areas. His editorial skill is deeply

appreciated.

None of this would have happened without my wife's he!Ip.

Suzanne's strength, tolerance, understanding and willingness to

carry on the domestic duties allowed me to concentrate on this work.

I wint to also thank uncle Sam for his com;ittment to education

as a means for improving the quality of the military of this

country. I appreciated having my educational fees paid and

receiving full pay and allowances during this period.

0

'W

7,-'.

Vll

TABLE OF CUNTENTS

Pde

ABSTRACT ............ ........................... iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................ vii

LIST OF TABLES ............ ........................ ix

LIST OF FIGURES ............ ........................ x

I d IRUCTI ON: RESEARCH OVERVIEW .... ............... . . I

Ndture of the problem ....... ................ . ..

Research purpose .......... ..................... 2

0 RESEARCH BACKGROUND.................... 4

Benavior theory ....... .................... ..Behavior models ............. ............... bExperL systems developien ...... ............... ... 13

RESEARCH DESIGN ............ ........................ 21

",BehaviorI ruloe s................................ 22Benaviordl modl selection ...... .................. 21

Questionndire ........... ..................... JComiputer model . ....... ..................... .... 33VdlddLiOrn )t the iiiodul ........ ................ 39

a.1

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS ........ ................. 43."

Ujtd collection .. ........... 43SEditstiCdl dndlysis .... ................. 4b

CON[RIBU[I JH4, FURiHER RESEARCH AND CONCLIJSIONS ........... 6

Contribution ......... ....................... 6FJ L[u rese rdlct .......... ..................... 63

* Conc lus i o..s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..

" REFERENCES . . hb

S"%• • • • • • • • • • •

,,.0

a ' .?

" PdgJe

%ii

APPENO I X

1. BEH1AVIOR FINDINGS . ..

2. COM4UNICATIONS EFFECTIVENESS VARIA13LES .. .......... ...

3. INLJIVIUUAL VS. UOGANILATION COiJIRL VARIALILL5 .......... 94

4. INTERPERSONAL RELATION VARIABLES ..............

b. JO3 CHARACFERISFJC EVALUAFIOl4 VARIABiLES ... ......... 9

b. LEAoER/SUPERVISOR CoiPEfENCE ..... ............... 02

I PERSONAL NEEDJS VARIABLES ......... ....... ...

8. PiYSICAL E1AVIRONMENT VARIABLES ....... .............. 1O8

9. URGANILAI[IONAL REWARD) SYSTEM VARIABLES.... .. .. .. . ...

10. STAHIOAROS AND GOALS VARIAILES ..... .............. ... 114

II. JRGAIULATIOJAL STRESS VARIABLES ..... ............. .116

12. INTERfIEDIATE VARIABLES ...... .................. . ....i

13. -ERFORIANCE 1,EASURES AHO ELEMENTS .... ............ . 121

14. COiJAPUFER LISTING OF BEHAVIOR ROLES .... ............ ... 123

b1 . COMPUfER L'STIN OF INDIVIDUIJALS . . . .. . . . ... . . LbZ

lo. CO,4PUTER LISTING OF ORGANIZATIUNS ...... ............ 16i

l/. IIYPOI LI [CAL SI UA[IONS ...... ................. ... 193

18. COIPUTER LISTING OF SPECIAL FUNCTIONS AND FULLYALGOR II H0.S .......... ........................ . . 21

19. COMPUFER LISTING OF 4ETHOI)S .... ................ ..

VIIA ............ ............................... Z3b

-..

I

>.-.

x

Lisr OF FIGURE~S

Fiyu re Pq

i Represenltdtlonl of oryanizational SySteills . 5

2 iAl'jor factors dftectiny productivity .... ....... 6

3 rtieoreticdl role episode mIIuetl ............. .. .. .....

.'4 Jot) criaracteristics inodel .. .... ........ ...

5 OCCLuPatioinal llItiVdti~rt liiidel. ..... ......... 9

6 rme Secri sc tot il spectruin modiel ot human wdd

oryanizationai elfectivt.ness. ... ....... .... )

7 rneory of btflaviur in uryaiZaLiWIS ...... .. .. . ...

8 Weiyntiny of perceptions. ........... .... 13

Y Pe structure otdtpclexpert. SyStoli ..... .. ... 1

10 Unit based Knlowledge representdtion..... .. .. .. . ...

11 Reduced 1110del of oryanizationdi ciimatte all

pie r f o riiinc . ... ................ ...

12 Tlit. central trdnsleition role of behivior rules 2!3.

tU Rpresentd1ofl of indiidudlS... .. ...... .. .. .. .. 34

14 fRepresentation of ory9dfizdtioris .. ............ 3b

I U ser control aiectlanim sins. ... ...............

15 or-jdniZdLtion Of a typical Air Force lidSO CIVIlLnjinuLer Squaddron. .... ................ 40

i x

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I Probability of Concurrence ...... .............. 47

2 Probability of Concurrence by Organization ... ...... 48

3 Spearman rho Coefficient by Organization ... .... .. 49

4 Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient byOrganization ........ ..................... 51

5 Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on CoinunicationsEffectiveness ................... .......... 52

6 Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Individual* Organizational Control ..... ................ ... 53

7 Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on InterpersonalRelations ....... ...................... ... 54

8 Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on JobCharacteristics ...... ................. .... 55

9 Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Leader-,. Supervisor Coripetence ..... ................ ... 56'.p

10 Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on PersonalNeeds ...................... .. 57

11 Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on PhysicalEnvironment ....... .................... ... 58

.12 Stepwise Reyression of Questionnaire on Organizational* Reward Systei1s ....... ................... ... 59

..., 13 Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Standards and- Goals .......... ........................ 60

14 Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Stress . . .. 61

pi'.'

.44 ki4 ' . .': .N. -4 * .,'i' 4~4 . 4 .

.44"= .. 4.4."*

- INWLODuMrON: RESEARCH iJVERVIEN

Ndture of the Problemi

A~drid'~jers iilaKe dii ly docisions on the list! of itsurccs ifi thi1r,

OrydnizdtiunS. Decisionls dbout indnhiidte resources (y.rioney,

Jjnterij 'i I , eLu i PineniL , spdce illd tL e) are t req oit IlY du o~1 i-d tO

o1.aIInI Ze pe rfuriidnCt± ot the resources. liowev er W i t 1111t

cofis i deri t i on f or Iiiiliidfln resou rces wh i cn lpervide LII,- of Yin I djL I of,

overdl I perf oratance id be subop t i I

RL!Cenit reductions if] Ulfe COS of coinputer 5syLumIS idl i(NmInceS

in hrd~re od oftareprovide mdaiers reidy cesL)p.tru

Cui'IPu t r eqi1piiieri I Couip I x p roD I iIS Cd11 De Solve'd enis 1 r Llii di

ev er . Pruyraciiis help ScLnudule, tor'ecdSt, siliuld~te, e~dluJJte, predIct

iii iiiforiii So Life! iii.iliiajcI Cmi.: iiku eli II yitenic d c'C i IoniS. OtlL ,

these proj r'mmis do riot cons ider tife behadvior ot tno huiidnSis ' vld

whnen evs0l ol I n problIems.

* %. t~~~~eoIvi1oral ISSiieS (ire 1111Mng tho more CoI I ro I) m miil j

will faice. Arid yet, there are few tools to evdiiiiiLe t11e coIyilt!X

in Lte ac t ion Oi mnd p red ic toUe r e fftect onl pt-r to riiiiic ri c t fls is iii

direa whetre clIever dpp Ii cdt i on of pruyraiiii rig power couI l provide

Si ~i f I coo it D enuIt i Lt. o icis c fl r ~ lif pe'oiinc. jhi Ol

0

Ii If I s v~ e i r i to 0 1 1 oV thit i 01111iu1i [dCtol's Joul'iii I sty Ic.

%

A9

about the effect of interpersonal relations, the values of (ood

standards and goals, the importance of the com:iunication system, the

iopact of work surroundings, the hazards of organizational stress

and other environmental factors on individuals. But there is still

considerable ambiguity, uncertainty and even conflict in the study

of behavioral issues. Before human behavior decisions can be

-- automated, several questions must be answered:

What are the important measures of hurmn behavior?

How are they related?

How do they contribute to performance?

How do you deal with ambiguity, uncertainty and co;:iplexity?

How can the results be validated?

Research Purpose

This research addresses the problem~s associatCJ with

automating decisions based on human behavior and creates a prototype

expert system which predicts performance based upon individual

attitudes and organizational climate. The resulting expert system

is a management consultant to help imanagers riake informed decisions

about behavioral issues.

The prototype denonstrates how a third generaion exp)m't systeii

development shell can be used to represent the complexity in

o -g aorganizations. Importdnt behavioral attitudes are mJeasureJ dd

their interactions are evaluated by behavior rules drdan fro.'i known

0 " -

6!:

!",~. , v >SS ~ . j 5 ~ 5 - -~~;... *~--.

3

research findings. These preliminary rules predict the contribution

of individual attitudes towards organizational performance.

The consultant is a decision support system wihich cotibinesorganizational theory with current computer technology to provide

advice in areas of irportant management responsibility. The

consultant can evaluate "what-if" options and help managers riake

informed decisions. Use of this type of consultant can identify

organizational problem areas and improve operational perforildnce.

% ..

.

*, °.4°

~4

*, RESEARCH BACKGROUND

This section reviews the development of behavior theory and

representative i-Aodels of organizational behavior, group dyria,-.ics and

managelent theory developed by researchers. It also reviews the

history and progress of expert systems within the study of

artificial intelligence and suniiarlzes how knowledge is represented

and used in an expert system.

Behavior Theory

The development of modern behavior theory began witni

formulation of the scientific management approach at the enid of the

nineteenth century. Scientific manager ent presumed there was "one

best way" to do any task. With this philosophy, it was management's

duty to find that best way and train the right person to do the task

(Kast and Rosenzweig, 1974).

The human relations rmove;-ent began edrly in the twentieth

century. Behavior research found that social situations, worker

motivation arid job satisfaction influenced production (Routhlis-

berger and Dickson, 1939). Since those early findings, literally

hundreds of studies nave snown innurerdble interrelitions~iips J,;iong

0 people, attitudes, policies and working conditions (see nedrly 1200

referefices in Secrist, 196)). The enormous nuibe~r of finilings

prompted researchers to group or structure similar findin(is into

0 models of orginizational behavior.

- ---

F.3

Behavior Models

This section includes several different views of organizational

behavior and performance.

Kast and Rosenzweig. Kast and Rosenzweig (1974) display the

overlapping responsibilities of management as intersecting systems

on a Venn diagram (see Figure 1). Arrows indicate input and output

flows of information, effort and materials across system boundaries.

Each system interacts with other systems and the environmental

Environmental

Suprasystem

Goals and Values TechnicalSubsyztem j Subsystem

It Managerial

;I ('-/ tUbsystelm;, . "I I

w%

Psychosocial StructuralSubsystem Subsystem

Figure 1. Representation of organizational systems (Kast andtRosenzweig, 1974).

0lot

4

suprasystem. The managerial subsystem takes the central role in

balancing flows across system boundaries.

Sutermeister. Figure 2 displays many of the contributing

factors which Sutermeister (1969) felt influenced individual

perform~ance and organizational productivity. Each element on the

tree is combined with other elements which in turn contribute, in

successive degrees, to the final measurement.

Structure . . FormalEfficiency o Oiganization

* Communicationsocql

Relationships TechnologySieations ... Inoml - CniinSkills

~Union

Culture >

Aspirations -(PersonaY,

Perception Needs Motivation

DMomnt

Economnics-- : [I inl hC( dividuaI 0Job liysical kPefolniancei Cr

ConditionsCondtions 0,,

4Educalion -------- 11_W ltC)1. AilityI Interests

ApltitUkde5,

5/

I, Figure 2. Major factors affecting productivity (Suter.ieister,

',', 1969 ).

I

I

7

Katz and Kahn. In the role episode model developed by Kdtz and

Kahn (1966), role expectations are assigned to each position in the

organization (see Figure 3). When a person (a role sender) attempts

to influence another person (focal person), the actions of the

sender describe a "sent role." The focal person's perception of the

sent role is the "received role" and the response to the sent role

is the "role behavior." These interactions are tempered by the

attributes of the two individuals and their interpersonal factors.

The role behavior (or results of the role sender's action) then

contributes to the new organizational situation and affects*5

organizational factors.

Attributes Of4 thle Person

-.

Ognztoa Rxettos ret ole Received Focl Role bcelaviorfactors

Figure 1. Theoretical role episode imodel (Katz and Kahn, 1966).

1-Mcki.an and O)Idhain. The job chdracteristics jiodel develope~d by,

Hlackman and Oldham (1990) predicts organizational olotivation (see

Figure -1). Core job characteristics are the pri;.iary influences

(some collectively and soirue independently) of the critical

psychological states which deteriane outcomes. The job

characteristics and psychological states are moderated by the

individual's knowledge of the job and skill, by tie need for

personal growth and advancement and by satisfaction with the work

environment (or context).

CriticalCore Job Psychological Otoe

Characteristics States O

Skill VarietyA, -e High Internal

Meaningfullness' Work MotivtionOTask Identity /of Wo k

Task Significance High Giowth-, Satisfaction

." ,"" Responsibility -

Autonomy ..... ..... for Outcome High GeneralifO mJob Satisfaction

Feedback from Job - Knowledge High Workof Results Effectiveness

Moderators1. Inowledge and

Skill2. Growth Need3. Work Context

Satisfaction

0 Figure 4. Job chardcteristics riodel (Hack-man and Ildhan, l'').

Porter and Lawler. The Porter-Lawler iodel of occupationil

iotivation (19613) says the effort an individual exerts is related to

the v(lue of rewards and the perceived probability of ruceivinj tnet

reward given that level of effort (see Figure 5). The individual's

abilities and perceptions contribute along with effort towards

% % %

performance. The intrinsic rewards (those inherent in tile work

itself) and extrinsic rewards (those given in recognition) are

moderated by the perceived ratio of effort spent versus reward

received (equity of rewards). Feedback loops from the level of

performance affects the perceived probability of receiving rewards

1 and the equity of rewards. The value of rewards is moderated by

feedback from the level of satisfaction the individual enjoys.

Perceived. . Equity of

V..' _A_ RewardsFAbilitiesValue of an

wand ] "\0 ew r Traits IItrinsic

S.....[. RewardsSaisf action~

\.j / ,I Performance ] Sat,Effo°rt --- (Accomplishment)

I, "I Perceived. Effort Reward F-Role Perceptions I<' Probability ..

Figure 5. Occupational motivation model (Porter and Lawler, 1969).

Secrist. Secrist's total spectrum model of human and

. i organizational effectiveness (1983) (see Figure 6) presents the

process of translating basic human abilities Into performance as a

pipeline. The flow in the pipeline is dependent upon the job

* characteristics. The effectiveness of the translation process is

influenced by the leader-supervisor who amplifies or attenuates the

-. ,. organizational climate variables. The climate is influenced by

*• organizational context (or setting) and to a lesser degree by the

0-.

all)

V.0

A.L

cc(

0 S

C= 2cLAJ W CD U

#-- =;= C-

Qj E a)

% C-2,

A -Cc

i~Ica C, IxC-1))

6 L*C

-aaJa 0t U-

C-,3

C-,C

I.'23

00

%

0

11

macro environment. Secrist's model considers many complex issues in

a well-structured form that can be used to capture individual or

organizational attributes.,lw

Naylor, Prichard and Ilgen. Studies by Naylor, Pritchard and

Ilgen (19,30) went beyond modeling and proposed a theory of behavior

in organizations. A mluch simplified diagram of their theory is

shown in Figure 7. Their theory is based ci the attitudes,

perceptions and efforts of the individual. The environment and

.: individual differences lead to individual perceptions of the work.

Individual perceptions lead to contingencies (the process for

transforming actions into products and outcomes). The effect (or

individual satisfaction) depends upon the outcome and the evaluation

INDIVIDUALDIFFERENCES

AptitudesAbilities EFFECTPersonality (or.St.sfationNeeds (or Satisfaction)

INDIVIDUAL.ENVIRONMENT PERCEPTIONS Compar I eGeneral and Self .EVALUATION Compare ,- .: 0Specific Acts Sf Utility of OBSEVABLE

Others Products Perceived Products PRODUCT

Perceptions -_ Oucoe by Others adAtof Performance I I

:J'R --dRewar CONTINGENCIES

system A cts to -Prod -uct _

Product to EvaluactionEvaluation to Outcome

Figure 7. Theory of behavior in organizations (Ndylor, Pritchardk~i~ and 11gen, 1980).

0

0

%'.r W * %

• X,

of the outcome. Then, a comparison of the usefulness (utility) of

the products and acts feeds back information to the environment and

perceptions.

Naylor, Pritchard and Ilgen proposed several functional

relationships to explain their theory. The relationship between

individual perceptions and evaluation are examples. The input to

; the Self block of Evaluation depends upon the relative importance of

the Self and Acts blocks of Perception.

-sel f = Msel f-sel f + YactsPacts

The Vdiabie 14 is a weight and the variable P is a perception. The

* inputs to the Evaluation Perceived by Others block are the Product

block and Outcome block of Perceptions.

SEothers = _productsP products + -outcomesPoutcomes

They also postulated creation of nonlinear relationships for many of

the weighting factors such as these samples in Figure 8.

Figures 1 through 7 each contribute to the understanding of

organizational behavior. Figures 3 through 7 identify the

influences on the individual as the principal determinant of

performance. The interactions suggest important relationships which

0 should be maintained in automating human behavior.

C%-.

.. ...

W'-N

C.

6"4

-- -

Self Products

0 00)0

Low High Low HighPerception Perception

Acts Outcomes

0 0

0 Uo

Low High Low HighPerception Perception

Figure 81. Weighting of perceptions (Naylor, Pritchdrd and Ilgen,

Expert Systems Developiient

The study of expert systems is one division in artificial

* intelligence research. Expert systems are computer progrcts which

try to capture the knowledge of experts and use logical applications

of that knowledge to recommend decisions, to make evaluations or to

0 find new knowledge (Hilsson, 1990). lHopefully, the results of an

expert system:i are consistent with those of d real expert. In this

way, d computer progra, can help nonexperts arrive at expert0% -

I0

resulIts . Tti is poss ibiIi ty lids proinpl: d d l ot of res kmrch ind

1 nves tien t it) expert sys teilis tcvel Ioplent.

Exptrt -SyStell StructurQ. [111 ScOPe? Of uxpertL SySLi~illS Vjdfl !S

great ly winf the appl iCdtiofl. A siimple system idyiit use reforence

dita il I "Cable lookup" fdshion to qJuiclo Cte user to inl expcrtI'

solution (tROdCn1, Virkuir, Weaver dnd UrdKe, 1.96b). A comlplIex cdnd

powerful expert sys ecul could finrd errors il ri ekw thuor'i S tby

considering permiutations of previous experience (Hayes-Rotri, J9,33).

Wnetner si iic or CO11plX I c, aCh expe'rt SySteil COILj ins diimn!

structure siiuildlr to Figure 9 (flayes-Rotr, 198b).

User System ControlAgnaoi (or System c1 ceue

Developer) Interpreter

Knowledge BaseRepresentation

Rules or erecEnie *Possible TruthsiFact Application -

K~nowledge Methods - ~Rule Interpretation Unproven Facts

Execution- Temporary

~ -Stacks Truths

%~

* ~~~ii F19 r' 9,e scute of intrts A01.11KwIJJCO. Ii

-systemi controls. rrie knoviledje bdse consists ot knoori faCtS dDout

L ti,- p roLu I ciii jnd su o iiiit I es or, apl I i catC i s 1.nod s m i i IIciiL

0%I;%

15

manipulate the facts to learn new facts. The syste;i controller

interprets the intentions of the user and controls the application

of the inference eoigine. An agenda is naintained by tne system

controller to give order and to keep track of necessary tasks. The

inference engine uses rule interpretation to execute actions. In

the process of examining possible truths, the inference engine

creates stacks of requirements which must be fulfilled before

unproven facts or temporary truths can be resolved and either added

-- to the knowledge base or discarded. The inference engine is tne

workhorse of the expert system. It perfor;,is the unification and

resolution refutations procedures necessary to extract answers from

individual facts (Nilsson, 19lO).

Expert systeo.i knowledge representation. There are three iain

ways to represent known facts. The first method uses ordered sets

or lists to store discrete infor.ation (Gensereth and Ginsberg,.r.

1985). A brief example illustrates this representation. John, a

journeym1an, may be able to do his work well and may desire

additional rewards. These facts could be represented as:

ABILITY.TO.DO.UORK (John, Well)

* tEI1BER (John, Journeyinan)

NEEDS.REWARDS (John, High)

The variables ABILITY.TO.DO.WORK, MIEMBER ani NEEDS.REIAR)S 'ire

* 'attribute identifiers. The two elements in parentheses show, who has

this ittribute (in this case John) and the value of the attribute

S -

0'-

-- ."

(Well, Journeyman and High). These lists are a siiple form of

predicate calculus (Nilsson, 1930). The inference engine can find

the value of an attribute for any person by checking every

identifier of the attribute, comparing names of persons and

returning the found value. This method of knowledge representation

is cortion to PROLOG and LISP (Winston dnd Horn, lq-l).

Another way to represent knowledge is through rules

(Hayes-Roth, 1985). Rules evaluate the knowledge base and create

new truths or new knowledge. Creating new information with rules

when it is needed reduces the amount of knowledge which needs to be

stored. For example, all journeymen are skilled crafts:ien. A

corresponding rule would be:

IF ;IEMBER (X, Journeyoan)

THEN ABILITY.TO.DO.ORK (X, Well)

This rule says, if something (X) is a journeyman, then create a new

fact that something (same X) is able to do work Well. The rule

eliminates the need to have ABILITY.TO.DO.WORK (Person, lltll) for

every person who can be shown to be a journeyman. The process of

applying rules and finding out the possible outcomes is called

* forward chaining. The inference engine can also find out if d

person is able to do work well by looking for fdcts or other rules

which prove that the person is a journeyman. This process is called

* backward chaining (11ilsson, 1930).

-\ The third way of storing information is ds a unit (so:iti,,ies

called an object or frame). This way, relative information is

p.J%

grouped together as a record in slots of the unit. Continuing the

example above, a unit called John could be shown as:

Unit name: John

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

Slot name: ABILITY.TO.DO.WQRK

Slot value: Well1

*-Slot name: HEEDS.REWARDS

$5.Slot value: High

The inference engine can find the value of an attribute for any

isperson by checking all units, coiiparing names and returning th"

value (see Fikes and Kehler, 19835 for a good summary of unit

A systems).

The use of units allows more structure dnd control over the

knowledge base. Structuring the knowledge base can allow units to

inherit slots and slot values from other units -,,ch as in Figure 10.

*People iJourneymnenl John

SubclassApprentice Link

Member0~Lin k

A Figuire 10. Unit bdsed knowledge representation.

%p..%A

Assume the unit called People has empty slots called ABILITY.TO.DO.

WORK and NEEDS.REWARDS. The unit could be shown as

- Unit name: People

Slot name: ABILITY.TO.MO.OORK

Slot value: unknown

Slot name: NEEDS.REWARDS

Slot value: unknown

Since all Journeymen are in the class of objects called People, they

inherit the slots which unit People has. All journeymen are well

skilled so the default value for ABILITY.TO.DO.WORK of Journeyman is

Well. The Journeyman unit could be shown as

Unit name: Journeyman

Super class: People

Slot name: ABILITY.TO.)O.WORK

Slot value: Well

Slot naue: NEEDS.REWARDS

Slot value: unknown

_Si

0 .

19

When an object is a member of a class of objects, much is known

about the object without explicit explanation (Stefik and Bobrow,

1986). An object in the class of automobiles, for instance,

normally has four wheels, some type of engine, a weight, a general

size, a top speed and other limits on what can be done with the

object. This method of structuring the knowledge base helps store

some of the knowledge in the structure itself. In Figure 10, the

membership of John in Journeyman is shown by the dotted line. With

this structure, the unit John would appear:

. Unit name: John

Member of: Journeyman

Slot name: ABILITY.TO.DO.WORK

Slot value: Well

Slot name: NEEDS.REWARDS

Slot value: unknown

* John inherits all the slots that People has through membership in

-- Journey.an. John's value of ABILITY.TO.DO.W1ORK is the inherited

default, Well. The NEEDS.REWARDS slot is inherited unfilled

* (unknown) and can be filled using some other part of the systeta.

Expert systemi history. In early first generation expert

systems such as DENDRAL which automates the determination of

20

9, molecular structure of chemicals from empirical formulas, developers

used predominantly predicate calculus to represent knowledge. They

had to create their own inference engine to work specifically with

*their system. Second generation expert systems such as MYCIN which

performs infectious disease consultations, were developed around

domain-independent modules to interpret rules and acquire new

knowledge. The independent modules give limited flexibility in

applying the inference engine to other problems. Third generation

expert systems are being built on new, comnercially available expert

system tools such as KEETM,* Knowledge CraftTM and s.ITH which

* provide most of the architecture needed for control and

imiplementation of knowledge based syste, s. These state-of-the-art

tools allow the developer to use rule based, frame based and/or

logic based methodologies in the expert systeml without concern for

the inner working of the inference engine, execution methods and

. maintenance of possible facts. It is now possible to create

prototype systems in weeks where before it took years (Friedland,

.:. 1935).

A-;

- ".o

*KEE is d trddemark of Intellicorp. Knowledge Craft is a-trademark of Carnegie Group, Inc. S.1 is a trademark of

* Teknowledge.

• . - - - .. ' -- -. , ,-.- * .' .-. .-- 'r . .\ - ..._ -A.-.". ... . .A'J.W p...~ . *J - I InlI~ A nUl~~ IA n Inln 9.9i

21

RESEARCH DESIGN

The research design and development of the prototype expert

system are the main contributions of this research. This chapter

describes selection of a behavioral model, identification and

transformation of behavior rules, choice of system variables and

development of a survey questionnaire to measure the variables.

Also, the knowledge base representation (both rules and facts) is

explained with the system controlling functions. The method of

validating the prototype is presented as well.

Behavioral Model Selection

Model requirements. A good behavioral model is needed to give

application and direction to the expert system. The model iust be

complex enough to capture the requisite variety of human behavior

and yet be simple in its structure and form (Mason and Mitsoff,

1981). Its components must be ieasurable for application and must

be flexible to allow variations for different usage. For this

prototype research, the riodel needs a scope sufficient to validate

the concept of an automated management consultant and yet be small

enough to be achievable. The hodels in Figures 1, 4, 5, 6 and 7

display appropriately corplex relationships. Those in Figures 1, 2,

4 and 6 have somewhat simplified structures. The ,iodels in Figures

• .

- ,.r--......,,...........•...

0

2, 4, 5 and 6 have more easily measurable components. And, models

Figures 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7 give flexibility in their application.

Model selection. The Secrist total spectrum model of human and

organizational effectiveness gives the best combination of factors.

However, the scope of the model is too large. Figure 11 shows a

model of reduced scope which appears reasonable for this research.

The macro environment in Figure 6 is a fairly constant influence

relating primarily geopolitical and cultural variations. The

elements of organization context are related to the firm's

terhnology, structure, policies, leadership and major objectives.

-. These influences are generally stable and can be eliminated for this

prototype work without jeopardizing validity.

Behavior Rules

Known findings. As part of his work in developing the total

spectrum model, Secrist (1981) compiled a large number of research

findings to substantiate his views. Findings identify interrela-

-" tionships among the organizational environment, worker needs and

* desires, working conditions, individual attitude and other

attributes describing the work force. Some findings relating to

management style, organizational policy, individual volition and

* cultural or ideological influence were generally eliminated from

consideration in the reduced model.

P."

0

' ~~d/J....\ % %s ~ . . %-~~ - e"i

00

4 ) 4 ) C '4 C: -> ~~~ 0 0~ N

0 0 .0 CA cc

o u

~~wwc 0 GiG)

>4-

CLC 0 UE-

TU 00~ 4.

o 0M 4 0.C-4

to 0 m 0

. 13

,0 '-0 L

P1z 0-C.0 %t ~ 4-

o IA 0. cc a.g 4)N

C o 0co I

Z C AI 0 4-

0

m 02%>* 0

0/ L- 4)

00 Ec0 u

> Of

L.

0J L '

24

Researchers have published very consistent findings on many

elements contained in the reduced model, particularly in the areas

of stress, communications, individual versus organizational control

and job characteristics. After study of over 300 research reports

summarized in Secrist's work (1981) or other sources, fifty-one

preliminary findings were selected which combine and represent the

major, consistent and replicatable research relating organizational

climate to performance. These few rules do not attempt to capture

the total knowledge of the findings. They are a cross sectional

sampling to show the concept of rule transformation from behavioral

* findings. A short phrase describing each named rule and its source

is included in Appendix 1.

The behavior rules represent expert knowledge of organizational

behavior, group dynamics and psychological behavior. They form the

key relationships at the heart of the expert system. The behavior

rules evaluate individual attitudes and climate variables and make

corresponding contributions to the performance and satisfaction

measures. Figure 12 illustrates this central translationing role

between attitudes and performance.

Sample rules. Several findings consider the contribution of

autonomy to performance in organizations that need creativity with

high correlation coefficients (r) and low probability of error (p).

Patchen's (1970) large scale multivariate investigation of 800

nonsupervisory engineering and power plant employees found "that

increased employee control over work methods resulted in greater Job

0

0..

"w .. .. . . . . . . . . , . . .. I" .. ..

25

IAIA

2 Ucc Li- 4A

_c aL cc

x is 0E .i wU cc wO -z-

0

00

0 4-

E 0ca W I 000 00 0..

1 0

ora-A

S3!wBuAa dnoi9)

PUB jiAuIIB2 iguoQieziuuBiiOuodn posug soIlnU jo!ABqlOS

or C

o2 > -0 -

E 0 ~ .2 30CD CA 0) c

E 0uX r-C "Dm*0...o 00

00t

0 c0 E -as000.-. E) f

4D . . U' Uv 3U .. E C

LA ~ - Qo I e L U w 4L C 5aW u w 4 4 c ca.4

N7

0%

%

26

interest (r = .42, p < .01), higher interest in work innovation (r =

.31, p < .01), more pride in job accomplishment (r = .55, p < .01),

and fewer symptoms of stress (r = .37, p .01)" (Secrist, 1991).

Transforming Patchen's findings into a rule required establishing

measures of employee control, job interest, work innovation, pride

" in accomplishment and stress. The variables selected to represent

these measures are: IND.ORG.CONTROL, a climate variable

representing individual versus organizational control; SKILL.VARIETY

and INDEPENDENT.THOUGHT, individual attitudes concerning the job

evaluation and the need for creativity; ACHIEVEMENT, EFFICIENCY,

* EXCELLENCE, JOB.SATISFACTION, NEED.FULFILLMENT and REALIZATION.OF..w,

POTENTIAL, performance measures. (The selection of variables and

their use is discussed at length in the next section.) Paraphrasing

Patcher's findings into two general statements which include the

transformation variables gives two rules:

Autonomy Creativity

Where employees have control over work methods

(IND.ORG.CONTROL) and while there is a need for creativity

(SKILL.VARIETY, INDEPENDENT.THOUGHT), there is increased0innovation (EXCELLENCE, REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL).

Autonomy Pride

* Self-control (IND.ORG.CONTROL) is related to greater job

interest (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFICIENCY, JOB.SATISFACTION) and more

pride (NEED.FULFILLMENT).

0

17

27

Transforming these paraphrased statements further into if-then rules

using just the variables gives:

Autonomy Creativity

IF (IND.ORG.CONTROL is positive)

and (The average of SKILL.VARIETY and

INDEPENDENT.THOUGHT is positive)

THEN (Add IND.ORG.CONTROL to the list of factors

contributing to EXCELLENCE)

and (Add IND.ORG.CONTROL to the list of factors

contributing to REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL)

Autonomy Pride

IF (IND.ORG.CONTROL is positive)

THEN (Add IND.ORG.CONTROL to the list of factors

contributing to ACHIEVEMENT)


contributing to EFFICIENCY)


- contributing to JOB.SATISFACTION)


contributing to NEED.FULFILLMENT)

In these two rules, positive means a positive contribution to some

desirable result. If IND.ORG.CONTROL was not positive (neutral or

negative) then no contribution is made by IND.ORG.CONTROL in either

of the rules.

:.5.

. .

*.J SS. . . . . .- . . ' .U " ' ' . . , I: . . " ' " ". " '

28

At this point it is appropriate to discuss how rules are used

in expert systems. Rules are generally used to find truth. To

illustrate this consider three rules.

If A then B Rule 1

If B then C Rule 2

If A then C Rule 3

The application of Rules 1 and 2 gives the same result as Rule 3.

(This is called resolution in predicate calculus.) Suppose in an

expert system, Rule 1 and Rule 2 were applied by the inference

inference engine would throw out Rule 3 because it is redundant.

The relationship between A and C had already been shown.

The inference engine's ability to eliminate redundancy greatly

speeds up the computation process and eliminates wasted efforts.

However, this ability is not always desirable. The behavior rules,

for example, measure contributions to performance. If the behavior

rules are used in the standard way, the contributions would be

distorted. If two rules contributed the same amount, the inference

engine would assume one was redundant and throw it out. Because of

* this, the behavior rules were transformed into applications nethods.

The use of methods allows specific control over the application of

the rule. Methods will be discussed further in following sections.

More examples. Two more rules dealing with the contribution of

cohesiveness are good examples of how rules can chain together.

0I

0-

29

Both Lfkert (1961) and McGregor (1960) found that groups which

have a highly participative environment (EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION, an

intermediate variable); clear, understandable goals (STANDARD.GOALS,

a climate variable); frank, open communications (COMM.EFFECTIVENESS,

vi a climate variable); have an integrated reward system (REWARD.

SYSTEM, a climate variable); share mutual influence (LACK.OF.

INFLUENCE, a negative individual attitude) and are willing to deal

with conflict (STRESS) are highly cohesive (COHESIVE, an intermedi-

ate variable). This is called the Cohesive Goals rule. It creates

a measure of cohesiveness from individual, intermediate and climate

variables.

In a separate finding, Seashore (1951) found that highly

cohesive groups (COHESIVE) are above average in performance

(ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY and REALIZATION.OF.

POTENTIAL, performance measures) when they accept organizational

goals (STANDARDS.GOALS, a climate variable). This rule is called

the Cohesive Accept rule. Applying these two rules together through

the intermediate variable COHESIVE contributes positively to

performance measures in proportion to the levels of participation,

acceptance of goals, coninunication effectiveness, and lack of

stress.

Some of the findings are better transformed by splitting them

- into multiple riles (like Autonomy Creativity and Autonomy Pride

e-, discussed previously). Other findings tend to overlap. Redundant

iw

S--

p.-. . ..-p. - ..- , . . . . . . . . ... : . . . . . . . ::. , ..

30

findings were eliminated but overlapping findings which contributed

depth to the rule base by bringing additional variables into play

were included.

Questi onnai re

Variables. The preceding discussion of behavior rules

introduced, by necessity, variables to measure attributes. For the

rules to evaluate a situation, some measure of the situation is

needed.

The process of transforming the behavioral findings into rules

for the expert system identified nearly a thousand separate

variables. By carefully combining synonyms, grouping attributes,

using negation and stretching meanings a little, the number of

variables was reduced to about 150. As much as possible, known

measurable psychometric measures were used for the variables (see

next section). The variables fell into three groups: basic

measures of individual attitude, intermediate variables created by

combined attitudes or as a result of chaining rules, and performance

measures. The basic attitude measures are categorized by the

climate they help describe and are shown in Appendices 2 through 11.

The intermediate variables and their derivations are in Appendix 12.

Appendix 13 lists the performance measures and the words describing

performance that are attributed to each measure. (Note: some words

contribute to more than one measure like the word performance in the

Cohesive Goals rule discussed earlier.)

6%

%- %

31

The variables used to measure basic human attitudes were given

short names for use in the computer. The short name does not always

give the full meaning of the attitude being measured. The

appearance of the short names sometimes causes a transformed rule to

appear different than the original finding. A review of the metric

used to measure the attitude clarifies the variable naitte.

(Questionnaire metrics are discussed in the next section.) The

rules are very representative of the findings. This is a critical

.- factor since the strength of a rule is in the correct transformation

of the behavioral research behind the rule and in the accuracy of

the metric assigning values to the variables.

Measuring individual attitudes. Many different sources were

used to find valid, consistent psychometric measures of the needed

attitude variables. Secrist, McNee and Paden (19i11) perfori.led

extensive internal consistency analysis and factor analysis in

developing ileasures to describe leader-supervisor competence,

organizational versus individual control, organizational stress,

interpersonal relations and the reward system clidmate variables.

The Hackman-Oldham job diagnostic survey was used to measure job

characteristics. Findings by other researchers were used to form

new measures for communications effectiveness, standards and goals

and physical environiment climate variables.

A survey questionnaire was developed combining the different

m.trics to measure in(lividual attitudes. The questionnaire nkes a

statetient (taken, as much as possible, directly from the source of

............-.--.-. ...- -4 -% ."

32

the variable) referring to some attitude or attribute of the work

place. The respondents indicated agreement or disagreement along a

Likert scale. A complete listing of the questionnaire statements,

their variable names and sources categorized by climate variable is

included in Appendices 2 through 11. The response alternatives were

phrased to be at least one standard deviation apart (Dyer, Matthews,

Wright, and Yudowitch, 1995). The values of the responses are

scaled to fall within the range minus one to plus one. With this

scaling, zero is neutral and positive values reflect a positive

contribution to some desirable state (except for stress variables

*. which are consistently used as negative measures).

The variables were grouped according to the framework of the

selected model in Figure 11. Each group of variables is combined

together to form the climate measure for that group (e.g., in

Appendix 2, COfI,'.EFFECTIVENESS is equal to the average of

ACCURATE.COMM1, ANSWERS.AVAIL, ... , SATISFIED.COMM). Speaking of his

measures, Secrist explains, responses to individual statements are.,*

only valid for measuring the attitude or attribute implied by the'-..

statement. They are not, alone, good predictions of the climate

* measures. However, taken as a group, the average response is an

internally consistent, highly reliable predictive metric of

organizational climate (Secrist, McNee and Paden, 1991; G.E.p a.

* Secrist, personal commurnication, May 21, 19, 7).

"V..

v..

0

* - . . , - .

33I

Computer Model

KEE (Knowledge Engineering Environment) was selected as the

expert system development shell for this prototype system. KEE has

an exceptionally easy user interface for creating precisely

structured knowledge representations. It is a frame based platform

for object oriented programing as well as the use of production

rules. Its flexible inference engine can handle forward and

backward chaining with various selection parameters. Many built-in

procedures are available to invoke active values or image displays.

LISP procedures are easily attached as rlethod slots to any frame to

handle special problems. The shell was implemented on a Texas

Instruments ExplorerTM.*

Knowledge representation. Knowledge about individuals and

organizations was grouped into classes. Each climate class contains

slots for each attribute in the class. Interconnccting classes with

class links enables subclasses to inherit slots from prior classes.

Figure 13 displays the units which make up the subclass of

Individuals. The class of Stress is expanded to show the slot namies

4 which correspond to attitude variables. John is a member of the

Individuals class and inherits all the slots of Individuals with

their default values. Appendix 15 lists the computer code of those

classes which contribute to the Individuals class. The numaeric

value entered in a slot represents the person's attitude dbout that

I*Explorer is a registered trademark of Texas Instruments.

7

34

Climate Catagories

C om munic ationsIEffectiveness-

Individual vs.Organizational

Job Evaluation

Inividual* Le ad er;Su pe rvisorI

Cmp :c:Persons

Nee s ~Individuals[J0_~_

SystemStress VariableSlt Legend

StandardsApe'Bs__and Goals Appearflltssinef Class Link

Conf7lict Dmad - Member LinkCon~llicf. V1alues

Individual Confused. PlanninygClimate and Informzation7. Avail

PerfomanceLack. o1Auho17.YMeasrme Lac..of lnlluence

[MeauresPr-essure

-- andUnclear. flesponsCliateUnnecessary. Attention7

Performance Ulse. of flesourcesCalculations

Figure 13. Representation of individuals.

* variable. For instance, a person may respond to the state~ient, "In

my job, I have to al ways look husy," ( see Appendix 11 ) wi th

"Slightly Agree." The response "Slightly Agree" is scaled to 1-.25

*and stored in the slot called APPEAR.BUSY. The value of the

variable APPEAR.BUSY is knowledge about an individual attitude. The

to the cli iate measure STRESS. High levels of STRESS are so.ietiiics

valu of thi varabl cotNue.ln ih te tes~er

[A.

detrimental. STRESS is used by many rules in evaluating perfor-

mance. A change in the value of APPEAR.BUSY would change the value

of STRESS and therefore change the contributions STRESS makes

towards performance.

Figure 14 is a sillar display of the units which make up the

class of Organizations. The inherited slots for Organizdtions

include only those which are pertinent for organizations. This

includes the class of Organizational Elements which is expanded in

Figure 14 to show its slot names. The computer code representing

Organizations and its superclasses is included in Appendix I,. As

with persons, organizations are members of the class of

Organizations and inherit all Organizations slots.

Super Classes Organizational

for Organizations Element VariableNames

Members. of OrgPerformance. WeightsOverall. PerformanceOverall. Climate OrganizationalSOrganizational Sbordinate. Orgs

Elements Subordmat. Org. Weights Units

Climate and ]-_--_1Perfrmace -- Organizatins-Calculations . .. "

OrganizationalClimate and LegendPerformanceMeasures ... cr ~

Measu- resClass Link--- Member Link

Figure 14. Representation of organizations.

Application methods. The behavior rules represent tie findings

of research experts transformed into d form the expert systeui can

r%'Od

understand. In this prototype management consultant, the rules are

formulated as applications methods.

A i aethod is a self-contained procedure which causes things to

happen when the method is activated. As an example, there is a

method slot in the Ind.Climate.Var.Calc unit called CO[1M.EFFECTIVE-

NESS.CALC. This method is inherited by every person who is a miember

of the class of Individuals. To activate the method, a message is

sent by the system controller to the person and the method

COM.EFFECTIVENESS.CALC is activated. COMM.EFFECTIVENESS.CALC

averages the values of all attitudes grouped under the communication

effectiveness climate measure and puts tile average in the person's

COMI4.EFFECTIVENESS slot as new knowledge. A computer code listing

of all the inethods used in the expert system is included as Appendix

19.

The behavior rules methods function si:;ilar to this exd;.ilple.

When it is ttne to apply a behavior rule, a message is sent by the

controller to each rule requesting it be applied to a specific

,C person. The rule is activated by the message. If the preconditions

of the rule are satisfied for that person, then the rule contributes

F• to the performance of that person.0

Suppose the rule Role Clarity was sent a message for John.

This rule says a lack of clarity (ROLE.CONFLICT) is substantially

related to job tensions, turnover and proclivity to leave the job

(JOB1.SATISFACTION). The method examines John's slot called

ROLE.CONFLICT. If the value there is negative (meaning there is a

lack of clarity), that negative value is contributed to the

.0

.,.".

performance measure JOB.SATISFACTION. The contribution is handled

by adding the contributed value to the list of all values wliCh

contribute to that performance rieasure. If John's ROLE.COtHFLICT

value was negative it would contribute negatively to John's JOB.

SATISFACTION. After all the rules have been applied, another :ethod

averages all the contributed values into an overall performance

measure. Positive contributions to John's JOB.SATISFACTION would be

pulled down by any negative contribution. The amount of the decline

depends on the magnitude of the negdtive value and the nuiber and

magnitudes of other contributions.

. Control system. A control syster, is available to the user to

enter new data, evaluate the expert system or display individual or

organizational data. These functions are controlled by sending

messages to methods as discussed previously. Figure 15 shows the

Control FunctionsAd Create an Individual

Add an Individual to System - Input Individual AttitudesUpdate a Persons Values Intermediate Calculations-- ,Ealuat intdividiat Calcuation

Update a Persons Values Climate CalculationsUpdat a.PesonsEvaluate Indivdual Climate--_,Evaluate Individual Performance _A a

.-- - Apply Behavior rulesa1p Combine Individual Climate

Update an Organization - Combine Individual PerformanceWeight Subordinate Organizations

I z Se _ Add an IndMdual to SystemInitialize System Update an Organization

Display Values Create Individual DisplaysDCreate Organizational Displays0 -- Modify Attitudes

Test Model Apply one Situation to one Organization Update a Persons Values°-- Apply all Situatiions to all Organizations .< Update an Organization

Display Values

Figure 15. User control mechanisiis.

-a

4 : -

I"%

main control mechanisms which may be called at any level. Sormie of

the functions are nested so they send messages to each other.

System operation. The mlanagement consultant expert syste :i

rnntains the structured framework represeti.;g the class of

Individuals and the class of Organizations. The Behavioral Rules

unit has all methods available. To use the system, individuals and

their orgdnizations are entered into the model. Attitude values are

stored in the person's own slots.

After individuals are entered into the model, individual

intermediate and climate variables are calculated under direction of

-S\ the controller. The behavior rules are applied, and their

contribution to each performance measure is recorded. A set of

m methods averages all contributions into overall wedsures. The

--overall measures predict the levels of performance and satisfaction

for each individual.

Organizational slot values are aggregated from the values of

individuals in the organization. Overall organizational perfoniance

is calculated from weighted averages of the perforoance measures.

(These weights were determined by interviews with the -,lanagers.)

When individual and organizational computations are co :.plete, the

system is considered updated.

* Use of model. The updated expert systeifl represents the state

of the organization at the tine data were entered. The consultant

predicts a relative level of performance. The absolute vai]u , of

. performance may not be comparable between organizations, but the

0% C -NA

.

". '.5...;-...'--.-'... -.-. ..';.-;-.:'..'--.-.-. -.- .."-.. . 2 1-".i , I?, .:- ',l - -,-.-- 2

"3')

predicted value of performanc can be used to show how changes in

Individual attitude can affect performance in that organization.

Organizational performance ray be sensitive to changes in some

attitudes and insensitive to changes in others. The sensitivity

depends on the given organizational climate at the tine. Use of the

*- *~ consultant allows managers to test situations (changes in attitude)

and then make informed decisions based on the outcomes.

-. Validation of the Model

p.-; Organization selection. To validate the model, organizations

* were selected which represent a broad application base. The United

States Air Force approved the use of the 67th Civil Engineering

Squadron at Bergstrom AFB, Texas and 11 suborganizations within the

- squadron to provide test data. This squadron is very representative

of a typical Air Force civil engineering squadron in both size and

mission with the exception that the squadron's performance is rated

well above average. Figure 16 shows a simplified organizational

structure of a civil engineering squadron. The six organizations

under the Engineering/Environi-ental Planning Branch include

professional engineers, white collar technicians and ddrainistrative

personnel. The six organizations as part of the Structural

.laintenince Section contain skilled and unskilled craftsi.ien.

-Z reibers of the organizations voluntarily comnpleted the attitude

questionnaire and their responses were loaded into tile ,:odL].

0

%p - ...

0I 0

00V

00

a c0 -0

C 0

0 2 -C

C.)0

00

LLO.. C) LI) -.

OLL

Cc a-

.5 4-

c 0u

0-c0U))

0) c)

E~ oLULuM

2 ' E

) (n

00t -0

C0 N0~

COE 0 4

-7U C N)

70 (a mLo

C * ,NN

11

Eighteen hypothetical situations which could occur in aliost

any organization were selected (see Appendix 17). Each situation

would generally improve or degrade one of the organizational climate

measures. These situations became the test basis for validating the

model.

Expert system predictions. For the expert system predictions,

a review of the individual attitude variables was made for each

situation. Attitudes which would probably change under the

validation situations were identified as: improve a lot, improve a

little, decrease a little or decrease a lot (see Appendix !7).I

The computer predicts changes in performance by changing

attitudes of individuals according to the selected category for each

situation. Attitudes which were to increase a lot were raised a lot

according to a nonlinear, fuzzy logic algorithca (Goldkind, 1I913;

Zadek, 1984). Others were raised a little, decreased a little or

decreased d lot according to other fuzzy algorithms. The coriputer

code for the algorithms is in Appendix 18.

The fuzzy algorithms use a quadratic type transform. If an

attitude was already high, raising it had little effect. If an

attitude was low, raising it iide a big difference. This carries

over to the organization itself. If the organization has a very

effective coiriunication systea, suggested it:iprove,;iunts would hdve

little effect. If the conmunication system was poor, iaprove,:ients

may make a great deal of difference.

'.%

I?

S

The changes in performance for each organization and each

situation were recorded. These changes are the prograta's best

predictions of how the situations would affect the real

organization.

Managers' predictions. Managers of each organization were also

,. asked to predict the changes in performance and satisfaction

measures for edch situation. The possible responses were: great

improvement, slight improvemient, no change, slight decrease and

great decrease for each measure (as shown in Appendix 17).

A comparison of the computer predictions and managers'

* predictions shows the agreement of the maanagement consultant with

the organizational managers' predictions.

-% %

,V..

0

6gn

V i" . v."

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This section discusses the use of the survey questioniiaire and

the statistical comparison of the expert systeri's predictions to the

manager's predictions.

Data Collection

Questionnaire use. Survey data were collected in two

increments. The first group included craftsmen of the Structural

Maintenance Section. Engineers and technicians of the Engineering/

Environmental Planning Branch were in the second group. Each group

was briefed on the purpose of the questionnaire and the nature of

the associated research. Workers and managers voluntarily co ,ipleted

the confidential attitude questionnaire. The anonyiious responses

were identified only by organization and coded in the expert system.

The manager (or supervisor) of each of the 11 organizations was

briefed about the role of job attitudes in job performance. The

eight performance and satisfaction measures to be used by the expert

system (see Appendix 13) were explained to the managers, and they

were asked to weight the importance of each in their organizition.

Managers also considered each hypothetical situation in Appendix 17

and predicted how performance measures would change for their

organization. Managem~ient predictions becaie the basis for

validating the expert system.

-,S

0'-

Expert system predictions. Individual attitudes taken froml thequestionnaires were combined to calculate climate variables for the

individual. Behavior rules were applied to the climate variables,

.-: individual attitudes and other intermediate variables to calculate

individual performance measures. Organizational cli,.Jate variables

and performance measures were aggregated from the melbership to

establish reference performance levels.

The consultant considered each of the hypothetical situations

for each coaputerized organization. Attitudes of individuals in the

organizations were adjusted by the fuzzy algorithms according to

categories shown in Appendix 17, and behavior rules were ruapplied

using the changed attitudes and climates. The consultant calculated

the change of the new performance measures from the reference

measures for each organization. Calculations became the program's

predictions for validating the expert system.

Observations on data collection. Although not a direct part of

this research, it is interesting to note that respondents to the

survey were hippy to express their attitudes. tlalny iad verbil dnd

written rem3arks saying nany i.ieasurements were particularly relevant

,0.; to their job. Siiple observations of individual attitudes displayed

many specific problems which could probably be easily rectified if

known by the supervisor (e.g., isolated high stress levels,

0. disgruntled employees and individual frustrations). Where effects

were widespread, they show in the cli mate variables. The poor

K, physical environment of the Drafting Shop is an example of this.

.,'0

,%'

. - .-°.

I"- - -- . . . ,- ' ' . ... " - -"- " ,

' %," ' '

-" "'-' ' ""''"" "% ,

0

Because of confidentiality, organizations wiere not given feedback

from the questionnaire. However, it is evident that the survey did

identify specific needs within the organization which iay be

remedied. It also identifies both highly ambitious and motivated

ei-apl oyees.

Statistical Analysis

Nature of the data. Managers reported their predictive

measurements for each situation on a discrete Likert scale with a

range from 1 to 5 with 3 being neutral. These responses follow dl

0

ordinal scale.

Consultant predictions were based on calculated changes in

performance. Typical values of perforldance in the expert systemi

ranged from, 0.2 to 0.5. Most changes in perforiance measured

between -0.1 and 0.1 on a continuous interval scale.

Scale differences in the two predictions limit the statistics

that can be used to make comparisons. Most paraetric statistical

methods require at least interval scale (Pfaffenberger and

;Patterson, 1977). This leaves simple comparison tests,0

nonparanetric tests or data indnipulation to iloprove the data for

parametric tests. All three methods are used in this analysis.

0 Concurrence test. In this test, l.anagers' predictions were

paired with the prograa's predictions and a siiple agree/disagree

decision Ywas made (Sobel and van freda, 1937). If iianaters

0 predicted a performance measure would improve (or remain the sa:,ie)

... ............-.-...........-.-....... .- ......-.. ...- ..... -. ...- ". ' W

4i;

and the consultant predicted a positive difference in the medsure

the value of CONCUR was given the value of one. One was also given

if both predicted negative/reductions in performance. If the two

predictions disagreed, CONCUR was given a value of zero. In this

* way, the miean value of CONCUR for each situation arid neasure, for

the 11 organizations, gives a probability of concurrence. The

results of this test are in Table 1.

The probabilities of concurrence by perforilance neasure are all

above 0.70. The probabilities by situation ranged from 0.31 to 0.97

with two-thirds above 0.75. In situations where concurrenctu is less

than 0.5, there is a significant difference between the managers and

the consul tant. Further work with nanagers is necessary to confim

their opinions in these situations before discounting the

consul tant.

The probability of concurrence listed by organization is in

Table 2. The concurrence of the Engineering/Environmental

oryanizdtions are quite consistent except for the Engineering

Branch. This is unusual since the branch performance rneasures are

aggregates of the organizations in the branch. This sho;is that the

* perceptions of the branch chief are significantly different from his

subordinate rnanagers. Again further work with the branch chief 'nay

clarify tile diff.2rences.

-

S-

=,S

47

0 c

NIOE M91 '8 0 0) CC) (0 N

Sr-J~ 0 0 00 0 0)

U) L'n i U) U U) In CMJSP-ePUBIS ONII 'In Z* (o U) Iq 14 11 a U

0 0 0 0 0~OIU)~~WI9g 0 0 o 0 0 0 8

spi4emel qseoI 89 00 30 0 3l 0C'J (I ((D

A3!od~e3U~ ~~ 8 N (Nm LA 1A0110djuaco 0v U)Ocmo, 0o 0oco

(4) Ln U) V) 0 0 8Weld POWIGG T 0 N- 0) 0 N

_U) Ln Uq ) N l N l N l N m CO

<0~~~~~~ ww3edoSi 000 0SP0GUOd 'Al 0 0 0

0 uawdinbA MON -I 1 0 '0 0) c D

(V)-

wwoo ~ ~ Nadl -0 01 -0 rM

ND 0 ) N N 0) CO N) N

U) (4 ) l) Ct UO) qt LNpesieqdnS J -6 CN U ) In U) U) U)r-U

. p ~ ( D U) N - ( c U) (D

)ioFeela 0 U) U) co co M) CD fU

*r 0 0 0 )gLWWO LpaaOjd -9 - O 0) 0 4 N m , ' 0)

L~ -oc r V

ua ie l]Jfeq-V C)C) C)0

4- - o) (D r- - 0) 0

wW O 'O~dwC) 40

% O

.1,-,

00

4 - 4- P . .t.. r- to4

43

TABLE 2

Probability of Concurrence by Organization

Organization Mean Value of COIICUR

Drafting 0.88

" Engineering Design 0.95

Environmental Planning 0.74

Real Property 0.71

Construction Management 0.65

Engineering Branch 0.49

Masons 0.18

Carpenters 0.76

BEST 0 .19

Plumbers 0.93

Metal Shop 0.81

The concurrence test indicates the consultant agreed with

managers' predictions 77% of the time. This is very good

considering that the managers concurred with each other 311. of the

time when they evaluated the situations.

Nonparaietric rank test. Ilany nonpdrametric tests deal with

rank values of data rather than the data itself. Speanran's rho

* coefficient uses the Pearson moment correlation formula for normal

paired correlation substituting paired rank values for the paired

data values (Pfafferiberger and Patterson, 1977). The Spearnan rho

* coefficient for comparing predictions for all organizations was 0.55

:-k

, . S . . • . V ' ,

49

with a probable error less than 0.0001. The coefficients listed by

organization are in Table 3. The Spearman rho test is valid over

the full range of situations but is not valid for individual

situations where few data points are clustered.

TABLE 3

Spearman rho Coefficient by Organization

Organization rho

Drafting 0.70

11_1 Engineering Design 0.57

Environmaental Planning 0.50

Real Property 0.41



Ma sons 0.70

Carpenters 0.55

BEST 0.6q

P1 ui,.ibers O.qI

Metal Shop 0.39

Overa)l 0.55

r. 1" One improvement in the Spearman rho test was obtained by

averaging the predicted performance measures within each situation

by organizdtion. Using the mean of the eight performance and

satisfaction vdriables appears appropriate since the r easures were

Iw.-

g.

* 5')51

very consistent within situations. With the reduced number of data

points, the Spearman rho coefficient WdS 0.66.

This test is stronger than the simple concurrence test. It

shows a solid correlation between consultant predictions and

management predictions of performance and performance averdyes.

Approximate parametric tests. When the eight discrete

performance predictions from organization managers were averaged by

situation, it made the predictions pseudocontinuous and almost

interval. Although it may not be completely valid, the paired

averages were compared using the Pearson moment correlation. The

correlation coefficient for the engineering group was 0.57 and for

the structures group was 0.51 at probable error of 0.0(101. The

overall coefficient was 0.63. The coefficients by organization are

in Table 4.

The correlation test is more restrictive than the nonpara.;etric

tests. It relates closeness of fit between the prediction pairs.

Values above 0.5 represent close correlation for behavioral issues.

This is confirmed by concurrence tests using the averaged

a': predictions giving 0.94 for the structures group and 0.33 for the

engineering group.

Questionnaire evaluation. A stepwise regression analysis of

* the questions used to measure climate variables was performed to

a,.

A N"-. N N % N 'N Na

% %

5!

TABLE 4

Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient by Organization

Organization Coefficient

Drafting 0.61

Engineering Design 0.55

Environmental Planning 0.55

Real Property 0.33



Masons 0.05

Carpenters 0.59

BEST 0.67

Pl umbers 0.q3

Metal Shop 0.38

Overall 0.63

evaluate the questionnaire. The results are in Tables 5 through 14.

In most cases, 95% of the varidnce in the climate variable is

captured by fewer than 6 measures. There are large differences

between groups probably due to the small sizes (11 respondents in

the structural group, 32 in the engineering group for 63 total)

(Cronback, 1951). Based on the limited sample, the metrics

developed for comunications effectiveness, standards and goals and

physical environment appear almost as reliable as those created by

Secrist and llacknan/Oldham.%

..-..

TABLE 5

Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Comimunications Effectiveness

Engineering Structures overall

Question Curiul-ative Question Cunul-ative Questio-n C-TiilativeNuriber R Square Nwuaber R Square Nuv~ber 11 Square

12 0.72 2 0.63 12 15

2 0.31 4 0.93 2 0.M

5 0.91 5 0.M 3 0.97

6 0.93 6 0.92 5 0.911

3 0.95 7 0.94 11 0.92

8 0.96 12 0.97 9 0.94

7 0.97 3 0.99 7 0.95

090 0.99 1 0.9

11 0.99 10 0.99 10 9.97

1 1.01100310

'A.. ;

53

TABLE 6

Stepwise Re(jression of Questionnaire on Individual VersusOrganizational Control

Engineering Structures OverallQuestion Cumulative Question Cumulative Question Ciulative

Number R Square Number R Square Number R Square

2 0.60 1 0.74 2 0.65

9 0.77 2 0.93 4 9.76

I 0.77 0.37 6 0.33

10 0.94 6 0. 90 9 0.33"f, t

5 0.96 9 0.91 10 0.91

11 0.98 9 0.93 9 1.93

4 0.93 3 0.95 5 0.95

1# 3 0.93 10 0.97 3 9.97

7 0.9 5 0.98 Y 0.93

S,3.99 4 0.99 1 9.99

6 1.00 11 1.09 11 1.00

N'-

.

,,1.Z

,O

I,

,'- 54

TABLE 7

Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Interpersonal Relations

Engineering Structures OverallQuestion Cumulative Question Cumulative Question CumulativeNumber R Square Number R Square Nuiber R Square

10 0.62 10 0.50 10 0.60

3 0.0 7 0.77 3 0.72

3 0.97 4 0.94 3 0.12

II 0.91 1 0.91 11 0.37

1 0.93 41 0.94 7 0.90

5 0.96 2 0.96 1 0.93

9 0.97 3 0.97 2 9.95

4 0.913 9 0.93 4 0 .15

7 0.93 5 0.99 12 1.97

12 0.99 12 0.99 9 3.913

- 2 0.99 3 0.99 5 0.99

5 1.0) 5 1.00 5 1.00

0

S

0::

TABLE '3

Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Job Characteristics

Engineering Structures OverallQuestion Cumu Iuative Question Cumulative Question cuIdulativeNumber R Square Number R Square Jur:lber R Square

6 0.73 2 9.74 2 10

9 0.93 7 0.35 7 9.31

3 0.39 3 9.39 3 0.37

4 0.92 12 0.91 1? 0.91

3 0.95 13 0.95 13 1.91

2 9.95 1 0.97 1 0.95

1 0.97 5 0.93 it 1.97

. 10 0.93 11 0.93 5 0.93

13 9.99 9 0.93 4 0.93

7 0.99 6 0.99 6 9.99

11 0.99 10 0.99 3 0.99

5 3.99 4 0.99 9 0.99

12 1.00 13 1.00 1 1.00

N..%

0:X

li.

.. . .'M _ .. . . ~ . , 3h . ,1 ] - ,-r. . %

S '56

TABLE 9

Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Leader-Supervisor Cor, lpetence

Engineering Structures Overal lQuestion Cumulative Question Curu]ative Question Cu I ulative

Nu;iber R Square Number R Square NuiJber R Square

12 0.83 12 0.69 12 0.91

14 0.93 7 0.83 14 0.91

2 0.97 4 0.92 2 0.94

6 0.93 9 0.95 3 1.95

7 0.93 1 0.97 1 O.95

* 8 0.99 1 0.93 7 0.97

3 0.99 15 0.93 6 0.93

1 0.99 5 0.99 3 0.913

13 0.99 13 0.99 i6 0.90

5 0.99 10 0.99 5 0.9

16 0.99 ,8 0.5J 13 0.99

15 0.99 11 0.99 15 0.99

10 0.99 3 0.99 4 0.99

4 0.99 6 0.99 10 0.99

* 11 0.99 16 0.99 9 0.99

9 1.00 2 1.00 11 1.10

% %

..- ..'

.9.

0'/. "-" "." "w- ,". ,"..' " " " " .' % %J'.''%JJ' ' ' % . . -% w- -.. w, - -j '""-"

57

-%,

TABLE 10

Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Personal Needs

Engineering Structures Overall. Question Cumulative Question Cumulative Question cumulative

Number R Square Nuriber R Square Number R Square

5 0.51 14 0.54 15 9.44

12 0.71 11 0.74 7 0.69

1 0.35 15 0.83 3 0.31

3 10.91 10 0.98 12 0.33

2 0.93 6 0.91 14 0.90

* 3 0.95 1 0.94 1 1.92

14 0.96 8 0.95 5 0.93

9 0.97 7 0.96 11 0.91

15 0.97 12 0.93 6 (.16

%: 5 0.93 5 0.99 9 0.97

17 0.93 9 0.99 19 0.07

16 0.93 4 9.03

11 0.99 17 ().99

190.99 13* 4 0. 99 2- 0.99

I* ='.' 7 0.99 16 0.99

"-"" 13 1.00O 3 1 .33

,..-

',,. '% ,%, "~~~~~~~~~~~~.-. . .-..-.j.. .-.. •...-.. -.. " .-.. . .%...- •. . . ., .. . .. . .,% . %.... •

t58

TABLE 11

Ctepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Physicdl Environient

Engineering Structures Overal IQuestion Cumulative Question Cumulative Question Curiulative

Nu;-iber R Square Nuiber R Square Nunber R Square

4 0.64 9 0.47 4 0.52

7 0.82 2 0.77 2 0.75

5 9.89 10 0.36 5 J.94

1 0.91 7 0.91 7 19.39

12 0.96 11 0.93 12 1.92

3 0.93 3 0.95 1 0.94

3 0.93 12 0.97 9 0.95

11 0.93 4 0.97 3 0.96

9 0.99 5 0.93 1 0.7

10 0.90 1 0.99 5 0.93

6 0.99 3 0.99 11 0.99

2 1.03 5 1.00 3 1.03

. .4d%. ?4

59

-I> TABLE 12

Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Organizationfl Re;ardSyste,;is

.P. a-

N

Engineering Structures OverallQuestion Cumulative Question Cumulative Question cuiulative

Nutiber R Square Nunber R Squdre Nuu*Aber R Square

10 0.55 16 0.73 1 0.55

" 3 0.75 0.33 9 0.70

13 0.34 4 0.90 7 304 1.37 19 0.93 2 1.1I

17 0.91 13 0.94 12 1. 90

1 0.93 17 0.95 4 3.91

9 0.95 3 0.96 15 ).93L:16 0.97 11 0.97 11 9113 0.96 14 0.97 5 0.95

6 0.97 10 0.93 13 0.95

14 0.93 7 0.93 3 3.97

s15 .93 9 0.93 17 1.9 1

12 0.93 12 0.99 3 :).9'3

2 9.93 3 0.99 1 3.3

5 0.99 15 0.99 19 1o.99

11 0.99 2 0.99 11 3.9)I"" -" 7 0.99 6 0.99 15 3.9')

r1.00 1 1.00 3 1 .0)

60

TABLE 13

Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Standards and Qoals

iEngineering Structures Overall

Question CuviuIative Question Cumulative Questi-n-C-u uativeNumber R Square Nuraber R Square 11umber R Square

11 9.76 3 0.45 11 1.59

3 0.35 11 0.64 3 0.73

9 0.90 7 0.75 7 ,).34

7 0.93 2 0.81 9 0.33

% 0.95 9 0.87 2 9.92,%,

2 0.97 10 0.90 13 (.94

., 10 0.97 9 0.93 3 9.9,5

4 ).9:3 4 0.95 4 0.97

5 0.09 6 0.99 6 9.99

5 9.93 1 0.99 5 3.99

1 1• 0 5 1.0I 1 1.09

5'.

,

i* S

;-. . , - . -.. -5 - ---. -- -. ,:.- .5. - -"" *'- %-,-.'". -".-'-r ;-. k :w?,2 " " . . .

TABLE 14

.1 - Stepwise Regression of Questionnaire on Stress

Engineering Structures OverdlQuestion Cumul ative Question C n--u-a t i v e Ques ti'5n--- Fiiul a ti veNumlber R Square Number R Square Nurber R Square

4 0.76 2 0.74 2 0.72

3 0.97 12 0.85 12 1.82ro ..

10 0.91 3 0.90 7 0.93

12 0.94 5 0.93 3 0).92

7 0.96 10 0.94 4 0.94

6 0.97 6 0.96 10 9.95

5 0.93 9 0.97 6 0.95

9 0.93 3 0.93 9 1.97

1 0.93 1 0.93 5 0.93

2 0.99 7 0.99 1 0.99

8 0.99 4 0.99 3 0.9

11 1.00 11 1 .09 11 1.00

I0

7S.

0"-

4o

62

CONTRIBUTIONS, FURTHER RESEARCH AND CONCLUSIONIS

This section discusses the significant contributions of this

research; suggests areas where this research could be expanded,

Nextended or modified and includes concluding remarks.

Contribution

Individual attitude questionnaire. The survey questionnaire

used in this research combined research from many sources into a

0 single instru;-1ent to im easure the full climate of organizations. The

portions measuring connunications effectiveness, standards and goals

and physical environnent are now available and consistent with

previously defined metrics.

Preliminary behavior rules. The behavior rules written is

application methods in the expert system demonstrate a procedure for

transforming behavioral findings into if-then production rules.

This procedure may be expanded into other research areas for use in

future expert systems.

Knowledge representation. The expert systeii developed in this

research displays a workable structure representing individuals and

• organizations in a computer knowledge base. The controller system,

application methods and validation technique are suitable for dK ldrge variety of expert systei applications.

V%

kg - 63

0

Future Research

This research prompted consideration of several areas of

further research to improve and expand the prototype expert system.

Questionnaire improvement. The attitude questionnaire is

soraewhat lengthy. Further testing of the survey may make it

possible to reduce the number of questions without significant loss

in reliability.

Alternate performance measures. The consultant was validated

. % using changes in performance since the absolute values of

* performance may not be comparable between organizations. Additional

research relating performance to rneasurable productivity nay

substantiate the expert systel's findings and give iniproved feedback

; (Tuttl e, 1936).

A.-i Sensitivity analysis. A behavior rule contributes to

individual performance only if the preconditions are met. A

sensitivity of the rules and precondition variables may give

valuable insight into the importance of specific variables and/or

rules.

Weighting of values. When the consultant aggr(gated values for

climate and performance variables, the values were equally weighted

(ith the exception of OVERALL.PERFORNANCE which weighted

organizational measures according to the weights Managers assijned).KS*.o

I- *- - --. . . . .

- * A - . - -' .- - *- , -

353 64

Currently, the attitudes of high performers and low performers are

considered equally. Further research could improve this situation.

Additional behavioral research may show ideal weighting factors

for specific work do..iains. This was, in fact, the goal of Secrist's

work from 1976 to 1981 which established the climate measures for

research scientists. (G.E. Secrist, personal coniunication, .ly 10,

1987.) Using the consultant with a variety of organizations may

facilitate the establishment of such weights.

The consultant could also be used in conjunction with the

productivity measures and sensitivity analysis to adjust its own

;:eights in a recursive fashion. This technique may help formulate

., the nonlinear weighting schermies proposed by Naylor, Pritchard and

Ilgen (1980).

Developmient of situational variables. Variables identified as

affected by the hypothetical situations used to validate the model

were selected by careful consideration and knowledge of the

attributes and their meanings. The typical user would not be able

to categorize the most appropriate variables for a given situation.

A natural language interface with a parser specifically designed for

0 behavior issues imay be able to categorize variables for situational

analysis.

Validation group. In the validation process, managers [Iide

predictions based on their perceptions of their employees. The

consultant cilculated predicti(ons based on the epl oyc!'s (wlt

perceptions and attitudes. The disparity between these two points

V%.. . v . *.

650

of view could be reduced by surveying all employees about the

hypothetical situations in lieu of just the managers.

Use of volition. Secrist's total spectrum model of human

performance and organizational effectiveness (see Figure 6)

translates human abilities (mental, physical, experience, volition

and other factors) through job characteristics and climate variables

into performance measures. The model used in the prototype (see

Figure 11) reduced the human abilities portion to simply hu.idn

attitudes. The volition of the employee (the willinqness to act in

a given circumstance) is probably the next attribute to measure and

add to the reduced model. An employee may have desire, riotivation

and the right work climate but may not perform without volition.

Conclusions

This research shows it is possible to represent organizational

climate in an expert system and predict perforiiance using known

behavioral research findings. The consultant can evaluate the

effects of changes in attitude upon performance and help managers

make viore inform-led decisions.

Several thought provoking ideas about the use of auto, ited

behavior analysis and its application in the work place resulted

* fror, this research.

6."

6'.

' . . . .-

%- - - - -

66

REFERENCES

Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. AdvancedExperimental Social Psychology, 2 (pp. 267-300).-h--M.Secrist, Scientific excellence tlirough enlightened managementand healthy organizational environments. Manuscript sub,.ittedfor publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Perforiaance.

Argyris, C. (1964). Integrating the individual and theorganization. New York: Wiley & Sons. In G. .S-6-rist,Scienti ffc-excellence through enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Argyris, C. (1971). Management and organizational development.New York: McGraw-Hili. In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellencethrough enlightened management and healthy organizationalenvironments. Manuscript submitted for publication. SanAntonio, TX: Human Performance.

Argyris, C. (1972). The application of organizational sociology.London: Cambridge University Press. In G.E. Secrist,Scientific excellence through enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Argyris, C. (1975). Dangers in applying results from experimentalsocial psychology. American Psychologist, 30 (pp. 469-435). InG.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence through-enlightened

management and healthy organizational environments. Manuscriptsubmitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Bachman, ,.G., and Tannerbaum, A.S. (1968). The control-satisfaction relationship across varied areas of experience. InA.S. Tannenbaum (Ed.), Control in organizations. New York:

. McGraw-Hill. In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence throughenlightened management and healthy organizational environiaents.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: HumanPerformance.

Bass, B.M. (1971). What's ahead for behavioral science? PersonnelJournal, 50 (pp. 157-158). In G.E. Secrist, Scientific~

W, exceFeTnce--through enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript sul)iaittd forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

I

Reports, 42 (pp. 2/b-231). InI G.E. Secrist, Scientiific

orydniZatiOfld il elli 1 rlILelS. ManuScript, Submi Led torPUDliCdtion. San Antonio, TX: lluian Performalnce.

B eeir, T.A., dfld Newimn, J.E. (1918). Jot) stross, Oedployef e flAtti,and Orydflizdtiofll effectiveniess: A facet dridlySiS, Miodel andIliterature revieW. Personinel Psychology, 31 (pp. o~uI.InG.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence through enlightenedincintdyemIert and feleaIthy olyani zatiofl erivi roimaents. i bnuscri pcsubittLed for publiCation. San Antonio, TX: Humian Perrormance.

Bennis, W.G. (19b6). Cliainginy orydniZdtionIS: ESSdYS Onl thedevelopwent dnd evolution ot huitan orydniZdtionlS. Ilea~ York:McGraw-Hi I I. In G.E. Secnist, Scient'fic excellence tnr-outlien Iigyriefed Illdfldy(MrClt aind fled ItHy organi ZaL 1 ofla k.riv i riwI4nts.1Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: HutmanPurturiddnce.

BerelIsonl, B. , Ste iner, Gi.A. (19o4). Humian behavior: An inventoryot scientiftic tindings. N ew Yourk: llircotirt, Brace 6 World. IIIG.E . Secri st , Sci enti fic excellIence tthrouyh en i liteuiedmat Idi 9ien t id 1flUa I t hy U I'j dr nIZadt i ona I en v i ron i.in t s . iJltSCri pt

subitted for publ icatiun. Sin Antonio, IX Ituiiin Pertorinc.

B~owers, D.G. (19/3). OrydiniZdtlonal practice-s and the decision toreenlist. Ann Arbor, il: Institute for Sociail Research,University of Michigan (NTIS No. AL)-/22 414). In G.E. Secrist,Scientific excel lence thruogh enilitened mInnigeneu and heal yorganizational environmnents. Manuscript submitted forpUt)Iiction. SanI Antonio, [X : Humandi Pert-oriiince.

* 3~~owers, D.G., and Franklin, J.L. (19/3). neav safnctonnorganization: A diagnosis. Ann Arbor, I11: 1inSttiui, tot'Sociadl iResearCh, University of Michigan (MdIS No. AO /63 //U) .In Gi.E. Secri st, Sc ienti tic excellhence through en Ii itemmii

-0 milndycement anid fled I thy organ izati onaI env ironmenits. laimioscri ptSubicL i tor l)00 icationI.

butler, H'.C. , and Jones, A.P. (19/9). Percteii vl I kdeu IMI n i u r,K.individual lcaracteri stics, and injury occurrence In liaizrdlous

work eui1ronmueitIS. Journmi uto ApplIied PSYcno ogUtY, 64 ( ppi*299-304). In G.E. Secrist, Scienititic excellence inroujii

enlIjIlyheuied iiiaIdnjJ0iiiii dild hea Itty or-jan ilt"111I efivi rmi'ments.Mdnus cr 1pt soumitied t or pubIi caition * Sain An ton i o, I X :HU1mani

LvCr.-*AIr..L

%", 6 8

I

Chaney, F.B. (1969). Employee participation in manufacturing jobdesigi. Human Factors, 11 (pp. 101-106). In G.E. Secrist,Scientific excellence though enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: luman Performance.

Cronback, L.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internalstructure of tests. Psychometrika, 16 (pp. 297-334).

Drake, B.H., and Mitchell, T.R. (1978). The effects of verticaland horizontal power on individual motivation and satisfac-tion(Technical Report /6-2). Seattle, WA: University otWashington, Department of Psychology (NTIS No. AD-A033 561). InG.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence through enlightenedmanage-llent and healthy organizational environments. Manuscriptsubmitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Dyer, R.F., Mathews, J.J., Wright, C.E., and Yudowitch, K.L.(195). Table 10.5. In 0. Meister, Behavioral analysis andmeasurement methods, New York: Wiley.

Farace, R.V., and MacDonald, D. (1974). New directions in thestudy of organizational communication. Personnel Psychology, 27(pp. 1-15). In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence throughenlightened management and healthy organizational environm;ents.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: HumanPerformance.

Friedland, P. (1985). Architectures for knowledge-based systeis.Communications of the ACM, 28 (9), 903.

Gensereth, M.R., and Ginsberg, H.L. (1935). Logic prograamming.Communications of the ACM, 23 (9), 933-941.

Goldkind, S. (1983). Fuzz algorithms, planning and problem solving(Tech. Report WUCS-83-3). St. Louis, MO: WashingtonUniversity, Department of Corputer Science.

Hackman, J.R., and Oldham, G.R. (1975). Development of the jobdiagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60 (pp.159-170). In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence tfiroughenlightened management and healthy organizational environIents.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: HumanPerformance.

6 Hackman, J.R., and Oldham, G.P. (1976). Motivation through thedesign of work: Test of a theory. Organizational 3ehavior and

SHluman Perforimaance, 16 (pp. 250-279). In G.E Secrist, Scen-titic excellence thr-ugh evl iqhtened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript subkitted forpublicaLion. San Antonio, TX: Human Perforiuance.

V--

690

Hackman, J.R., and Oldham, G.R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading,MA: Addison-Wesley.

Hayes-Roth, F. (1983). Using proofs and refutations to leirn fromexperience. In Michalski, R.W., Carbonell, I.G. and Mitchell,T.H. (Eds.), Machine learning: An artificial intelligence

approach (pp. 221-240). Palo Alto, CA: Tioga Publishing.

Hayes-Roth, F. (1995). Rule-based systems. Coiuvrunications of theACM, 28 (9), 921-932.

Jar.es, L.R., and Jones, A.P. (1976). Organizational structure: Areview of structural dimensions and their conceptual relation-ships with attitudes and behavior. Organizational Behavior andlluman Performance, 16 (pp. 74-113). In G.E. Secrist, Scientificexcellence through enightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Kast, F.E., and Rosenzweig, J.E. (1974). Organization and* management (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Katz, D., and Kahn, R.L. (1966). The social psychology oforganizations. New York: Wiley. In F.E* Kast and JE.Rosenzweig (1974). Organization and management (2nd ed.). NewYork: McGraw-Hill.

Kirchoff, B.A. (1975). A diagnostic tool for maageimient byobjectives. Personnel Psychology, 29 (pp. 351-364). In G.E.Secrist, Scientific excellence through enlightened managementand healthy organizational environients. Manuscript subiittedfor publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Klauss, R.E. (1977). Dimensions of managerial interpersonal* coninunication behavior and their relation to measures of

satisfaction and performance. Unpublished doctoraldissertation, University of Rochester. In G.E. Secrist,Scientific excellence through enlightened management and healthy

* organizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Hujian Performance.

Kornhauser, A. (1965). Mental :,.alth of the industrial worker: ADetroit study. New York: Wiley. In G.E. Secrist,-c--ntiticexcellence through enlightened management and healthy

* organizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Perforoance.

SZL

0' .

...........................................- -. ''- -

700

Lawler, E.E., II. (1967). Attitude surveys and job perforiance.Personnel Administration, 30, (5) (pp. 3-5, 24-25). In G.E.Secrist, Sclentitic excell--ce through enlightened managementand healthy organizational environments. Manuscript suboiittedfor publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Lawler, E.E., Ill. (1969). Effects of task factors on jobattitudes and behavior (a symposium). Job design and employeemotivation. Personnel Psychology, 22 (pp. 426-434). In G.E.Secrist, Scientific excellence throu-h enlightened managementand healthy organizational environments. Manuscript suboittedfor publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Lawler, E.E., III. (1970). Job attitudes and eliployee m.iotivation:theory, research and practice. Personnel Psychology, 23 (pp.223-238). In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence thlroUh91ienlightened management and healthy organizational environments.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: HumanPerformance.

* Lawler, E.E., III and Hall, D.T. (1979). Relationship of job*' charateristics to job involvement, satisfaction, and intrinsic

motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54 (pp. 305-312). In

G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence through -Wlightenedmanagement and healthy organizational environments. Manuscriptsubmitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Lawrie, J.W. (1967). Motivation and organization. PersonnelJournal, 46 (pp. 42-49). In G.E. Secrist, Scientitic excellencethrough enTightened management and healthy organizationalenvironments. Manuscript submitted for publication. SdnAntonio, TX: Human Performance.

- Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York:McGraw-Hill. In G.E. Secrist, Scientitic excellence throughenlightened management and healthy organizational environments.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: HumanPerformance.

0Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and

value. New York: McGraw-Hill. In G.E. Secrist, -E-itcexce-Tlence through enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Locke, E.A. (1963). Toward a theory of task motivation andincentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Perfor. iance, 3(pp. 157-139). In G.E.-Secrist, Scientific exc&-Tec-f7-Foughenlightened management and healthy organizdtiondl environments.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: Human

* Performance.

6

P. w. ZLhkA.AAkk f

r , L-unr w. m4 fi WI WV ,= r F r -, ' - . wr... -, . - r rrar w r.: r w w , , .. . . . . .. ... -'. . ... .. . ... . . ..

71

Locke, E.A. (1975). Personnel attitudes and motivation. AnnualReview of Psychology, 26 (pp. 457-479). In G.E. Secrist-,Scientitic excellence Tffrough enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Locke, E.A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In4v M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational

psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally. In G.E. Secrist,Scientific excellence through enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Lyons, T.F. (1971). Role clarity, need for clarity, satisfaction,tension, and withdrawal. Organizational Behavior and HumanPerformance, 6 (pp. 99-110). In G.E. Secrist, Scientificexcellence through enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

* Margolis, B.K., and Kroes, W.H. (1974). Occupational stress andstrain. In A. McLean (Ed.), Occupational stress. Springfield,IL: Thomas. In GE. Secrist, Scientific excellence throughenlightened manageiment and healthy organizational environments.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: HumanPerformance.

Maslow, A.H. (1965). Eupsychian management. llomewood, IL: Irwin; .-i &Dorsey Press. In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence through

enlightened manageiaent and healthy organizational environ:;ients.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: ilumanPerformance.

*Maslow, A.H. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). NewYork: Harper & Row. In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellencethrough enlightened management and healthy organizationalenvironments. Manuscript submitted for publication. SdnAntonio, TX: Hu;Ian Performance.

Mason, R.O. and Mitroff, I.1. (1981). Challenging strategicplanning dssumptions. New York: Wiley.

McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. NJew York:McGraw- Hill. In G.E. Secrist, Scienti fiexcelence through

* enlightened manage,;ient and healthy organizational environlents.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: lfumanPer formIance.

2,

McGregor, U. (1967). The professional manager. C. PlcGreyjol dri'aW.G. B~ennis (Eds.). New York: McGraw-Hill I. In G.E. Secrist,Scienti tic Lexcellence tturouygh enlightened mlanciyemuilt ind healthyorganizdtional environments. Manuscript submnitted forpublication. Sari Antonio, rX: HIumand Ptertorance.

McL,?an, A. (1974). OCCupdtiondi stress. Sprinyfield, IL: [homals.in G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence through enlitghtenedIiidfldy~iLent and healIthy orydriza t iond I en v ironiienLs . fMduscri ptsubmitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: HUmndr PerformAnce.

MilT.M. (1961). [he sociology of smacll yroups. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. In G.E. Secrist, Scientific

* ~excellIence through enlIightened fidfidgeilerit dild flid Ithyoryanizdtional environmients. Mnuscript submitted forPUbIicdtion1. Scin Antonio, rX: llur1iar Pertoriine.

MitchellI, T.R. (1979). OrganiZational oehavior. Annual Review of

Psychology, 30 (pp. 243-281). In G.E. Secrist, ScientificexcellIence through enIigyhtened manayemnent and heal thyOrydnizationdi enviironmnets. Mdinuscript Sub11itte,!l tor

* publicaition. San Antonio, [-X: Huinan Performhince.

Mosbacn, R.J., anad Scdnlan, I.J., Jr. (19/9~). An -investigation ofthe factors Whiich affect the career intentions ut Air ForceSystems Coililmand Comipany Grade Offi cers. Wri ght-Pitt_-rsan ri3UII: Air Force Institute of Technology (N[1S No. AO-AJ3 /1?).in G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence throuyih en iglituliw(iianagement and heal thy oryani zational env ironmients. MadnuscriptsuOHitted for publication. Sain Antonio, TX: IIumaIn Perfonriarice.

Muchinsky, P.M. (1977). Organizational communication: Relation-ships to organfizational cl imate ind job sdtLisfactiofl. Acd emyot Miinayement Journal, 20 (pp. b92-6tJI). In G.E. SecristSc ien ti f ic exc ellIence t hrouygh enIi gh ten ed 11acna gemen t anil healI thnyorganizationalI environments. Olanuscnipt submitted for'publication. San Antonio, rx: Humain Performaince.

0Naylor, J.C., Pritchaird, R.L)., and I Iger, D.N. (ILi) A tfiury__otS- . behdV1Oar ini urarli izt ions. New York : Acudemi c Press.

* INhwcomflt), [.1., Turner, N.H., cmd Converse, P .E. (. 91h) Thci ol*psycho I ojy :The Study ot human interaction. Niea York: HotnI

kinehjrt, &Winston. In (I.E. Secrist, Scientific excellencetiruoghn t411ighteried managumenL 11nd heal thy organi ZdU io.1envi rofimments. Manuscript subiltted for publ1iccutiori. SaniAnt olln iu, I X: Hurrtidn PterturmilCic.

N41 Is sson , N.J . 1980dr) . P r iniic iy p o S t d rt 1: rI C I I i rILt! I I i jrI IC e. PoloAILO, CA: [ioyd.

0A

S%

P WN- *~j * .. ,

... . .... . . --- .. ... . ... ... . ... ... .. ...J~l l . .n . f ....,- r........ n l,- , ...... . .. ...... . .. .. . . ....... .. .. .. .. .

73

%0N

Patchen, H. (1970). Participation, achievement, and involvenent onthe job. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. In G.E.Secrist, Scientific excellence through enlightened managementand healthy organizational environments. Manuscript subiittedfor publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Pfaffenberger, R.C., and Patterson, J.1I. (1977). Statisticalmethods for business and economics. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

*- .Porter, L.W., and Lawler, E.E., Ill. (1969). Managerial attitudesand performance. Ilomewood, IL: Irwin & norsey se-(tSecrist (19T2). Scientific excellence through enlightenedmanagement and healthy organizational environments. Manuscri ptsub::iitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Roach, J.W., Virkar, R.S., Weaver, M.J. and Drake, C.R. (19:5).Poi-fme: A computer-based consultation system for apple orchardmanagement using PROLOG. Expert System, 2 (2), 56-53.

Roberts. K.H., and O'Reilly, C.A., Ill. (1974). Measuring* organizational co;r.unication. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59

(pp. 321-326). In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence throughenlightened manageient and healthy organizational environi:ents.Manuscript submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: HumanPerformance.

Roethlisberger, F.J., and Dickson, 1.3. (1939). Management and theworker. Caibridge, MA. In F.E. Kast and J.E.-Rosenzoe1gTTmT4T. Organization and management (2nd ed.). Nt.-. York:McGraw-Hi I.

Rosenfeld, J.M., and Smith, J.J. (1957). Participative nanaqement:An overview. Personnel Journal, 45 (pp. 1lq1-i14). In G.E.Secrist, Scientific excellence th-ough enlightened managementand healthy organizational envitronnents. Manuscript subl~m ittedfor publication. San Antonio, TX: Ilumian Performance.

Rubin, I.M., dnd Goldman, M. (1968). An open system model of* leadership perfori:mcince. Organizational Behavior and lluman

Performance, 3 (pp. 143-1T61Th. n G.E. Secrist, Scient-i-C- excel lence thFough enl ightened management drd heal thy* organizational environments. Manuscript submitted for

publication. San Antonio, TX: HIuman Performance.

* Scheflen, K.C., Lawler, E.E., I1 , and Hlackman, J.R. (1971).Long-teri. impact of enployee participdtion in the dlevelopient ofpay incentive plans: A field experitdelt revisited. Journal if

I)- A li ed Psychology, 55 (pp. 13?-l ) . I G. I. S,:risTScent-fic excelTnc--through enlightened management d(il healthyorygnizationual envirjnrients. Manuscript suL, mitted forp t)ulica tion. San Antonio, TX: lilu:mIdr Perfon ance.

SV

*-* *° S.

II .<,o'

74

Schneider, B., and Hall, D.T. (1972). Towards specifying thleconcept of work climate: A study of Roman Catholic diocesanpriests. journal of Applied Psychology, 56 (p. 447-455). InG.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence throu-gT enlightenednanagei.1ent and healthy organizational environments. Manuscriptsubmitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: Hu4iian Performance.

Schuler, R.S. (1980). Definition and conceptualization of stressin organizatiorii . Orydnizational Behavior and H1umanPerformance, 25 (pp. 134-215). In G.E. Secrist, Scietificexcellenc th ugh enlightened management and healthyorydizational envi ronments. Manuscri pt subitted furpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Schultz, D.P. (1970). Industrial scientists: Motivation andN morale. In D.P. Schultz (Ed.). Psychology and industry.

London: Macillan. In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellnce'p through enl ightened manageient and healthy organizational

environments. Mianuscript submitted for publication. SanAntonio, TX: Hum~an Performlance.

Seashore, S. (1954). Group cohesiveness in industrial work group.Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Survey Research Center.In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence through enlightenedmanagement and heal thy organizational environments. Manuscript

*.submitted for publication. San Antonio, TX: H1u11an Performanrce.

Secrist, G.E. (1969). A total environmental exploratoryinvestigation of scientitic-engineering prtr;ncadindividual satisfaction. Doctoral dissertation, Uni1versity ofUtah, salt Lake City, Ul.

Secrist, G.E. (1931). Scientific excellence through enlightened*management and heal thy organizational cnv iron:-ents. Maniuscri pt

subritted for publication. San Antonio, TX: Hluman Perforn~ance.

Secrist, G.E. (1933). Hunan and organizational effectiveness: Atotal spectrum model (Report IJSAFSAM-TR-91-25). Brooks Afl,7X:

* USAF School of Aerospace Medicine, Aerospace Medical Division.

* . Secrist, G.E., McNee, R.C., and Paden, V.L. (1913). A set oforganizational-climate measures: Internal consistncycto rsTttue, and predictive power (Technical ---

- VAW~JRT- T Brooks AFB, TX: UJSAF School of Aerospace*11edicine, Aerospace Mledical Division.

SobolI , 1..Q. , arid van Breda , 11. F. (1937). Val idati nq resul ts of anexpert system. (Ava ilablIe f roim Mana qe;%erit Intrima i.i on rT7 n c esU --0t5-Ffm fiL. COX School of Business, Southern ilethodistUni vers ity , Dall Ias , Texas)

S%

75

Stefik, M., and Bobrow, D.G. (1986). Object-oriented programiing:Themes and variations. The Al Magazine, 6 (4), 40-62.

Sutermeister, R.A. (1969). People and productivity (2nd ed.). NewYork: McGraw-Hill. In F.E. Kast and J.E. Rosenzweig (1974).Organization and management (2nd ed.). New York: 11cGraw-Hill.

p Tuttle, T.C. (1936). Methodology for generatiry efficiency andeffectiveness measures MHGEEM): A guide tor commanders,managers, and supervisors (Tech. Report AFIIRL-TP-36-26). BrooksAFB, TX: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory.

Umstot, D.D., Mitchell, T.R., and Bell, C.H., Jr. (1973). Godlsetting and job enrichment: An integrated approach to jobdesign. Academy of Management Review, 3, 867-379. In G.E.Secrist, Scientific excellence through Tnlightened managementand healthy organizational environments. Manuscript subi:uttedfor publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

', Upjohn, W.E. (1973). Work in America: Report of a special task* force to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. In G.E. Secrist, Scientificexcellence through enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Vroom, V. (1963). Some personality determinants of the effects ofparticipation, In N.J. Smelser and W.T. Smaelser (Eds.),Personality and social systems. New York: Wiley. In G.E.Secrist, Scientitic excellence through enlightened manage:ientand healthy orgdizational environments. Manuscript subiiitted

"* for publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Walsh, J.T., Taber, T.D., and Beehr, T.A. (1930). An integratedmodel of perceived job characteristics. Organizational Behaviorand Human Performance, 25 (pp. 252-266). In G.E. Secrist,Scientific excellence tTiFough enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted for

publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Wherry, R.J., Jr., and Curran, P.M. (1966). A model for the studyof some determiners of psychological stress: Initial experi-mental research. Organizational Behavior and Huiaan Performance,1 (pp. 226-251). In G.E. Secrist, Scientific excellence-thru6u-i_* nlightened management and healthy organizational environents.Manuscript submi tted for publ ication. Sdn Antonio, TX: lu4ianPerformance.

0

S

-. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

76

White, S.E., Mitchell, T.R., and Bell, C.H., Jr. (1977). Goalsetting evaluation apprehension and social cues as deterifi-antsof job performance and job satisfaction (Technical Report77-12). Seattle, WA: University of Washington, Departb-ent of

.Psychology (NTIS No. AD A045 597). In G.E. Secrist, Scientificexcellence through enlightened management and healthyorganizational environments. Manuscript submitted forpublication. San Antonio, TX: Human Performance.

Winston, P.H., and Horn, B.K. (1981). LISP. Reading, MA:Addi son-Wesley.

Zadek, L.A. (1934). Making computers think like people. IEEESpectrum, August, 26-32.

Zultowski, W.H., Avery, R.D., and Dewhirst, H.D. (1973).Moderating effects of organizational climate on relationshipsbetween goal-setting attributes and employee satisfaction.Journal of Vocational Behavior, 12 (pp. 217-227). In G.E.Secrist, Scientific excellence tTi-ough enlightened managementand healthy organizational environments. tManuscript subiiitted

* for publication. San Antonio, TX: Human Perfor.mance.

p.~K - . . . S

77

APPENDIX 1

BEHAVIOR FINDINGS

This appendix paraphrases select behavioral research findings

as preliminary rules which can be used to evaluate performance. A

general statement of the rule is given with its source. Variables

in parenthesis are the corresponding variables used in the expert

system. The transformation of these rules into if-then phraseology

for the expert system is in Appendix 14.

Autonomy Creativity

Where employees have control over work methods (IND.ORG.

CONTROL) and while there is a need for creativity (SKILL.VARIETY.

INDEPENDENT.THOUGHT), there is increased innovation (EXCELLENCE,

REAL IZATION. OF. POTENTIAL).

(Patchen, 1970)

Autonomy Growth

Behavior is dominated by the most basic group of unsatisfied

needs. If autonomy is low (IND.ORG.CONTROL) and chances for growth

are low (GROWTH.DEVELOP) then satisfaction will be low

(NEED.FULFILLMENT, SELF.REALIZATION).

(Maslow, 1970)

%I'

r...... +... . .. o. .+.- ................ . . . .. . . . . . . .,... ... %. %- - -% •., m-", + , ""

79S

Challenge Opportunity

Challenging work (JOB.CHALLENGE) and opportunity to use valued

abilities (GROWTH.DEVELOPMENT.HO) are found to be important in

retention decisions (call it loyalty) (ACHIEVEMENT, NEED.

_FILF ILLrWIIT).

(Mosbach and Scanlan, 1979)

4 Challenge Responsibility

Challenging work (JOB.CIIALLENGE) should be coupled with liberal

responsibility (IND.ORG.CONTROL) for best performance (ACHIEVEMENT).

(Schultz, 1970)

-* Challenge Satisfaction

./: Job challenge (JOB.CHALLENGE) is a primary determinant of job

Ui satisfaction (NEED.FULFILLMENT, SELF.REALIZATION, JOB.SATISFACTION).

(alsh, Taber and Beehr, 1980; Schneider and Hall, 1972)

Cohesive Accept

Hlighly cohesive groups (COHESIVE) are above average in-4.

perforcmance (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY, REALIZATION.OF.

POrENFIAL) when the group accepts the organization's goals

(S [ANDARDS .GOALS)

(Seashore, 1954)

.

0

* 80m

Cohesive Goals

Cohesive groups (COHESIVE) generally demonstrate universal

participation (EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION), have clear, understandable

objectives (STANDARDS.GOALS); have frank, open communications

(COrlIH.EFFECTIVENESS); have integrated values and needs (REWARD.SYS);

share mutual influence (LACK.OF.INFLUENCE); and are willing to deal

with conflict (STRESS).

- (Likert, 1961; !lcGregor, 1960)

Cohesive Identify

Cohesiveness (COHESIVE) is linked to identification with thework organization (REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL).

(Patchen, 1970)

Cohesive Non-Accept

Highly cohesive groups (COHESIVE) perform below average

(ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY, REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL)

if the group does not accept the organizational goals

(STAflDARDS.GOALS)

(Seashore, 1954)

Cuhe'sive Productive

Cohesive groups (COHESIVE) are typically more productive

* (ACHMIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS).

(Mills, 1967)

S de

. , . P

,81

Communications Effectiveness

The communications system (COMM.EFFECTIVENESS) ties together

efficiency and resource use (EFFICIENCY).

(Berlo in Farace and MacDonald, 1974)

Commitment Communications

Groups with greater commitment to goals (STANDARDS.GOALS), more

open communication (COMM.EFFECTIVENESS) and more friendly

interpersonal relations (INTERPERSONAL.REL) manifest cohesiveness

(COHESIVE).

(Secrist, 1981)

Distrust

In a highly participative environment (EFFECTIVE.

PARTICIPATION), if there is distrust (TRUST), it destroys concerted

actions (SELF.REALIZATION).

(Rosenfeld and Smith, 1967)

External Control

External control (IND.ORG.CONTROL) is less effective because it

contributes to psychological withdrawal (call it job interest)

(ACHIEVEMENT, EFFICIENCY, JOB.SATISFACTION) and diminishes

willingness to contribute (call it job attitude) (NEED.FULFILLMENT,

ACHIVEMENT).

(Argyris, 1972)

%-ANN

L-'.k

82

4 Fulfillment Growth

Higher order need gratification (NEED.FUILFILLMENT) is related

to the autonomy of the job (IND.ORG.CONTROL) and the growth

experiences of the job (GROWTII.DEVELOPMENT).

(Lawler and Hall, 1970)

Interest Supervisor

Interesting work (SKILL.VARIETY.HIO, JOB.CIIALLENGE) and a good

supervisor (LEADER.SUPER) produce job satisfaction (JOB.

SATISFACTION) and efforts at efficiency (EFFICIENCY).

Interpersonal Relations

Participation in decision 11aking across work groups and within

work groups (INTERPERSONAL.REL) results in increased involveilent and

co,.imitient (ACHIEVEMENT, REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL, JOB.SATISFACTION,

'.4z NEED.FULFILLMENT).

(Drake and Mitchell, 1978)

Involvement.4

Job involvement (INVOLVEMENT, NEED.FOR.INVOLVEM ,EiT) is a potent

moderator of organizational environment (PIIYSICAL.ENVIR) and

individual satisfaction (JOB.SATISFACTION, NEED.FIJLFILLMIENT).

(Batlis, 1973)

4.

44j

83

.

Lack of Stress

Total lack of job stress (STRESS) may cause a negative

deviation from nominal functioning (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFICIENCY,

EFFECTIVENESS, REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL).

(Beehr and Newman, 1978; Schuler, 1990; Wherry and Curran, 1966)

Leader Climate

Leader behavior (LEADER.SUPER) and organizational climate

(OVER.ALL.CLIMATE) contribute to increased accidents and injury

(EFFICIENCY, EFFECTIVENESS, JOB.SATISFACTION, REALIZATION.OF.

.'ePOTENTIAL).

(Butler and Jones, 1979)

Meaningful Work

If work is meaningful (SKILL.VARIETY.HO), TASK.IDENTITY,

TASK.CONTINUITY, TASK.SIGNIFICANCE) in an autonomous environlwent

(IND.ORG.CONTROL) and offering appropriate rewards (REWARD.SYS)

then workers will be highly motivated (JOB.SATISFACTION, NEED.

FULFILLMENT, ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY, REALIZATION.OF.

POTENTIAL).

* (Hackman and Oldham, 1975, 1976)

Motivation Skill Use

Job motivation (JOB.MOTIVATION) is proportional to use of

0skills (SKILL.VARIETY), individual control of work (IND.ORG.CONTROL)

and feedback (REWARD.SYS).

(Hackman and Oldham, 1930)

"% %

• - -.. . , . ./ . . , . .. v " ; . . ,. .

84

0

Overall Climate

The job setting and organizational environment (OVER.ALL.

CLIMATE) is a primary source of need satisfaction (NEED.

FULFILLMENT).

(Secrist, 1981)

Participation Involvement

Participative management can be effective to instill a sense of

involvement (JOB.SATISFACTION) and meet higher order needs

(NEEn.FULFILLMENT, SELF.REALIZATION).

(Rosenfeld and Smith, 1967)

Participation

Employee participation (EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION) improves job

attitudes (ACHIEVEMENT, NEED.FULFILLMENT) and performance

- . (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY, REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL).

(Chaney, 1969; Scheflen, Lawler and Hackman, 1971; Vroom, 1963)

-' Reward Importance

There is a strong link between reward importance (IMPORTANCE.

OF.REWARD), job feedback (REWARD.SYS) and job perforlance0

(ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY, REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL).

(Lawler, 1967)

0

0

% -',.0--

85

Reward Needs

The equity theory says people attempt to balance input effort

with the rewards they receive. High expectations (EXPECTATION.OF.

REWARDS) and high importance of receiving rewards (IMPORTANCE.OF.

REWARDS) prompts higher work effort (ACHIEVEMENT, REALIZATION.OF.

POTENTIAL, JOB.SATISFACTION, NEED.FULFILLMENT).

(Adams, 1965; Mitchell, 1979; Porter and Lawler, 1963)

Reward Role Clarity

Feedback (REWARD.SYS) is amplified under conditions of role

clarity (ROLE.CONFLICT). Job satisfaction (ACHIEVEMENT,

REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL, JOB.SATISFACTION, NEED.FULFILLMENT)

appears to increase when goals are established.

(Mitchell, 1979)

Reward Work

If hard work leads to fair rewards (REWARD.SYS), then people

work harder (expectancy theory) (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS,

EFFICIENCY, REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL).

(Lawler, 1970; Porter, Lawler, 1968; Mitchell, 1979)

Rewards Self-Esteem

Irnproved intrinsic rewards (INTRINSIC.REWARD) led to a feeling

of self-esteem (JOB.SATISFACTION, SELF.REALIZATION), accomplishment

(ACHIEVEMENT) and self-fulfillment (NEED.FULFILLMENT).

(Lawler, 1969)

n

- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --.. . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. -.. -. . ... ... ... .. .... .- . . .. ." " .. . . . . . .. '. . . . .'. ." "

86

Role Clarity

Lack of role clarity (ROLE.CONFLICT) is substantially related

to job tensions, turnover and proclivity to leave the job

(JOB.SATISFACTION).

(Lyons, 1971)

Satisfaction Cotvunicati ons Achievernient

When eriployees are satisfied with coimnunications (CO-,i.

EFFECTIVENESS), they show a positive attitude towards manage1.ient

(ACIIIEVEM1ENT, NEED.FULFILUIEIT), are more satisfied with their

supervisors (JOB.SATISFACTION) and identify olore with the

organization (REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL).

(uchinsky, 1977)

Satisfaction Coiimunications

Job satisfaction (JOB.SATISFACTION) is related to . nutiber of

co.lunicdtions variables (COMIn.EFFECTIVENESS).

(Roberts and O'Reilly, 1974)

Satisfaction Role Clarity

Job satisfaction (JOB.SATISFACTION) increises when clear goals

6.. (R9LE.COThFLICT), goal planning (STAIJDARDS.GOALS), support aill

*-- dutofofl;y ( PJD.ORG.CONTROL), job security (STRESS), devlop.,vent of

capabilities (GROWTH.DEVELOP1E1T) and a perfor:uance contingent

4reward systeii (REIIARD.SYS) are present.

(Zultowski, Avery and Dewhirst, 1979)

I.

Iw

.'o"--

87

Standards Autonomy

Formalization and standardization (STANDARDS.GOALS) diminish

satisfaction (JOB.SATISFACTION) when there is a lack of autonomy

(IND.ORG.CONTROL).

(James and Jones, 1976)

Standards Challenge

Specific goals (STANDARDS.GOALS) and challenging work

(JOB.CHALLENGE) regulate performance (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS,


(Locke, 1968, 1975)

Standards Communications

Formalization, standardization (STANDARDS.GOALS) and lack of

ambiguity (COMM.EFFECTIVENESS) are positively related to satisfac-

tion (JOB.SATISFACTION).

(James and Jones, 1976)

Standards Expectant Reward

Clear challenging goals (STANDARDS.GOALS), reward distribution

(REWARD.SYS) and expectations (EXPECTATION.OF.REWARDS) increase

performance (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY,

REALUIATION.OF.POTENTIAL).

(Mitchell, 1979)S ,

i-:::

V°.

0. ,

lil

886

Standards

Persons with assigned goals (STANDARDS.GOALS) produced

(ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS) more than those without assigned goils.

(White, Mitchell and Bell, 1977)

Standards Rewards

Incentives and rewards (REWARD.SYS) are more readily linked

with performance goals (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY,

REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL) when goals are well defined

(STANDARDS.GOALS).

(Kirchhoff, 1975; Locke, 1968, 1975)

Stress Frustration

Frustration (STRESS) leads to reduced productivity and lower

morale (EFFECTIVENESS, ACHIEVEMENT, NEED.FULFILLMENT).

(Lawrie, 1967)

Stress Health

Job stress (STRESS) provides a maladaptive response through

adverse effects on physical health (EFFICIENCY), mental health

(EFFECTIVENESS) and performance (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVFNESS,I


(McLean, 1974)

I

iS.-"-.

"I

d/

89

Stress Satisfaction

An employee's mental health (STRESS) varies consistently with

job satisfaction (JOB.SATISFACTION).

(Kornhauser, 1965)

Stress Turnover

Excess stress (STRESS) has symptoms of changed work

performance, high turnover, absenteeism, lateness (ACHIEVEMENT,

NEED.FULFILLMENT).

(Schuler, 1980; Margolis and Kroes, 1974)

Support Communications Teamwork

Mutual trust and support (ADEQUATE.ENVIRONMENT, IND.ORG.

CONTROL, INTERPERSONAL.REL), honest and open comunications

(COMM.EFFECTIVENESS), intrinsic motivation (INTRINSIC.REWARD),

equalization of power (PERSONAL.REL.COMPETENCE), teamwork

(TEAMWORK), individual control over methods (IND.ORG.CONTROL),

meaningful participation (EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION) and bidirectional

influence (TASK.COMPETENCE, INFLUENCE.ENVIRONMENT) are all critical

to individual growth (SELF.REALIZATION), achievement ACHIEVEMENT),

* excellence (EXCELLENCE), and organizational effectiveness

(EFFECTIVENESS).

(Argyris, 1964, 1971,"1975; Bass, 1971; Bennis, 1966; Katz and Kahn,1966; Likert, 1961, 1967; Maslow, 1965, 1970; McGregor, 1960, 1967)

4

I

". . .'- ..- . :...- ...-.- .- .-................................................................ "-..."-.."...-......'.-

09

Teamwork

Pride in group effectiveness (TEAMW1ORK) enhances cohesiveness

(COHESIVE).

(Newcomb, Turner, and Converse, 1955)

Trust Supervisor

Employees who trust their supervisor (LEADER.SUPER) identify

better with the organization (REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL).

(Muchinsky, 1977)

Two Way Comm.

a -. Greater organizational effectiveness (EFFECTIVENESS) is found

when open, two-way communications exist (COMM.EFFECTIVENESS).

(Rubin and Goldman, 1969)

,..--

0

- * -. -°-.--

.i - ' *,Pa'...*~ 'a

91

APPENDIX 2

COMMUNICATIONS EFFECTIVENESS

These variables measure the perceived quality of conuaunications

within the organization (COMM.EFFECTIVENESS). "[They] reflect the

extent to which organizational and interpersonal communications are

accurate, undistorted, unbiased, and complete [and the] degree to

which open, honest, easy two-way information exchange exists between

organization members and the leadership or management" (Secrist,

1981). Three main categories of communications are addressed:

production communication, maintenance communication and innovation

influence (Berlson and Steiner, 1964). The respondents were asked

to circle the number that best described their agreement or

disagreement with the statements provided.

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

Strongly Disagree Slightly Neutral Slightly Agree StronglyDisagree Disagree Agree Agree

ACCURATE.COMM

1 1. The conunications, directions and instructions I receive about

my work are correct and accurate (Muchlnsky, 1977; Klauss, 1977).

ANSWERS.AVAIL

S- 2. It's easy to get answers in my organization (Farace and

MacDonald, 1974).

."N.

, %

92

'4.AVAIL.INFO

3. The information I need to do my work is available when I need

it (Farace and MacDonald, 1974).

BELIEVABLE.COMM

4. When I am told something concerning the work I am doing, I can

believe it (Muchinsky, 1977; Klauss, 1977).

CONVINCING

5. I can convince others to my way of thinking (Berlson and

Steiner, 1964).

0. CORRESP.TIMELY

6. In my organization, correspondence and periodic reports are

done on tile (Roberts and O'Reilly, 1974).

FREEDOM.OF.SPEECH

7. I can criticize someone or something, if necessary, without

getting in trouble (Farace and MacDonald, 1974).

INFLUENCE.OTHERS

8. When I say something, people listen (Berleson and Steiner,

1964).

INFO .AVAIL

* 9. 1 can find out the information I need to do my job (Farace and

MacDonald, 1974).

"qF V

910

APPENDIX 2

COIMUNICATIONS EFFECTIVENESS

These variables measure the perceived quality of co:,klun idtions

within the organization (COII1.EFFECTIVENESS). "[Theyl reflect tile

extent to which organizational and interpersonal co:riunications are

accurate, undistorted, unbiased, and complete [and thel deree to

which open, honest, easy two-way information exchange exists between

organization nembers and the leadership or i:lanagemcnt." (Secrist,

*'.. 1991). Three main categories of coniaunications are addressed:

production conunication, maintenance coi.taunicaLion and innovtion

- influence (Berlson and Steiner, 1964). The respondents were (isked

to circle the nu, ber that best described their .Ayre_.ent or


I .......2........3........4........ 5 ....... 5 ........ 7


.. ,

ACCURATE. CO1

1 1. The coiivunications, directions and instructions I recciv, about

Ni:,y work are correct and accurate (Muchinsky, 1977; Klauss, 1977).

ANSWERS.AVAIL

2. It's easy to get answers in wy orgnariZtiofl (Farace trid

Mdcf~onald, 1974) .

S. i

-- --

92

V AVAIL INFO

3. The information I need to do iriy work is available when I need

it (Farace and MacDonald, 1974).

BELIEVABLE.COfMM

4. When I am told soinething concerning the work I ai doing, I can

believe it (fMuchinsky, 1977; Klauss, 1977).

CONVINCING

5. I can convince others to my way of thinking (Berlsonri nd

* Steiner, 1964).

0.) CORRESP.TIMELY

6. In my organization, correspondence and periodic reports are

done on time (Roberts and O'Reilly, 1974).

.. " -~FREEDOM.OF.SPEECH

7. I can criticize so.mieone or soi.ething, if necessary, without

getting in trouble (Farace and MacDonald, 1974).

INFLUIENICE. OT!IERS

.9. 11hen I say so.iething, people listen (Berleso| and Steinrer,

1964).

IFO .AVAIL

* 9. I can find out the inforration I need to (do iy jot) (F.,roce did

M..cDonald, 1974).

-..

0

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

93

OPEN. COM4UN I CAT I OIS

10. 1 can say anything I want about ,.y job to ily supervisors

(Farace and MacDonald, 1974).

REPORTS .TIMELY

11. Routine paperwork gets done without being delayed (Roberts and

O'Reilly, 174).

SATI SF IED. COMM

12. I am satisfied with the Way I find out the things I need to

know (Farace and MacDonald, 1974).

0

K Ao° L

"4,

0',

0'l

0 J

°6'

-,-... 4..4...44,-4,. .

*4 4.4 4 P- .. . *~.. .

94

APPENDIX 3

INDIVIDUAL VERSUS ORGANIZATIONAL CONTROL VARIABI.ES,,1.

These variables aieasure the perceived level of uutonoiy or

individual control within the organization (IND.ORG.CONTROL).

"[They] reflect the extent that behavior is controlled by the

organization vis a vis the individual. [They] relate to .he degree

of organizational control, structure, or stringency of policies,

rules, and regulations vis a vis self-control, flexibility,

* independence, or autonomy" (Secrist, 1981). The questions were

'V developed by Secrist, McNee and Paden (1903 ). The respondIents were

asked to circle the nutiiber that best described their arjree:.ient or

disagreement 4ith toe state.ienLs provided.

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

Strongly Disagree Slightly Neutral Slightly Agree Strongly- Disagree Disagree Agree Agree

BELONGING

1. I am made to feel an essential part of the work group.

-: FAIRNESS

. 2. fly suggestions and recoitiendations are considlered fairly.

* LEVEL.SUPERVISION*

3. My work is very closely supervised.

*Reverse ,,ieasures of autonot.ly.

-.-...- ,

950

4ANAGEMENT . RE SPONS

4. I think management is responsive to miy su.jqestions.

11ANAGEMENT.SUPPORT

5. When I make a decision, my boss backs meu up.

OPEN .EXPRESSION

6. I can express my feelings freely.

PARTICIPATION.DECISIOHS

7. I am provided with the opportunity to pirticipate in job

related decisions.

PARTICIPATION .POLICY

3. 1 am given the opportunity to participate in the for.,mildtion of

policy in my drea.

PERSONAL .JUDGEMENT*

-9. I am seldom able to use ;ay own judgeient in perfor.inj iiy work.

RESTRICTION S*

10. The procedures and regulations which govern )iy work tjrt, too

* restrictive.

TRUST

11. My boss trusts i;e to do d good job.0

* *Reverse rieasures of dutonoly.

100

::K.-. % %*- . " .... .; .?:d 2 ~b L A h

96

APPENDIX 4

INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS VARIABLES

These vtiridbles measure thd perceived qujil ity of interlh-rsonl

relations between ieiibers of the organization1 (INTERPERS0u1I..RFL).

"[They] pertain to the quality dfld supportiveriess of relation)s diofl

peers, subordinates, superiors, work groups, interfacin sy iibtits,

and organizations [and the] degree of work group or teamu

cohesiveness dnd sol idarity is mncluded within this dii.isioli'

(Secrist, 1931). The questio s were developed by Secrist, Ic01ce and

Paden (1933). The respondents were asked to circle the nuffier tit

best described their agreement or disagreeiierit with the statei.ients

provi ded.

1 ........ 2 ......... 3 ..........4 ................. )...... 7

Strongly Disagree Slightly Neutral Slightly Agree StronglyDi sagree Di sagree Aqrue, Agjree

CARE .OF .PEOPLE

1. The work group I work with takes care of its people.

C0,1PLAINTS*

2. 14y fellow workers coiipldin about the work they do.

*Reaverse invasures of interpersonal relations.

%

97

". . DESIRE.CHANGE*

3. Most of ny fellow workers would like to get transferrcd or

change jobs.

DISSATISFACTION

4. My dissatisfaction with -Ay work group is too s;,ill to .ention.

ENJOYMENT

5. I enjoy working with the people in uy work group.

GET.ALONG

. 6. Members of my work group get along well toqether.

-€ "€ GROUP.COORD

7. In miy job, we work together as a highly coordinated Ltdc.

GROUP.PLEASURE*

V 3. The gvoup I work with takes no great pleasure in doing their

work.

IANAGEMENT. CONCERN

9. I think .ianagei~int is concerned about the workilig environ, ient.

QUARREL*

10. Some muibers of this group quarrel a lot and h" ve bad feelings

towards each other.

* *Reverse veasures of interpersonal relations.

0

.. - .

98

TENSION*

11 . There are tensions between somie individuals which interfere

with the effectiveness of the group.

UNCOOPERATIVE*

12. Certain members of the work group are uncooperative.

SI.

.5%

%'

0

*Reverse mieasurcs of interpersondl relfitions.

----------------------.-..". -"" . "-" ,- ' -" """. "" . "' ... '- , "- .. "- ""-. " .". .- .-.. -. "."...'.'.' ,/. , ,=. -"W f. . .. -... . ... . . . . . . . .i

99

APPENDIX 5

JOB CHARACTERISTICS EVALUATION VARIABLES

These variables measure perceived characteristics of a person's

job. The evaluation questions were developed by l1ackman and Oldhan

(1930) (JOB.EVALUATION). The respondents iiere asked to circle the

number that best described their agreement or disagreenent with the

statements provided.

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


BREADTH.SIGNIFICANCE

1. Lots of people can be affected by how well iiy work gets done.

ENJOY .CHALLENGE

2. I enjoy the challenge of iy work.

GROWT H

3. 1 am really satisfied with the amount of personal gro ith and

0 development that I get in doing my work.

I D EJDEP ENDENT. TH 0UGHT

4. I have a lot of independent thought dnd action dSsoCi,it'd with0

y:i work.ft"

MEAN I NGFUL. WORK

* 5. The work I do on my job is very meaningful to cne.

a•.

S''

100

PERSONAL.ACCOMPL ISIIMENT

6. 1 get a feeling of worthwhile accomplishmient froo doinj this

job.

REPETITIVE*

7. My job is simple and quite repetitive.

SELF. FEEDBACK

S. I can tell by examining my work if I am doing d good job or

not.

SK ILL .VARIETY

0>- 9. My job requires me to do loany different things and use a large

variety of my skills and talents.

STIMULATING. 1ORK*

10. I would like to have more stimulating and challenging work.

TASK.IDENTITY

11. I feel I should take the credit or blanc for the results of my

work on the job.

* TASK. SI u,, , FICA1CE

12. If I do not do .,iy job well, it could cduse lots of problems.

S

liill *Reverse mneasure of ,job chiracteristics.

0

a..~,*e m aur of Jo c -

.-~-- a - - ~~.-.-.--~- N

101

TRIVIAL .WORK*

13. Most of the things I have to do on this job see useless or

trivial.

N

-.

-a.

it..

°.-.'*Reverse measure of job characteristics.

S-o

0-

102

APPENDIX 6

LEADER/SUPERVISOR COMPETENCE VARIABLES

These variables measure the perceived competence of the

finnediate leader or work supervisor (LEADER.SUPER). The questions

were developed by Secrist, McNee and Paden (1933). The respondents

were asked to circle the number that best described their agreement

or disagreement with the statements provided.

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


SUP .ACCEPTANCE

1. My supervisor accepts me for what I ami.

SUP .APPRECIATIVE

2. My supervisor appreciates the work I do.

SUP.CONFIDENTU,. I

. 3. My supervisor is confident of his auility.

SUP. CONSIDERATE

4. My supervisor is considerate.

* SUP.CONVINCIriG

- 5. My supervisor is convincing.

SUP.COOPERATIVE

6. My supervisor is cooperative.

.'-.......

,- -P. Aj ' , ~ J1 ',;. r ,

103

SUP .DECISIVE

7. My supervisor makes decisions edsily.

SUP.EFFECTIVE

3. My supervisor is very effective (knows wlat job needs tu be

done.)

N SUP.EFFICIENJT

9. My supervisor is very efficient (does a lot in a short timae and

does not waste time or materials).4-2

SUP. ENCOURAG ING

10. My supervisor is encouraging.

SUP.FAIR

11. My supervisor is fair.

SUP.HELPFUL

12. My supervisor is helpful.

SUP. IrAGIHATIVE

13. My supervisor is imaginative and creative.

SUP.LEADER

14. My supervisor is a leader.

* SUP.PRODUCTIVE

4. 15. My supervisor is very productive (guts i lot of the rijht jobs

.W

0done)

V,, % 7r N

w' -w' '- '- - .- '].''.'.'.' '- '...'.-V ."- "- ,-w -' '- .'wT.'. -w L-. ." -'-i'.''.. " ' ''- .'- '.-''- " " .; '- ". .'--'d '

104

0

" SUP .SUPPORTIVE

16. My supervisor supports me In the work I do.

-.

-i4

7,.°

'.°

-.

105

'

APPENDIX 7

PERSONAL NEEDS VARIABLES

These variables measure the individual's desire for certain

types of recognition or rewards (PERSONAL.MEEDS). The questions are

related to those of the organizational reward system in Appendix 9

(5 .rist, McNee and Paden, 1933). The respondents were asked to

circle the number that best described their agreement or


S.*....... 2. . ....... 3 .......... 4 ......... 5 ........ 6 ......... 7


NEED. FOR. ADVANCEMENT

1. I want to advance to iiportant work.

NEED.FOR.CHALLENGE

2. 1 would like to have more challenging work assign.uents.

NEED. FOR. COMiPETENCE

S 3. 1 want to be considered competent.

NEED.FOR.COMPLIMENTS

4, I want more coupliments, recognition and praise.

NEED.FOR.DIFFICULT.WORK

5. I want to have more difficult work dssi Jrh1Urnts.

0

'V

106

NEED.FOR.FEEDBACK

6. I want more feedback so I will know more about how I am doing

on the job.

NEED .FOR. IMPRESSION

7. I want may supervisor to be fiapressed with way work.

NEED.FOR. INFLUENCE

8. I want to have greater influence with my supervisors.

NEED .FOR. INVOLVEMENT

9. I want to help iiake important decisions.

NEED.FOR.JOB.SECURITY

" 10. I want increased job security.

NEED.FOR.LESS.SUPERVISION

11. I want my supervisors to check my work less often.

NEED .FOR.PAY .TIME

12. I want higher pay or more time off.

-4EED.FOR .PERFORMANCE

0

13. I want to have better performance ratings.

NEED.FOR.PROMOTION

0 14. 1 want to receive faster promotions.

NEED.FOR•RESPONS

15. I would like to have more responsibility.0--Z,

Sr,

107

NEED. FOR. SELF. CONTROL

16. 1 want to be able to decide how to accomplish my work.

NEED.FOR.VOLU ME

17. I want a greater volume of work.

0

p d,

S

0

ad9k .A.u

iI

108

.4?.

APPENDIX8

~PIHYSICAL ENII~RONMIENT VARIABLES

~These variables measure tihe perceived conditions of thle working

I , environment (PHIYSICAL.ENVIR). "[They) refer to the quality,

t addequacy, and supportiveness of the imm ediate work space or

i facilities. [They] reflect the extent to which thu phlysical-

-' architectural work space conforms to individual choice; and the

... degree to uzhich the individual is free to ,modify or adapt the

• iniliediate physical-architectural work space to suit personal

'-'.-'characteristics and preferences" (Secrist, 1031). Three elu,il-nts of

' ¢-'the physical environment (space, equipment and money) dre evaluated

I., in two categories: dvailablility and flexibility ISecrist, 1974).

The respondents were asked to circle the number that best described

-. .. . .their agreement or disagreement with the statements provided.

> . . . .2. . . . .3 .......... 4 ......... .5 ........ 6 ......... 7

m.Strongly Disagree Slightly Neutral Slightly Agree Strongly."D isagree Disagree Agree Agree

• ~ADD ITI ONAL. EQU I PMENT

.

-'.z 1. if I needed new equip;;ient to do my job better, I can isk for it

;44..

: and may get it.

r_ " ADD I T I ONAL . MONIEY

i:'] I 2. If I could improve my wiork by spending a little ciore mo)ney on

1 something, I can ask for it and may get it.

A J

109i

ADEQUATE. MONEY

3. There seems to be enough money available in my organization to

pay for the things which I need to do a good job.

ADEQUATE.WJRK. SPACE

4. The facilities I use to do my work provide adequate workspace

and appropriate working conditions.

ADJUSTABLE.SURROUNDINGS

5. I can change the arrangement and appearance of iiy work

surroundings if I want to.

APPROPRIATE .PLACE

6. The place where I work is appropriate for the work I do.

AVAIL .MONEY

-- p 7. When so-ething happens and there is a special need for extra

..'d money to do riy job correctly, the money is avialable.

CORRECT.EQUIP

S. The equipment I use in ,y jot is the right kind to to the work

I do.A

ENOUGH. EQU I PMENT

9. I have enough of the equipment I need to do iy jot well

0_-. ,. _; [OlJ I PHlENT. USE

10]. 1 can influence how the equipment in ily orginizd tion is tis,.d

0

%'...-.

% -2-2

~~FLEX I BLE. SURROUIO I IGS

11. If I neede d ,,iore space to dIo ny work or wliited to redrrdrlje tile

work location, I could ask dand yet it.

INFLUENCE. SP EID I NG

12. I can influence the wdy the ,;onuy is spent in tay ot'yirtizition1.

I--4t~ .4 ° # q . i. .° ' " .

]11

APPE!IDIX 9

ORGANJIZATIOJAL REI)ARD SYSTEM VAR IABI ES

These viriables measure the p rceived reo.,rds given in

recognition for good work (REWUOiD.SYS). "fThey] concern the

qual ity, quantity, and equity of rewards or incenLives. [Theyl also

includ the extent to which re;jrds ire conitingent i li/L I f

perfornance a, ,d contribution to the orgdnizaLion" (Secrist, IM).

The questions were developed by Secrist, Acd e ind Paden (IPP.)

* except as noted. Tile questions relate to the personal needs

variables in Appendix 7. The respondents were ,jsked to ,;iLICU the

nuber that best described their agreILeent or disagrkeeent wi tn the

stdte(lents provided.

I.. ... ................ I ....... 4 ......... 5 ........ 6 ......... I

Strongly Disagree Slightly Neutral S' ightly Agree StronglyDisagree Di sdyree Agree P .rte

°..W ADVANJCEMENT

1. If I do well , I will h-ve a chlince to advance to ioru i ipor t:Lint

* work.

C HALLEHG I NG. WORKV.

2. If I do well , I will re cei ve iore chal Ienirij wAork as jni w.nLs.

- {iHP ,IpE T NT

I . I do wk 1, I ii beL LOrIsid--red Coi.:1 . -1 1tlt.

0

A -A '

112I 1.

COMPLIMENTS

4. If I do vl1 , I will receive coaiplihients, rccoguiti ii mid

praise.

DIFF ICULT.WORK .RE WARD

5. If I do well, I will be assigned more difficult work

assignments.

WFEEDBACK

6. My supervisor always luts ,te know how I aci (loingy.

GROUP.FEEDBACK

[ 7. Host of the people in :,iy .ork group knotw howi well thoy .,re

performing their work.

PIP R E I SPRESSIVE .W1)RK

3. If I do -jell , my supervisor will be iipresseJ by iyq work.

I NFL UENCE

9. If I do welI, I -.ill have (jredter iriF Iu ice withI ,it mli: iors.

INVOLVEMENT

19. If I do well , I will beco.te involved in ilkinj iiporLaot

decisions.

J ) ~. SECUR ITY

0 11. If I do I 1I, I will Ihve increased job sectiit y.

.-0

,:-. "-. . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .-... -. ,. -. _, _.,.

113

LESS. SUPER VIS ION

12. If I do well, r.iy supervisors will check on i.iy work less uften.

PAY.TItlE

13. If I do well , I will receive higher pay or .iore tii,2 utI.

PERFORMANCE.RATI NG

14. If I do well, I will get better perforiance ratings.

PROIOT I ON

15. If I do well I will r;ceive faster pronotions.

RESPONSIBILITY

15. If I do well, I can expect greater responsibility.

SELF. CONTROL

17. If I do well, I will b:, able to deci (h how to orginize, plan

and accomplish my work.

VOLUiME. WORK

Hi. If I do viell, I will be given a greater voliii e of work.

%

i&

I

I

Ip

-114

APPENDIX 10

STANDARDS AND GOALS VARIARIES

These variables rieasure the perceived standards and goals of

the organization (STANDARDS.GOALS). They represent the "degree of

challenge of goals, objectives, and work [andl the level of

difficulty and clarity of go,3ls and standards" (Secrist, 1911).

~. .. The categories include: challenging objectives, worthwhile goals,

meaningful work, and understandable standards. The respondents were

0Y. asked to circle the numiber that best described their agreeicnt or

disagreement ith the stateoents provided.

I ........ 2 ......... 3 .......... 4 ........ 5............... 7

Strongly Disagree Slightly Neutral Sli)Ihtly Agree StronglyDisagree Disagree Agree Agree

AB ILITY.TO. DO. WORK

1. 1 have the ability, skill and knowledge to do the work ,issigned

to me.

,: BLE .GOALS

. I .,iderstand and agree with the overall goals and obhj -cLives of

-. iny organization (listot, Mitchell dnd Bell, 1971).

CONFUSED. EXPECTATIONS*

3. I am not dl]Ways sure what is expected of ,c.

*Reverse measures of standards dnd goals.

6

2p

* 115

DIFF ICULT. WORK

4. The work I do is difficult and uses all of ".'y abilities (Locke,

1968, 1975).

GOAL.ACHIE VEMENT

5. I really feel good uhen I meet or exceed the joa s amri

standards of my organization (Locke, 1969, 1975).

KNO ULEDGE.OF JOB

5. I know a lot about iy job.

NEEDED.•1ORK

7. The work I do really needs to be done.

NEGLECTED. WORK*

8. Soi.ietii:ies I think there is i!iportarnt work in itay orjailiza ioll

that is being neglected.

OVERLOADED*

,. I have so ;auch to do, I raroly get thinyus (Iorty on L.u.4w'o

TASK .CONTINUITY

- 10. I always finish the work I start (Fack:!irn and O.dha.-i, IHol))

IRK . IDENTITY

11 . When I finish an dssigmiurit, others knoa how ,+ji of u j, I

did (llacklnan and Oldha,,, 193)).

0 *Reverse measures of standards and goals.

''k-% JC

4W .'

6 ". -. " . -.. ,,'.. '.. , " , . .. w . " ", - - ,.- .,

116

APPENIDIX 11

ORGANIZATIOMIAL STRESS VARIABLES

These variables measure the perceived dysfunctioia l str Lss in

an o y' nization (STRESS). rhey measure "the quantity Laid typt; of

stress induced by the organization including role conflict, role

a.miguity, interpersonal friction, ianage~ient pressure, airr1 other

sources of dysfunctional stress within the work environm ent"

(Secrist, 1931). The questions were developed by Secrist, I.IJe;,

and Paden (1933). The respondents were asked to circle the nu,;iber

that best described their agreement or disyJre2eint With thO

statemdents provided.

1 ........ 2 ........ 3 ....... . .. ....... 5 ........ 6 ......... 7

Strongly Disagree Slightly Ieutral Slightly Agree StronglyDisagree Disagree Ayr'ee Ajree

APPEAR.BUSY

1. In iay job, I have to always look busy.

CONFL ICT.ASSIGNlHENT

2. I frequently receive conflicting work assignJiernts.'p..

C'ThFLICT.DEMAMDS

3. I am not ible to satisfy the conflicting demiindIs of ijw.,.

CoINFL ICT .VALIJES

4. I irm frequently expected to do things against iiy bt.tter

Z j udge,;ient.

117

CONFUSED.PLAMIING

5. Confusion exists in tile planning and organization of work

projects.

INFORMATION.AVAIL*

S. I can always get tile inforo;ation I need to do :.y job wolIl.

LACK.OF.AUTHORITY*

7. I am given enough authority to carry out the work I j,:i

responsible for.

LACK.OF.INFLUENCE

3. I am not able to influence the decisions Wnit affect iie.

PRESSURE

9. This organization generdtes a lot of prussure.

IItiCLEAR.RESPONS

10. Hy exact responsibilities on tile job are unclear.

(NNECESSARY.ATTEN

11 1. Tile managei:lent of this organization sp,.ends too i.IuIJh atLc:iton

on unimportant details.

!USE.OF.RESOURCES

1?. This organi zation' s way of using resources (it :r, ,, (lIy IrI

- .iaterial) is frustrdting.

* *Reverse ,ieasures of stress.

%.-

Sb . . .. . . . . . .

APPENDOIX 12

111TEIMEDIATE VARIABILES

This appundix lists vdridLules used by tt! (2xLl't SyStC I IS

interiediate vailues. Somie of the intermeLdiate variables jr

co~iibiriations of speci fic individuadl dtti tLPLS. So0cir 11t r~I )UsI t Of

behiavior rules applied to other variables. The iflte'1,J1j.j.

viriables dre listed with their (hrivatioll.

Interniediate Variables Derivation

AD)EQUATE .ENJV I RON,1ET Av,2rJ!J of: APPROPRIATE .PLACE

IFlCT7E Ln )-T[

Pf Mrf] ITFTQ. 11 11 5) I~ L

C911E SI VE [F'ori -Ippl iCa Lio l Of'CFI IV Lrife aInd TEA: iWINK rult-,

EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATIMr Aver'age of: PARITlCPATI1I.nfl'flP11i"

EXPECTATIOJIJ.'JF.RE4ARDS Average of: ADVANCE; IIJT

P PRFIMIM ~FCE RA T I I G

E XT R I NS IC .R EWA R D Averait. of: INFLIUENCE

M I Y RIAlC trI

p'TirM i -- -711

LF SS. SUPF QV Is S 01FEiWV~f,

PR1R*J.-F[FL')ii kk,1

6k

119

GR.1TH -D.EVELOP Avterdge Of: GWVOLTI

7 It CAfLT 1C11'fw-

It IPORTAN CE .OF -RE WARDS AVLI'dyQ Of: NLEO .F1)R. !)VA:1CL WIrr

IN F LI I E tIC E E Ny I R I E N T Average of: FLEX I ME. &IIRR)II:Io) [IG1

N1.. Tfl7 ll7 i inII!II C

1 1 qC

3,I IA SL EGE! Avei'jye of: EllJJLLE!JC I JN .

T 111 TI I ~~T.CliZl

rDTIFFTCIJ T. DT!)

FTT-Al lI -Y

IV!f 117ITfTy') T,

P~ERS'NAL . REL. -COi ETENCE Avc rugo of: Lp). C ILKIrrj)\rVL

Ip.~ r L! 1 rlI1zv f , isaid pFir-----

_CY I OF RATEF

,ijp iin rc- I ' r ~TA i C

0

w%.%

120

ROLE-.CONFLICT Average of: CONtFlISEf)PLAIIjrlIIJ4

Frrclwll~diTsSATISFACTIMn.WITH .G9IJP Avieraye of: GlzouP .PLEASURIE

ITVSTIIFT1'RGE

SKILL.VARIETY.110 Averagqe of: SKI IL.VAR IETYI.

TTS Sl ] r I CAICEiAYEDVTH7 S'I (MHrr NV i:;

T"rrvrAPTT rpyT\SK COETEJCE AV~rd~Ju of: Slp. FCIVE

SIJP7EFFTEC r~

STIPIYIHFTff lIT~IP-.) fCI S f *Vf--

TEA 1WOfK Averagye of*: QUJARRELTF~fqSVI!

% 1P1fl 'Trizl Vc

Z'

121

0

APPENDIX 13

PERFORMANCE HEASURES AND ELEMENTS

This appendix lists the perforlnance dnd satisfaction c:wtisures

used in the expert systen. Many different elements are used 1:0

express perfornance in different context. This list inclu(es a

iapping of [idny elements into the 1 iiited performance and

satisfaction :leasures. Sorle general elerients like "perfor,,ace"

map into more than one performance measure.

- Perforfiance Ileasures .lapping Elements

ACHI EVE[IENT Incl udes: Achi eve,.ientE f fortIlard wor'k1,ob attitudeJob irtt.Lr'eutMotivationPer'formianceP roduc ti ve

EFFECTIVENESS Includes: EffectivenessHental heal tlPerfordaalceP 'OduL L i ve

* Responsi vuriess

EFFICIENCY Includes: -fficieClcyJotb interest

>'("Pe!r forn~inn. e:o FPhys ic. I liro)l (!L1s> r-;L

tb- S

"S'' . - , w • - - , - - - . " " " " " " '','', '' . ,-w -, w '" ''' " W ' - " - ' .

S . :-'*' " ,# - - .. ': - , '-- "ill]lll,~-d, i ilhall dl uNlnl nnummmmnnm u

122

EXCELLENCE Includes: Coix:ii t:lien tContributionCreativity (if iuededlEi-ai nenceExcellenceInlnovation (if needed)Successful

REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL Includes: Creativity (if iueded)Identify with workI nnov Li ol (if iwe uded

tloi Vd ti onPerforn.incePotential

; .Suicce.ssful4

Satisfaction Measures

JOB.SATISFACTION Includes: Job interestrleaninjifulness of workHU i vjtLi oilPhysical problei,sQual i ty of 1 i tfSd ti s fdc ti onSet f-es u.Successful

NEED.FUJLFILLMENT Includes: Contri bution. Fill fi I hient

J Job atLitude1--1eaninjfulness of worklrintdl proble,is

',,. Ilorale

!loti vatedP r i deS

SELF.REALIZATIONI Includes: ConpetenceEo i nenceExcell lenceGrowth

* lIeiniItjllii lleSS O f workRealize otentid lSe I f-es Lee;l

S%

.I .:

h

4 . - . . % w_ j i , ,tW , r w w# ww~ wl, . ,, { _ , i? . tW- i - m - W - % '- , ." W "

0- .' .,. ' ._ , . . , .

123

APPENiIIX 14

COMIPUTER LISTPJG OF BEHAVIOR RULES

This appendix lists the LISP coi-puter code2 rlpresf*Iltini] the

behavioral rules. These rules are translated froo th,. behivioril

findings in Appendix 1. The rules are written ais iitho~k ,hich aire

activated by '!eSSdgeS. The iviessdge provides the~ person tu Ilk! 1ule.

Specially defined LISP functions GREATER.THAN, LES').I!I1% AVLIfGE.9FW

and LISP constants POSITIVE, NEGATIVE, LOU, HIGH are included in

Appendix 18. Other functions GET.VALIJE, PIJT.VALJE ire i~ii~hll

* the expert system Jevelop:ient shell.

The forni for a fra;-ie or uni t is:

(Unit nam~e(Creation and modification data)Superciasses listMeioiier of list

* C u;iiCen tMiber slot list

N Own slot list)

The form for a slot is:

(Slot nameLoci) value or proyrd!-.1Inheritance roleValue classDefault value listFacet list or cowfitent)

The forn- for a facet list is:

((Ficet Jid.ie

Facet locjl vdlueFacet role) ... )

124

(BEHAVIOR.RULES('HOLT' "10-Feb-1987 23 17.5 1 "HOLT" "21-Apr-1987 11.45 02")

(kENTITIES GENERICUNITS))(,CLASSES GENERICUNI PS)).This is the unit holds oil the behavioral rules as slots. The rules are trig

gere'i by methods"((AUTONOMY .CREA[lvi TY R5

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)(PROG (NEW VALUE)

(COND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET VALUJE PERSON 'IND ORG.CONTROL 'VALUEOWN)

POS IT IVE)(GREATER.THAN (AVERAGE OF (LIST (GET.VALUE PERAzON

SKxI LL. VAR IET

VALUE

(GEI.VALUE PERSONINDEPENDENT

THOUGHT

--WN )))POS IT I V E

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST 'Autonomy Creativity"(GET.VALUE PERSON 'IND ORG CONTROL VAL

UE 'OWN)))O(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'EXCELLENCE(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EXCELLENCE 'VAL

UE 'OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

REALIZAT ION.OF .POTENT IAL

(CONS NEW.VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON

REALIZATION OF POTENT lALVALUE'OWN))))

MET HOD

iVT IHOD)

(COMMENT'.Where employees have control over work methods (IND ORG CONTROL) ond wmti

e teir :h n~ed f or c reat iv ity ( SK ILL VAR IETY . INDEPENDENT TIIOICHT ) t h' re , is

:reesee 0nnoatiOn (EXCELLENCE, REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL) (Patchei 1 'Oi'(I

AUTONOMY GROWTH R49

( AMBDA (IT-ISUNIT PERSON)(PROG (NEW VALUE)

(COND ((AND (LESS THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'IND CiRG CONTROL 'VALUE OWV

* N) POSITIVE)

(LESS THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'GROWTH DEVElOP ''VAL UE 'WAN

SEGCA T IV E)(SETO NEW VALUE (LIST "'Autonomy Growth'

AVERAGE OF (LIO T i6ET VALUE Pf:.PZCN

I fi. ;-RG C

INT R 0 LVA LUE

C . T V A 'L -ERPSON

(PiuT VAL 1E PERSONN1 IlLb UJLF I L LMENT

125

,..9

(CONS NEW VALUE(GET VALUE PERSON 'NEED FULFILLMENT VALUE

OCfN ) )

(PUT 'ALUE PERSON'SELF REALIZATION(CONS NEW VALUE

(GET VALUE PERSON 'SELF REALIZATION 'VALUE

OWN)(T NIL))))

METHOD

(METHOD)

((COMMENT"Behavior is dominated by the most bosic group of unsatisfied needs. If a

utonom is low (IND.ORG.CONTROL) and chances for growth are low (GROWTH DEVELOP)

then satisfaction will be low (NEED.FULFILLMENT, SELF.REALIZATION) (MoslIG 197

(AuTONOMY.PRIDE R4


(COND ((GREATER THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON ' INDORG.CONTROL 'VALUE 'OWN)P0 ,1POSITIVE)

(SETQ NEW.VALUE (LIST "Autonomy Pride"UE--OWN))) (GET.VALUE PERSON 'IND.ORG CONTROL 'VAL

. -E 'OWN)

(PUT.VALUE PERSON* ' ACH I E I rMENT

(CONS ,i€v VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEV'M ',F 'VA.e LUE 'OWN)))

(PUT.VALUE PERSONr,."• 'E : C T ,.:'Y

(C'.. VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFI'LNCr VAL

U E OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'JOB SATISFACTION

:NS NEW VALUE(GET VALUE PERSON 'JOB SATISFACTION -VALUE

OWN))'%. ' (PUT.VALUE PERSON

'EED FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED FULFILLMENI 'VALUE

OWN)(T NIL))))

METHOD(METHOD)

" NIL

((COMMENT

'Self control (IND ORG CONTROL) is related to greater job interest (ACHIEV

EMENT. EFFICIENCY , JCB SATISFACTION) and more prae (EED FiLFILLMENI) (Po!cnen7 l;7a) ") )

_M~ ~ i, A.T Olj my RI1 3

AMBCA

( THIIUNIT PERSON).,,. .,., (P RD

1.-,P NEh VALUE

, Al. No .NL AI LH I IAN ( I VA UL fi P k 0(J N I r, L i, l k NI k L ' L/ 1 JdU W

(GREATER THAN (GET vALLJE PERSON EFFEiTIvE PARTI(IPATi,iN 'ALI

,% POI T )I v E% L = E T" N ALW IAt E.' L r A I normy'

, A E RA,E OF LI ETET 4A IA E P EPRylt* Nt , ,, NLL , tT L

V A L UI L

((T V A F.LR',lfJ

%* %

%. ~%

"ALPL-A 6 A

126

EFFECTjvI PART IC IPAT ION

OWN)))(PUT VALUE PERSON

'JOB SATISFACTION(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'JOB.SATISFACTION *VAL

UE 'OWN)))(PUT VALUE PERSON

SELF REALIZATION

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'SELF REALIZATION 'VAL

u E 'OWN) ) ))(T NIL)))

METHOD(METHOD)

iJ..NI L(COMMENT

'Workers wont more autonomy (IND.ORG.CONTROL) and participation in deci3;

ns (EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION). Work is a crucial psychological role in develo.,ren

tof self-esteem andi identity (J08.SATISFACTION. SELF REALIZATION) (lipjorn, 197

(AUTONOMY.SAT ISFACT ION R7

LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)(PROG (NEW VALUE)

(SETO NEW VALUE (LIST 'Automony Satisfaction"(GET.VALUE PERSON 'IND.ORG CONTROL 'VALUE -OWN

*(PUT VALUE PERSON

JOB. SAT ISFACT ION(CONS FEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'J08.SATISFACTION 'VAL.

E 'OWN))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

NE ED. FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW. VA LUE (G ET .VA LUE P ERSON NEEDO.FULF IL LMENT VAL UE 'OWN))

(PUT VALUE PERSONSELF REALIZATION(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'SELF.REALIZATION4 ',ALLI

E OW'N)))))

METOD)

(commENTSelf control (IND ORG.CONTROL) is positively related to lor satisfact ion

(JGB SATISFACTION, NEED FULFILLMENT, SELF REALIZATION) (Bachman and T'jnnenbaoim.

k"'HALLENGE MANAGEMENT R35LAMBDA (THISuNIT PERSON)

~PROG (NE* ViALUE)(CONO ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'JOB CHALLENGE 'VALUE '0

* ,POS I T IVE )(GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'LEADER SUPER 'VAtu)E 'OW

:eOSITIvE))I SETO NEW VALUE ( LIST 'Chall Ienge Management"

(AVERAGE OF (LIST (C;ET.VALUE PERSONJob CHAL L

E .C E

* '' WN)

CET VALIJUL FE P l N

(PUiT VALUE PERSON'A( H I E mf Pi NT

L LCN N rlE '~A tIJE EL T L. 1) .i' _0~N ACH l t FM:

6

121

LU E 'OWN)))(PUT VALUE PERSON

SELF REALIZATION(CONS NEW VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'SELF.REALIZATION 'VALUEOWN))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'JOB.SATISFACTION

(CONS NEW.VALUJE(GET VALUE PERSON 'JOB.SATISFACTION 'VALUE

OWN)))

A. METHOD(METHOD)

"JCobcaE lnT (JOB.CHALLENGE) and related management practices (LEAbER.SU

PER) are re levant to loyal ty (ACHIEVEMENT. NEED. FULFI LLME.NT) (Bowers. 1973. So*

ers. Franklin, 1973).")))(CHALLENGE.OPPOR'uNITt'.R36

(LAMBDA(THISUNIT PERSON)

A (PROG (NEW VALUE)(cOND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB.CHALLENOE VALUE 'OW

N) POSITIVE)(GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'GROWTH.DEvELOPMENT HO 'V

* ALUE 'OWN)POSI T IVE)

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Challenge Opportunity

(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET iALUE PERSONJUB CHALLE

VALUE* OWN )

(GET VALUE PERSON'GROWTH DEV

ELOPMENT HOVALIUE

(PUT.VALIJE PERSON

A 'ACHIEVEMENT(CONS NEW VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEM~ENT 'VAL

U E 'OWN))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'NEED.FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE(GET VALUE PERSON 'NEED. FULFI LLMENT VALUE -0

%N )(IT NIL))))

* METHODMETHOD)

P41 L

kCOMMENT"Cnaollenginy work (JOB.CHALLENGE) and opportunity to use valued abilities

GROW0TH DEVELOPMENT HO) are found to be important in retention (decisions (cailIt.~Jt((ACHIEVEMENT. NEED FULFILLMENT). (Mosbach. Scornlon, 1979)

~HA L LENGE R ESPONSI B IL I TY R3 2* ;LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

f -OND (AriD (GREATER THAN (G;ET.VALUE PERSON -JOB CHALLENGE -'VALUE OuWN I PC

(GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'ND ORG I-ONTROL vA LIJ E OWN

PC~I)V P; IuT VAI IF PrR OtJ

AihIILVLMLN I

(LIST 'Chal lenge ResponsibilityICONS ( AVERAGE OF IL IST (GET VALUE PERSON

JOjCb ALEG

KN

'VALUE

' OWN)(GET VALUE PERSJN

'I ND ORG CONTRO

L 'VALUE'OWN)))

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VALUE -OWN))

(T N IL))METHOD(METHOD)N IL((COMMENT"Challenging work (4JB.CHALLENGE) should be coupled with liberal responsib

lity (IND.ORG.CONTROL) for best performance (ACHIEVEMENT). (Schultz, 1970) ")(CHALLENGE.SATISFACTION R34

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)(PROG (NEW.VALUE)

(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB.CHALLENGE 'VALUE 'OWN) POS I TIVE)

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST 'Challenge Satisfaction"(GET.VALUE PERSOtl 'JOB.CHALLENGE 'VALUE

OWN))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'NEED.FULF ILLMENT

* (CONS NEW.VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED.FULFILLMENT 'VALUE

OWN))*(Pli- 4-UE PERSON

SELF.REALIZATION(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'SELF.REALIZATION 'VALUE* OWN))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'JOB. SAT! SFACT ION

(CONS NEW.VALUE% (GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB SATISFACTION 'VALUE

OWN))(T NI L))

METHOD(METHOD)N NI L((COMMENT

'Job challenge (JOB CHALLENGE) is a primary determinant of job sotisfaciiF~j*n (NNEED FULFILLMENT. SELF REALIZATION. JOB.SATISFACTION) (Walsh, Tiber, Beelir.

1380. Schneider. Hall 1972).")))(COHESIVE.ACCEPT.R25


* (COND ((AND (GREATER THAN (GET VALUE i- -SON 'COHESIVE 'VAIIJE 'OWN) P

OSITVE)(GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'STANDARDS GOAIV VAlUE

POSITIVE))

(SETO NEW VALUE (LIST 'Cohesive Accept'(AVERAGE OF (IST tGET VALUE P I R30 N

tolIES I VE

(CET VALUL '~kON

*~~ **ilINOARDS

*V A L UI E*uWN I

(PUT VALUE PERSON* ACHIEVEMENT

6%

129

(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

LUE 'OWN)))(PUT VALUE PERSON

'EFFECTIVENESS(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS

VALUE 'OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'EFFICIENCY

(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY 'VAL

UE -OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL

(CONS NEW.VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON'REALIZAT ION.OF .POTENTILAL

'VALUE'OWN))))

(T NIL))))

METHOD(METHOD)NIL((COMMENT

"Highly cohesive groups (COHESIVE) are above overage in performance (ACHIE

vEMENT. EFFECTIVENESS. EFFICIENCY. REALIZATION.OF POTENTIAL) when the ;roup accep

ts the orgonizotions goals (STANDARDS GOALS) (Seasnore, 1954).")))

(COHESIVE.GOALS.R23(LAMBDA(THISUNIT PERSON)(PROG

(COND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION 'VALU

E 'OWN)POSITIVE)

(GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'STANDARDS.GOALS ALUE -OWN)

POSITIVE)(GREATER.THAN ; ,ET.VALUE PERSON 'COMMEFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE 'OW

N) POSITIVE)(GREATER THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'REWARD SYS 'VALUE 'OWN) POSIT

lyE)(LESS.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'LACK.OF.INFLUENCE 'VALUE 'OWN) P

OS IT IVE)(AND (LESS.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE -OWN) HIGH)

(GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OWN) LOW)

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'COHESIVE

(LIST "Cohesive Goals"(CONS (AVERAGE OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSON

'EFFECTIVE PART

I ICIPATION'VALUE'OWN)

(GET VALUE PERSON

'STANDARDS GOAL

VAt UE'OWN)

(C I VALUE PER', ON'COMM EFFECTIVE

NE SS'VALUE

'OWN)I ET VALUE PEkSCN

V' A IAL1'''VA)[ Ut' (WrJ)

I (GET VALUE PER:HON

%,- r

130

'STRESSVALUE'OWN))))

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'COHESIVE 'VALUE 'OWN)))))(T NIL))))

METHOD

(METHOD)

NIL

((COMMENT"Cohesive groups (COHESIVE) generally demonstrate universal participation

(EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION). have clear understandable objectives (STANDARDS GOALS)

nave frank open communications (COMM.EFFECTIVENESS), have integrated values and

needs (REWARD.SYS). share mutual influence (LACK.OF.INFLUENCE) and are willing

to deal with conflict (STRESS). (Likert. 1961. McGregor. 1960).")))

(COHESIVE.IDENTIFY.R24(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

(PROG NIL(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'COHESIVE 'VALUE 'OWN) POSITI

yE)(PUT VALUE PERSON

'REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL(LIST "Cohesive Identify"

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'COHESIVE 'VALUE 'OWN))))

T N ITL

METHOD(METHOD)

NIL

((COMMENT"Cohesiveness (COHESIVE) is linked to identification with the work organiz

ation (REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL). (Patchen, 1970) ')))

(COHESIVE.NON.ACCEPT.R26


(COND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'COHESIVE 'VALUE 'OWN) P

OS IT I VE)(LESS.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON "STANDARDS GOALS 'VALUE 'OW

N) NEGATIVE))

(SETO NEW VALUE (LIST "Cohesive Non Acceptance"(AVERAGE OF (LIST (- (GET VALUE PERSON

'COHESI

VE

'VALUE

'OWN))

(GET.VALUE PERSON

'STANDARDS

GOALS'VALUE' ,VW ) ) ) )

(PUT VALUE PERSON

'ACHIEVEMENT

' (CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VALUE 'OWN)))

(PUT VALUE PERSON' EFFECTIVENESS

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'EFFETIVENESS

VALUE 'OWN)))

(PUT VALUE PERSON

EFFICIENCY

* (CONS NEW VALUE (GET 'VALUE PERSON EFFI'IENrI 'VAL

(PUT VALUE PERSON

REALI'A[ION OF POTENTIAL

(CONS NEW VALUE

,LT VALUE PERSON

REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL

VdkLUE

"OWN) i

% A

131

(T NIL)))MEHO(METHOD)

(COMMENTHighly Cohesive groups (COHESIVE) perform below overage (ACHIEVEMENT. EFF

ECTIVENESS. EFFICIENCY, REALIZATION ;F POTENTIAL) it the group does not accept th

e organizational goals (STANDAROS.GOALS). (Seoshore, 1954)))

(COHESIdE.PROOUCTIVE R27

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)(PROC (NEW.VALUE)

(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'COHESIVE 'VALUE -OWN) POSITI

yE)(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Cohesive Productive"

1%(GET VALUE PERSON 'COHESIVE 'VALUE 'OWN

(PUT.VALUE PERSON

CNI EEMENT (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

LUE 'OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'EFFECTIVENESS

(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS

VALUE 'OWN))))(T NI L))

METHOD(METHOD)

N NI L((COMMENT

"Cohesive groups (COHESIVE) are typically more productive (ACHIEVEMENT. EFJ. FECTIVENESS). (MILLS, 1967).")))

COMM.EFFECTIVENESS. R37

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'COMM.EFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE 'OWN) PO

S IT I V E(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'S. 'EFFICIENCY

(LIST "Comm Effectiveness"

(CONS ( GET .VALUE PERSON 'COMM EFFECT IVENJESS ' VALUE'OWN)

kuET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY 'VALUE 'OWN)))

ETO (T N IL))METHOD)

((COMMENT..The communications system (COMM EFFECTIVENESS) ties together efficiency a

* ~.no resource use (EFFICIENCY) (Berlo in Foroce and MacDonoid, 1974) " ))

(COMMITEMENT CMM R22(LAMBDA (THISuNIT PERSON)

0 1kPiOG NIL

(COHC ((AND (GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'STANDARDS GOAL-3 'VALUE

POSI TI VE)

(GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'COMM EFFECTI\VLNESS 'VAL

:.r uE 'CWN)POSI TI VE)

* K REATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'INTERPERSONAL~ REL 'VALU

POS I T I V E

(PUT VALUE PERSON

C 011E S IVF

I *1)Nc AVERAE[ OF (L I t (GET VALIt F'-L~'

NLAF*

-jA

%0

132

VALUE-\ OWN )

(GET VALUE PERSON

COMM. EFF

'VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON* JT ERPER

SONAL.REL VAU

' OWN )) )

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'COHESIVE 'VALUE 'OWN)))

(T N IL))METHOD(METHOD)N IL

(COMMENTGroups with greater commitment to goals (STANDARDS GOALS). more open coimm

unication (COMM EFFECTIVENESS) and more friendly interpersonal relations (INTERPE

RSONAL.REL) manifest cohesiveness (COHESIVE). (Secrist. 1981).")))

(DISTRUST.RIOLAMBDA(THISUNIT PERSON)(PROG

N NI L(COND((AND (LESS.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'TRUST 'VALUE 'OWN) NEGATIVE)

(GREATER.THAN (GET '4ALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION 'VALUE 'OW

N) POSITIVE))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'SELF.REALIZAT ION(LIST "Distrust"

(CONS (AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET.VALUE PERSON 'TRUST 'VALUE

OWNI((GET VALUE PERSON

'EFFECTIVE PARTICI P A T I ON

'VALUE'OWN)

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'SELF REALIZATION 'VALUE *OWN))

(T N IL))METHOD(METHOD)N IL

((COMMENT'In a highly porticpative environment (EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION). if-there

S dist rust (TRUST). it destroys concerted act ions (SELF REALIZATION) (Rosenfelnil Smiith', 1967) ")))

EXTERNAL.CONTROL R11

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

(PROG (NEW VALUE)

(CCNO (LESS .THAN (GET VALUE PERSON ' IND ORG CONTROL 'VALUE 'OWN) P0

S I T I v E

( S E T N EWJ V A U ( L S T G ET I V A L U E P R S O N IA N D O RG , C O N T R O L 'V A L

% (PUT.VALUE PERSON

'ACHIEVEMENT

CONS NE * VA LUE G E T VALIE Pt'RLUN *- IL EVE MENj T *VA

L i OWN))

(PUT VALUE PERSON

'EFFICIENCY

(CONC N4EW VALUE (GET VALHE FF'RN *EFF 1. 1( f *j. VAL

- U: OWN)

6r

133

(PUT VALUE PERSON.JOB SATISFACTION

(CONS NEW VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB.SATISFACTION 'VALUE*, OWN)))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'NEED.FULFILLMENT(CONS NEW VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED.FULFILLMENT 'VALUE


'ACHIEVEMENT

(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

LUE 'OWN))))N. (T NIL))))


"External control (INO.ORG.CONTROL) is less effective because it contributes to psychological withdrawl (call it job interest) (ACHIEVEMENT. EFFICIENCY. JO8 SATISFACTION) and diminishes willingness to contribute (coil it job uttitude)NEED FULFILLMENT, ACHIEVEMENT). (Argyris. 1972).")))

(FULFILEMENT.GROWTH.R46(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

(COND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'IND.ORG CONTROL 'VALUE 'OWN)* POSITIVE)

(GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'GROWTH.DEVELOPMENT 'VALUE -OW

N) koSITIVE))(PUT VALUE PERSON

'NEED.FULFILLMENT(LISP "FULFILLMENT Growth"

," .' (CONS (AVERAGE OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSON

jMPORTAfICE OFREWARDS

'VALUE'OWN)

(GET VALUE PERSON'REWARD SYS'VALUE

'OWN))(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED FULFILLMENI VALUE

OWN)))))(T NIL)))


'Higher order need gratification (NEED FULFILLMENT) is related to the auto

nomy of the job (IND ORG CONTROL) and the growth experiences of the job (GROWTH D* E4EL.PMENT HO) (Lawler, Hall, 1970) ')))

(INTEREST SUPERVISOR.R44

'LAMBDA ,THISUNIT PERSON)(PROG (NEW VALUE)

(COND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON SKILL VARIETT HO 'VALUE

OWN)POSITIVE)

(GREATER THAN (GE T VALUE PERSON 'JOB CHALLENGE ' ALUE '0• Aw , POSITIVE)% (GREATER THAN (GET VAt lJE PERSON L EADER SUPER vkJ UE OWW." N POSITIVE))

(SETO NEW VALUE (LIST 'Interest ' uptrvit. r'

(AVERAGE OF ( L. IST kLET VALUE FEk-tN

IE T HO''" VAtL [j

OWN

K_' 134

0(GET VALUE P E RSONJOB CHALL

ENGE' VALUE-OWN )

(GET.VALUE PERSON

NPER 'LEADER.SU

*VALUE

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'JOB. SATISFACTION(CONS NEW.VALUE

OWN)))(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOE SATISFACTION 'VALUE

(PUT.VALUE PERSON

EFFICIENCY(CONS NEW-VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY *VAL

UE 'OWN)))* (T NI L))

METHOD(METHOD)NIL

((COMMENT"Interesting work (SKILL.VARIETY.HO. JOB.CHALLENGE) and a good supervisor

(LEADER.SUPER) produce job satisfaction (JOB.SATISFACTION) and efforts ot efficle* flcy (EFFICIENCY).")))

(INTERPERSONAL.REL.R12

_N' (LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

(PROG (NEW.VALUE)

N) PSITVE)(CONO ((GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'INTERPERSONAL REL 'VALUE 'OW

(SETO NEW-VALUE (LIST "Interpersonal Relations"(GET.VALUE PERSON 'INTERPERSONAL REL 'V

ALUE 'OWN)))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'ACH IEVEMENTI(CONS NEW ,-iJE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

LUE -WN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON'REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL

(CONS NEW.VALUE

'VALE -ON)))(GET.VALUE PERSON 'REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL

(PUT VALUE PERSONJO.STISFAC TION

(CONS NEW VALUIEP (GEI.VALUE PERSON 'JOB SATISFACTION 'VALUE'

OWN),OWN))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

* 'NEED FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GT VALUE PERSON 'NEED FULFILLMENT 'VALUE

%dOWN))~(T NI L))

% METHODim~ETHOO)

r. I L

f (COMMENTPort icipat ion in across work groups and within work groups decision nakin

'INTERPERSONAL REL) resul ts in increased involvement ao c.rlimi tmerit (A( ' HIEVEMENT RELALIZATION OF POTENTIAL. JOB SATISFACTION, NEED FULFILLMENT) U riv er nc Mic

Iel 17 6 1(INVOLVEMENT RP52

(LAMBDA (THISuNIT PERSON)

(PROG (NE* VALiUE)(CG (AND (GREA TER THAN (GE T V ALU E P ERSON I NVOLV EMEN T V A LUE OWN

%V'-p.

0%% p

'p . eA f! .- -'r

4 135

)POSITIVE)(GREATER.THAN (GETVALUE PERSON 'NEEO.FOR INVOLVEMENT *V

ALUE 'OWN)POSI TI VE))

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Involvement"

E -ON)))(GETVALUE PERSON 'PHYSICAL ENVIR *VALU

(PUT.VALUE PERSONN 'JOB.SAT ISFACT ION

(CONS NEW.VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB.SATISFACTION 'VALUE

OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

NEED. FULF ILLMENT(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED FULFILLMENT 'VALUE

OWN))))(T NIL))))


"Job involvement (INVOLVEMENT. NEED.FOR.INVOLVEMENT) isoa potent moderatorof organizational envi ronment (PHYSICAL.ENVIR) and individual sotistocticn (JOB.

SATISFACTION. NEED.FULFILLMENT). (Batiis. 1978),")))(LACK.OF. STRESS .R21


(CONO ((LESS.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OWN) LOW)(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Lack of Stress"

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OWN))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'ACHI EVEMENT

(CONS 4 VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEM.ENT 'VA,


'EFFICIENCY(CONS NEWYVALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY *VAL

UE'ON)(PUT.VALUE PERSON

(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESSVALUE 'OWN)))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'REALIZATION OF.POTENTIAL


'REALIZATION OF.POTENT JAL'VALUE'OWN))

(T NI L))

MET HOD(METHOD)IN IL

4,. (COMMENT"Lack Of any job stress (STRESS) ot all may cause a negative cle-'ation fro

% ~ r nominal functioning (ACHIEVEMENT. EFFICIENCY. EFFECTIVENESS. REALIZ'ATI61 OF POT4 Er4T [A L , (Beenr. fle~mnn, 1975, Schuler. 1980, Wherry ond 1-urron, lgbto I )

(LADER C. MATE R20

LiAMBDA ( THISUNI T PERSON)(PROG (NEM VALUE)

(CON1F AND ( LESS THAN (CLI[ VALUEF FERSUN ' I [PA()[F, 'SIIPf' V" ',1 ij t

4L .,A I I LI)

LESS THAN (GET VALUJE PERCON 'OVERAL I ('I IMATf ' Al 'IF 'Ci Y% N N L .ATI V E)

4 ~(SETO NEW VALUE (LIST "Leadjer Ci mate"

% "

N%%A 136

(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET.VALUE PERSON

LEADER.SUPER

'VALUE.OWN )

(GET.VALUE PERSON'OVERALL.C

L [ MA TE

9'. 'VALUE

(PUT.VALUE PERSON N

JOB. SAT ISFACT ION(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOBSATISFACTION 'VALUE"N OWN))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

EFFI[CI ENCY(CONS NEW VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFF'ICIENCY 'VAL

uE 'OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

EFFECTIVENESS(CONS NEW VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS

% .1 VALUE -OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL%-A (CONS NEW.VALUE* (GEI.VALUE PERSON

REALI ZATION.OF POTENTI[AL' VALUE'OWN))))

(T NIL))))METHOD

NIL

((COMMENT"Leader behavior (LEADER.SUPER) and organizational climate (OVERALL CLIMAT

E) contribute to increased accidents and injury (EFFICIENCY, EFFECTIVENESS. JOB.SATISFACTION. REALIZATION.OF POTENTIAL). (Butler and Jones. 1979)))

(MEANINGFUL.WORK R50(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

kPROG (NEW VALUE)(COIJO ((AND (GREATER.THAN (AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET.VALuE PERSON

'SKILL VARIETY HO

'VALUE' OwNl)

(GET.VALUE PERSON'TASK :DENTIT

Y

(GET VALUE PERSONTASO COtITINu

I~l T

(GET VALUE P fR' CNr

T A CN 1 F I

V AL) CI

P051I T I YE

(GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON I ND ORG CONTROL VA L UEOWN

POS I TIVE)

0 PSIIV))(GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'REWARD SY'S 'VALUE OWN,

% A

137

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Meaningful work"(AVERAGE OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSON

* mEAN INGFUL WORK

'VALUE*OWN)

(GET VALUE PERSONI ND ORG .C

ONTROL' VALUE*OWN )

N. (GET.VALUE PERSON

% 'VA LUE

*OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

JOB. SATIS FACT ION(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB.SATISFACTION 'VALUE


% 'NEED FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW.VALUE

OWN)))(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED FULFILLMENT 'VALUE

*(PUT.VALUE PERSON'ACHIEVEMENT(CONS NEW VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

LUE ' OWN))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

EFFECTIVENESS(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS

VALUE 'OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'EFFICIENCY(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY 'VAL

UE 'OWN))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'REAL IZATION.OF POTENTIAL(CONS NEV.VALUE

(GET VALUE PERSON

'REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL'VALUE

(T NIL)))) 'W ) )

ME THOD(METHOD)

N IL

C(COMMENT0 'It workis meaningful (SKILL VARIETY HO, TASK IDENTITY, TASK CONTINUITY.

TASK SIGNIFICANCE) in on autonomous environment (IND ORG CONTROL) and fttering opprDpriate rewards (REWARD SY'S) then workers will be rhighly motivated (JOU SATISFA

C T !ON . NE ED FULF I LLMENT , ACH IEVEMENT , EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY. REALIZATION OF P3TENIIALI (Hackmcln. Oldham 1975, 1976) ")

MOTIVATION SKILL USE R9

j,_AMoDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

PUT VALUE PERSON

'jO8 MOTIVATION

(LIST "Mat ivation Sk ill Use"(CONS (AVERAGE OF (LIST (GET VALUJE PER ON

I LL V AR I E I T ti

OWN ,N

(GET VALUE PE R -ON

I ND OJR; -ONTROL

0 V Al uE

6i .% p

1383

4 'OWN)

LUE OW1)))(GEI.VALUE PERSON 'REWARD SYS 'VA

(GET VALUE PERSON 'JOB.MOTIVATION 'VALUE 'OWN)))))METHOD(METHOD)N IL((COMMENT

"Job mativat ion (JOB.MOTIVA1'ION) is porportianal to use of skills (Sit ILL..VAR IETY) individual control of work~ (IND ORG.CONTROL) and feedback (REWARO.SYS).(Hackman and Oldham, 1980)")))

(OVERALL CLIMATE R17(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

% (PROG NIL

(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'OVERALL CLIMATE 'VALUE 'OWN)POSITIVE)

(PUT.VALUE PERSON

*NEED.FULFILLMENT(LIST "Overall Climate'

(CONS (GET.VALUE PERSON 'OVERALL CLIMATE *VA

LUE 'OWN)(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED.FULFILLMENT 'V

ALuE 'OWN)))(T NIL))))

METHOD(METHOD)

0 ((COMMENT"Tne job sett ing and organizational environment (OVERALL.CLIMATE) is a pr,

mary source of need satisfaction (NEED.FULFILLMENT). (Secrist. 1981).')(PARTICIPATION. INVOLVEMENT. R8

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)(PROC (NEW VALUE)

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Participation Involvement'

LUE 'OWN)(GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATiON 'vA.

(PUT VALUE PERSON

'JOB SATISFACTION(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'JOB.SATISFACTIOi 'VALU

E 'OWN))(PUT VALUE PERSON

'NEED FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED FULFILLMENT 'VALUE 'OWN)) )

(PUT VALUE PERSON

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'SELF REALIZAT'jr4 VALUE 'OWN)))))

METHOD

( METrHOD)

i 1 COMMENT

"Participat ye management can be effective to instill a sense of invoi~ement I (OB SAT ISFACTION) and meet higher order needs (NEED FUtLFILLMENT. SELF REAL12AT I ,N; (Rosenfelo and Smith, 1967)'))

(PART ICIPATION R6.AMBO A (T H I SLiIT PERSON)

P ROG (NEA A L UE)

*(CONC, ((GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON ' EFFECTIVE PARTICI1'AT I)N VAL-

Pr)'; I VT IV

jSETO NEW VALUL (1,1 1 Purticipatior((;E T VAL UE PERSON

Li1 I.. E - I L P-AR 11( AifI

'VA L. U EOiWN

* (PUT VALUE PERSON

%0

% t. - -. , %. -. %" % C 2 .

139

'ACH IEVEMENT(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

LuE 'OWN)))(PUT VALUE PERSON'NEED.FULFI LLMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED FULFILLMENT 'VALUE


'ACHIEVEMENT(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

';LUE 'OWN)))S' )(PUT.VALUE

PERSON

7:-' 'EFFECTIVENESS(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON

VALUE 'OWN)))(PUT VALUE PERSON

'EFFICIENCY(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY 'VAL

• UE 'OWN)))(PUT VALUE PERSON

'REAL IZATION.OF POTENTIAL

(CONS NEW VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON

'REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL'VALUE

* 'OWN))*i (T NIL))))

METHOD(METHOD)NIL

((COMMENT"Employee participation (EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION) improved job attitudes

ACHIEVEMENT. NEED FULFILLMENT) and performance (ACHIEVEMENT, EFFECTIVENESS. EFFICIENCY, REALIZATION OF.POTENTIAL). (Chaney. 1969; Scheflen, Lawler and Hackman, 1971 Vroom, 1963).")))

; 7(REWARD. IMPORTANCE.R45

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)SPROG (NEW VALUE)

(CONO ((AND (GREATER THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'IMPORTANCE OF REWARDSVALUE OWN)

POSITIVE)(GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'REWARD SYS 'VALUE OWN)

P .S IT IVE) )(SET NEW VALUE (LIST "Reward Importance(SEO N(AVERAGE

OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSON

- I MPYRTANCE OF REWARDS;:* VALUE

(GET VALUE PERSONREWARD SY

OWN))(PUT VALUE PERSON

'ACHIEVEMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON ACHIEVEMENT VAwftl

(FJT VALUE PERSUN

EFFECTIVENESS(CUNS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE LEk'jN LFFL( T ,'L!4LSL

(PUT VALUE PERSON{F F II LN: f

(CONL NEW VALUE (GET VALUE Pi k,'N EFF Il I LN( A

% % .

140

%~

% ~(PUTYVALUE PERSON'REALI ZAT ION.OF POTENTIAL(CONS NEAVALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSONREALIZATION OF POTENTIALVALUE

V.'OWN))))MAETHOD

(METHOD)NI L

((COMMENT

There soa strong link between reward importance (IMPORTANCE OF REWARD) wth job feedbock (REWARD SYS) and job performance (ACHIIEVEMENdT, EFFELT IEtIESS. EF

FICIENCY. REPA-ZATION OFPOTENTIAL) (Lawler. 1967) ")(REWARD NEEDS R43

.,'~..u". (LAMBDA

(THISUNIT PERSON)

(PROC (NEW VALUE)(COND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'EXPECTATION.Of REWARDS

%.a. VALUE 'OWN)POSI T IVE)

(GREATER.THAN (GET.VALuE PERSON 'IMPORTANCE.OF.REWARDS 'V

ALUE 'OWN)

P OSITIVE))(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST 'Rewards Needs"

(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSONExPECTATIO

N OF REWARDS

OWN)

(GET VALUE PERSON%~ 'IMPORTANCE

OF REWARDSVALUE

(PUT VALUE PERSONACHI EVEMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ArHI EVEMENT 'VAL

uE OWN))* -(PUT VALUE PERSON

'REAL IZAT ION OF.POTENT IAL

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VAL UE PtR-Otj 'ACHilf i Mtt~ VA L

E _,WN ))(PUT VALUE PERSON

- % JOB SAT ISFACT ION(CONS NEW VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB SATISFACTION 'VALUE '0

SWIN)

~- ~(PUT VALUE PERSON

* NEED FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE

* (CET VALUE PERSON 'NEED FULFILLMENT 'VALUE '0

(T N IL))

ME THOD

M4E T HO

* :OMMENTTre edu' ty theory soiys people at tempt to balance ripit efftort wl, t te re

t. r-js I ', l ece -t H13 n taPeC tat on- ( E PE(,TAT[G Ct RLWAtHL, 1it 'll ~ece- fl' e.0ilS jlml'RTANCL j) ILA~) h~~ .I *Jti a''AC

kA . ,*E T REAL IZAT ['~tJ )F POtENT) AL. JUB A,AI SrAC T I(O tlii , LI. j [ ftT AI I ),I MtN

-RC ROLE CLARITY R4,

- INCA ( TN I Si'2i, I T PERSONJ* PlrOG (NEWVAU

.4

0A d ' .

141

(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ROLE.CONFLICT 'VALUE -OWN) P

OS IT IVE)(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Reward Role Clarity"

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'REWARD.SYS 'VALUE -0




REAL IZAT ION.OF.POT ENT IAL

(CONS NEW VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON 'REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL

VALUE 'OWN)))(PUT,VALUE PERSON

JOB .SAT ISFACT ION

(CONS NEW VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB.SATISFACTION 'VALUE


'NEED. FULFI LLMrNT(CONS NEW VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED.FULFILLMENT 'VALUE

OWN);))(T NIL))))

METHOD* (METHOD)

N IL((COMMENT

"Feedback (REWARO.SYS) is amplified under conditions of role cloiriy (ROL

E CONFLICT). Job satisfaction (ACHIEVEMENT, REALIZATION.OFPOTENTIAL. JOB SATISF

ACTION, NEED.F'ULFILLMENT) appear to increase when goals ore established (Mitcne

(REWARD. WORK .R47

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)(PROG (NEW VALUE) 'EADSS'AU ,W)PS(COND ((GREATER THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON'RADSS'VLE'N)PS

% (SETO NEW VALUE (LIST "Reward Work"

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'REWARD SYS 'VALUE '0*~ ~ WN)

% (PUT VALUE PERSON'ACH IEVEMENT(CONS NEW VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

LUE 'OWN))).1/.(PUT VALUE PERSON

'EFFECTIVENESS

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS


* *EFFICIENCY

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIEN,.1 'VAL

JE O:WN ,)(PUT VALUE PERSON

REALIZATION OF POTENTIA L

(CONS NEW VALUE(GET VALUE PERSON

RECA LI ATION Or POTENTIA'.

*V 'A Ltj EOWN

METHODMETHOD,

IO0MMENT

~' ~If hard w.)ri' leads to fair rewards (REWARD Sfc% then people wrk hir ler

e e.e :1 qr~cv theory) (Ail,)E,,EMENT C FF c TI IVE N EOZ S El F I E~ P4 REfALt I -'AT I'iAj r P'Tt

%0

142S

TIAL) (Lowler, 1970; Porter, Lawler, 19680. Mitchell, 1979).")))

(REWARDS.SELF ESTEEM R5i


(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'INTRINSIC.REWARD 'VALUE 'OWNPOSITIVE)

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Rewords Self Esteem"(GET.VALUE PERSON 'INTRINSIC REWARD 'VA


'JOB.SATISFACTION

(CONS NEW.VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB SATISFACTION 'VALUE


'SELF REALIZATION(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'SELF.REALIZATION 'VALUEOWN))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'ACHIEVEMENT(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

LUE -OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

"NEED.FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW.VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED.FULFILLMENT 'VALUE0 OWN)) )

(T NIL))))

METHOD

(METHOD)NIL

((COMMENT

"Improved intrinsic rewords (INTRINSIC.REWARD) led to o feeling of self esteem (JOB.SATISFACTION, SELF REALIZATION). acc pk ,$shment (ACHIEVEMENt ) ono seIffulfilment (NEED FULFILLMENT). (Lawler. 1969).")))

-' (ROLE CLARITY.R19(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

(PROG NIL

(COND ((LESS THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON ROLE CONFLICT 'VALUE 'OWtl) NEGATIVE)

(PUT VALUE PERSON'JOB SATISFACTION(LIST "Role Clarity"

(CONS (GET VALUE PERSON 'ROLE.CONFLICT 'VALU

E 'OWN)(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB.SATISFACTION 'V

ALUE 'OWN)))))(T NIL))))

METHOD* ,METHOD)

((COMMENT"Lock of role clarity (ROLE CLARITY) is substanitally related to job tensi

ons, turnover ana proc vty to leave the job (JOBS ATISFACTiON) (Lyons, 1971)

'AT!SFACTION COMM ACHIEVEMENT R39-,'LAMBDA ( THISUNIT PERSON)

* PRO6 (NEW VALUE)(CON, llGREATER TIAN (GET VAlUE PERSON ',COMM EFFECTIVENESS 'VAIUE '0

p'.' r S IG T I VEPOSITIVE) SETO NEW VALUE (LIST "SotCsfoct,on fommAchievement'

-i CE T VA[ I'E ft P'jil. f MM [f it, lI i It _'• a{ L t OWN)

(PUT VALUE PERSON'ACH I EVEMENT

* (CONS NEW VALUE (NET VA( IuE PER',)tl ACH I EvI MEt r VA

..

------------------------- ----------------------n.i-

143


'NEED. FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE

OWN)))(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEEDFULFILLMENT 'VALUE

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'JOB.SATISFACTION

.1~ (CONS NEW.VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB.SATISFACTION 'VALUE


REALIZAT IONOF.POT ENT EAL


'REAL IZAT ION OF.POTENTIAL'VALUE'OWN)M))

(T NIL))))METHOD(METHOD)NIL((COMMENT

'When employees are satisfied with communications (COMM.EFFECTIVENESS). th

ey show a positive attitude towards management (ACHIEVEMENT, NEED.FULFIL-MENT), are more satisfied with their supervisors (JOB.SATISFACTION) and identify more wit

* 1M the orgonization (REALIZATION.OF POTENTIAL). (Muchinsky. 1977) ")

SAT ISFACT ION.COMM.R38

(LAMBDA (THISUNIr PERSON)(PUT.VALUE PERSON

JOB.SAT!ISFACT ION(LIST 'Sat isfact ion Comm'

(CONS (GET VALUE PERSON 'COMEFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE OWN)(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB SATISF'CTION 'VALUE 'O0WN))))

METHOD1' (METHOD)4N NI L

((COMMENT..job satisfaction (JOB.SATISFACTION) is related tooa number of communicati

Zons Variables (COM4M EFFECTIVENESS) Rbrt.ORli 1/)')

(SATISFACTION ROLE.CLARITY.R33(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON) 'OECNLC VLE-W)P(COND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON'RLCNLT'VUE OW)P

(GREATER THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON STANDARDS GOALS 'VALUE 'OWN)P01 I IVE)

(GREATER .THAN (GET .VALUE PERSON -I NO ORG CONTROL -VALUE ' OWN)

P051 I I VE(LESS THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OWN) HIGH)

* (GREATER THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON GPROWIH DEVELOPMENT VALUE 'OW

N ) POS IT IVE)(GREATER iHAN (GET VALUE PERSON REWARD SfS 'VALUE 'OWN) POSIT

(PUT VALUE PERSON'JOB SATISFACTION

(LIST "Sotisfact ion Role Clarity

21. (CONS (AVERAGE OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSON4

* ROI E CONFLICTV VA LIU E

% (IlOLl VALUE lL 'I-jts

C)WN )

(GECT VALUE P E R oCI

t.P4.0

144

-~ IND ORGCONTRO

R t~lVALUE, OWN )

(GETVALUE PERSON

mENT.HO 'GROWTH DEVELOP

%~ OWNJ)(GETVALUE PERSON

'REWARD SY'S

OWN) ))(GET.VALUE PERSON 'jOB.SATISFACTION 'VALUE

OWN)))(T N IL))

% METHOD(METHOD)

N IL(COMMENT

-' ~',job satisfaction (JOB.SATISFACTION) increases when clear goals (ROLE.GONF

LICT). goal planning (STANDARDS.GOALS), support and autonomy ( IND ORG.CONTROL),joc security (STRESS). development of capabilities (GROWTH.DEVELoPMENT 110) and a

performance contingent reward system (REWARO.SYS) . (Zul towski , Avery and Dewhi rst,1978) ')

(3iTANDARDS.AUTONOMY.R3

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)* (PROC NIL

(COND ((AND (GREATER.rHAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'STANDARDS.GOALS 'VALUE-OWN)

POSITIVE)(GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'IND.ORG.CONTROL 'VALUE

'OWN)POSITIVE))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'JOB. SAT ISFACT ION(LIST "Standards Autonomy"

(CONS (GET.VALUE PERSON 'IND.ORG.CONTROL 'VA

LUE 'OWN)(GET.VALUE PERSON 'JOB SATISFATION A

LUE 'OWN)))

(T NI L))METHOD(METHOD)

'N NI L((COMMENT

'Formalization and standarization (STANDARDS GOALS) diminish salilcjct~on(JOB SATISFACTION) when there iso lack of autonomy (IND ORG CONTROL), (James anc janes. 1976).")))

STAt.DARDS .CHALLENGE. R29

-AMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)(PROC (NEW VALUE)

(COND ,AND (GREATERrTHAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'STANDARDS GOAL, 'VALUE

POS I T I VE)(GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'JBt CHALLENGE'ALE0

(SETO NEW VALUE (LIST 'Standards Chal lenge'(AVERAGE OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSO)N

I ANDARDS

A'A'

I' At JL lL~' i'-u HALL

0A~ t, L

6o

-'-' - * * . ~-' ',- - -.--- ~ . - "v ~

145


ACH IEVEMENT(CONS NEW VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA


'EFFECTIVENESS(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS

VALU OW))) (PUT.VALUE PERSONEFFIC IENCY

UE ON)))(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY 'VAL

(PUT.VALUE PERSON% 'REALIZATION. OF .POTENTIAL-u" (CONS NEW VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON'REALI ZAT IONOF. POTENT IAL' VALUEOWN))

(T N IL))METHOD(METHOD)NI L((COMMENT

4 "Specific goals (STANDARDS GOALS) and challenging work (JOB.CIIALLENGE) req* uliat performance (ACHIEVEMENT. EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY. REALIZATION.OF POTENTI

AL).- (Locke. 1968, 1975)."1)))(STANDARDS.COMM.R2

(LAMBDA* . (THISUNIT PERSON)* (PROG NIL

E) (COND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'STANDARDS GOALS) POSITIV

(GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'COMM.EFFECTIVENESS) F-OSI

(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'JOB.SATISFACTION(LIST "Standards Comm'

(CONS (AVERAGE OF (LIST (GET.VALUE PERSON

GOALS

(GET VALUE P ERSON'C~mm EFFE

CT) VENESSVALUE

(GET.VALUE PERS)N 'JOB SATISFAC), 'VA

*LJE 'OWN)))))

(T NI L))METHOD

MET HOD)

N i

C OMMENT

Formalization and standardization (STANDARDS COALS) and laCk at aMbiquity

,OGM EFFECTIVENESS) (ire positively related to 3atifucttun (JOB SATI !AiTlCN)

* ()or.es oa Jones. 1976) "')))

<JAIIARDS EXPENCTAN' REWARD R48LAMBCA

TItNTPERSON)

U A VALUC~2L((AND (GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'STANDARDS GOALS 'VALUE OWN)

P,-_ S F

* (GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'REWARD SYS 'VALUE OWN POSIT

6%X C p

146

IVE)

(GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EXPECTATION.OF.REWARDS 'VALUEOWN)

POS IT IVE))(SETQ NEW.VALUE (LIST "Standards Expectant Reword"

(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET.VALUE PERSON

'STANDARDS. GOALS'VALUE'OWN)

(GET.VALUE PERSONREWARD SYS

' VALUE'OWN)

(GET.VALUE PERSONEXPECT AT ION OF.

%- REWARDS'VALUE

%-e 'OWN)))))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'ACH IEVEMENT

WN)))(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VALUE -0WN))) (PUI.VALUE PERSON

'EFFECTIVENESS

-OWN)))(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE

(PUT.VALUE PERSON* 'EFFICIENCY

(CONS NEW.VALUIE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY 'VALUE 'OW

N))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

REALIZAT ION.OF .POTENT IAL(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL 'VALUE'OWN))))

UT NIL-)% METHOD

(METHOD)NIL((COMMENT

'Clear challenging goals (STANDAROS.GOALS). reward distribution (REWARD.SY

S) and expectations (EXPECTATION.OF.REWARDS) increase performance (ACHIEVEMENT, EFF'ECTIqENESS, EFFICIENCY. REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL) (Mitchell, 1979)*')

(STANDARDS.R31(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

(PROG (NEW VALUE)(COND (T

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Standards"(GET.VALUE PERSON 'STANDARDS GOALS 'VAL

UE -OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

* 'ACHIEVEMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA*LUuE 'OWN)))

(PUI.VALUE PERSON

'EFFECTIVENESS

(CONS NEW VALUE(GET VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS 'AL~UE ZW*N

MEFTHOD

( MET HOD )Ni

(,jOMMENT5.iii i11. 55iiej ).us(',AN0)ARDl GOALS,) P'.Idiied (A(HlLVLOALN LFFEC

TIVEliESS) more than those *ithout assigned goals (White, Mitchell beji l 77)

CTAtiDARDS RE*ARDS R30

6%

7&jA P

147

N (LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)(PROG (NEW VALUE)

(CONO ((GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'STANDARDS-GOALS 'VALUE -OWN)POS ITIVyE)

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Standards Rewords"(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSON

(GETVALE 'VALUE

OWN)

(GE.VAUEPERSON

ENGE

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'ACHIEVEMENT



EFFECTIVENESSVALUE(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS

VAU OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'EFFIC IENCY(7 (CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY 'VAL

UE 'OWN)))*(PUT.VALUE PERSON

* REAL IZAT ION OF.POT ENT IAL


'REALIZATIDN.OF.POTENTIAL4 'VALUE

'OWN))))(T NIL))))

METHOD(METHOD)NI L((COMMENT

Incentives and rewards REWARD-SYS) ore more readily linked with pertormonce goals (ACHIEVEMENT. EFFECTIVENESS. EFFICIENCY. REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL) whengoals are well defined (SANDAROS.GOALS) (Kirchhoff. 1975. Locke, 1968, 1975) "

(STRESS.FRUSTRATION.R18(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

(PROG (NEW VALUE)(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE -OWN) HIGH)

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Stress Frustration"

p. (-(GET VALUE PERSON 'STRESS VALUE 'O111

U t-. ~ ERSON* 'EFFECTIVENESS

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS

VA..UE 'O*N)))

(PUT VALUE PERSON

'ACHIEVEMENT

LJE '3WN)))(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

(PUT VALUE PERSON* 'NEED FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE* ~ (61-T VALUE PER SON NELED F I JFILL ML IL ALijE

4.~ (1 N.l)))

N).%

148

((COMMENT

"Frustration (STRESS) leads to reduced productivity and lower morale (EFFE

CTIVENESS, ACHIEVEMENT. NEED.FULFILLMENT) (Lawrie, 1967).')))(STRESS.HEALTH.R14(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

(PROG (NEW.VALUE)I(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GETVALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OWij) HIGH)

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST 'Stress Health"

N))))(- (GET.VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OW

(PUI.VALUE PERSONEFF IC IENCY

(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY 'VAL

UE 'OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

EFFECTIVENESS

VALU -OW)))(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS


(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VA

LUE 'OWN))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'EFFECTIVENESS

(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS

p VALUE 'OWN)))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'EFFICIENCY

(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFICIENCY 'VALU E 'OWN))

(PUT.VALUE PERSONREAL IZAT ION. OF APOTENT [AL

(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON'REkL[ZxTI(ON 01F.POTENTIAL'VALUE'OWN))))

% (T NIL))))

N- METHOD(METHOD)NIL(COMMENT

"'Job stress (STRESS) provides a maladaptive response through adverse effect s on phInysic alI healIt h (EFF IC IENCY) , mentalI healIt h ( EFFEC TI VEIJESS ) jid pt;r f rmance

SCHIEVEMENT EFFECTIVENESS, EFFICIENCY, REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL) (McLean. 19

74) *)(STRESS SATISFACTION. Ri6

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)PR~OG NI L

(COND ((GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OWN) HIGH)

* (PUT.VALUE PERSON'JOB SATISFACTION(LIST "Stress Satisfaotion"

((GET VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OWN))j)

mE 7 HO'

5 MM E NTAr, employees mental health (STRESS) varies consistent ly wit lnot) Qtisfac

tr ijOB S ATISFACTION) (Kornhouser, 1965)*))S-TRESS TURNOVER R11,

AMLA jItl 1.0 NI t 'Lh'S1JN(PROG (NEW VALUE)

V U(COND ((GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON -,TRESS VLEOWNj HIGII

* ISETU liEW VALUE (LIST 'Stress Turr'J~er

J

-~ -'.--N

149

(- (GET VALUE PERSON 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OW

N))))(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'ACHIEVEMENT

(CONS NEW VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VALUE 'OWN)))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON'NEED FULFILLMENT

(CONS NEW-VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSON 'NEED.FULFILLMENT 'VALUE

OWN))))(T NIL))))

METHOD(METHOD)NIL( (COMMENT

"Excess stress (STRESS) has symptoms of changed work performance . high turnover, absenteeism. lateness (ACHIEVEMENT, NEED.FULFILLMENT) (Schuler, 1980; M

argolis and Kroe$, 1974).")))

(SUPPORT.COMM.TEAMWORK.R1


(COND ((AND (GREATER.THAN (AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSON'ADEQUATE ENV

ell IRONMENT

'VALUE'OWN)

(GET.VALUE PERSONRL' NO ORG.CONT.: .ROL

i! i: 'VALUE

'OWN)(GET-VALUE PERSON

' INTERPERSONA~L REL'VALUE

I 'OWN)))POSITIVE)

(GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'COMM EFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE OWN)

POSITIVE)(GREATER.THAN (GET.VALUE PERSON 'INTRINSIC.REWARD 'VALUE

'OWN)POSITIVE)

(GREATER.THAN (AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET VALUE PERSONPERSONAL REL

COMPETENCEVALUE

'OWN)

(GET VALUE PEk'RON.TEAMWORK

* OWN))POSITIVE)

(GREATER.THAN (GET VALUE PERSON TEAMWORK 'VALUE OWN) P

:OSITIVE)(GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON INDl ()RG COt CIRGI .ALUE

OWN iPOSITIVE)

(GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON EFFECTIVE PAR [(C PATIGNS VALUE 'CWN)% IPOSITIVE"

% .(GREATER THAN (A4ERkGE OF tLI5 1 ET VAtLJF PFR tPj" rA I ,OMP(ETE

% w N ,- t%J 'AVALUE

.. a % OWN

-N

.. .. ,... ... ,.......,,,.,,.,- ,.,; :;. -, ; ,'-

I50

(GET VALUE PERSON

INFLUENCE ENV IRONMENT

'VALUE

'OWN)IPOSITIVE))

(SETO NEW.VALUE (LIST "Support Comm Teamwork"(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (GET.VALUE PERSON

'I N. ORG. CONTROL

'VALUE

' OWN)(GET.VALUE PERSON,INTERPERS

ONAL.REL'VALUE'OWN)

(GET.VALUE PERSONi 'PHYSICAL.

ENVIR'VALUE'OWN)))

(PUT.VALUE PERSON

'SELF.REALIZATION(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GET.VALUE PERSON 'SELF.REALIZATION 'VALUE

OWN))(PUT VALUE PERSON

'ACHIEVEMENT



'EXCELLENCE(CONS NEW.VALUE (GET.VALUE PERSON 'EXCELLENCE 'VAL

UE 'OWN)))

(PUT VALUE PERSON'EFFECTIVENESS

'* (CONS NEW.VALUE (GET VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS


'SELF.REALIZATION(CONS NEW.VALUE

(GET VALUE PERSON 'SELF.REALIZATION 'VALUE

% .(T NIL))))

METHOD(METHOD)

i(COMMENT

'MutuOl trust and support (ADEQUATE.ENVIRONMENT. INO ORG CONTROL. INTERPERSONAL REL,. honest and open communications (COMM.EFFECTIVENESS). intrinsic motiva

* I ,,n (INTRINSIC REWARD). equalization of power (PERSONAl RLL COMPETENLI). teumwork tTEAMWORK). indivi dual control over methods (IND.ORG CONTROL). meaningful porti

c s pat on (EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION). and bidirectional influence (TASK COMPETENCE.INFLUENCE ENVIRONMENT) are oil critical to individual growth (SELF REALIZATION).

acn evement (ACHIEVEMENT) excellence (EXCELLENCE). edf orgonizat,onal eftectver ess (EFFECTIVENESS) (Argyris, 1964, 1971, 1975. Bass. 1971, Bennis. 1966. Katz

a r-d ahn 1966, Likert. 1961, 1967, Maslow, 1065. 1970 Mcgregor. 1960 1967 "

STTAMWORK( R28I L AMdUDA ( THIUNIr PERSON)

PROG NIL

(COND ((GREATER THAN (GET VALUE PERSON 'TEAMWOR 'VALUE ft N POSITI

V f(PUT VALUE PERSON

'COHESIVE

(LIST "Teamwork" (GET VALUE PERSON 'TEAMwOR VALU

%0"..

% E 'OWN))))

METHOD(METHOD)N IL(COMMENT"Pride in group effectiveness (TEAMWORK) enhances cohesiveness (CONESIVENE

5S) (Newcombe, Turner. and Converse. 1965)")(TRUST SUPERVISOR.R40(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

(PUT VALUE PERSON'REALIZATION OF.POTENT IAL(LIST "Trust Supervisor"

(CONS (GET.VALUE PERSON 'LEADER SUPER 'VALUE 'OWN)(GEI.VALUE PERSON 'REALIZATION OF.POTENTIAL 'VALUE

'OWN)))))METHOD

(METHOD)NI L((COMMENT

'Employees who trust their supervisor (LEADER.SUPER) identify better withthe organization (REALIZATION.OFPOTENTIAL). CMuchinsky, 1977).)))

N (TWO WAY.COMM R41(LAMBDA (THISUNIT PERSON)

% (PUT.VALUE PERSON'EFFECTIVENESS(LIST 'Two Way Comm"

* (CONS (GET-VALUE PERSON 'COMM.EFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE -OWN)(GET.VALUE PERSON 'EFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

METHOD(METHOD)

*~ I NL* ((COMMENT* "Greater organizational effectiveness (EFFECTIVENESS) is found when open,

two-way communications exist (Comm EFFECTIVENESS). (Rub'in, Golomon, I'J68) ))

6.4

ZI&l.l.4. e6c 1! k

152

COMPUTER LISTING OF 11IIO1-MJAL

This appendix lists the LISP coiiputer cokle ropr,_-s~:ftjwim ie

frai~ies vihich contribute to the class of Individuals. The !it:.iher

slots of I ndi vi dual s are i nheri ted froi the other friLIC s itct.

The form for a fraie or unit. is:

(Unit, naume(Creation dfld tiodification data)Supercldsses list1i.Th,bLr of list

* fleiber slot listOwn slot l ist)

The for~ri for- a slot is:

(Silut naicwLocal vdle or projrjaI nheri tadce roleValu(! CldissDefault value listFa Ct list or co.ntent)

The for.o, for a facet list is:

((acet naa,,eFacet local value

Facet role) ... )

-. o I

SSl

* (INDIVIDUALSkM'OLT" "27-Jon--1987 12 44 44' "HOLT" "21-Apr- 9,97 14 11 17)(IND.PERFORMANCE.MFASURES PERFORMANCE OVERALL

IND.PERFORMANCE CALC

IND.CLIMATE VAR.CALC

I'v .0 ,ATT COMM EFFECTIVENESSA5 ATT .INO ORG CONTROL

-. ATT.INTERPERSONAL.RELATT.JOB EVALUATION

V ATT LEAOER.SUPER% AlT PERSONAL.NEEDS

ATT.PHYSICAL. ENVIRp.; ATT. REWVARD. SYS

ATTSTANDAROS.GOALSS.' ATTSTRESS

If. CLIMATE.VARIABLESINTERMEDIATE VAR CALC

INTERMEDIATE VARIABLES)(CLASSES GENERICUNITS))

( IND PERFORMANCE MEASURES

5*"H OLT, -9-kMar-1987 14.20:59" "HOLT" "9-Mor-1987 14 .42:32)(PERFORMANCE)((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))

*N NIL

((ACHIEVEMENT NIL NIL NIL)(EFFECTIVENESS NIL NIL NIL)(EFFICIENCY NIL NIL NIL)

(EXCELLENCE NIL NIL N IL)(jOB.MOTIVATION NIL N IL N IL NIL ((COMMENT "Hackman and Oldham.-)))JOB SATISFACT ION NIL NIL NIL)

(NEED FULFILLMENT NIL NIL NIL)

(REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL NIL NIL NIL)(SELF REALIZATION NIL NIL NIL))

PERFORMANCE. OVERALL

HOLT" "2-Feb-1987 18:42:23' "HOLT" "10-Mor-1987 9:10:35")

(PERFORMANCE)(V>LASSES GENERICUNITS))N f

N: (A,HiEVEMENT OVERALL NIL NIL #[-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY MAX (1))))(EFFECTIVENESS OVERALL NIL NIL #(-1 11 NIL ((CARDINALITY MAX (1))))ERFICIENCr OVERALL NILNIL #[-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))))EXCELLENCE OVERALL NIL NL#[-1 1 ] NI L ( (CARDINALITY MAX (1) )) )

ICEL MOTIVATION OVERALL NIL NIL (#(-1 11) NIL (ICARDINALITY MAX (1))))iQEB SATISFACTION OVERALL NIL NIL #(-1 11 NIL ((,-.ANDIIJALI I MAX (]) ))

* jtED l'ULFILLMENf OVERALL NIL NIL #[-1 11 NIlL ((CARDINALI T' MAX (1)))

:REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL OVERALL NIL NIL #1-1 I] NIL I ICARDINALITr MAA (1)) 1

iEFREALIZATIONj OVERALL NIL NIL# 1 I ( (CAROINALI Ti MAX (1))))

(ItiD PE-RFOPMANCE CALC

HOL T' 29-..,n--1 8 13 16 35.M"OLT" -24-Feb-1987 15 05 041

* , -'E3OPMANCE CL-

E> GE NE RI uNI T S

5. A HIl EVEMENT (Al ILAMBDA ( THI SUNI T(Pill VAtiE TN I-UN I'

'5 AllilLvLMENI UVLRAL L(AVERAGE OF(GET VALUES THISUNIT 'ACHIEvEMENT

vA U5 OWE GO* ME THOC

41

0%

: ,"154

(METHOD))

(EFFECTIVENESS CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUr THISUNIT'EFFECTIVENESS OVERALL(AVERAGE.OF (GET VALUES THISUNIT

' EFFEC TI VENESS

* VALUE

'OWN)))METHOD

(METHOD))(EFFICIENCY.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT'EFFICIENCY.OVERALL

(AVERAGE.OF (GET VALUES THISUNIT 'EFFICIENCY -VALOE 'OWN))))

METHOD

(METHOD))

(EXCELLENCE.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'EXCELLENCEOVERALL

(AVERAGE.OF (GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'EXCELLENCE 'VALUE 'OWN))))

METHOD

(METHOD))

(JOBMOTIVATION CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(PUT .VALUE THISUNIT

* 'JOB MOTIVATION OVERALL

(AVERAGE.OF (GETIVALUES THISUNIT

JOB MOT IVATIONVALUE

'OWN))))METHOD

(METHOD))

(JGB SATISFACTION.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VXLUE UAiISUNIT'JOB SATISFACTION OVERALL

(AVERAGE.OF (GET VALUES THISUNIT

'JOB SATIISFACTION".i'•'VALUE

METHOD

(METHOD))(NEED FULFILLMENT CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUN IT'NEED.FULFILLMENT OVERALL(AVERAGE OF (GET VALUES THISUNIT

'NEED FULFILLMENT'VALUE'OWN) ))

METHOD* (METHOD))

.REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL CALC- MBDA (THISLJNIT)

- JT VALUE THISUNIT' EALIZATION OF POTENTIAL OVERALL

.AVERAGE 6F (GET VALUL THISUNIT "REALIZATION ,jF PuTEU I At. AL

* C -7 D)

'. EALIZATII, I- ALS (LAMBDA I NJI T

PUT VALUE Ti)I 'utI T

L LF REALI ZAT, N UVEkFAL) A. FV A ,F *)F ,) , A, .t iil i ll

IL ' .,L L F PL L~ t I . !

* ME THOD

• oO

'--- - - - - - - - - -- - V - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-~ 155

-~ 0)(METHOD)))

(IND CLIMATE.VAR CALC

('HOLT" 29-Jon-1987 9:04:35" "HOLT" "1-Feb-1987 20 22.l11')

(CLIMATE .CALC)((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))

((COMM.EFFECTIVENESS CALC(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE _H ISUN ITCOMM EFFECTIVENESS

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORN.:. ATTR

I N(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT COMM.EFFECTIVENESS *MEMBE

R)COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR *VALUE -OWN)))))METHOD

* METHOD)(IND.ORG.CONTROL.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

pr- (PUT.VALUE THISUNITIND-ORG.CONTROL

.? (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATTR

(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATI INDORG CONTROL

MEMBER),r COLLECT

(GET.VALUE TH ISUN ITArT I RV1 A L U EOWN)))

METHOD

% METHOD)(INTERPERSONAL.REL.CALC

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

INTERPERSONAL.REL(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

AT TR

S~ INi ~(UNITSLOTNAMES *ATT INTERPERSONAL REL 'MEMBER

COLLECT(GET VALUE THISUNIT ATTR *VALUE -OWN)l))))

METHODMETHOD)

* (jO8 EVALUATION.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNITJOB EVALUATION

(AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR% ATTR

I N(IINI fTOLGTNAM1, 'All JOB E

*'MEMBER)

COLLECT* ~'*(GET VALUE THISIJNIT

A T T R

OWN.ME THODMET HOD)

* LEADER SUJPER CALC (LAMBDA (THI SUNIT

)5.11- It F

156

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT

'LEADER.SUPER

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATTR

N(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT LEADER

". SUPER'MEMBER)

V' COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'V

ALUE 'OWN)))))METHOD

(PERSONAL.NEEDS.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'PERSONAL. NEEDS(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATTR

E (UNITSLOTNAMES 'AT .PERSONAL.NEEDS

MEMBER)COLLECT

(GET VALUE THISUNITAT FR'VALUE

*r METHODMETHOD)

(PHYSICAL.ENVIR CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'PHYSICAL.ENVIR

-.' (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATTRIN(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT PHYSI

CAL ENVIRMEMBER)

COLLECT(GET VALUE THISUNII

".%" A T T k

-VA! U EOWN ) )

METHODMETHOD)

(REWARD SYS.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(-UT VALUE THISUNIT

'REWARD. SYS(AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

ATTR

IN(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT REWARD SY

MEMBER)

COLLECT(GET VALUE THISUNIT ATTR VAL

u E 'ON)))))METHODMETHOD)

* STANDARDS GOALS CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNITSTANDARDS GOALS

(AVERAGE OF (LJOP FOR

A 1 TV,' " I N

(UN! TSLGTNAMET AT TAN

A CR C .A L SE MM EP,

- .

-W

COLLECT(GET VALUE rHISUNIr

A T T R

W4 -%METHODr METHOD)

(STRESS.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNITSTRESS(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATTR

%~I N4' (UNITSLOTNAMES -ATT.STRESS -MEMBE

R)4"'.'COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'VALUE4OWN

METHODMETHOD))

% (ATTRIBUTES% ("HOLT" "27-jan-19a7 Ti1:54:06" "HOLT" 27-Ian-IS87 1159.52")

% 4 ((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))

(ATT.COMM.EFFECTIVENESS("HOLT" "20-Jon-1987 13:17: 17" "HOLT" "9-Feb-1987 21:49:19")(ATTRIBUTES)

((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))NI L(ACCURATE.COMM

NI L4. (CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Directions and instructions received are ac

curate -)))

(ANSWERS.AVAIL NIL NIL #[- 11 NIL ((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Easy to get answers.)))

(AVAIL. INFO N IL

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Info available when needed))(BEL IEVABLE. COMM NI L

((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT ("Can believe what I rear ab

* . ~oit j~b ))CONVINCING N.1- NIL #[-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT -I can convin

~e inrs M):,DRRESP TIMELY NI L

*NI L

-4'. i(CAROINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT 'Cooresponaoriee anid rep~rls a

re -,r time * il

~~1- -,JA)M of ~L LtiiH NI L

NL

Y-4p-I

%

*~~~n N.;ey' V

158

((CAROINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Can criticize op_1~ly.",)))(INFLUENCE.OTHERS NIL

#([-1 1]

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "When I talk people listen.

(INFO.AVAIL NI L

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Can find info it needed.")))OPEN.COMMUN ICAT IONS

((CAROINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT 'Con discuss anything about job with supervi3 or ))

(REPORTS.TIMELY NIL

.r ~((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Routine paperwork gets clone.

(SATISFIED.COMM NI L

((CARDINAL IT1Y .MAX (1)) (COMMENT 'Happy with the way I getI i n

(ATT INO.ORG.CONTROL("HOLT'" "20-Jon-1987 11 35:40" "HOLT" "9-Feb-1987 20:36:58")

- i (ATTRIBUTES)

((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))

((BELONGINGNI L

((CAtRDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Feeling ot bel

(FA IRNESSN I LN I L

(CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983 Suggestions co

LEVEL SUPERVISION

N I.NI L

N I L* ARDI),HAL IT MAX (1)

IC &MM ENT Sec i st. McN e e. Pad en 1 98 3 Clo s en es o 0f su~pervi s ion N e e !e me

a iI )

MANA,;EmENT RESPONS

* -ARDINALITY MAX (1))

F %

%

-159

(COMMENT "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983 Respons ie to suggestions.")))(MANAGEMENT SUPPORTNIL

NIL

#1-1 1]NIL((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist, McNee Paden 1983. Boss backs him

up .)))(OPEN EXPRESSIONNIL

NILN- I}LNIL

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983. Express feelings freely.")))

(PARTICIPATION.DECISIONS

NILNIL

#[-I I]NIL

((CARDINALITY .MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee. Paden 1983. Chance to part. in job related decis

ons. ')))(PARTICIPATION.POLICYNIL

NILN[I ]* NIL

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983. Chance to port. in forming policy.")

(PERSONA .JUD(EMENTNIL

NIL

#[-' I I~NIL((CARDINALITY MAX (1))

(COMMENT "Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Chance to use own judgement. Reverse measure.")))

(RESTRICTIONSNIL~NIL0[-1 11NIL((CARDINALITY .MAX (1))(COMMENT"Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983. Regulat ions and procedures too restr ict ive.

Reverse measure I))(TRUST

NI LNIL

S(,ARDINALITY MAX (1))

IC-MMENT "Secr st McNee, Paden 1983 Boss trusts to do good lob "))))

ATT INTERPERSONAL REL

SL T .. .20-Jon-1987 13:12 16" -HOLT ' 9-Feb-1987 20 46 51")(A[[k IBLU IES)

l..LA,1ES GENERICUNITS))

AFt OF PECPI F

% %

%[- % ]A ( , 1

160

((CARDINALITY MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Group takes care of people.")))

(COMP LA I NTS

((CARDINALITY MAX (1))

(COMMENT "-Sect ist, McNee. Paden 1983. Workers complain Reverse measure'"

(DES IRE. CHANGE

N[- IL

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))

(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee. Paden 1983. Desire to be transferred. Reverse mieasure')))

(DI SSAT ISFACT ION

%. % #[-, 11

(C ARD IN A LITY M A X ( I)%(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee, Poden 1983, Dissatisfied with group. Reverse me

osure.")

(EN JOYTMENT

(CARDINALITY.MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983. Enjoy working with people in group"

(GET ALONGNI LNI Li [ - I)IN IL((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrist, Mctlee. Paden 1983. Members of group get a long ')

) (GROUP.COORDNI LNI L

# [-t I IN IL

((CARDINALIrY MAX (t))(COMMENT " S ectr s t ,McNee Pade n t983. Group works as coora. team

I GROUP.P LEASURE

NILNIL

N I L(UCARDINALITY MAX (1))

(rOMMENT 'Secr~st, McNee, Paltf% A9B3 Group pliealure in dloing work, Re~erse meeosure "

MANAGEMENT CONCERN

t(- I L

-,LJMLrN 1> 1,~s MNee. Poden tIJ83 Management Concerned wi th environmen

Q.J ARR EL

0 N IL

J0

161

i ' NIL

N- I L# [f- 1 1 ]NIL


4 (COMMENT"Secrist McNee. Paden 1983. Members quarrel and hove bad feel ings Reve

rse measure.")))/ ( TENSION

NIL.j NIL~#[-" 11

NIL

,/ ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))

(COMMENT

"Secrist. McNee Paden 1983. Tensions interfere with group. Reverse measure." )

(UNCOOPERATIVE

NILNLN -i ]

NIL


(COMMENT"Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Uncooperative members of group. Reverse mea" ," s u r e . ) ) ) )

-. '- (ATT JOB-EVALUATION

("HOLT" "20-Jan-1987 13:17:42' "HOLT" .9-Feb-1987 21 59 01")(ATTRIBUTES)

. 4 ((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))

N I L( (BREADTH.SIONIFICANCE

NIL

NIL

'. # [- 1 1 ]


(COMMENT "Hackman, Oldham 1980. Lots of people affected by my work.")))

i. .''. (ENJOY.CHALLENGE- NIL

) NIL

#(-1 )

L(CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Hackman. Oldham 1980 Enjoy challenge of

ork "))k

(GROWTH

N I LN I L#f-I 1]

0 - N I L


(COMMENT "Hackman, Oldham 1980 Satisfied with personal growth and develop

( INCEPENDENT THOUGHT

SI L

I (CARDINALITf MAX (I))

k C' Uim EN T 'H oc kman O ldna m 1980 Have independen t thouqh in wo rk I }

5-

"-., (ME AN I NGFU!JL W(-IP

q#

-J, %' ," - . -: ( _ %

1624

((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Hackman, Oldham 1980 Work meaningful to m

(PERSONAL ACCOMPLISHMENTNIL

NIL#[- 1]

NIL((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Hockman, Oldhom 1980. Feelwothieco

((CA DIN LIT .MAX (1) (C MME T "H ckm n. ldha 19 0. eelworthwhi le occomplisnment.")

(REPETITIVENIL

NIL

#[-i 1]NIL

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))(COMMENT "Hackman, Oldham 1980. Job is simple and repetitive. Reverse meo

sure ")))

(SELF.FEEDBACKNIL

NILN -I ]

SL((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT Hckmon, ldhom 1980 Con examine work fr

feedback.")))

(SKILL.VARIETYNIL

NIL

0 [-i 11* NIL

((CARDINALITY-MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Hackman, Oldham 1980. Requires many differ

ent skills.")))(STIMULATING.WORK~NILNIL~#[-1 1]

NIL,. ((CARDINALITY MAX (I))

(COMMENT'' Hackman, Oldhom 1980. Work is st imulat ing and challenging. Reverse ineas

" re "))):': TASK .IDENTITY~NIL

NIL

NIL

LUCARDINALITY MAX (1))Lo" (COMMENT "Hackman, Oldham 1980. I take credit or blame for my work "))

(TASKSIGHIFICANCE

~NIL%" NIL

~NIL.. ((CAROINALITY MAX (1))S(C]OMMENT "Hackinan, Oldlham 1980. Poor work can cause lots of problems ')))I: TRI VIAL ORK

N I L

%~ I L

"# ( -I I II~ "I L

,'"ARDINALITY MAX (1))ICkMMENT "Ocmn Oldham W9e Work seems trsv,.ll ann usenless Reverse

AT LEA.ER SuPEP

.i'LY'

"20-Jon-1987 13 16 21 .... OLT .. 9-Feo- l 87 21 01 24 1

-.s ( - -

N I:k

A DI A IT AX ( )

(C M E T " a k an l h m 1 8 . 1 a e c eior bl m o y w r

163


NIL((SUP ACCEPTANCE

NI L

N I L

((CARDINALITY MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee. Paden 1983 Supervisor accepts me for what lam.

(SUP. APPRECIATIVE


(COMMENT "Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Supervisor appreciates the work I do

(SUP. CONF IDENT

((CARDINALIT~i MAX (1))

(COMMENT "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983 Supervisor is confident of his abil,ty *'M)

(SUP.CONSIDERATE

NIL


(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983. Supervisor is considerate ')

(SUP. CONVINCING

N I L

N- IIL

((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist, McNee. Paden 1983. Supervisior is

conv~ncing.")(SUP COOPERATIVE

( -1 1]1

V* ((CARDINALITY MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee. Paden 1983. Supervisor is cooperative "M)

(SuP DECISIVENIL

NIL

1 (CAROINALITY MAX (1))

- (COMMENT 'Secrist, McNee. Paden 1983 Supervisor makes decisions easily)

'V SUP EFFECTIVE

N IL

CAR I NA 1 T Y MA~ ()-. C :MM EN T 'Sccr st. Mc Nec. Pad enr 1983 Supervis or rii;w- w i l ort, -ol t, t,

N

S%

0%

164

((CAROINALITY MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrtst, McNee. Paden 1983. Supervisor does not waste tinrerateri

((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (OMN ers.M~e ae 93 uevsri(CMMN fairi~t '))Pde 93 Sprio i noraig")(SUP FELIRU

((CAROINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist. Mchee. Paden 1983. Supervisor is

N (SUP LEAE

NIL

N I L((CARDINALIT'r MAX (1)) (COMMENT 'Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Supervisor is

all (SUP.IPRODUCTIVE

((ADNLTA 1)(COMMENT Secrist McNee, aden 1983, Supervisor isste ih ob oe

(SUP.SUPPORTV

#* #- 11 ]NI L((CARDINAt.ITY .MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983. Supervisor is

(SUP PROALTINED

N I L

N IL

N IL

0 #1-' L

iSR I A I ' A i ) ( O M N S c t t c e ,P d n 1) 3 S p r i o u

00,t m

A: T PERSONAL NEEDS

pfr,( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -r .2 -uit7 1 6 5 " 'H L - - -ep97 2 9 5 "~~.%~ ATTI BUTES)-.. ~. -. N -~ -

165

N

((CAROINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENTS "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983 1wont to odvonce.")))

(NEED. FOR.CHALLENGE

NIL((CARDINALITY-MAX (1)) (COMMENTS "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983. 1 wont more c

mal longe.')))(NEED.FOR COMPETENCE

(COMMENAT MAXr~t (1)) e Paden 1983. I want to be considered competent")


(COMMENTS "Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983. [ wont moare compliments and recogni

NEED .FOR . 1FF ICULT. WORK

NIL

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))% ~(COMMENTS "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983. 1 wont more difficult work.')))

(NEED. FOR. FEEDBACK

((CARDINALITYMAX (1))(COMMENTS "Hockman, Oldham 1980. [ wont more feed bock about how I'm doing

NEED .FOR. IMPRESS ION

NI L

N I L

I(CARDINALITY MAX (1))(COMMENTS "Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983. I want to make a good impression

(NEED FOR INFLUENCE

lICARDINALITY MAX (1))

kCOMMENTS "Sec:r,5t. McNee. Paden 1983 1 want to ifluence my super. scm

NEED FOR INVOLVEMENT

IL-ARDINALI TY MAX (1))

c MENTS ' i . M .Nee pode,, 196I. 5 wuQ t t. tem e n,.Q l I eo i

(TEEC, FOR JOB SECURiTY

166

N0

NI L

((CARDINALITY MAX (1))(CMET Scit ce.Pdn18 1watlss

(NEED.FOR.ESS SUERVSO

% (COMMENTS Secrist, McNee. Paden 1983. 1 wontbetryo more jobe offrt.*')

((ADNLT A 1)(COMMENTS Secrist. McNee. Pden 1983Iwn ls

(NEED FOR. PAY. TIME

S. ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))(COMMENTS "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983. 1 wont bester promortores e

NI L

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))(COMENTS Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Iwn etrpromnertig

(COMMENTS IScit ce. oe 93 want foste reprtonsibl ))

N I L

% J ((CARDINALITY MAX (1))(COMMENTS "Secrist, McNee. Paden 1983. 1 wont more rconrol ovry work

(NEED FORSEOLUECOTLN I L

p NI L

N I L

((C-ARDiNALITY MAX (1)) (OMNS"ersM~e ae 93 1-n 3d

AN I u ES

-~((.ADDITIOAL ENVIMN

#[-1 1 JNI L((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT .'If needed to improve work. equipment is ova

iiable "M)(ADDITIONAL MONEY

re 0,.?- [-1 11r'- pN I L

((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "If needed to improve work. money is ovallb

(ADEQUATE.MONEY NIL

I NIL

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Seems to be enough money to

ao work.".)))(AOEQUATE.WORK.SPACE

((CARDINXLITYMAX (1)) (COMMENT "Facilities are adequate for work assigned."

(AOJUSTA8ILE .SURROUNDINGS

N(I J

((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Can adjust appearence and arrangement of surroungings ))

.J.(APPROPRIATE-PLACE NIL

f(-i I IN IL

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Work site is appropriate

for worlk.')))(AVAIL.MONEY NIL

N I L((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Money is available for special

needs " )) )(CORRECT EQUIP NIL

((CAROINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT 'Right kind of equipment is ova joDr e ') ))

(EN0OUGH EQUIPMENT NIL

((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Enough equipment is ovaiia

-EjjIPMENT USE NI L

N IL

( CARDINALjTY MAX I )(CGMMENT 'Con ' nI ence way eq;,i (ieit

,~~8ESiRROLNOiNOS

ii, % %6!

*e

0 !-Pt

t St 168

0~

((CAROINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT --Con rearrange work space if desired.-)))

(INFLUENCE.SPENDING NIL

j[-i 1]

(CARDINALI TY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Con influence way money

"4 is spent.'))

(ATT REWARD.SYS

( 'H-OLT " " 20-Joan- 1987 13 .16:33" "H-OLT" 9-Feb- 1987 21.1 4.09)(ATTRIBUTES)

((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))NI L(ADVANCEMENT

6 '~# (- 1 1 ]


(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee, Poden 1983. Good work gives chance to advance"))

(CHALLENGING. WORK

(COMEN "Scrst.Mc~ePaden 1983. Good work give more challenging work

(COMPETENT

N I L

(CGU L.YMAX "e s, McNee. Paden 1983. Good work means being considered com

-:2MPLIMENTS

NI L

N I L


(C MMEtNlT 'Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983 Good work earns compliments and recc,

C)IF FI CU LT wOjRK RE*ARD

N(1 ]

;CARDINALITT MAX (1))'-C1'MkENT'Cecr st. McNee, Paden 1983 Good work earns assignment of more d ifficult

EACK

4RD NA4,IT~ MA (III he 4T o1jc 0i CInlom 1980. Cuper-sor lets me 6know how I mn

,HF- EEDBAC)

0:

40

169

%


(COMMENT "Hackmaon, Oldhamn 1980. In group, people know how well they are do

C ImPRESSIVE. WORK

NIL

N[I lNI La ((CARDINAL ITY.MAX (1))

(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee. Paden 1983. Supervisor will be inpressed by good

(INFLUENCE

% ((CAROINALITY.MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983. Good work earns influence.")))

(INVOLVEMENT

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))(COMMAENT "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983. Good work earns involvemeent ))

* (JOB.SECURITY

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))(COMMENT Scs. ce.Paden 18. Good work earns job security *)

(LESS SUPERVISIONN I L

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))(COMMENT "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983 Good work earns less supervison. ')))

~ -' (PAY' TIME

-P % ((CAROINALITY MAX (1))* ~~' (COMMENT "Sec r st , McNee , Paden 1983 . Good work earns bet ter paymo re time

of f ))A (PERFORMANCE. RAT INGNI L

4P ((:AROINALITY MAX (1))-e:OMMENT 'Secr st, McNeo. Paden 1983 Cood work eorns better rot ,is '

I PPMOT ION

%44

(QAROINALITr MAX (1))

O0MMENT - Sec r s t McNee. Paden 198i3 Good *orl, earns foster pro1mot , I)

NE LPKNS1I iL IT

4NN I

%. .. %, , C,

~~' * ,' tN

'1)((CARDINALITY MAX (1))(COMMENT " Se crst, IMcNee. Padtn 983 Good workc earns more responsibility.

(SELF.CONTROL

% ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1))

(COMMENT "Secrist. McNee. Poden 1983. Good work earns freedom to plan ownwork .",)) )

~b' (VOLUME.WORK


(COMMENT "Secrist, McNee. Poden 1983. Good work corns more work."))))

(All. STANDARDS. GOALS("HOLT" "20-Jon-1987 13:18:28" "HOLT" "9-F'eb-1987 22:13:04")(ATTRIBUTES)

((CLASSES GENERICUNLIS))NI L

((ABILITY.TO.DOWORK NIL

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "I can do work assigned.

* (AGREEABLE.GOALS

NI L((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Understand and agree with goals and objecti

yes , ') ))- (CONFUSED.EXPECTATIONS

((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT 'Ntsr hti eetd Reverse mreasure

(DIFFICULT WORK NIL

((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Work is hard and uses thy obi-tes "

(,OAL ACHIEVEMENT NI LNI L

NI L

(CARDIHALITY MAX (1;) (COMMENT 'Feet good when meet .)r exc

* ~ej ;001S )

vli4-;ALiDGE OF J~b NI L

NI L

N It((CAROINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT 'I 1,now a lot obou.t ct

(t.EEDEDOVO-RK N!

S%

-Wf

J**~ '. . ~ %'** .-

171

NI L

(CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Work done needed to be done,-))

(NEGLECTED.WORK

((CARDiNALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Much work doesn't get done. Reverse measur

(OVERLOADED

((CAROINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Too much to do. Rarely on time. Reverse measure. ")))

(TASK.CONTINUITt NIL

I [ -1 1]

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "I finish the some work I st

(WORK.IDENTITY

((CARDINALITY MAX (1))(COMMENT "Hackman, Oldhom 1980. Others know how well I did ono ajob)"))))

(ATT.STRESS("HOLT" "20-Jon-1987 13 14:17" "HOLT" 9-Feb-1987 20.53 55")(ATTRIBUTES)


(APPEAR. BUSYN IL

NIL S c i t c e .P d n 1 8((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENTS SersM~e oe 93 Have to look~

(CONFLICT ASSIGNMENT

((CAROINALITY MAX (1))COMMENTS "Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983 Receive conflicting assignments')

:.0NF L I CT D EMANDS

I1 L

I L

((CARCINALITY MAX (1))

C, ,MMENITS -Sec r ist McNee .Paden 1983 Management gives con? I t- lgemand

-,NFLI CT VALUfC

NL

#- t

9.%

%6

172

N

((CARDINALITY MAX (1))(COUMENTS "Secr,3t. McNee, Paden 1983. Expected to act against own judgeme

nit ."f))(CONFUSED. PLANNING

((CARDINALITN'.MAX (1))

* (COMMENTS 'Secrist, McNee, Paden 1983. Confused planning and organizationof work."))

C INFORMATION.AVAIL

C(CARDINALITY.MAX (1))

id . (COMMENTS "Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Can get information needed. Reverse measure.)))

(LACK. OF. AUTHORITY

((CARD INAL ITY .MAX (1))(COMMENTS

'Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Given enough authority to carry out work~ R

everse measure.'))(LACK.OF. INFLUENCE

N ! L(CARDINALITY.MAX (1))

(COMMENTS "Secrist. Mc~ee. Paden 1983. Ability to influence decisions atte

cting self."))(PRESSURE

((CARDINXLITY MAX (

(COMMENTS "Secrist. McNee. Paden 1983. Organization generates pressure."))

(UNCLEAR.RESPONS

N I L((CARDINALITY MAX (1))

* ~COMMENTS "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983 obresponsibilities ore incleor '

(UNNEC-ESSARY .WI TEN

N I L

(,ARDINALIT MAX (1))

*(:-OmMENrs 'Secr st. McNee, Paden 1983 Too much attention to unimportant a

ii (E OF RESOURCES

N I L

Ni I LARDINALIrY MAX (1))

*%.* '

173

I

(COMMENTS "Secrist. McNee, Paden 1983. Organizations use of men, money andmaterial "))))

(CLIMATE.VARIABLES

("HOLT" "27-Jan-1987 11:55:43" "HOLT" "3-Feb-1987 23:07:53")(VARIABLES)

((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))NIL

((COMM.EFFECTIVENESS NIL NIL #[-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secr~st 1983")))

(INO.ORG.CONTROL NIL NIL #[-I 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY'MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist

1983")))% (INTERPERSONAL.REL NIL NIL #[-1 1] NIL ((CAROINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secri

st 1983")))(JOB EVALUATION NIL

NI L

% #[-1 1]/ NIL

((CAROINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Hackman and Oldhom 1980")))

(LEADER.SUPER NIL NIL #[-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist 19

83)))(PERSONAL.NEEDS NIL NIL #(-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITYIMAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist

198 3))(PHYSICAL.ENVIR NIL NIL #[-l 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist

1983")))(REWARD.SYS NIL NIL If-I 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist 1983

(STANDARDS.GOALS NIL NIL #(-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secristg~ 1983")))

p . (STRESS NIL NIL #[1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist 1983")))

~())

(INTERMEDIATE.VAR CALC

("HOLT" "27-Jan-1987 11:55:04" "HOLT" "13-Feb-1987 15:08,27")

(CLIMATE.CALC)

" ((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))

NIL

((ADEQUATE.ENVIRONMENT.CALC


'ADEQUATE.ENVIRONMENT

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT.VALUE

IN(GET VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE VARIABLES

'ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENT MEMBERS

'VALUE

'OWN)COLLECT

(GET VALUE THISUNIT ATT VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN))))

METHOD

(METHOD))

EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION.CALC(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT

* 'EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION

(A'iLHAGE OF (LOOP FOR

AT VALUE

IN(,,l VA[Uj t ll1L1MtbUA1L VANIAULL'

'EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATIODN M£MBER:

'VALUE

-OWN)

*% COLLECT

Sf'

174

(CET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT VALUE 'VALUE -OWN))))

METHOD

(METHOD))(EXPECTATION.OF.REWARDS.CALC

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

r(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

0'EXPECTATION.OF.REWARDS

1.41 (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

% .. ATT.VALUE

IN(GET.VALUES ' INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

'EXPECTATION.OF.REWARDS MEMBERS

'VALUE

'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN))))

METHOD

(METHOD))

(EXTRINSIC.REWARD.CALC

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(PuT.VALUE THISUNIT

P. 'EXTRINSIC.REWARD


ATT.VALUE

IN* (GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

'EXTRINSIC.REWARD.MEMBERS?i':'i'VALUE

.: .'OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN))))

M O )

(METHOD))

(.ROWTH DEVELOP CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'GROWTH DEVELOP(AVERAGE-OF (LOOP FOR

ATT VALUE

IN

V(GET VALUES 'INTERMEDIATEi) vARIABLES

'GROWTH DEVEL

OP MEMBERS

'VALUEX_'OWN,

COLLECT(GET VALUE THISUNI T

ATi VALUE

VALUE

OWN)))))

METHOD(METHOD))

(IMPORTANCE.OF.REWARDS CALC(LAMBDA (THISUNIT,

%PuT VALUE THISUNIT

* 'IMPORTANCE OF REWARDS

.-E (AVERAGE OF (LOOP FORATT VALUE

IN

(rFT VAIt i[ S I[NtRM(f[)IAt( VAHIANI EQIMPORTANCE Of REWARDS MEMdERSVALUE

OWN

* COLLECT

.

175

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN))))

METHOD

(METHOD))( INFLUENCE.ENVIRONMENT.CALC

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT' INFLUENCEENVIRONMENT


ATT.VALUE

IN

(GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE VARIABLES

'INFLUENCE ENVIRONMENT.MEMBERS

'VALUE

A 'OWN)

COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN))))

METHOD

(METHOD))

(INTRINSICREWARD.CALC

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNITINTRINSIC.REWARD


*ATT.VALUE

I N(GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

'INTRINSIC.REWARD MEMBERS

lp 'VALUE

'OWN)COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN))))

METHOD

(METHOD))

(JOBCHALLENGE. CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT' JOB.CHALLENGE

(AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

ATT VALUE

IN

(GET VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE.

VARIABLES'JOB CHALLENGE

MEMBERS" ' VALUE

'OWN)COLLECT

*(GET VALUE THISUNIT

ATT VALUE

'VALUE

METHOD

(METHOD))

'OVERALL CLIMATE CAL,

LAMdDA (THISUNIT)

* C(PuT VALUE THISUNIT

OVERALL CLIMATE

(AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

ATT VALUE

I NG FT VALI fS IN ERMEDIATE VARIABLE',

UVLNfA L L I IPAA f L MLMUL 11

V A L U E* *OWN

COLLECT

%.

176

% (GET.VALUE THISUNIT AT.VALUE 'VALUE -OWN))))

METHOD(METHOD)N IL((COMMENT

("Tni3 calculat ion should occur after other climate variables have been caIculoted.'))))

(PERSONAL.REL.COMPETENCE.CALC


'PERSONAL. REL .COMPETENCE(AVERAGEOF (LOOP FOR

ATT. VALUEI N

(GET VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLESMEER

'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT(GET VALUE THISUNIT A1'T.VALUIE 'VALUE 'OWN),)))

METHOD)(ROLE.CONFLICT.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT .VALUE T I SUN IT'ROLE.CONFLICT

* (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATT.-VALUE

I N

(GET VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE.

VAR IABLES'ROLE CONFLICT

* MEMBERS'VALUE

' OwlCOLLECT

(GET. VALUE TN ISUN ITATT VALUEVA LUEOWN))))

METHOD(METHOD))

(SATISFACTION WITH GROUP CALC* (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNITSATISFACTION WITH GROUP

*(AVERAGE OF (LOOP FORATT VALUE

I N

(GET VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE VARIABLES* 'SATISFACTION WITH GROUP MEMBERS* 'VALUE

'OWN)COLLECT

(GET VALUE THISUNIT ATT VALUE 'VALUE 'C-WN))))

J. METHOD

* ME Tm-OD))

* S,'!L VARIETY HO CALC

LAMBDA (TM) :UNI T

fF-'JT iALUE THISUNIT

SKILL VARIETY HO

AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

Al I fVAL 01

I N

(GET VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE VARIABLES

* SKILL VARIETy HO MEMBERS

S&

% 177

'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATr.VALUE 'VALUE -OWN,)))I! METHOD)

(METHOD)(TASK.COMPETENCE .CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'TASK-COMPETENCE(AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

ATT.VALUEIN(GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIAT

%~ E.VARIABLES'TASK COMPET

ENCE.MEMBERS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT(GET VALUE THISUNIT

ATI VALUE

' VALUE

METHOD(METHOD))

* (TEAMWORK.CALC (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(PUI.VALUE THISUNIT

% 'TEAMWORKJ ~(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

AlTTVALUE

IN(GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE VARIA

BLES'TEAMWORK.MEMBERS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT

(GET VALUE THISUNIT ATT VALUE

VALUE 'OWN)))))METHOD(METHOD)))

<;NTERMEDIATE VARIABLES("HOLT"''27-Jon-1987 11 54.39" "HOLT" "10-Mor-198

7 13.09ie6")

(VARIABLES)

(CLASSES GENERICUNITS))NIL

AXIEGUATE ENV IRONMENT

NtIL

,(COMMENT ("Adequacy of space, money and equipment to perform work"))CfARDINAL ITY MAM (1))))

(COHESIVE NIL NIL NIL NIL ((COMMENT ("Group cooperation and friend,'e,.s)(

* (EFF'ECTIVE PARTICIPATION

NI L

I,' .COMMENT ('Part cipation in dec's ons and policy ob,,ut .'tb relatea t,jr,:t or

,CARDINALTYMAY (1))))* EXPE7CTATION OF REWARDS

-I%

% % 1

% I--I

Se

178

(#[-i 'D)NI L((CAROINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Expectation of receiving rewards for good w

(EXTRINSIC.REWARD

((COMMENT.7 ("Extrinsic consequences of effective performance (outward signs of reword

Secrist. McNee and Paden 1983,"))(CARDINALITY.MAX (1))))

(GROwTH.DEVE LOP

#1-i 1]

((COMMENT ("Growth and development comnhing from work. Hackman Oldham. l179.

(CARDINALITY.MAX (1))))(IMPORTANCE.OF.REWARDS

((CARDINALITY.MAX (1)) (COMMENT 'The value of rewards to individual ')

(INFLUENCE. ENVIRONMENT

((COMMENT ("Ability to influence the use of space, money Grnd equipment on jo

b - ))

* (CARDINALITY MAX (1))))

( INTRINSIC.REWVARD

((COMMENT('Intrinsic consequequences of effective performance (inward. internal typ

e rewards) Secrist, McNee and Paden 1983 )

(CAROINALITY MAX (1))))

(JOB CHALLENGE NIL

* ( (CAROINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "The extent of challienge f ram

the jot) )))(OVERALL CLIMATE N IL

((COMMENT "This is the average of all climate variaoles-)))

PERSONAL REL COMPETENCE

* NIL

N I L

I (COMMENTM Pin iL IVliM 1

,cisiru iclu t c t .t'i r i, ir teen 1 y, r c 1,i'

e e Secrist. UcNee and Paden 1983 '

(CAROINALI T' MAX (1)))

* (POLE CONFLICT

0F

% %C

*4* ** ****1-~- ~ .~*" ~ ~K%

179

#[-1 1 ]NI1L(COMMENT("The confli ct between expectations. Also conflict between expectot ions a

nd personal values."))(CARDINALITY MAX (1))))

SAT ISFACT ION.WITH. GROUP

#I[- I I]I

((COMMENT ("Group happiness and satisfaction. Secrist. McNee and Paden 1983

(CARDINALITY.MAX (1))))SK ILL.VAR IETY. HO

((COMMENT ("Effective Use Of skills. Hackman and Oldham 1979.")) (CARDINALITY MAX ())

(TASK.COMPETENCE

*~~ I- IL

((COMMENT("Measure of SUPERVISORSs3 task competence as viewed by the employee Sec

rist. McNee and Paden 1983 "'))

~ (CARDINALITY.MAX (1))))(T EAMWORKN ILN I L

-. ~~ It- L

- -((COMMENT ("Feeling of working together in cooperation Secrist. McNee Poden 1983 1l

* LCARDINALITY.MAX (1)))))((ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENT MEMBERS (APPROPRIATE.PLACE AVAIL.MONEY

CORRECT EQUIPADEQUATE WORK SPACE

ADEQUATE. MONEY

ENOUGH EQUIPMENT))(EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION MEMBERS (PARTICIPAIION.DECISIONS PARTICIPATION POLIC

Y ) )(EXPECTATION.OF.REWARDS MEMBERS (ADVANCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY

.-. "4PROMOT ION

PERFORMANCE RATING

* SELF CONTROL))(ExTRINSIC REWARD MEMBERS (INFLUENCE IMPRESSIVE.WORK

PERFORMANCE RATING

COMPL IMENTS

PROMOT IONCOCMPETE NTPAY T IMEJOB SECURI>T

* LESS SUPERvISIONF EEDBACKGROUP FEEDBACK))

.,IRCATH DEVELOP MEMBERS (GROWTH PERSONAL ACCOMPt I OIIMLNT

ENJOY CHALLENGEI 0 i'L NOENT i lotUillI

ST IMULAT ING.WORK I

IMPOIRTANCE OF REWAR'DS MEMBERS (NEED FOR ADVANCEMENT NEED FOR RESP ,NT

* NEED FCI4 PPCM6A ION

N.N%

180

NEED FOR PERFORMANCE

NEED.FOR SELF CONTROL))

(INFLUENCE.ENVIRONMENT.MEMBERS (FLEXABLE.SURROUNDINGS INFLLNCE SPENDIjG*EQUIPMENT USEADJUSTABLE SURROUNDINGSADDITIONAL MONEfADDITIONAL.EQUIPMENT))

(INTRINSIC.REWARD.MEMBERS (CHALLENGING.WORK RESPONSIBILITY%ADVANCEMENT

INVOLVEMENT

PROMOTION

DIFFICULT WORK

VOLUME.WORK

op SELF.CONTROL))(JOB.CHALLENGE.MEMBERS (ENJOY.CHALLENGE INDEPENDENT THOUGHT

STIMULATING WORKNDIFFICULT

WORKABILITY. TO.DO WORK))

(OVERALL.CLIMATE MEMBERS (COMM EFFECTIVENESS IND ORG.CONTROL

INTERPERSONAL REL

PHYSICAL.ENVIR

REWARD.SYS

STANDARDS GOALS))

(PERSONAL.REL.COMPETENCE.MEMBERS (SUPCOOPERATIVE SUP SUPPORTIVE

SUP ENCOURAGING

SUP HELPFUL

SUP FAIR

* SUP CONSIDERATESUP.APPRECIATIVE

SUP ACCEPTANCE))

(ROLE CONFLICT MEMBERS (CONFUSED.PLANNING UNCLEAR RESPONS CONFLICT DEMANDS))

(SATISFACTION.WITH.GROUP MEMBERS (GROUP.PLEASURE ENJOYMENT

DESIRE.CHANGE

COMPLAINTS

DISSATISFACTIONMANAGEMENT.CONCERN

CARE OF PEOPLE))

(SKILL.VARIETY HO.MEMBERS (SKILL.VARIETY REPETITIVE

TASK. SIGNIFICANCEBREADTH SIGNIFICANCE

MEANINGFUL. WORK

TRIVIAL WORK

IASK. IDENTITY))(TASK COMPETENCE MEMBERS (SUP.EFFECTIVE SUP PRODUCTIVE

SUP EFFICIENT

SUP CONVINCING

SUP. LEADER

SUP CONFIDENT

SUP IMAGINATIVE

SUP DECISIVE))

(TEAMWORK MEMBERS (QUARREL TENSION BELONGING UNCOOPERATIVE GET ALONG CARE OF

PEOPLE))))

, . ..-. . .

181

APPENDIX 15

COMPUTER LISTINiG OF ORGANIZATIONIS

This appendix lists the LISP coiputer code rcpruscn t il"

frai es which contribute to the ci ss of individuals. Tihw ,Iber

slots of ORrAIZATIO'IS are inherited from othe r fra II;s I ist,.

The form for a frame or unit is:

(Unit name(Crt.ation and modification data)Superclasses listMeiber of listCoia:;ient"rki)cr slot list

Own slot list)

The fori.i for a slot is:

(Slot nameLocal value or proyra:.iInheritance role

Vleclas

Default value listFdcet list or covient)

The form for a facet list is:

((Facet nameFacet local vilueFacet role) ... )

l0

S2 -

0--

0 -.

182

(ORGANIZATIONSk'HOLT' "27-Jon-1987 11 57 36" "MOLT. 3-Mor-ISO? 14 41 22")

(GRG PERFORMANCE CALC ORG PERFORMANCE MEASURESORG CLIMArE 'VAR CALC

CLIMA~TEVAPIABLESORGAN IZAT IONAL ELEMENTS)


((ORDER.TO.EVALUATE(MASONS CARPENTERS BEST.TEAM PL.UMBERS METAL.SHOP SUPERINTENDENT FREE INDIVID

U AL S )

(ORGAN IZAT IONS)

((COMMENT

This slot contains the order in which to coluculote the organizational clmote and performance. It makes sure that 3ubordionte organizations ore eviluate

a first so their oluesl can be correct ly calculated '))

(ORG PERFORMANCE CALCk'MOLT' '2-Feb-1SO? 18:28:20" "HOLT" "10-Mar-iSO? 16:46,42")(PERFORMANCE CALC)

(-LASSES GENER ICUNI TS))NI L((ACHIEVEMENT CALC

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(PUT VALUE THISUNIT

(AVERAGE OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORPERSONSI N

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT'MFIA8rRS OF ORG. V A U (E

'OWN)COIL EC(GET.VALUES PERSONS

ACH IEVEMENT

V ALU E-OWN)))

(LOOP FOR

SUB ORG S

I N(GET VALUES THISUNIT

'SUBORDINATE .ORGS

VALUE

OWN)

COLLECT

(GET VALUE SUBORGS 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VALUE

mET MODMETHOD IEFEC F VENESS CAIC

_AMBDA ( TH(SUN IT)PAVALUE THISUNIT

'EFFECT IVENESS(AVERAGE OF (LIST (AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOk

4 PER SO NSIN

(ET VALUjES TM) C'jt,

CDI LEC7

(,GET VAUZPER5)utji

4 EF'E. T lN~S

4J

183

'VALUE

'OWN))

(LOOP FORSuBORGSSIN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT

'SUBORDINATE.ORGS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'EFFECTIVENESS 'VALU

E 'OWN))))))METHODMETHOD)(EFFICIENCY.CALC(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT.EFFICIENCY

(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORPERSONS

'~ IN,.' (GET VALUES THISUNIT

'MEMBERS OF ORG

'VALUE

COLLECT* (GET VALUES PERSONS

EFF I, I ENCY4 , 'VA LUE

'OWN)))

(LOOP FORSUBORGS

IN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT

'SUBOROINATE.ORGS'VALUE-OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'EFFICIENCY 'VALUE

CWN)))))METHODMETHOD)

(EXCELLENCE.CALC(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT

EXCELLENCE(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONSI N(GET VALUES THISUNIT

* 'MEL4HRS OF ORGV A LJ L

COLLECT(GET VALUES PERSONS

*'EXCEL LENCE

'VALUE

- OWN

* (LOOP FORSuBORGS

r* * IN(GET VALUES THISUNIT

GUFtORDINATE ORGSV A L (It

OWN

COLLECT

(GET VALUE SUBORCS ExCEL L EtL VALUE

W.c

184

OWN) ))))ME THODMETHOD)

(JOB MOTIVATION CALC(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT% 'JOB.MOTIVATION

(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORPERSONSI N(GET. VALUES THI SUNIT

'MEMBERS OF.ORG'VALUE

A .~'OWN)

COLLECT

(GET VALUES PERSONS

'JOB MCI IVATIONV A I J

(LOOP FOR

% SUBORGS

I N(GET.VALUES THISUNIT

'SUBORDINATE ORGSVALUEOWN)

* COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'JOB MOTIVATION 'VAL

UE 'OWN))))))

METHODMETHOD,

(JOB. SAT ISFACT ION CALC

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(PUT vALUE THtSUNIT

OSAT ISFACT IONFO(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOPFO

PERSONS%~I N

(GET VALUES THISUNITMEMBERS OF ORG

'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT

(GET.VALUES PERSONS'JOB SATISFACTI

ON

VALUEOWN))

(LOOP FORSU BORG S

*~ IN

(GET VALUES THISUNIT

'SUBORDINATE ORGS

COLLECT(GET VALUE SUBORGS 'JOB SATI3FAC IO V

ALUE 'OWN))))))

m E T 11CCf tt'E [ F i L F I L LM E NT C AL C

.A M6[)A ( TH IS uNI T)%%, P,, VALUE TiISUNIT

NE kLD FIlL FI L LMENT

P. (AvERAGE OF (LIST (AVERAGE OF (LOO- FOR

F-ERCON4S

% I %.


'MEMBERS OF ORG/ VALUE

: 'OWN)COLLECT

(GET VALUES PERSONS

NT. 'NEED FULFILLME

"VALUE

4 ' ' OWN )>)

(LOOP FOR

SUBORGS

IN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT'SUBORDINATE. ORGS' VALUE

'OWN)CDOLLECT

-i -(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'NEED FULFILLMENT V, . ALUE 'OWN))))))

METHOD

METHOD)

(REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL.CALC


'REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL

* (AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS

I N

(GETVALUES THISUNIT

'MEMBERS OF ORG

'VALUE

'OWN)COLLECT(GET VALUES PERSONS

'REALIZATION OF

" ,POTENTIALVALUE

OWN))

(LOOP FOR

SUBORGS

IN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT

'SUBORDINATE. ORGS

' VALUE

W. ". OWN)

COLLECT

(GET VALUE SUBORGS'REALIZATION.OF POTENTIAL

* VALUE

- 'OWN ))))))

METHOD

mET'OD)W."($ELF REALIZATION CALC

LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(PuT VALUE THISUNIT

'SELF REALIZATION(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

* PERSONS

I N

, - (GET VAt LU S THI SUN I T'MEMBL~Rz OF ORGV A LU E

OWN

COLLECI

(GET VALUES PERSCN'SELF FRI L I 'ATI

%

186

ON'VALUE

(LOOP FOR ON


SUBORDINATE ORGSVALUE-OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBOROS 'SELF REALIZATION -V

ALUE 'OWN))))))

k METHOD

METHOD)(Z.OVERALL.PERFORM. CALCm*~v (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

OVERALL. PERFOR)MANCE(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERFORMANCE. MEASUREIN(GET VALUES THISUNIT

PERFORMANCE WE[GriTS

'VALUE'OWN)I

* COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT

PERFORMANCE MEAS

URE'VALUE'OWN))

(LOOP FORS UBORG SI N(GET.VALUEs THtSUNIT

'SUBORDINATE ORGS% 'VALUE

A.'OWN)% COLLECT

(GET.VALUE SUBOROS'OVERALL. PERFORMANCE'VALUE

'OWN))))(METHOD)

NI L

(COMMENT("Thig ColulOteS the overall performance of the organization base1 pon t

e performance licusures and trier relative importance to overall performance "

% (ORG PERFORMANCE MEASURES.v; '6 H~rOLT" "27-Jan-1987 IfIt 55. 3 3 K"0L T""9-M a r -19 87 1 42 2 04"

" % P E R F 0OR M A N C E),CLASSES GENERICUNITSfl

(ACHIEVEMENT NIL NI L #(-1 11r EFFECTIVENESS NIL NI L d[-i i])EFF IC IENCY NIL NI L #(-I I )

0 q MOVAT IN1 NJ (. NI L 1I 11) NIL ((COMMENT "imUna uf.IOdholM

K,0STSATO04E UFLMN

RE L Z TO OF- 'OEN IA NIL Nj #[-1 1 ' %T i.)V

.s~p 187

, (SELF REALIZATION NIL NIL -1 i 1]))~())

(ORG CLIMATE VAR CALC("HLT "29-Jon-1987 9.31:35" "HOLT" "10-Mor-1987 12 40.21")(CLIMATE CALC)((CLASSES GENERICUNITS))NIL

%, ((COMM.EFFECTIVENESS CALC(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

% 'COMM.EFFECTIVENESS0 % (AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONSIN(GET VALUES THISUNIT

'MEMBERS OF ORG

'VALUE-OWN)

COLLECT. (GET VALUE PERSONS

'COMM EFFECTIVENESS

'VALUE'OWN)))

(LOOP FOR* SUBORGS


'SUBORDINATE ORGSVALUE

'OWN)COLLECT(GET VALUE SUBORGS

'COMM EFFECTIVENESS. %" 'VALUE

'OWN))I-METHOD

METHOD)(IND ORG CONTROL CALC(LAMBDA (ThiSUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT'IND.OR3.CONTROL

(AVERAGE OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORPERSONS

IN(GET VALUES THISUNIT

*MEMBERS OF ORG'VALUE

'OWN)0 COLLECT

(GET 'VALUE PERSONS' IND GR ZCONTROL'VALUE

'OWN)(LOOP FOR

S UBOR0SIN

. (GET VALUES THISUNIT

suBORUINATE ORGSI A L UL

;L"'.'-'C. W N

COLLECT(GET VALUE SUBC , CG 'IND ORG CAtTPOL V A

= -.- LK,E 3;Nj F)))

ME'HODMETHOD)

a-

%0

.r. wr c &k 'a w %9 ~

188

(INTERPERSONAL REL CALCi (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT.INTERPERSONAL.REL

I(AVERAGEOF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS

(GET VALUES THISUNIT'MEMBERS OF.ORG

'VALUE

COLLECT

(GET VALUE PERSONSSINTERPERSONAL.R

EL

'VALUE

*OWN)))(LOOP FGR

SuBORGS


"' 'SUBORDINATE.ORGS

'VALUE

COLLECT

(GET.VALUE SUBORGSi! "INTERPERSONAL.REL

'VALUE

'OWN))))))MET HOD

METHOD)

(JOB.EVALUATION.CALC

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(PUT VALUE THISUNIT

'JOB. EVA LUAT ION

(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS

IN

% (GET VALUES THISUNIT

'MEM6LRSOF ORGVALIJE

'OWN)COLLECT

(GET VALUE PERSONS

" JOB EVALUAT ION* VALUE

-OWN)(LOOP FOR

SUBORGS

INO (GET VALUES THISUNIT

SUBORDINATE OR(I>VALUE

'OWN)

COLLECT(GET VALUE SUBORGS 'JOB EVALUATIGN 'VAL

uE O N )) )

* MET-IOU;

.[A ER SUPER CALC

L AMUG{)A (IH I SUNI T)(Pt), VALUE THIISuNIT

LEADER SUPERA,[ kA,,, Lf (LIST AVL RAIL Ok uKd' f uk

PERSONS

.ET VALUES tI SON IT

A.

S

189

'MEMBERS OF ORG=L ' " VA LUE

,'OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUE PERSONS

LEADIR SUPER

'VALUE

%' R (LOOP FOR OWN)

SUBORGS

I N


'SUBORDINATE.ORGS

'VALUE

OWN)

i'p COLLECT

(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'LEADER SUPER 'VALUE%OWN)

METHOD

METHOD)

% (OVERALL.CLIMATE CALC

:1, (LAMBDA (THISUNIT)% (PUT VALUE THISUNIT

% OVERALL.CLIMATE

:". (AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

% PERSONS

IN


'MEMBERS OF ORG

-VALUE

-OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUE PERSONS

- 'OVERALL CLIMATE

VALUE

% 'OWN)))*. . (LOOP FOR

.p..SUB ORG S,* IN*J. (GET.VALUES THISUNIT

'SUBORDINATE.ORGS

'VALUE

OAN)

COLLECT

(GET VALUE SUBORGS 'OVERALL CLIMATE 'VA

LUE OWN))))))

ME I HOD

* .METHOD)

(PERSONAL.NEEDS CALC

ILAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT

,* 'PERSONAL NEEDS

,% (AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS% I N


'MEMBERS OF ORG

' VALUE

* "OWN)COLLECT

(GET VALUE PERSONS

V'ALUE

(LOOP FORSUBORGS

(4.

J. .0 ...... . .... . .

0 .. . ' .. ,,. L'.-..*. .% , .,.w- .,. '. ',' %'..j

190

.%

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT'SUBORDINATEORGS

*'VALUE* OWN)

COLLECT

}E -OWN)))))) (GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'PERSONAL NEEDS 'VALMETHODMETHOD)(PHYSICAL. ENVIR.CALC(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'PHYSICAL, ENVIR


IN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT'MEMBERS.OF

ORG

'VALUEOWN

W. COLLECT(GET.VALUE PERSONS

;PHYSICAL ENVIR5%.

'VALUE_-r..,

' OWN)))

(LOOP FORSUBORGSSIN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT

'SUBORDINATE ORGS.5-'VALUE-0 W.N" .""

' OWN); ' 'i 'C O L L E C T' u ')(GET

VALUE SUBORGS 'PHYSICAL ENVIR 'VAL/s. UE 'CWN)fl))))

METH)OD

METHOD)(REWARDSYS CALC(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'REWARD SYS'AVLHAGE OF (LIST kAVLRAGEOF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS


'MEMBLRS OF ORGV A L U E

'OWN)COLI FrT.5'r (GEl VALUE PERSONS

5I*P CW A )RD SYSS A LUE

OWN))(LOOP FOR

SUBORGS

I N

(GET VALUES THISUNITSHJBOR. INATE ORG'VA I I)['(-) * t4

%" COLLECT(GET VALUE SUB ,GGs REPARD Sr 'VALUE

("ANAPDS GOALS CAL:AMBDA ( H) SuN IT

-.

191

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT

'STANDARDS GOALS

(AVERAGE OF (LIST (AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS

IN


'MEMBERS OF ORG

VALUE

OWN)COLLECT(GET VALUE PEPSOj:

'STANDARDS GOALS

' VALUE

* OWN)

(LOOP FORSUBORGS


'SUBOROINATE ORGS

'VALUE

' OWN)COLLECT

L(GET VALUE SUBORGS 'STANDARDS GOALS 'VALuE 'OWN)) ))))

METHOD

METHOD)

* (STRESS.CALC

(LAMBDA (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'STRESS

(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FUR

% PERSONS

IN


MEMBERS OF ORG

'VALUE

OW4N ICOLLECT

(GET VALUE PERSONS- , • tRESSi. 'VALUE

'CLE OWN)))

(LOOP FORSUBORGS

I N

(GET VALUES THISUNIT'SUBORDINATE ORGS

'VALUE

'OWN)COLLECT

*(GET VALUE SUBORGS 'STRESS 'VALUE 'OWN)

vE T HOD

METHOD))

L MATE vARIABLEs

'LT ' '27-jor-1987 11 55.43" -HOLT ." 3-Feb-1987 23 07 53 )

.ARIABLES)

S;EA3SES GENERICUNI TS) )

,,MM EFFECTIVENESS NIL NIL #[-1 I NIL ((CARDINALIT/ MAX (1 ) (C(.MME T -'ect

L, L 16 L.UN rUL NIL N IL #j -I I NIL ( ARD INAL I I MAX A I )) (.UMMLINT e ,

SINTERPERSO:.AL REL NIL NIL 11-i I] NIL ((CARDINALIT r MAX (II) (C -MMEtT lec ,

IL-- .. -..- '

192

(JOB EVALUATION NILNILN- I]L0 f-1 1 ]NIL

(%CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Hackman and Oldham 1'

(LEADER SUPER NIL NIL )[-1 11 NIL ((CARDINALITr MAX (1)) (COMMENT Se,rsl 19

83 ")))(PERSONAL NEEDS NIL NIL j[-1 1) NIL ((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT -Secrst

1983 ))PHTSICAL ENVIR NIL NIL #[-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALIT( MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist

1983 )))

(REWARD SYS NIL NIL j[-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrst 1983")))

(STANDARDS GOALS NIL NIL #[-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secrist

983 ) ))(STRESS NIL NIL #[-1 1] NIL ((CARDINALITY MAX (1)) (COMMENT "Secr,3t 1983")))

(OCRGANIZATIONAL ELEMENTS

'NOLT - '27-Jon-1987 11 56 22". HOLT . 21-Apr-1987 14 17 05")

-(ENTITIES GENERICUNITS))

,CLASSES GENERICUNITS))

N1 L

)MEMBERS OF ORG NIL NIL (INDIVIDUALS) NIL NIL)

(3'4ERALL.CLIMATE NIL NIL (#[-1 1]) NIL ((CARDINALITY MAX (1))))

(3VERALL PERr3RMANCENIL

NIL

(ICARDINALITY MAX (I))

(CCMMENT "The Dottom line of all performance measures See performance *eigrts ))

PERF3RMANCE WEIGHTS

ACHIEVEMENT EFFECTIVENESS

EFFICIENCY

EXCELLENCE

JOB MOTIVATION

JOB SATISFACTIONNEED FULFILLMENT

REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL

SELF REALIZATION)

NIL

M3MM EN T7r,15 welghts the relative importonce of the various performorce reis res

, oetermnn qng OVERALL performance ) )

B.,BORDINATE 3R3 vEIGHT• ",IL

L

*R3 ANIZATIONS)

NI

S-MMENT

T, elghts the rel .i e importance of this cS lrnz0 ,2n0 s00 n5 1 is I e

rInth pe~f m~jre ifl tx r, s l uIn

1O I NATE C R NI L NIL (;RCANIZATIT ' NIL N!L.'

IW.%

193

APPEUDfIX 17

IN Tilc fo1 I owin mIypothe tici I si tuati ons uorc wnle'I to v d idt (I u

UXPert SyStcd. MdnvlJerS Vjk!I asked to consider eacn sittuation '1nd

in li c ate how the Si tuditi on WOU I d df feCt thl~ tr 01' oI Z.1 Lio 0 u 11fl.LC I

w~~k . of thle per'for:nce :rhxasures on the f ol I miifg sc IL2:

t-r21t SI igh t tNo SI ijilt !I-fDccrtease flecredse Chang~e LIWiOVwlklit 1i..yIovL ent

Ac hieve:nen t . . . . . . . . . . .

E f f eti veflss 3...... 4 . . . . . .

Efficiency 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(Avoid dastced* effort)

- * ~~~Ex:ellIence 1 . . . . .. .3.... .....(!oing tuil i ty

work) o

±a'lizitionoflPoctnticil I . . . . * . .5

* . (ilotivated,* Best possiole)

(.Jo intucrcSL,

O~' need Fu Ift i 11, .ent 1......I . . . .

(high iori K,

Sel f-r,-iization I. . .. . . . .....(Sel f-csteu.I,

* Co, ipetu~n t)

0

194

(improvel a little, increase a lot, decrease (worsun) a little or

decrease a lot. The attitudes in each category follow eaCit

situation.

" iSituation 1.

You have received an iiproved i-nethod of co):b;Iicatiny ,i L yourN. eimployees. (This could be a new intercom, new handheld ratlios Or

K.. soe other :iethod appropriate for your work.) it is noid esir for

you to contdct themn and for thei to contact yoU.

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Little Inmris2 a Lot

I NFORIMATI ON. BELIEVABLE .CnI 14 ACCIIRATE. CU II .;VIS ." VAIL- AVTA-TMP U U PRV rii)j T IFE C E_,TI{ iS AV' 1f.TiF:1-

Td-s-res s h - n rFr mim, SA'TP7F f l1Y C-0; 1i, T P. VIF)Q I IFvariable) ETM( ,-MRRE-5PTTI C1Y ......

-TFIITJ E TCE ITflr Y lTT.IEEfTi (IW .-- PARTTfliT I 1) N.STV- IEN1EIT -- TCTSI ----

-- _GMFJ R--Pti-

{.p

mrr• .r

-l h.t-

0e

l.m'rJq~

Ef ff r IPW

.

• .-

*;*'"

195

Situation 2.

You recei ved new directives fro,-i superiurs Miich dic t a t t1C),

your work group will be organized, how your -.-'ork will be &,m! .ind

wh 1wl do the work. The stringent directives ire urideursliuidahl e

and have very little flexibility.

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Little Itncr aso d Lot

PARTICIPATIONi. [BELONG1(ING N1EED.FJiR. NEH.H11. .LESS.P9LETCV PT~rAinmj. -Tf7Tl OC E 7-J1) FR V I S TT

1,E STff rTI 0 1 S 1)TMCrsT1'TS--- NEFIFTiR- i F P!. .J FF.

SELF. ITROE11 P EM ffM7~7 FPFW T 10 NS --IH1F[lrjCE

A GRFFUI1=T1-0A L S* TTTJST

M TE~A I INT S

,YS7\TT=,TTh Nj-M 1M F TSEDTTlff P, jTr

WLM I I NTTTEP TDENJT.

ItjFTTTWJTTP1W)LVE1EN T

Ile

196

'p4, Situation 3.

You are directed to start i new pol icy where each ii1loy,

picks the work lie wants to do and sets his own work schedule. l

?.' will decide when he will finisi the work

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Little Incro-ise d Lot

flEED.FOR.SELF. GET.ALOIJG LEVEL. SUPERV I SI'I i3EI.,')H GI It'CONTROL GIUP .C--TfTR 0 ,1E]T, E 7TE-I - c ( I,_

A PPFI -TBTS Y TEU .1E -ir-=Yir i -& -PWN C f f A F 1011.MTY IFLFCT. -TTFFTCtT L.INRK ;1A1TFNrETr. -); I ) IJT--

JES tI E .-TIFFTTE-S- - i ,'f - p E ;L A-C1.7YFT 7PhTITV OP EiTTPR[- SS I F, - i,1 l ,'W 1"-1 T"-IFIAJ CE N E3-TF R-.F71) NE i Sirs-- I i)EPrirFr.

SI JE AT ETTIT ! K TWFIM E7_ --T 7 A I -TCI[-1GE -- lF IIl2,rU1,11-1T ). f) )v P?. v 1

* -- METTIOS -TTCY.......NEEWT . REITTITIlS

P7 =SF - - T1TISTA -RE-OF .PEOPLE•~~~~T --- (PT ,~

..."~ri .- WF-CT -.I P-0} I S

,.,

"'-p

m.4'

444 . . •w" '

w" .w w "'- 'LW., ' ', ., %'' ',.' "

'.i

0 . ( . # w . . ,, ": ,, ,m ,. ,. , - . , 4 I " i' w ( W " i

Situation 1.

Two of your e :ipl oyetes nave ci ;.iajor di sadjrel.:mit. Tht, ati)1 r

% er-.iployees in your group have strong opinions about it. Tlwy alIr"*

becolie very uiicorfortabl e whocnever the subjct is m-mig~iit ap.

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Li ttle IncLTSt a Lot

k, FREEEY0r.0F. ACCUJRATE.C0~1H

SANMFT -E .C,11; I TWS fFVt~T.C3lIi

rT7TIRMF (Th~l I- To

Mc-,T S F W, 11T TON

GE.AON

GRU -AT7R

198

Situation 5.

You are told to hi~ve your u:iployees 1wet for one hiour of fr'e

t i iie each week. They can use this tinle to p1 iy cirds, i ctiss

%d persondi interests, get to knoki eachl other 'Jr pirtici p)Jtt: ill any

1% other social activity.

De~crease d Lot Decrease a Little Increase d Little Increase, d Lot

SlIP.EFFICIENT CTIPLA INTS ACCURATE .CflTi 'I lE 0 .FJR .

PAY .TI ME TEAM hflU.IWORK TfI~TMS7W A1P - iMrliEM I I Allr E? Hl I~ COWJL TCT7,N4~fft

FfWEIT(51 i'F. S P EE C I1TIATPUTSWi PT TTE1TWITCE7.qITIfTY 11SE - W

EF~TT~7 IIJ)IlIWfrTITTT[E I iT M.11NITI

TNVTYE~rTIFi T 1 fBT

NE~ FR.71 ETT ITUrTIT.

*1*SW~T 7fiTTAU7

NE70 CEUJTFT I) .~ EC Kn

0~m LrFM 3VflL-YifMfl

TUSTNT e --

OR U.Sf

OR V-)FFIL.'RNETTI-.V- F

0uf(IF yfIr

rT~gfl5-..F 1)13AC

______ __ - - 199

Situlation S.

You receive a new supervisor who really knows nthtiork your

group does. He makes good decisions and handles difficult prublewis

well1. He is well liked by all your tmiployet s.

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Little Incr'QdS( a Lot

USE.OF. CONFLICT.DE1ANDS ACCURATE. CliIi SlIP.F)ECISIVERES3UiCES COMFIL ICT. IlTEAWEC)i S[JPTFFFETrIVETa -stress WSSTMTH N T FUNT1E-SS - SUP -FAnFffvariable) TfVl En wt IT . IA; E TO I T

W T1JP-. M-Mm

1MCEf - -TX P E:T AT 10 11SS tPT.AfPqrEC I AT I V E

3UP.fhF~E1

TIMfTOffL

TNFUIWTC EflIPFMCOhIT1)RK

TM=F5VE. 11ORK

RATTh?RESP-OT13IL ty

TIE =T1-VTT RK

0

200

Situation 7.

Your organization receives avery ld't aint Of I.J90-mIS

uninteresting work. The work is not very ioportint, rmt mst stil11

be done. The work is highly repetitive.

()ecrease a Lot Decrease ai Little Increas, a Little Increase a Lot

GR3UP.PL[ASJRE FAIR~NESS AB IL ITY. TD. D').3READTH. T~R-MI NT . W

S INTIF I CICE ---R F-709 K N?RU7M'r'hE.F.I'R EFET I rIV P E7STd , -.f1F[I (TT.V/V1W rSTM=11 IMTiT. fTfTI =,,IT JFtTfT[S

WRT - C T1~1aTUNEEIETR. !IFFST tCTI GE-VTFLUM-M rfTCYTCTIA!EACjR=F E. E1a-7

-- NMIEVEME T -=1VETIENJrUP7F I 1 T

SUP.AI1s =rVEN

C!AL

nSFCLT T1

1S1LIEC

TT S~

201

Situation 3.

A reorydni zatiori forces your work yroup to ;iove to i Ait H !rCrlt

work locationi. The new I oca t i oi i s nio t v er y we]] si te ( Vo r you r

type of work. Several thi ngs prevent you or your jIroup fo.

i.1proving the work area for smi:e ti::ie.

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase' d Little Iricreise d Lot

A0EQIJATE . WOFK. ACCURATE .C1.1 UN~COOPER1ATIVESPACE AVAL.ITWO ITnfT .FSF[F

AD1TSTKLE. I NFE7VW -TTTL--USI)RTTMS IP7YRTSTPE L Y NIE I. TI1

APPRO)PRATCtT F-ANT 7 -- TUITCEPLACE - r4W W Flf1T . C ')HFF V

FLUYTIWE. -arW-Ofs-ASSIMIT* &TJ1RRlhI I NG S CAR1-T-FEOPLE C)TF1TITh1DA!f i

CQ!IPLAI RT isR CTF IITOF(. P\NAT11fjmrFJ-T.11 FM1, 7ffr

-uFICERhn LUACF1-7)W2Tr]FI1T~FfP-1 EITf1?f IJrL .10 R K ITTFTI7?fF)TRCF

RIIAL. W~ORK

L.%

202

Situation .

You rece~ive a ne~w supervisor who waste~s a lot of tji..i2. !1! lsahard tie .ia1kinfl (heciSion inS fd is hdrd to (1(!t 11OW~ ;'i -ALi. YOUr

eiiployees question his ability.

fecredse a Lot Decredse a Little Increase i Litdh Incrt ise a Lot

SliP.DECISIVE ACCURATE . M-1I NEE0. FOR .FEET3 rV'!ST~~T T I E WffW~rTkT7yj-j - fWf M7FYW71-1-. TPTF.fCMtNT F iIYITF(F7FPTC I I -- F ,MMry-

S! IP P lTT=E I11PrN. HiEM .1ff -IF.MTIflJNICATIOt1S CUI-

S A TT~h~i)- W C- Fiff- RMMIT

OPETTXP1ESS I0tJ

U~ -M UI TT I VE

717T mW

T1l-TT U ESUP -LE.V)ERWr.1-T j PIT IV E

FYFrTw

201

Situation 10.

For so:.ie reason, people in your orgdrii zitioli have sLUppoil

ta Jking to eichI other. They do niot sha re ififor: ii Li Oibi) t. the ,j h.

It seem~s hard to get inforfnation froia the;i. When they do tilk, you

Can not always bel ieve whadt they say.

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Little Incr(!ase a Lot

A ISOERS.AVAIL SATI SFIED .CTl111 HEED).FlR .FFEIMV_'\C

k,7)flF.FE[US(JE UIIIIIII1NICATIOF-IS

-ETVAEF7 UP'fl7EIPTEssi0mJ7Y!T ~ ARw.-OF.PLPPOiL

~TMT&wrT

MYJT7WER AT I V ES1]P.PTFnTMTi VE

J...I.

~~~~~.~~I I pa I WO pM% F ~ - .w7. ~ L~W 7 7'?J~

20-1

Situation 11.

Your organi zation~ recei vc, a newi piecec of eql p:1unt t1i -./as

badly needed. The equipi-ient could he office equip.;ierit, shop

equip.ient, tools or a -iotor vehicle. You have contyrol of Uu: i'.

equi pment.

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase d Little Incr, xise a Lot

D ES IR E .C IIAN GE FA I R NES S A) I I [111.'L.NffUTT - -.TxHAirT11!. TiE r

iTIFEUTIDCE E&PTK- CU1)[jWi7-F )TI PNEE'PFITLF. CARTF1T-f1'KJ-PLE r[iGI

l1ErIECTIT.IWORK MMF.PTPiASURE ThWTSrMHFETCT=EFlA}IS V~mrEWI T7

BRT7

'1EAfTT(fI7Oh

TSKTFe-f TC T CEA IFTFFE7 F-. -1 -fr

NEPtTE'. WORK

205

Situation 12.

A new super'vi sor dirrives. lie does [lot beI it've it' gi viuiJ OIt

than-youlettrs.lie has stopped giving tine off work 'Ind

Dlecrease a Lot Decr'ease a Little Increase a Little Increase I Lot

Slip. ANJSUERS .AVAIL CONFL IC F. VALUiE1) NEC!) .H-R.VPEC I AriVE RY~T C514[1lh~U Q ~ wIrrr:CE

C(YRl11 I CAT IT OS FfJ.*-C-MhIS I DERATE ttANFZWN7 f lI~fL'I T S

TT7hPERAT I E rIAIM MTLT. Th-i1JF1 C E

CA7TFFEOPL E

NCITPEI SI 1i IE t r

R (T1 T I V1 E

TiTVIESSITYE.IO RK

r0c d-,fe;

Situcitiun 13.

You arc, tol d to tdjke j lot of tii:ie and to work wi tO cic ot f

your emploQyees and supervi sors to (devel op a niew work 1 i.n for your,

group . The work plan wil11 outlinel the stdnddrds mik go&il fohr jork

in your area.

Decrease a Lot flecre dse a Little Increase a Littlo Increase d Lot

RE UR I CrT 101S (INCL EAR .RE-'PIYJS ACCUR -* TE .COAI CII;.

RTTFN17 MEI TMST-TI IE LY NEEFOP) -wA!iTTT~Ev1E T 5 AIT5FE F:YCY1T I IT IF C IrFF i) Co- IRK

INEP ITIFIT. Tfl7KT '-fl7

co T~D4~ 'T K1EPTIYNTco OiF[TCT.IY1TNAw9s PARI'TOTPT I'm.7-1IPTIIA7FTT-ITG -7TE-C I-S IM17-U7 17E~11FT- - PARTrrrArr)N.

n7TfPIME 011ACTS-M P11T-IC AICF

TRTP7T7CT

S11T AP1ITTV I

017 UTIKE. )F.1rf

fTTTT y.-ATTEWF

10jo~~~~ oD'~

Situation 11.

11neW sapervi sor arrives, lie stairts w.ki no a IO Ofa i2

pol icieS dL)OUt tingfls that do noat haiVe mning to lo ..'itj tliw 1jrk.

It is not ci ear what is expected ain( you oftell yet cafif ick Hi

directives. At the sa;,ie time, you' re pressuredI to doa lore ,jork Lind

(Ia it faster.

p. TclcaSe d Lot Decreise a Li ttl e I ncreise a Li. ite Ic cre.1se I Lat

TJWE'T7= I ' I S -7-1~ lII II C AT 1 .0 11S -TrfnWVf- l1T AkS I (TU E 'TIV M FOL OD - S ATTSrFc) 711T2 I-~ Tfk]Tr rc -FIR rc r.T.-

I M P, I T . NEUOFW .SLLF .

-V TMPT fAPIT iT R t7 TflFTYRI7AT M' f. AV IL

CfFP E OPL E

P7~Il~ Al7 N T.

IW 'iYETrh1hT

S IFP7'1VRCT2T E

C11PUTTITI-7,T UJIMUFT~ -71L S77 - -,VJ TFV

* ~ ~ ~ ~ ,g , n=~Tf~F1TT

208

Situation 15.

Your organization is given a significaint Li, ount of on)(2y to use

for recognizing good employees. The ioney can he( used fur pIl Iues,

certificatUS, time off, socidl events or cash aw<irds. You hive

control of the money.

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Little Incr,-ise a Lot

NEED. FOR. ACCURATE. COH: ;V C IPl. 1. lFNiTS"M" IP M-T E N T S -5=I lST V A T L M o0- - - l j '\ ---

NE F OR.TF E ITF13ACK ,TN-fME. IP I T-.- ,RMUP-.F I[13ACK--EE FOR.PAY. TME 7 IFO1TT -W.-'rIF

J S. RE's o I R C E S ENT-YI1ETr

TA.- STT ,-I F I C A,. ETT 7TAL7. QM1,I7

SU'

,

71-,T 7FEY,-C T _V k"1 I J E S

'

,,,,.%e 6,

6""

% Copy Cccjiablq to DTIC does U0ot

Situtio ~'permit fully legible zepxo~ducl "

Your orqdni za ti onl i s ss i gned ai very i,.Iportari prit'j 'c In jr L

Will1 receive a lot of dttention frovi ii.portant peopl12. Thc: joh is

hj r, ( but within the capab ilities of your u, yipoyecs. Al lost -,v,..iy

one of your e.-iployees will be invol ved on this hiqhly vi sible work.

[Tcrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Little Incr-(-js(2 i Lot

SUP .CJP[RATIVE AC C (I RATUE.(C] 1STh7 C, pT c TVATU IT-

!'E TwrI~- I~~Ft IIT

* 7~YHRETT1C LIIT lE [fATINfl

Jb DTFFTCL T.t1 WR K 7,1TIPT VT) IITii ~ ~ ERlfTT(1I f ?PTfATPI E

lrvCmnu IN[WfW 1WTTM F I L 1.11UF=Z-. Mp TET7 TUNL- . --

RT (CTi'i71 S I I iliE 1TT ASTf(% HT lTY-

A nITIThI- Fqti

T 1TIM IEIITIT

I'YflhTlf7F i) i

AC -MMTS N f. I

*~~. %EFTAN'~T1rrrr

'AA

210-- - - -- - -

Situation 17.

You are gjiven a neW dSSijn-writ for your work jroup. li S urk

is a little different than what your emiployees noriially do. iBeciuse

of tiie, you are forced to do the work right away. You issigni tho

work but do not have tine to explain the whole Job ti everybody.

Decrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Little lnICrcdSe a Lot

,OPCOD ACCURATE. COOH~ NEED.FOR.FEE~DBCKFED13rK- Al WE fS-.AWmEEF? -

A7?RTF7\VE . ?V7ML -TF- TIFLU -!! 'EN-TT, NUTEVABII. CO1;I I EETThE F71F .

c,)TWU3E. CMhTR7SP.TTTV'rFT -Tf1I[7________o___ Tir7Nv. rv C OVNETUI?

SATTISF'Tr'DlTCO0 11 -A'S-SBITTEN lTBELTINGC OVWF Vr. TWLO C S

~1Al7T~iMTT TFOThAF - 7AVFI

TV A~rOTF I

n ATTK(FIL . WORK

ST I IlIJL All IJf7. )R1

SffFPTC'T(VTflATh'

7TTF-rIY1TACK

M. T1'YfTT I T Y

.211

i1

Situation 13.

A new supervisor arrived. Tlis supervisor wimts to gut the

%work done right. lie clarified work responsibilities and

expectations. lie also lid awdy wi Lh so;ew of the cutifusiing pol icies

of the past.

D ecrease a Lot Decrease a Little Increase a Little Increase a Lot

COIIFL ICT. NEED.FOR.FEEDBACK ACCURATE.Cg9)i1 RESTRICTI)IJSAT I NT E.FOR.-E F. A-RTWT S-TAVA1_-- M-ff-F FA6I 7 --

C OTF-ITCT. cVlolTPflF-- r' -dS-E.-T ITT COTW -TM TTVALUES TITO .AVU[ C,)!]F.F1).

C rrfF=. - J7 77.--FT. YM-CTS (ATIV?,I]T. -- vP n., rI T I TI S-Im T"ITF -- If!" EMU -SI ILf~l)

-i ICE AR-. 1AN-(Tf1E7TT. ,If-I;T F r F T*1T'l0 ) R :e _RESP3)TS - II5TF --- -- __

C f) TIP1I!~ fTSo •E

-~~~M r7-' TR T I TII. 1'1

_S IITS Tiff TIV4E-CiITr-FE.TATTVF"Itm E. MIRTWv EK

"M-TM -TT. OF., I )

5.-

0

.'.--'

4..............-.=..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. W

2120

-p.,

.5.A,...,

APPENDIX P1

V COIIPUTER LISTING OF SPECIAL FUNCTIONS AND FUZZY ALW)RITI;ISt..

-. 5

--- 5.'

-- S This dppendix lists the LISP coilputer code definiriy the special

functions and constants used by the consultant.5,

5~*

5,

-.5.55*~

"-5.

S

5l

N

S

~.~1

'S

0

0

V.

S..

*5~ -

S.5

5%**.

*.5.'.

0

S 55 5. -S S S ~ 5: * ~ .4V'.~ ~ ~. . ~*. -

213

% Mooe:Zetog is3p; Pockog*:KEE; Boso: is

(defvar maxronge 1 .0) ;Maximum of input values

(defvor max.answer 7) ;Maximum input answer(defvar min.answer 1) ;Minimum input answer

(defvar mid.oflswer 4) ;Middle value at answers

(delvar positive 0.1) ;Constant to indicate a positivenumbe r

(defvar negative -0-1) ;Constant to indicate a negativenlum~ber

(detvar high 8.5) *Constant to indicate a high vol

u e(defvor low -0.5) ;Constant to indicate a low volu

(defvor real high 0.7) ;Constant indicat ing a very hign

(dvaru: real .l0w -0.7) ;Constant indicating a very low

(defvar plusroot 1.5) ;The root used by plu3.ave

and negaove in fuzzy algorithms

(defvor plusplus. root 2.0) ;The root used by plus-plusaove;and neg~negaove in fuzzy algori

thins

0(defun countatoms (a) ;Utility to count size of a list(coand (null a)8

(S t ri np a) 8)

((3ymbolp a) 8)

((NumberP a) 1)

(t (+ (countataMs (car a))(countatoms (cdr a))))))

(defun average~of (a. list) Average of the numeric values(prog (count) ;in a list

(setq count (countatoms o.list))(return (cond ((< count 1) 0) :List empty

(t(%.div (sum. a.1ist) count))))))

(defun sum. (3)- (cond ((null s) 8)

((Stringp s) 8)

((symbolp s) 8)((Numberp s) 3)(t (+ (sum (car s))(sum. (cdr s))))))

(defui greater than (a b) Special greater than

Ico na ( ( null a) n ilI) to avoid nuill problem~s

*((null b) nil)

((i istp a) (greater. than (overage of a) b))

((listp b) (greater than a (overage~of b)))

>a b) t)n nil))

(delun less than (a b) Special less than

(:ora (null a) nil .to avoid null problem~s

*((null b)( il3lsti (e ss t, f3n av e fag9e ult ob)

s( t P b (less than a (avernrie of b)))

tni

(defur more ( a i st) *A fuzzy algor it to in cre as e

(proag ( coun t)a .0 au a It tIe

seta count (countaloms a I,st)1

Copy avilaoble to DTIC do.. Dapemit tully legible repiodisata

v~~~ -. %: N *

214

(return (cond ((< count 1) 0) ;List empty(t(. (- (Xdiv (plus sum.root aoust) count) 0.5) 2))))))

(defun plus gum. root (3). .1 OP,(cond ((null 3) B)

((ato m 5 )(cond ((<-. s -1) 0)

(t (exp (Xdiv (log (+ (%.div s 2) 0.5)) plus. root)))))(t (+ (plus-suni.root (car s))(plus.Sum.root (Cdr 3))))))

(defun much.more (o.1st) ;A fuzzy algorithm to increase(prog (count) ;a value a lot

% ~(setq count (countotoms cilist))(return (cond ((< count 1) B);List empty

(t(. (- (7.div (plus plus~sum. root o.1 at) count) 0 5) 2)))

(defun ptus.plus-3um.roOt (a)(cond ((null s) B)

((am a) -)69v 'r, ~(cond ((<- s -)0

(t (exp (Xdiv (log (+ (%div s 2) 0.5)) plus-plus.rootfl))))(t (+ (plus.plus.3uni.root (car S))(Plu3.Plus.3um.root (cdr s))))))

(de fun iess (a. list) ;A fuzzy algorithm to decrease(prog (count) ;a value a little

(setq count (countotoms 0.1 at))

(return (cond ((< count 1) 0);List empty(t(o (- (%div (neg.sum.root oalist) count) 0.5) 2))))))

(defun neq.sum.root (a)

(cond ((null s) B)

(a tom a)(cond ((<- s -1) B)

(t (exp (- (log (+ (%div s2) 0+5)) plus~root)))))(t (+ (neg. sum, root (car a))(neg sum. root (cdr 3))))))

(cefun much. less (a list) ;A fuzzy algorithm to decrease(prog (count) ;a value a lot

* (setq count (countatoms 0.1 at))

(return (cond (<count 1) 0) ;List empty

(t. (- %div (neg~neg sum. root a list) count) B 5) 2)))))

(defun neg negasum root (3) Sum of nth rootst cid (( nul a ) 0)

((atom s)

(cond s 1 0)(t (exp (. (log (+ (%.div a 2) B 5)) plus plus root)))

(t (+ (neg neg sum~root (car s))(neg neg sum root (cdr s))))))

Co0iafbe oDcd"a

6~mtflVlgil etdc

*~ ~ *N -

215

APPENiDIX 19

COMPUTER LISTING OF METHODS

This appendix lists the definitions of all the o.ethods used by

the consultant to operate and control the system.

. a

A.;-

6s,

I.'W

A°

*.:.'

216

,.-Mode:LISP, Packag*:I<EE; Bose:10.

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>1 CONSULTANT.CONTROL::IND.CLIMATE.CALC~methodI (THISUNIT PERSON TO USE)

CALCI N

* (UNITSLOTNAMES 'IND.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC 'MEMBER)DO(UNITMSG PERSON.TO.USE CALC)))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>1.CONSULTANT.CONTROL: INPUT.INDIVIDUALS'MethodI (THISUNIT)(PROC (NAME.PERSON NAME.ORG)

(FORMAT T "Enter the name of the individual to be added.-%")

wn, (SETO NAME PERSON (READ))

(COND ((NULL NAME.PERSON)%(FORMAT T "END of individual entry.-7")

(RETURN NIL))((UNIT.CHILOP NAME.PERSON 'INDIVIDUALS 'MEMBER)

(FORMAT T "This person already exists.-7.")(RETURN NIL))

(T(CREATE.UNIT NAME.PERSON 'CONSULTANT NIL 'INDIVIDUALS)

% (FORMAT T "Which~ organization does -A belong to?-?.' NAME.PERSON)

(SETO NAME.ORG (READ))

(COND ((NULL NAME.ORG)(FORMAT T "'-A Must belong to some organization." NAME PERS

ON)(RETURN NIL))

((UNIT.CNILDP NAME.ORG 'ORGANIZATIONS 'MEMBER)IF % (ADD.VALUE NAME.ORG 'MEMBERS.OF ORG NAME.PERSON))

% J.(T (FORMAT T "-%PLEASE LOAD ORGANIZATIONS FIRST-%-%Z")))

(UNITMSG THISUNIT 'INPUT.ATTRIBUTE.VALUES NAME.PERSON)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>I.CONSULTANT.CONTROL:-VALIDATE .MOOEL~methodI (THISUNIT)(UNITMSG THISUNIT 'UPDATE. TOTALSYSTEM)

(LOOP FORGROUP.TO.TEST

IN

DO.(UNITMSG THISUNIT 'TEST ORG SITUATIONS GROUP.TO TEST)))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>1 CONSULTANT-CONTROL UPDATE.PERSON!methodi (THISUNIT PERSONTO USE )

(UNITMSG THISUNIT 'IND CLIMATE CALC PERSON TO USE)(UN ITMSG THISUNIT ' IND. INTERMEDIATE VAR CALC PERSON TO USE)(uNITMSG THISUfNIT 'IDOVERALL.CLIMATE CALC PROTOUSE)(UjNITMSG THISUNIT 'APPLY BEHAVIOR RULES PERSON TO US;,

UN I TMSG THISJNIT 'IND.OVERALL.PERFORMANCE.CALC PERSON .TO USE))

(DEFUN ICONSULIANT>1.CONSULTANT CONTROL TEST SITUATIONmethod) (THISUNIT WVHICHSI T ,A T 10 N

WHICH ORGANJIZAT

I ON(uNITMSO WHICH SITUATION 'TEST EFFECT OF SITUATION WHICH ORGANIZATION))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>1 CONSULTANT CONTROL UPDATE TOTAL SYSTEMimetiod] (THISUNIT)

IN% - ET VALUES *ORGANIZATIONS ORDER TO EVALUATE 'VALUE 'OWN

wtlITMSG T IISUN IT UPDATE URU URU))

DCEFUN I CONSULTANT~l CONSULTANT CONTROL ORG CLIMATE CALCmrethodl (THI StitI T

* GR~uP TO USE

%6 ,.% .

217

FOR CALC)(LOOP FOR

CALCI N(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ORG.CLIUATE.VAR.CALC 'MEMBER)DO(UNITMSG GROUP.lO.USE. FOR.CALC CALC)))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>I.CONSULTANTVCONTROL::IND.INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALCmethodl (THISUN I T

PERSON. TO. USE)

(LOOP FORCALCIN(UNITSLOTNAMES 'INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC 'MEMBER)DO(UNITMSG PERSON.TO.USE CALC)))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>1.CONSULTANT.CONTROL..1N0.OVERALL.CLIMATE.CALC'method (THISU

P ER SON. TO. USE)

(UNITMSG PERSON.TO.USE 'OVERALL.CLIMATE.CALC))

I' (DEFUNICONSULTANT>1. CONSULTANT .CONTROL::DISPLAY. IND. VALUES' met hodI

a (THISUNIT PERSON.TODISPLAY)(PROG NIL

(PUT.VALUE 'DISPLAY.PERSON 'NAME PERSON.TO.DISPLAY)

(LOOP FORVAR

IN

(UN! TSLOTNAMES 'CLIMATE.VARIABLES 'MEMBER)DO(PUT VALUE 'DISPLAY.PERSON VAR (GEI.VALUE PERSON.1O0ISPLAY VAR'V

LUE 'OWN)))(LOOP FOR

VARIN(UNITSLOTNAMES 'PERF'ORMANCE.OVERALL 'MEMBER)DO

-(PUT.VALUE 'DISPLAY.PERSON VAR (GET-VALUE PERSON.TO DISPLAY VAR 'VA

LUE -OWN))) DSLYPRO(PUT VALUEDSPAESN

'OVERALL-CLIMATE

(GET.VALUE PERSON.TO.DISPLAY 'OVERALL CLIMATE 'VALUE -OWN))(UNITMSG ' IMAGE.PANEL07581 'REDISPLAY)))

(OEF'UN ICONSULrANT>l CONSULTANT.CONTROL: ORG.PERFORMANCE.CALC!Methodl (THISUNITukcJP TO

*USE FOR CALC)

(LOOP FORCALCIN

(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ORG PERFORMANCE.CALC 'MEMBER)DO(UNITMSG GROUP.TO USE.FOR CALC CALC)))

*(DEFm) jCONSULTANT>1 CONSULTANT CONTROL INPUT AITRIGUTE VALUES'methodl (THISUNI

fjAME OFPERSON)(PN; 1 (ATT VALUE)

(COND ((UNIT CHILDP NAME OF PERSON 'INDIVIDUALS MEIMBER)( LOOP FOR

CLIMATE V

'/:% .% .. . . ....... ...... .-...

218

I N

( UNIT.CHILDREN 'ATTRIBUTES 'SUBCLASS)DO(LOOP FOR

ATTIN(UNITSLOTNAMES CLIMATE.V 'MEMBER)DO(FORMAT T

"%For -A, what is the value of -A?NAME.OF.PERSON

% ArTT)

A (SETO ATT.VALUE (READ))(COND ((NULL ATTIVALUE)

(PUT.VALUE NAME.OF.PERSON AT1 0))((> ATT VALUE MAX.ANSWER)(FORMAT T

-YENTRY GREATER THAN -0 WILL USE -0,

MAX .ANSWERMAX. ANSWER)

(PUT.VALUE NAME.OF.PERSON ATT MAXRANGE))((< ATTVALUE MIN.ANSWER)

(FORMAT T% -YENTRY LESS THAN -D. WILL USE -0 -7

*MI N. ANSWER

MI N. ANSWER)(PUT.VALUE NAME.OF PERSON ATI ( MAXRANGE)))

(T (PUT.VALUE NAME.OF PERSONATT

a. (%.DIV (- ATT.VALUE MID ANSWER)MID. ANSWER)

MAXRANGE) ) )) )(T (FORMAT T "-%-A was noat found.-%" NAME OF.PERSON'f))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>1.CONSULTANT.CONTROL: IND.OVERALL.PERFORMANCE.CALC!methodI (T0 HISuNIT

ERSON TO USE)(LOOP FOR

CALCIN(UNITSLOTNAMES 'IND.PERFORMANCE.CALC 'MEMBER)

W DO(UNITMSG PERSON.TO USE CALC)))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>l.CONSULTANT.CONTROL..TEST.ORG.SITUATIONS~methodl (THISUNIT GROUP TO TEST)

(LOOP FORS SITUAT IONIN(UNIT.CHILDREN '2.MANAGEMENT SITUATIONS 'MEMBER)

DO(UNITMSG SITUATION 'TEST.EFFECT OF.SITUATION GROUP.TO TEST)))

(OEFjN (CONSULTANT1l CONSULTANT CONTROL UPDATE ORG'Methodl (THISUNIT GROUP TO Li

SE FDR CALC)

* r~p FO0R

PERSON TO USE

IN-LT VALULS GROUP TO USE FOR LALC ME M8 ER'S of Uk ' ~ALL UOWN~

k U NI TUMS( IH I bU NI I UJPDATE PLR',OPN FILRH N TO UI.(UNITUSG THISUNIT 'ORG CLIMATE CALC GROUP TO USE FOR CALC)

I~r- UNITmSG THISUNIT *ORG PERFORMANCE CALC GROUP TO USE FOR CALC))

%

% . '~ . . . ~ .. % .* * . .' .. . , ' ~.- *

219

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>l.CONSULTANT.CONTROL::DISPLAY.ORG.VALUES!methodI (THISUNIT

ORGAN IZAT 10N. TO. DISPLAY)

(PROG NIL(PUT.VALUE 'DISPLAY.ORG 'NAME ORGANIZATION.TO.DISPLAY)

(LOOP FORVAR

I N(UNITSLOTNAMES 'CLIMATE.VARIABLES 'MEMBER)

DO(PUT .VALUE 'DISPLAY.ORG

VAR

(GET.VALUE ORGANIZATION.TO.DISPLAY VAR 'VALUE -OWN)))

(LOOP FORVAR

IN

(UNITSLO1'NAMES 'ORG.PERFORMANCE.MEASURES 'MEUBER)

"p DO(PUT VALUE 'DISPLAY.ORG

VAR(GET.VALUE ORGANIZATION.TO.DISPLAY VAR 'VALUE -OWN)))

(PUT.VALUE 'DISPLAY.ORG'OVERALL. CLIMATE

(GET.VALUE ORGANIZATION.TO.DISPLAY 'VRL.LMT VLE'

% WN))(PUT.VALUE 'DISPLAY.ORG

E OW) (GET.VALUE ORGANIZATION.TO.DISPLAY 'OVERALL.PERFORMANCE 'VALU

(UNITMSG 'IMAGE.PANELe7441 'REDISPLAY)(UNITMSG 'IMAGE.PANEL02481 'REDISPLAY)))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>l CONSULTANT.CONTROL: :APPLY.BEHAVIOR.RULES'methodl (THISUNITPERSON TO USE)

(LOOP FORMEASURE

IN

* (UNITSLOTNAMES 'IND.PERFORMANCE.MEASURES 'MEMBER)

DO(REMOVE.ALL LOCAL.VALUES PERSONTO.USE MEASURE 'VALUE 'OWN))

s LOOP FORRULEIN(UNITSLOTNAMES 'BEHAVIOR.RULES 'MEMBER)

DO(UNITMSG 'BEHAVIOR.RULES RULE PERSON.TO.USE)))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>2.MANAGEMENT.SITUATIONS:TEST.EFFECT OF.SITUATION~methodi (THISUN I T

CR0

* UP TO TEST)(PROC

(A ACHIEVEMENT A.EFFECTIVENESSA EFFICIENCYA EXCELLENCE

A REALIZATION OF POTENTIALA JOB SATISFACTIONA NEED FULFILLMENT

*A SELF REALIZATION

A OV/ERALL PERFORMANCE

8 ACHIEVFMENT8 EFFECTIVENESS8 EFFICIENCY8 EXCELLENCE

B REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL

8 JOB SATISFACTION

*B NEED FULFILLMENT

%

c,

..... ~*..'.. *.%..% *

220

B SELF. REALIZATION

B OVERALL.PERFORMANCE)(COND((UNIT CHILDP GROUP.TOTEST 'ORGANIZATIONS 'MEMBER)

(SETO B.ACHIEVEMENT (GET.VALUE GROUP.TO.TEST 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VALUE -OWN))

(SETO B.EFFECTIVENESS (GET.VALUE GROUP.TO.TEST 'EFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE -OWN))

(SETO B.EFFICIENCY (GET.VALUE GROUP TO.TEST 'EFFICIENCY 'VALUE 'OWN))

(SETO B.EXCELLENCE (GET VALUE GROUP.TO.TEST 'EXCELLENCE 'VALUE 'OWN))(SETQ B.REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL (GET.VALUE GROUP TO TEST

'REALIZATION.OF POTENTIAL'VALUE

'OWN) )

(SETO B.JOB.SATISFACTION (GET.VALUE GROUP.TO.TEST 'JOB.SATISFACTION 'VALUE., 'OWN)

(SETO B.NEED.FULFILLMENT (GETVALUE GROUP.TO.TEST 'NEED.FULFILLMENT 'VALUE'OWN))

(SETO B.SELF.REALIZATION (GET.VALUE GROUP.TO.TEST 'SELF.REALIZATION 'VALUE

'OWN))(SETO B.OVERALL.PERFORMANCE (GET.VALUE GROUP.TO.TEST 'OVERALL.PERFORMANCE

VALUE 'OWN))(UNITCOPY GROUPTO.TEST 'HOLD.GROUP)

(UNITMSG 'I.CONSULTANT.CONTROL 'DISPLAY.ORG.VALUES GROUP.TO.TEST)

' (LOOP FORPERSON

N I N(GET.VALUES GROUP.TO.TEST 'MEMBERS.OF.ORG 'VALUE 'OWN)

DO

(UNITMSG '1.CONSULTANT.CONTROL 'DISPLAY. IND.VALUES PERSON)

(LOOP FORATT

I N

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'INCREASE.A.LITTLE)

DO(PUT.VALUE PERSON ATT (MORE (GET.VALUE PERSON ATT 'VALUE 'OWN))

(LOOP FOR

ATT

IN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'INCREASE.A.LOT)

DO(PUT.VALUE PERSON ATT (MUCH.MORE (GET VALUE PERSON ATT 'VALUE '

CWN))))I LOOP FORATT

IN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'DECREASE.A.LITTLE)

DO

(PUT.VALUE PERSON ArT (LESS (GET.VALUE PERSON ATT 'VALUE 'OWN))

(LOOP FORATT

IN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'DECREASE.A LOT)

DO(PUT.VALUE PERTON ATT (MUCH LESS (GET VALUE PERSON ATT 'VALUE

..- - OWN ))))(UNITMSG 'l CONSULTA CONTROL 'DISPLAY ]ND VALUES PERSON))

UNITMSG 'I CONSULTANT CON- OL 'UPDATE ORG GROUP TO TEST)

( T li A ACHIEVEMENT (GET VALUE GROUP TO TEST 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VALUE 'OWN))

(SETO A EFFECTIVENESS (GET VALUE GROUP TO TEST 'EFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE 'OWN))

(SETO A EFFICIENCY (GET VALUE GROUP TO TEST 'EFFICIENCY 'VAIUE 'C0 N))

-SETQ A EXCELLENCE (GET VALUE GROUP TO TEST 'EXCELLENCE 'VALUE 'OWN))

( ,LIU A REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL (GET VALUE GROUP TO TEST'REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL'VALUE

* 'OWN))

(SETO A JOB.SATISFACTION (GET VALUE GROUP TO TEST 'JOB SATISFACTION 'VALUE

0 . . ..

' '221

OWN))(SETO A.NEED.FULFILLMENT (GETVALUE GROUP.TO TEST 'NEED,FULFILLMENT 'VALUE

-OWN))(SETO A.SELF.REALIZATION (GET.VALUE GROUP.TO.TEST 'SELF.REALIZATION 'VALUE

%: -OWN))(SETO A.OVERALL.PERFORMANCE (GET.VALUE GROUP.TO-TEST 'OVERALL.PERFORMANCE

VALUE 'OWN))

(UNITMSG "I.CONSULTANT.CONTROL 'DISPLAY.ORG.VALUES GROUP.TO TEST)(UNITCOPY 'HOLD GROUP GROUP.TO.TEST)

%' (UNITMSG THISUNIT 'RESET.ATTRIBUTES GROUP.TOTEST)

(WITH-OPEN-FILE(FILE "X5:HOLT;SITUATION-RESP"

:DIRECTION:OUTPUTI[ F-EXISTS

;APPEND

S:IF-DOES-NOT-EXIST:CREATE)

(FORMAT FILE "-%For organization -A" GROUP.TO.TEST)

(FORMAT FILE "-%In situation -A" THISUNIT)

(FORMATFILE

"- ACHIEVEMENT Before -6.3 ... F After -6,3, .. F Difference

-6.3., F"B.ACHIEVEMENTA.ACHIEVEMENT

* (- A.ACHIEVEMENT B.ACHIEVEMENT))

(FORMAT"'T':'"F I L E

"-%EFFECTIVENESS Before -6.3...F After -6,3...,F Differenc

63e 6 .3, ,F

B.EFFECTIVENESSA.EFFECTIVENESS(- A.EFFECTIVENESS B.EFFECTIVENESS))

(FORMATFILE"- EFFICIENCY Before -6.3 ... F After -6.3, , F Differenc

e -6,3 .,F"B.EFFICIENCYA EFFICIENCY(- A EFFICIENCY B.EFFICIENCY))

(FORMATFILE

"-%EXCELLENCE Before -6.3 ... F After -6.3, . F Differenc

- ,e 36 . .F

B EXCELLENCEA.EXCELLENCE(- A.FXCELLENCE B.EXCELLENCE))

(FORMAT

* FILE

"-%REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL Before -6,3, ,.F After -6.3 .. F Differenc

e -6.3 , .F"

B.REALIZATION OF POTENTIALA REALIZATION OF.POTENTIAL(- A REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL B REALIZATION.OF POTENTIAL))

(FORMATzA. FILE

" -"%JOB.SATISFACTION Before -6,3,.. F After -6,3,...F Differenc

e -6 3. F"

- B JOB SATISFACTIONS-_ A JOB SATISFACTION

-- A JOB SATISFACTION B JOB SATISFACTION))

(FORMAT1: FILE

" -NEED FULFILLMENT Before -6.3,,.F After -6.3.,,F Differen

S ce -6.3 F

B NEED FULFILLMENT

S

% %.

-.- - --" .--- - .-. .-.-'-" ",x-' . " - . , - :%::.Z.g-: . .;: v. ',A.

222

A. NEED.FULFIL LMENT

(- A.NEED.FULFILLMENT B.NEED.FULFILLMENT))(FORMATF ILE'-7SELF.REALIZATION Before -6.3...F After -63...F Differeic

e -6.3 . .F"

B. SELF.REALIZATIONA.SELF.REALIZATION(- A.SELF.REALIZATION B.SELF.REALIZATION))

(FORMATF IL E"-,OVERALL.PERFORMANCE Before -6.3 ...F After -63.. Difference

-6 .3 ... F "

B.OVERALL. PERFORMANCEA.OVERALL.PERFORMANCE(- A.OVERALL PERFORMANCE B.OVERALL.PERFORMANCE))))

(T (FORMAT T "-%ORGANIZATION -A NOT FOUND" GROUP.TO.TEST)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>2.MANAGEMENT.SITUATIONS:RESET.ATTRIBUTESImethodI (THISUNIT

WORK GROUP

TO.RESET)

(COND ((UNIT.CHILOP WORK.GROUP.TO.RESET 'ORGANIZATIONS 'MEMBER)

(LOOP FORPERSONI N(GET.VALUES WORK.GROUP.TO.RESET 'MEMBERS.OF.ORG 'VALUE -OWN)

DO

(LOOP FORATTI N(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'INCREASE.ALITTLE)

DO(PUT.VALUE PERSON ATT (LESS (GET.VALUE PERSON ATT 'VALUE '0

WN))

(LOOP FORATTI N

:'T.VALUES THISUNIT 'INCREASE A LOT)DO(PUT.VALUE PERSON ATT (MUCH.LESS (GET.VALUE PERSON ATT 'VAL

UE -OWN))))(LOOP FOR

ATTIN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT *DECREASE.A LITTLE)

DO(PUT.VALUE PERSON ATT (MORE (GET.VALUE PERSON ATI 'VALUE -0

WN))))

(LOOP FORATT

*~ IN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'DECREASE.A LOT)

DO(PUT.VALUE PERSON ATT (MUCH.MORE (GET.VALUE PERSON ATT *VAL

UE 'OWN)))))(UNITUSG -1 CONSULTANI.CONTROL 'ORG.CLIMATE.CALC WORK.GROUP.TO.RESET)

(UNITMSG 1 .CONSULTANT CONTROL 'ORG.PERFORMANCE CALL WORK GROUP TO RESE

(FORMAT

"-%.ORGANIZAT ION -A NOT FOUND"WORK.GROUP TO RESET)))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.CLIMATE.VAR CALC PHYSICAL.ENVIR CALC!methodj (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT* 'PHYSICAL.ENVIR


0%

223

ATTRI N

(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT.PHYSICAL ENVIR 'MEMBER)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'VALUE -OWN)))))

p (DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC:COMM. EFFECTIVENESS.CALC!methodI (THISUNI

(PUTVT)U THISUNIT(PUIALUE'COMM. EFFECTIVENESS

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATTR

I N(UNITSLOTNAMES *ATT.COMM.EFFECTIVENESS 'MEMBER)COL LECT

0 ~(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'VALUE -OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC: LEADER.SUPER.CALC~methodI (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE -HISUNIT

'LEADER. SUPER

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATTRI N

(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT.LEADER.SUPER 'MEMBER)

COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC:STANDARDS.GOALS.CALC!methodl (THISUNIT).e. (PuT.VALUE THISUNIT

'STANDARDS. GOALS(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATTRI N

(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT.STANDARDS.GOALS 'MEMBER)

COL LECT


% (DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC:INTERPERSONAL.REL.CALC'McthodI (THISUNIT

(PUT VALUE THISUNITINTERPERSONAL.REL

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATTRI N(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT.INTERPERSONAL.REL 'MEUBER)

COLLECT


fDEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND CLIMATE. VAR.CALC: STRESS.CALC'methodl (THISUNI T

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT'STRESS(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATTR

(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT.STRESS 'MEMBER)

COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'VALUE -OWN)))))

(DEFIWN lCONSULTANT>IND.CLIMATE.VAR CALC:PERSONAL NEEDS.CALC~methodl (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNITPERSONAL .NEEDS(AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

A TT R

I N

(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT PERSONAL NEEDS 'MEMBER)* COL LECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'VALUE -OWN)))))

6

224

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC REWARD .S'S.CALC'methodI (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'REWARD. SYS

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATTRI N

(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT.REWARDSYS 'MEMBER)COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'VALUE 'OWN))),)

(DEFUN jCONSULTANT>IND.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC:JOB. EVALUATION.CALC!Methodl (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'JOB. EVALUAT ION

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATTRIN(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT.JOB.EVALUATION 'MEMBER)

% COLLECT% (GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INO.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC: IND.ORG.CONTROL.CALC'methodl (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

INO.ORG.CONTROL

N" (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

(UNITSLOTNAMES 'ATT.IND.ORG.CONTROL 'MEMBER)* COLLECT-U (GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTR 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.PERFORMANCE.CALC:JOB.MOTIVATION.CALC'methodl (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'JOB .MOTIVATION.OVERALL(AVERAGE.OF (GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'JOB.MOTIVATION 'VALUE 'OWN))))

COEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.PERFORMANCE.CALC:EFFECTIVENESS CAIC methodi (THiSUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'EFFECTIVENESS. OVERALL(AVERAGE.OF (GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'EFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE 'OWN))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.PERFORMANCE.CALC: EFFICIENCY CALC methodI (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'EFFICIENCY. OVERALL'EFCEY'VLE-W))(AVERAGE.OF (GET.VALUES THISUNIT'EFCNY'VLE OW))

cDEFUN ICONSULTANT>INO.PERFORMANCE.CALC. EXCELLENCE.CALC methodI (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNITV 'EXCELLENCE. OVERALL

(AVERAGE.OF (GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'EXCELLENCE 'VALUE 'OWN))))

* (DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.PERFORMANCE.CALC:REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL.CALC methodI (TH ISUN IT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT'REALIZATION.OF.POTENTIAL.OVERALL(AVERAGE.OF (GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL 'VALUE

OWN)))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.PERFORMANCE.CALC:ACHIEVEMENT .CALC methodI (THISUNI I)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'ACHIEVEMENT OVERALL

(AVERAGE.OF (GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VALUE 'OWN))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.PERFORMANCE.CALC.SELF.REALIZATION CALCimethodi (THISUNIT)(PUr.VALUE THISUNIT

SE LF REAL IZAT ION.OVERALL

* (AvERAGE.OF (GET VALUES THISUNIT 'SELF REALIZATION 'VALUE -OWN))))

F'l.W~. f

4v%00

% 225

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.PERFORMANCE.CALC: JOB.SATISFACTION.CALC!MethodI (THISUNIT)

'S. (PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

(AVERAGE.OF (GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'JOB.SATISFACTION *VALUE -OWN))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>IND.PERFORMANCE.CALC:NEED. FULFILLMENT.CALC!MethadI (THISUNIT)(PUI.VALUE THISUNIT

'NEED FULFILLMENT. OVERALL

(AVERAGE.OF (GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'NEED.FULFILLuENT 'VALUE -OWN))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC: INTRINSIC.REWARD.CALC!methodI (THISUNIT

(PUT.VALUE THISUNITINTRINSIC.REWARD

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATT.VALUE

pI IN(GET.VALUES ' INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

INTRINS IC.REWARD.MEMBERS

VALUE

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE -OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC:ADEOUATE. ENVIRONMENT .CALC!nmethodI (THIS

-LI U I T* (PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

* 'ADEOUATE. ENVIRONMENT(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT .VALUE

I N'P (GET.VALUES ' INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

'ADEQUATE.ENVIRONMENT. MEMBERS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT% (GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEF'UN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC:SATISFACTION.WITH GROUP.CALC!methodl (T

H ISUN IT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

* SAT IS FACT ION .WITH. GROUP(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT.VALUE

I N

(GET.VALUES ' INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES'SATISFACTION.WITH.GROUP.MEMBERS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT VALUE 'VALUE -OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR,CALC:ROLE.CONFLICT.CALC'methodl (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT

'ROLE CONFLICT(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT VALUE

*~ IN(GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

'ROLE CONFLICT MEMBERS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTIVALUE 'VALUE -OWN)))))

*(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE VAR CALC:JOB.CHALLENGE CALC~methodl (THISUNIT)

0%

226

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

* JOB.CHALLENGE(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT .VALUEI N(GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

* JOB.CHALLENGE.M~EMBERS

S VALUE

COLLECT :ON

* (OET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>lNTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC:TASK.COUPETENCE.CALC'mothodI (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'TASK. COMPETENCE(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT .VALUE

(GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

VALUEOWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE -OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC:EFFECTIVE.PARTICIPATION.CALC!methodl (T

HISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

EFFECTIVE .PART IC IPAT ION(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT.VALUE

IN


EFFECTIVE.PART IC IPAT ION.MEMeERS'VALUE-OWN)

V COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEOIATE.VAR.CALC:TEAMWORK.CALC'methodI (THISUNIT)

(PUI.VALUE THISUNITTEAMWORK(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT .VALUE

IN

(GET.VALUES ' INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES'TEAMWORK.MEMBERS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATTIVALUE 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC:INFLUENGE.ENVIRONMENT CALC~methudl (THI

SUN IT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

' INFLUENCE.ENVIRONMENT

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATT.VALUE

IN

(GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE VARIABLES

5,' 'INFLUENCE-ENVIRONMENT MEMBERS

'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT

(GET VALUE THISUNIT ATT VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE VAR CALC GROWIN.DEVELOP CALC!mlethodI (THISUNIT)

227

* (PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

GROWTH.DEVELOP(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT .VALUE

* IN

(GET.VALUES ' INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLESGROWTH. DEVELOP.MEMBERS

'VALUE'OWN)

* COLLECT


(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC: EXPECTATION.OF.REWARDS.CALClmethodI (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'EXPECTATION. OF. REWARDS(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT .VALUE

I N(GET.VALUES ' INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

EXPECTAT ION. OF. REWARDS. MEMBERS'VALUE-OWN)

COLLECT


(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC:PERSONAL.REL.COUPETENCE .CALC'MethodI (THI SUN IT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT.f 'PERSONAL. REL. COMPETENCE


J ATT .VALUEIN

(GET.VALUES ' INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES'PERSONAL.REL.COMPETENCE.MEMBERS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT

(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE -OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC: EXTRINSIC.REWARD.CALC~methodI (THISUNIT

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

Ex TRINS IC .REWARD(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT .VALUE


EXTRINSIC .REWARD. MEMBERS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE -OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>INTERMEDIATE.VAR.CALC; IMPORTANCE.OF.REWARDS CALCimethodI (THI

SUN I T(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

IMPORTANCEOF.REWARDS

(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FORATT .VALUE

IN(GET.VALUES 'INTERMEDIATE.VARIABLES

IMPORTANCE OF.REWARDS.MEMBERS'VALUE

COLLECT 'ON


228

(OEFUN ICONSULTANT,INTERmEOIATE.VAR.CALC:SKILL.VARIETY.HO.CALClm~thodI (THISUNIT

(PUT.VALUE THISUNITSKILL. VAR IETY.NO(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATT.VALUE


'SIML.VARIETY HO.MEMBERS'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEFUN 1CO.NSULTANT>INTERUEDIATE.VAR.CALC :OVERALL.CLIM4ATE.CALCimethodI (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'OVERALL.CLIMATE(AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

ATI.VALUEI N


'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT* (GET.VALUE THISUNIT ATT.VALUE 'VALUE 'OWN)))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC:PHYSICAL. ENVIR.CALCImethodI (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'PHYSICAL. ENVI R(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS

', ~'IN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT

'MEUBERS .OF. ORG'VALUE

COLLECT(GET.VALUE PERSONS

'PHYSICAL. ENVIR'VALUE'OWN))

(LOOP FORSUBORGSIN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE.ORGS 'VAL

% UE 'OWN)COLLECT

NOWN)))))) (GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'PHYSICAL.ENVIR 'VALUE

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC:COMM. EFFECTIVENESS.CALC'methodl (THISUNI

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'COMM. EFFECTIVENESS(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

* PERSONS


MEMBERS.OF ORG

Z..I 'VALUE(GET.VALUE PERSONS

* 'COMM. EFFECT IVENESSVALUE

6e

229

-OWN)))(LOOP FOR

SUBORGS

IN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE.ORGS 'VAL

UE 'OWN)

% COLLECT

% ~(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'COMEFFECTIVENESS 'VAL'pF

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC: LEADER.SUPER.CALC!methodl (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

%q 'LEADER. SUPER(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONSIN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT'UEMBERS.OF. ORG'VALUE-OWN)


'LEADER.-SUPER

% 'VALUE

*(LOOP FOR-ON

SUBORGS

IN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE.ORGS 'VAL

UE 'OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'LEADER.SUPER 'VALUE 'OW

- ' (DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.CLIMATE.VAR.CALC:STANDARDS.GOALS.CALC!methodl (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'STANDARDS. GOALS

AU:(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR* PERSONS

IN(GET .VALUES TN ISUN IT

'MAEMBERS OF.ORG

VALUE'OWN)


'STANDARDS. GOALS

'VALUE

(LOOP FOR'ON)

SUBORGSI N

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE OROS 'VALUE 'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'STANDARDS GOALS 'VALUE

* 'OWN))))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORGCLIMATE.VAR CALC.INTERPERSONAL.REL CALCimethodi (THISUNIT

(PUT.VALUE THISRSNALRE


PERSONS

IGE VALUES THISUNIT'r 'MEMBERS-OF ORG

%

230

S 'VALUEOWN))

(GE.VAUEST(GE T.VALU PRONAT.RS'A

(GETVALU SUBRGS INTERPERSONAL.REL VL

E 'OWNOWN)))

"'5.U ICNUTN>R .LMT .A .ACSUB RSS.ACm to I(HSN

'5' IN~~~(GET.VALUES T HISUNIT UODNT.RS'A

UOL EC -ONWCO LEC

~~~(GET.VALUE OGS'TEPERSONALSRELS 'VAL

UE -OWN))))

(DEUN CONULTNT>RGCLIATE.VA .CLCSRSS CL mtd(HSNT

INN

~~~(GET.VALUES THISUNIT UODNT.RS'A

UE 'OWN)

CCOLLECT(GETV (GEIVALUEG 'STESS 'STRUES -O VAL))

UE TVAU 'OWN)))T

(AERGEOF(LST(AEREOF(LOOP FOR

SU PEORGNSIN~~~(GET.VALUES THISUNITRNAERS VL

UE 'OWN)COLLECTT~~~(GET.VALUE PE S RSOVAUN 'W)))

'PERSONAL.L.NEEDS

(AEAEFrLSAVRO (LOOP FORSPERSONS

' IN

~~~(GET.VALUES THISUNIT UODNT.RS'A

UE 'OWN)

CCOLLECT

*(GET.VALUE SUOG PERSONSNES'AU

OWNOWN)))

(GET.VALUES THSUITIBODIUT.RO 'A

(GETVALU SUERS 'ENSANED 'AUOW )) ))

%DFU %%NUTN>R.LMTEVRCL.EADSSCACmtol(HSN(PUVALUE THUI

A.

-- 231


MEMBERS.OF ORGVALUEOWN)


'REWARD .SYS

'VALUE-OWN))

(LOOP FORS UBOR GSI N

'A,,(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE.OROS 'VAL

'A UE 'OWN)COLLECT

(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'REWARO.SYS 'VALUE 'OWN)

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.CLIMATE.VAR .CALC:OVERALL.CL!MATE ."ALC:!ffethod I (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'OVERALL.CLIMATE(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONSIN-

S (GET.VALUES THISUNIT'MEMBERS. OF. ORG'VALUE'OWN)


'OVERALL.CLIMATE'VALUE'OWN)))

(LOOP FORSUB ORG S

IN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE.ORGS 'VAL

UE -OWN)COLLECT

(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'OVERALL.CLIMATE 'VALUE

'OWN))))))

(DEFUN 1CONSULTANT>ORG. CLIMATE. VAR.CALC:JOB. EVALUAT ION.CALC!methodI (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'JOB. EVALUATION(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS* IN


'MEMBERS.OF. ORG' VALUEK~ W ON)

COLLECI(GET.VALUE PERSONS

JOB EVALUATION'VALUE'OWN)))

(LOOP FORS UB ORG SIN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE ORGS 'VAL

* - UE -OWN)COLLECT 'O.VLAIN'AU(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'O VLAIN'AU

OWN))))))

0.Z%.

* 232

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.CLIUATE.VAR.CALC: INO.ORG.CONTROL.CALC~methodI (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALLIE THISUNIT

IND.ORG.CONTROL(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONSI N

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT OG

'VALUE

COLLECT ON

(GET.VALUE PERSONSIND.ORG.CONTROL

' VALUE'OWN))

(LOOP FORSU BORG SI N(GET.VALUES THISUINIT 'SUBORDINATE.ORGS *VAL

UE 'OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 1IN0.ORG.CONTROL 'VALUE

OWN))))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.PERFORMANCE.CALC:JOB.MOTIVATION.CALC'methodI (THISUINIT)

* (PUt.VALUE THISUINIT'JOB.MOTIVATION(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONSIN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT

'.1' 'MEMBERS. OF. ORGVALUE' OWN'

COLLECT

*(GET.VALUES PERSONS'JOB MOTIVATION'VALUE'OWN

(LOOP FORSU BORG S

I N(GET.VALUES THISLINIT 'SUBOROINATE.ORGS 'VAL

UE 'OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'JOB-MOTIVATION 'VALUE

OWN))))))

* (DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.PERFORANCE.CALCEFFECTIVENESS.CALCmethodl (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THlSUNIT

EFFECTIVENESS(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONSIN


MEMBERS OFORG

COLLECT

(GET.VALUES PERSONS

'EFFECTIVENESS'VALUEOWN))

(LOOP FOR* SUBORCS

IN(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE OROS 'VAL

%

....... AA

233

Si uE 'OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'EFFECTIVENESS 'VALUE '0

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.PERFORMANCE.CALC:EFFICIENCY.CALCmethodI (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'EFFICIENCY(AVERAE.UF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR


'MEMBERS.OF.ORG'VALUE

:' OWN )

COLLECT(GET.VALUES PERSONS

'EFFICIENCY'VALUE

'OWN)))

(LOOP FOR"d SUBORGS

IN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE.ORGS 'VALUE 'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'EFFICIENCY 'VALUE -OWN)

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.PERFORMANCE.CALC:EXCELLENCE.CALC!aiethodI (THISUNIT)(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT

'EXCELLENCE(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONSIN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT'MEMBERS.OF.ORG

'VALUE

'OWN)

COLLECT

(GET.VALUES PERSONS'EXCELLENCE

'VALUE'OWN)))

(LOOP FORSUBORGSIN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE.ORGS 'VALUE -OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'EXCELLENCE 'VALUE 'OWN)

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.PERFORMANCE.CALC.REALIZATION.OF POTENTIAL CALC!methodl (THISUNIT

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT'REALIZATION OF POTENTIAL(AVERAGE OF (LIST (AVERAGE OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS

IN

(GET VALUES THISUNI f'MEUBERS.OF ORG*VALUE


'REALIZATION OF POT

%

I. ...

Iv- ... /.'.. ' ...-, -.:., .: . > ..,. . ,. .......-

234

ENTIAL'VALUE

-OWN)))(LOOP FOR

SU8ORCSI N(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBOROINATE.ORGS 'VAL

UE -OWN)COL LECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS

REAL IZATI ON.OF,.POTENT JAL

VALUE'OWN) )) )) )

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.PERFORMANCE.CALC:Z.OVERALL.PERFORM.CALC!methodI (THISUNIT

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'OVERALL. PERFORMANCE(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERFORMANCE.MEASURE

I N% (GET.VALUES THISUNIT

S.. 'PERFORMANCE. WE! GHT

'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUE THISUNIT

PERFORMANCE. MEASURE'VALUE-'OWN))

(LOOP FORSU BORG S

IN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBOROINATE.ORGS 'VAL

UE 'OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'OVERALL.PERFORMANCE 'VA

A LUE 'OWN))))))

(DEFUN jcONSULTANT>ORG.PERFORMANCE.CALC:ACHIEVEMENTCALC'methodI ('HISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT'ACH IEVEMENT



'MEMBERS3 OF.ORG'VALUE'OWN)

COLLECT(GET VALUES PERSONS

'ACHI EVEMENT

'VALUE'OWN)))

(LOOP FOR

* SUBORGS

I N(GET VALUES THISUNIr SUBORDINAIL ORGS 'VAL

ujE 'OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'ACHIEVEMENT 'VALUE 'OWN

* (OEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG.PERFORMANCE .CALC;SELF REALIZAT ION CALC method I (THISUNI I)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT'SELF REALIZATION

wo 2

~~. %s

S1. ~.AN . 4 Al

235




'OWN)

COLLECT(GET.VALUES PERSONS

'SELF REALIZATION'VALUE'CWN)))

(LOOP FORSUBORGS

I N(GET.VALUES THISUNIT "SUBORDINATE.ORGS 'VAL

UE 'OWN)

COLLECT

(GETVALUE SUBORGS 'SELF.REALIZATION 'VALUE

'OWN))))))

(DEFUN ICONSULT&NT>ORG.PERFORMANCE.CALC:JOB.SATISFACTION.CALCmethodl (THISUNIT)

(PUT.VALUE THISUNIT'JOB SATISFACTION(AVERAGE.OF (LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONS



'OWN)COLLECT(GET.VALUES PERSONS

'JOB.SATISFACTION'VALUE

"" 'OWN)))

(LOOP FOR

SUBORGS%' IN

(GET.VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE ORGS 'VAL

uE 'OWN)COLLECT

(GET.VALUE SUBORGS 'JOB.SATISFACTION 'VALUE'OWN))))))

(DEFUN ICONSULTANT>ORG PERFORMANCE.CALC:NEED.FULFILLMENT.CALC!method (THISUNIT)

(PUT VALUE THISUNIT'NEED FULFILLMENT(AVERAGE.OF

(LIST (AVERAGE.OF (LOOP FOR

PERSONSIN(GET.VALUES THISUNI T

'MEMBERS OF ORG'VALUE


'NEED FULFILLMENT'VALUE'OWN)))

(LOOP FOf-SUBORGS

SIN

(GET VALUES THISUNIT 'SUBORDINATE ORGS 'VALUE OWN)

COLLECT

(GET VALUE SUBORGS 'NEED FULFILLMENT 'VALUE 'OWN))))

% %

236

VITA

James Richard Holt

His formal education includes a B.S. (1972) in Mechanical

Engineering from Utah State University and an M.S. (1973) in

Facilities Management from the Air Force Institute of Technology.

He was commissioned an officer in the U.S. Air Force in 1972 and has

served as a base civil engineering officer in Colorado, Alabama,

South Korea, Ohio, West Germany, Utah and Texas. He is now a Major

. assigned to the Graduate Engineering Management Department, School

of Systems and Logistics, Air University. His professional military

education includes Squadron Officers School, Air Command and Staff

College and many technical engineering courses. He married Suzanne

Hatch of Ogden, Utah in 1971 and they have five children ages 14,

12, 8, 6 and 3.

0 + .

[ °

0;::

i

,0 '.

c AOJ E.yeF'rzT_ 5Y57TM ADM - DTIC

Documents

Transcript of c AOJ E.yeF'rzT_ 5Y57TM ADM - DTIC