Task Engagement
by
Michael B. London
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Thesis Advisor: Suresh Srivastva
Department of Organizational Behavior
Case Western Reserve University
May 14, 1989
Task Engagement
Abstract
by
Michael B. London
The research discussed in this thesis concerns a study in which business students and managers
were surveyed, interviewed and observed in an effort to understand an individual's potential and
behavior in task situations. Two samples were studied, one focusing on scale construction and
reliability and the other on changes in the individual's disposition over time. From this research a
theory of Task Engagement was formed and a Task Engagement Style Inventory was developed.
Task Engagement concerns the personal and cultural attributions that give meaning to a task
situation, and an individual's frame of mind as he does his work. An individual's proficiency and
demeanor in task situations is seen as a function of three major factors; task, environment and Task
Engagement Style. A synergy of these factors increases the probability that a desired level of
performance and quality of work experience can be achieved.
It is proposed that there are four Task Engagement Styles; Functional, Creative, Social and
Intentional, which can be viewed in either a general or situational context. These are derived from
two dimensions in the Task Engagement model: task disposition, which can be viewed as a
continuum between purposive and expressive; and environmental disposition, a continuum between
anticipating and adapting. The statistical analysis of results from version 3 of the Task Engagement
Style Inventory revealed a five item task disposition scale (expressive/purposive), and 2
environmental disposition scales (anticipating/adapting) of five and eleven items.
Results indicated that undergraduate grade point average is related to Task Engagement Style. This
was supported by a significant correlation between grade point average and a purposive task
disposition, and a moderately significant relationship between grade point average and an adapting
environmental disposition. The results suggest that institutions of undergraduate education may
favor students that adopt a functional approach to their studies. It is inferred that the emphasis on
achievement and conformity in formal education may be encouraging students to engage their
studies in a way that runs counter to creative learning and thinking.
Acknowledgements
This dissertation was accomplished with the help and love of many outstanding friends and
scholars. I wish to acknowledge some of the people that have guided, supported, and engaged in
seemingly endless dialogue with me about the ideas that fill these pages.
I wish to acknowledge the help of my dissertation chairman first. Suresh Srivastva has been and
will be a friend of the first order. He has had immeasurable influence on my development, and has
taught me that being a teacher means having the courage to take a position and see the truth even
when it is difficult. From him I learned to look for underlying themes and issues, and to combine
the best of the head and the heart. His scholarship, concentration, insight and gift for dialogue
serve as an enduring inspiration.
I also wish to acknowledge Richard Boyatzis for the major contribution he has made to this work.
Also a true friend, he helped teach me the art and rigor of research, and that academics can be more
than ivory tower dreamers. He serves as an inspiration for me to be a grounded, competent,
professional. He believed in me before my ideas were fully formed, helped to shape them, and
invested himself in the process throughout.
This work is a reflection of a scholarly environment that I have been fortunate enough to be
surrounded by. It is an environment that values significant relationships, kindness, creativity, ideas
and a quest to improve the human condition. These priorities are implicit to this research. Several
people in particular have encouraged me in this work. Bill Pasmore has been a source of sanity,
humor and intellectual rigor since the very first year of my Ph.D program, and this has continued
during this new transition from graduate student to professional. His feedback has been invaluable
in this effort. The contribution of David Kolb must also be mentioned. He enthusiastically
discussed and supported my ideas, while the richness of his Learning Style Inventory served as an
inspiration for the development of my own instrument.
Several friendships have also been
instrumental in developing this thesis. Bruce Hanson was an enthusiastic and highly competent
partner in the data manipulation, methodology and analysis that were so essential to this study. We
learned about research together. Frank Barrett, a scholar and friend has been a spiritual partner in
the development of these ideas. He inspired me to make this thesis an expression of my values and
to approach it with integrity. Darlyne Bailey, Barbara Bird, Tom Blue, Ron Fry, RuthAnne
Goldberg, Carol Hoffman, Jeffery London, Leslie London, Sheila London, Asbjorn Osland, Dan
Ruben, Susan Taft and the people of Robert H. Schaffer and Associates also deserve recognition
for their important contributions. All have been good friends and have served as sources of
nurturance, friendship and family.
I also wish to thank my parents for their immeasurable influence in preparing me for this work. My
mother, Annette London, encouraged me to reflect on human nature and understand the underlying
causes of behavior. She taught me to be empathic, creative, expressive and sincere. My father
Leon London helped sustain me and taught me to be rigorous in my work, professional in my
standards, and kind, generous and respectful to others.
Lastly and perhaps most importantly I must thank Anne Renio. She inspired me to strengthen my
values, improve my writing and raise my intellectual standards. Throughout the dissertation
process she selflessly involved herself in my work, providing constant feedback and support.
Through many hours of dialogue with her this construct of Task Engagement became much clearer
and succinct.
Table Of Contents
Chapter
Page
Abstract
Acknowledgements
Preface
ii
iv
xii
ONE - Literature Review / Theory 1
Potential and Action
2
Involvement
6
Task Engagement Model
8
Imagery
9
Task Engagement and Inquiry 14
Level of Analysis
17
Dimensions of the Model
18
The Will
21
Task Disposition
25
The Expressive Dimension 27
The Purposive Dimension
29
A Constraint Relationship
31
A Need For Integration
34
Environmental Disposition 38
Anticipating
42
Adapting
43
Freire's Perspective
44
Research Questions
46
Final Comments
48
Two - Methodology
49
Initial Development of the Survey Instrument
Time Series Study
51
Reliability Study
52
Hypotheses
54
Overview of Experimental Design 55
49
Three - Results & Discussion
56
Results Of Factor Analysis 58
Scale Construction
64
Comparison With The Locus Of Control Scale
68
Relationship Between Task Engagement And Grades
Demographic Data
72
Results of the Time Series Study
73
Summary
79
Four - FURTHER Discussion OF THE CONCEPT 82
Functional Task Engagement Style 82
71
Creative Task Engagement Style
85
Social Task Engagement Style
86
Intentional Task Engagement Style 87
Synergy Between Style, Task and Environment
88
Is there a place for expressiveness in organizational life?
Dispositional Shifts 98
Implications For Supervision 101
Final Comments
104
92
Bibliography 106
APPENDIX 114
A.
Task Engagement Style Inventory (Version 3)
115
B.
Revised Task Engagement Style Inventory Booklet 118
C.
Preliminary Version (The P.D.T.A. Inventory)
133
D.
Locus Of Control Instrument (Rotter, 1966) 135
E.
Demographic Survey 140
F.
Demographic Data Results 142
G.
Time Series Analysis of Individual Teams 145
H.
Styles Of Engagement With A Task (chart) 147
I.
Strategies For Working With People Of Various Styles
List of Figures
Figure
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Page
Task Engagement Model
9
Level Of Analysis
19
Dimensions of the Task Engagement model 20
Continuum between purposive and expressive
Continuum between anticipating and adapting
Time Series 75
Environmental Demand Model
80
Two By Two Task Engagement Model
83
Task Engagement Styles Grid
89
Demographic Data Results - gender 142
Demographic Data Results - U.G. degree
Demographic Data Results - ethnic group
D.D.R. - years of managerial experience
D.D.R. - years of work experience 144
D.D.R. - date of birth 144
Time Series Analysis - (Individual Teams)
Styles Of Engagement With A Task (chart)
25
40
142
143
143
145
147
148
Integration
97
List of Tables
Table
Page
1. Characteristics of Purposive and Expressive Dimensions
26
2. Characteristics of Anticipating and Adapting Dimensions
3. Task Engagement Scales
56
4. Principle Components Factor Analysis with Varimax Rotation
5. Principle Components Factor Analysis with Oblique Rotation.
6. Restricted Factor Analysis Models using LISREL
65
7. Reliability/Validity Matrix
69
8. Environmental Disposition Scale used in time series analysis 74
9. Anova / T-Test Results From 2/26 to 4/1
77
39
60
62
Preface
Interest in Task Engagement began with a personal inquiry into processes of learning, and this
author's own experiences as student and teacher. After seventeen years of formal education, I was
employed as executive director of the S.O.S. Crisis Center of Ypsilanti, Michigan. Being away
from academia led me to reflect upon my many years of formal education. In these reflections I
was struck by the preoccupation with grades that I had occasionally observed in my peers and
myself. While some formal education experiences were a catalyst for enlightening and significant
learning experiences that enriched our lives, many others were not. In the lessor of these
experiences it seemed that rather than pursue those areas that might prove intellectually or
professionally enriching, we wasted the opportunity to learn and grow.
In reflecting upon these observations and experiences I wondered why intelligent human beings
would choose to conduct a significant portion of their education in this manner. At times we
seemed so absorbed by the performance appraisal aspect of our education, that our own intellectual
interests seemed to be almost a distraction from the quest to earn high marks. Perhaps the lure of
earning a positive evaluation was so powerful that we were distracted from caring about the very
content of the material we were studying.
While contemplating these experiences brought insight it was not at all clear how or why we had
chosen to waste these potential learning experiences. It was not as if we were blind to what was
going on. On some level we had awareness of the opportunities for significant learning and growth
that we were not utilizing. Still we forged ahead in pursuit of positive evaluations, and expressed
this growing knowledge about our process in the context of cynicism, satire and humor. Somehow
awareness was not enough.
Nevertheless, we had considerable pride in our scholastic work. The development of grade earning
abilities had come through rigorous training, and we were proud of them. What is more, we were
certain that our teachers, parents, peers and potential employers were impressed by them as well. It
was made very clear to us that an excellent grade point average was an important ingredient in
laying the foundation for a successful career. However, when earning an "A" grade in a course, in
which we realized that very little that was personally meaningful had been learned, we were left
with something of an empty feeling. We knew we had achieved - but what had been achieved?
After graduating with honors we were left with the question, what had really been accomplished?
After graduating, during the years at the crisis center I noticed what seemed to be a very different
way of approaching work. Though feedback was given on a regular basis people seemed more
interested in the actual work than the performance appraisal that followed. Few of the center's
employees appeared to be driven by meeting the requirements of their jobs, measuring up to
external standards, or achieving a positive evaluation. This way of engaging with work seemed
very different from the way I remembered my fellow students approaching their studies at school.
In trying to account for the disparity in my observations I wondered if it was the nature of the task,
the work environment or something else that was causing work to be engaged in a different way.
After three years at the Crisis Center I returned to academia. In entering a Ph.D. program at Case
Western Reserve University I was determined to learn as much as possible and avoid the distraction
of grades. I hoped that somehow I could approach my studies with the same integrity and quality
that had characterized my work at the crisis center. I entered the program with other students, and
joined a community of many other colleagues all of whom were in the process of pursuing a Ph.D.
While in some ways each person in this community was confronted with a similar learning
environment, I observed that they did not necessarily approach the task of getting a doctorate in the
same fashion. There seemed to be something fundamentally different about how these individuals
regarded their task. Some students seemed most interested in learning for learning's sake while
others appeared to view learning as the means to a degree. Some seemed most concerned with
performing to the standards set by their professors, while others placed their emphasis on
developing close relationships. Some became caught up in their own fascination with the material
they encountered, while others took a reactive approach in responding to the requirements of the
curriculum. In struggling to make sense of these observations I noticed that the individual
differences I observed in my colleagues went beyond questions of how motivated these persons
were. The differences I was observing had more to do with how they experienced their Ph.D.
education and the particular kind of personal meaning they endowed it with. There appeared to be
individual differences that was causing these students to approach a similar set of circumstances in
very different ways.
As I advanced in the program I took on the role of Instructor at a nearby university. In working
with and observing groups of undergraduate and masters students involved in various courses I
perceived the same phenomenon that I had seen in my peers. I noticed patterns that suggested that
individuals approach their work in very different ways. I was determined to understand more about
how and why these phenomena were occurring.
CHAPTER ONE
LITERATURE REVIEW / THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Task Engagement is a psychic concept that describes how an individual goes about doing a task. It
concerns the personal and cultural decisions that are made about the meaning of a task, a person's
frame of mind as he works, and how individual differences relate to the way the task situation is
approached. Task Engagement also embraces larger issues such as: world view; ideology;
relationship to one's environment; self-concept; and the meaning of work. In this chapter the
literature related to this concept will be examined, and a theory of Task Engagement will be
presented.
'
Task' is defined as a body of work requiring mental and/or physical activity (Garland, H., 1985).
The source for a task can be the immediate physical environment, an ongoing or recent interest of
the individual, or, as is usually the case in formal organizations, an individual's role responsibilities.
Some jobs are comprised of a single task that is repeated throughout the workday, while many
others are more complex and include a variety of activities.
High performance is rarely uniform. On any given day an individual performs hundreds of tasks,
yet he does not engage with each of them in the same way. He may invest his heart and soul in
some, and do only the minimum necessary to meet a required goal in others. Some of these
activities seem to get the best he can offer, while other's seemingly get his worst.
Even the most competent worker has some parts of his job that for one reason or another tend to get
shortchanged. Some are taken on wholeheartedly with the highest standards, while others are done
with little care. When involved in some assignments he may refuse to be interrupted for anything
other than a major event, while in others he seems all too happy to be called away for the smallest
of reasons. Why do people devote their voluntary discretionary time to some tasks, while
perfunctorily doing the minimum on others? It is clear that the potential exists for either approach.
Potential & Action
Many competent people in organizations feel under-utilized. Some are in plateaued positions,
unable to advance due to organizational constraints. Others are in jobs that do not fit their
particular interests and talents. Still others have supervisors that do not inspire them or make good
use of their strengths. In most organizations there is a tremendous untapped reservoir of potential,
or what Ashkenas and Schaffer have termed the "hidden reserve" (1982).
It is often assumed that if a person has the ability and knowledge to do a job that he will then do it
competently. Knowledge, however, does not always translate into action or skill. An individual's
talents are often regarded as commodities, yet ability does not always result in high performance.
In some tasks potential is converted into action while in others it remains dormant. The concept of
task engagement is proposed as a conceptual bridge between potential and action.
Social scientists have had a difficult time accounting for the relationship between potential and
action. Porpora, a post-Wittgensteinian philosopher argued that the prevailing concept of action as
behavior that is accompanied by a subjective motive or purpose is mistaken (1983). He asserted
that an adequate conception of action must involve a reference to mental states - i.e, the actor's
wants, beliefs, and intentions. Similarly, Bandura wrote that "knowledge, transformational
operations, and component skills are necessary but insufficient for accomplished performances.
Indeed, people often do not behave optimally, even though they know full well what to do" (1982,
p.122). In a related vein Boyatzis distinguished between traits and skills, observing that the former
does not always lead to the latter (1982).
To combat the difficulty and unpredictability of translating potential into action, organizations
annually invest millions of dollars in supervision, training, team building etc. - hoping that people
will choose to do their work well and go above and beyond the call of duty. They make this
investment in their human resources because it is clear then that there is more to supporting high
performance than assigning tasks. Edwin Locke observed:
It is not enough to know that an order or request was made; one has to know whether or not the
individual heard it and understood it, how he appraised it, and what he decided to do about it before
its effects on his behavior can be predicted and explained (Locke, et al., 1968, p. 174).
On a daily basis the average individual must constantly choose how he will delegate his attention choosing which tasks get filed away until everything else is done, and which will be attended to as
soon as possible. Given that time is fixed, attention may be an individual's most precious
commodity, and to focus on one thing can often preclude focusing on another. If Task Engagement
is to be understood then one must contend with how attention is focused, because in the quick pace
of today's workplace an individual has many choices about what to attend to.
With varying degrees of input from the environment, the individual decides how much to discipline
himself, which tasks get filed away until everything else is done, and which will be attended to as
soon as possible. When doing some tasks he may refuse to break his concentration, while in others
he allows himself to be easily distracted. In choosing which activities he will devote his limited
attention toward, he assigns priority to those that seem most meaningful at the time, though he may
have no conscious awareness of doing so.
In most situations there are many options for how attention is allocated. This relates to Garland's
notion of task conflict; a situation in which two or more tasks compete for an individual's attention
(1985). Though the choice of what to focus attention on is sometimes made purposively, it is often
made at an unconscious level.
Given a fixed set of abilities or competencies, an individual makes his own personal choice
concerning the extent to which he will devote them to a particular task situation. Garland (1985)
suggested that individuals develop expectancies for reaching many different levels of performance,
not just that level represented by some task goal. He defined performance expectancy as a
composite of an individual's subjective probabilities for reaching each of a number of different
performance levels over a range of performances that might be considered. Since many directives
do not specify the standards that must be achieved, it is up to the individual to select the level of
performance he will be satisfied with. For most tasks there are a range of performance standards
that can be adopted - from doing the minimum to attempting perfection.
Scholars have often been frustrated in their attempts to account for individual differences in relation
to task accomplishment. McCaskey called for more research in this area stating that, "We need to
learn more about the influence of personal differences and preferences in planning and other
organizational-environmental processes"(1974, p. 288). While the literature concerning task and
environmental factors is extensive, research on the relationship between individual differences and
task accomplishment has lacked consistency.
The importance ascribed to individual differences has varied considerably amongst scholars. B. F.
Skinner (1971) and other behaviorists have proposed that the major instigators of behavior lie
outside the individual and stem from the environment. These theorists see stimuli, reinforcement,
social norms, and environmental pressures as the main determinants of task behavior, and therefore
view individual differences as largely irrelevant.
Taking a different view are individual personality theorists, psychodynamic therapists, trait
theorists and humanists who see individual differences as consistent and enduring. They view
general patterns of thinking, behaving and self-actualizing as important for understanding the full
range of dynamics that affect task performance.
Involvement
Whether a person is preparing food, grading papers, defining a strategic plan, or conducting a
meeting he must become involved with his work and establish some way to get it done. An
individual's level of involvement in a task situation has been addressed in the literature by the
related concepts of job involvement and work involvement. These concepts are differentiated from
Task Engagement in that they attempt to quantify the extent of an individual's involvement, rather
than describe its qualities.
Job Involvement is a psychological construct that has been conceptualized by theorists in two
different ways (Kanungo, 1982). One view of job involvement looks at how an individual's
performance on the job affects their self-esteem (French and Kahn 1962; Vroom 1962). Other
psychologists have viewed job involvement in terms of the extent an individual identifies with his
job (Lodahl and Kejner 1965; Lawler and Hall 1970; Maurer 1969).
Among the originators of the job involvement construct were Lodahl and Kejner who created a
questionnaire designed to measure both its meanings. More recently research has been conducted
in this area by Reddy and Rhaman (1984), Rimmerman, Portowicz, and Ehlich (1985), Jans (1985),
Verma and Upadhyay (1986), and Blau (1987). These studies have sought to measure the extent of
job involvement in relation to a variety of factors including: locus of control; emotional
exhaustion; self-expression; job satisfaction; and person-environment fit.
The concept of work involvement refers to the level of significance an individual attaches to his
work. Beliefs about the importance of work in relation to other areas of a person's life inform what
can be termed his level of work involvement. As a construct work involvement is value based.
One's level of work involvement can be viewed as a reflection of values instilled by the culture or
religion in which he was raised.
In this area of work involvement studies have been conducted by Kanungo (1981), Newton and
Kennan (1983), Reddy and Rhaman (1984), and Morrison (1985). Research in this area has
explored the concept in relation to variables including: alienation; locus of control; personal
characteristics; environmental properties; and interactions between person and environment.
The concept of Task Engagement shares a common domain with the concepts of job involvement
and work involvement in exploring an individual's relationship to his work. However, Task
Engagement is not concerned so much with the quantity of involvement the individual brings to his
work, but the way he allocates energy to different tasks that compete for his attention . Task
Engagement then refers to the many ways that people become engaged in their work, and the
qualities of their involvement.
Task Engagement Model
The theory of Task Engagement is based on the premise that how a person engages with a task is a
function of: task; environment; and task engagement style. This premise is illustrated in the Task
Engagement Model in Figure 1. Conceptually this model is an extension of ones proposed by
Steers and Porter (1974) in regard to performance under goal-setting conditions, and Boyatzis
regarding effective job performance (1982). Additionally, it is grounded in findings by Blau (1987)
who in a study of nurses at an urban hospital found that a person-environment fit model was
predictive of job involvement.
Recruiters and supervisors often talk about "fit" when considering a candidate for a position, but
what do they really mean? What is it that makes a person appropriate for a particular position or
work environment? It is proposed that a good fit between task, environment and the individual's
Task Engagement Style enables him to achieve optimal performance. It is also suggested that a
major cause of talent that lays dormant is a mismatch between these factors. Only when an
individual's Task Engagement Style is aligned with the task and the task environment, can his
fullest potential be realized and translated into the highest possible results. A synergy of these
factors increases the probability that a desired level of performance and quality of work experience
can be achieved.
Figure 1
Imagery
To understand an individual's patterns in regard to task engagement, one can examine the imagery
he uses in constructing the meaning of his task. Imagery is a process of perception, which includes
the interpretation of objects, symbols, and people in the light of pertinent experiences (Gibson et al,
1988). Images an individual has of the task and task environment inform a mental set that is then
adopted toward the task. Bills and Brown (1929) reported the effects of mental set as follows:
One of the most important factors determining the level of efficiency which an individual may
attain in ... work is the attitude or set with which he enters upon the task....But more effort has been
directed toward studying it for its own sake. As a result little is known regarding the...influence of
set in ...work. (p.301).
When a person thinks about doing a task, it exists (not as an action), but as an idea, image or
construct. Even while performing the task he retains some image of what it is that he is doing and
the meaning he ascribes to it. This imagery comprises the individual's mental set. As a task is
carried out, his imagery of it may change and grow, and after it has been completed these images
may remain as a remembrance or record of the experience. Task Engagement Style is indicative of
the imagery an individual tends to construct before, during and after engaging with a task.
An individual constructs his experience of a task in much the same way as he constructs the
meaning of an object. Kelly (1955) in his theory of personal constructs asserted that acts and
events must be categorized to become meaningful, that people tend to construct the meaning of
their own lives, and that individual differences cause them to differ in how they interpret reality.
Similarly when one engages with a task he views it through a paradigm that assigns a particular
meaning to it. Bandura's comments support this assertion:
Most of the things people enjoy doing for their own sake originally had little or no interest for
them. But under appropriate learning experiences, almost any activity, however silly it may appear
to many observers, can become imbued with consuming significance (Bandura, 1982, p. 133).
Man's conscious ideas affect what he does, in that one of the (biological) functions of
consciousness is the regulation of action (Locke, 1968). The imagery a person constructs of a task
situation has a profound impact on how he engages with it. When the individual considers doing a
task, he constructs a mental image of it. He then consciously or unconsciously imagines what
performing the task might be like while constructing an image of the personal meaning and
relevance it represents. Kolb, Rubin and McIntyre further describe how people construct reality:
We are not cameras or tape recorders. We do not take in, with our eyes, exactly what is "out there."
We constantly respond to cues that have meaning for us. We see what we want or need to see to
define ourselves or to advance our aims. We do not see people as they are, we see them for what
they mean to us. (Kolb, Rubin, McIntyre, 1984 p.214)
While perception relies on the external senses and apparatuses, the image is purely a mental
representation. Images are connected with past perceptions, and are elaborations of memory traces
(Arieti, S., 1976). The imagery an individual constructs of task and environment have a profound
impact on how he engages with that task situation, and could be said to be his cognitive map.
Krech, Crutchfield and Ballachey discuss this concept further:
The cognitive map of the individual is not, then a photographic representation of the physical
world; it is, rather, a partial, personal construction in which certain objects, selected out by the
individual for a major role, are perceived in an individual manner. Every perceiver is, as it were, to
some degree a nonrepresentational artist, painting a picture of the world that expresses his
individual view of reality. (1962, p. 20)
The following example is provided to illustrate this concept in the context of supervision. Suppose
that Jim King, a manager at Acme Insurance is thinking about a task he will undertake tomorrow in
his office. He is imagining a meeting in which he must confront Sam Smith, who has an on-going
tardiness problem. As Mr. King sits on his sofa at home he thinks about tomorrow's task. Though
Sam is not present, images of the upcoming confrontation are with him. The images are based on
the memory traces of previous interactions he has had with Sam, other times he has confronted
people, times he has been confronted himself, meetings he has had in his office, and an
assertiveness training workshop he attended last year. Because Mr. King has an image of this task,
it acquires a psychological reality that he experiences even though he is not presently in the act of
doing the task.
In this illustration Mr. King's imagery of his task causes him to adopt a disposition toward it that is
a reflection of what it means to him. This imagery is not static. As the meeting is carried out, his
conception of what he is doing may change and grow. For example he may begin the interaction
with an intention of altering Sam Smith's tardiness behavior. However, if while explaining his
tardiness Sam were to divulge that he is worried that he may be developing a drug dependency
problem, Mr. King might soon change his disposition to one of concern for a friend. In this case
Mr. King's image of what he was doing was reframed as he carried out his task. As in this example
there are an infinite number of images that can be constructed of a task situation, and how the
individual engages with that situation is indicative of the meaning he ascribes to it.
After a task has been completed an image of it may remain as a remembrance or record of the
experience. What the person remembers about doing a task may be a potent indicator of what was
personally meaningful about it. This is exemplified by a case in which four friends pooled their
resources to hold a garage sale one summer weekend. When the sale ended each went away with a
different image of the experience. The first left with images of how hard they had worked. The
second remembered the weekend as a time when they made $200 dollars. The third recalled how
the four of them had bonded together when a customer became irate, while the fourth left thinking
about ideas for doing a bigger and better garage sale next summer. In this illustration each of the
four individuals involved were part of the same task, yet the experience held a different meaning
for each.
Task Engagement & Inquiry
As a person engages with a task, he is simultaneously in a process of doing and a process of
learning. While he carries out the task, he consciously or unconsciously asks questions and
inquires; gathering information relevant to what he is doing. Newell proposed that though
considerable theorizing and research have centered on issues concerning either acquisition of
knowledge or execution of response patterns, the processes governing the interrelationship between
knowledge and action have been largely neglected (1978). While it is tacitly recognized that some
knowledge gets converted into action while other knowledge does not, the amorphous nature of this
relationship has made it difficult for social scientists to grapple with. As a result this
interrelationship has been more the domain of philosophers, who have attempted to account for it
with the concept of Will. This concept shall be explored later in this chapter.
What an individual chooses to learn about, and the kind of questions he asks as he inquires are a
reflection of his Task Engagement Style. This is a view of learning, not as an academic event, but
rather as an ongoing process of inquiry that is conducted as an individual pursues interests and
attempts to uncover information relevant to those interests. This view is drawn from the
philosophical notions of "movement toward something", and "meaning as an intention of the mind"
(Arendt on Husserl, 1978). When a person engages with a task, the meaning that he ascribes to
doing it and/or the outcome he hopes to accomplish suggests movement in a particular direction.
His Task Engagement Style then, suggests that he will advance in a direction that is congruent with
the meaning he ascribes to the task situation. As an individual pursues his interests, he naturally
inquires in that same direction - in that only those questions that are relevant to what is most
meaningful and relevant to that person at that moment are posed.
Task Engagement is then indicative of what an individual inquires about and ultimately attends to.
This is illustrated in the following example. On Miss Johnson's desk sits a computer. If she has an
interest in writing some thoughts for a report she has been working on then she sees the computer
in terms of its flexibility in manipulating words. Her inquiry is then directed toward learning how
to best utilize the many features of the word processor. If Miss Johnson's interest is in using the
computer for the very first time, she may view it in terms of a complex and intimidating array of
buttons and knobs. In this case her inquiry might be directed toward ways to acquire resources that
might lessen her anxiety about approaching this confusing and unfamiliar machine. If she has been
considering the idea of getting a better computer, she may attend to the computer's flaws and all the
features it lacks that the superior computer she covets might have. In this event her inquiry might
be directed toward planning how she might get the best possible trade in value on her present
computer toward the one she wants. If she has a strong sensitivity to interior design then perhaps
she focuses on the color of the computer and how it fits in with the decor of the room. In this
instance she might pose internal questions about what might be placed next to the computer to
make the best visual statement. In each of the above cases Miss Johnson is responding to the same
computer, yet inquires in very different directions.
The relationship between Task Engagement and inquiry is further illustrated in a second example.
This case concerns Mr. Samson, a bank teller at First National. On a particularly trying day during
which he has repeatedly dealt with irate customers his mental set might best be described as "trying
to make it through the day". With this frame of mind, the questions he internally poses include:
"What time is it now?"; "How much time is there left?; "Is there anyone watching me?"; "How can
I avoid this rude customer"; and "Do I look busy enough?". These questions are indicative of what
Mr. Samson is inquiring about on this difficult day. Questions like; "How can I best please this
customer?", or "How can we improve our process for handling new accounts?" do not occur to Mr.
Samson on this particular day because they seem irrelevant given his frame of mind.
I
n contrast is Mr. Peters, who has a very different Task Engagement Style. Mr. Peters is a manager
who is trying hard to sell a new idea to his board of directors. He has a clear goal in mind and will
do almost anything within his power to achieve it. With this mental set he inquires by posing the
following questions: "How is the Chairman going to vote?", "What can I offer to get his support?",
"How will I respond to potential confrontations?"; and "What should I wear to the board meeting
that will inspire confidence in me?"
In each illustration the actor's Task Engagement Style suggested a particular kind of inquiry. Both
Mr. Samson and Mr. Peters inquired by asking those questions that would enable them to proceed
in the direction implicit to the particular meaning they constructed of their task.
When the ups and downs of particular days and events are factored out, a pattern emerges that
generalizes how an individual tends to approach task situations. It is this pattern that is referred to
as his Task Engagement Style. Task Engagement Style is suggestive of the way an individual
relates to his work and is indicative of what he tends to inquire about in relation to task situations.
It refers to the kind of data he tends to seek, and ultimately then, the kind of information that is
internalized and incorporated.
Level Of Analysis
In applying the concept of Task Engagement, the level of analysis must be specified. Despite the
variance between an individual's approach toward various tasks, he can be said to have a historical
pattern of how he has tended to approach his work. In the broadest sense he can then be said to
have a General Task Engagement Style (GTES). This describes the mental set he most often
adopts in the context of doing a task. General style suggests a pattern and a tendency, but does not
preclude the individual from adopting a different approach toward any particular activity. For
purposes of clarity we will term the more situation specific usage of the concept, Situational Task
Engagement Style (STES). These various levels of analysis are illustrated in Figure 2.
Dimensions Of The Model
A task in and of itself is devoid of meaning. It's meaning comes via the environment and the
individual(s) performing it. These sources of meaning are represented in Figure 3 as two
dimensions in the Task Engagement model: task disposition, which can be pictured as a continuum
between purposive and expressive; and environmental disposition, a continuum between
anticipating and adapting. The origins of these dimensions are explored in the following section.
From the literature we have explored thus far it is clear that there is more to high performance than
knowledge, competence and skill. Today's employee increasingly makes his own voluntary choice
regarding how much he personally invests in the tasks that comprise his organizational role
(Berlew, 1984). Organizations often try to motivate their employees, but despite various motives
people still have the option of behaving or not behaving in a certain fashion. Scientists and
scholars have tried to understand human action with the concept of motivation, but all-encompass
ing theories based on concepts such as instinct, drive, and conditioning have not succeeded in
explaining how and why people apply themselves to their work (Locke, 1981). What is it that
allows one to do his best in a task situation? Social scientists have experienced difficulty with the
amorphous quality of this question, so we will turn to the philosophers for their point of view.
Figure 2
TASK ENGAGEMENT LEVELS OF ANALYSIS
Figure 3
Dimensions Of The Task Engagement Model
EXPRESSIVE
-imaginative
- excited about doing the task
- fully experiences the moment
- discovering
- feeling oriented
- playful
- personally involved
- growing/developing
PURPOSIVE
-steady and accountable
- concerned with production
- converging efforts to achieve goals
- pursuing/striving
- goal oriented
- systematic development of strategies
- rational assessment
- achieving
ANTICIPATING
- preparing
- long-term focus
- explores alternatives
- changes social norms
- redefines problems
- considers new procedures
- envisions alternatives
- removes constraints
ADAPTING
- responding
- short-term focus
- cooperative
- accepts social norms
- deals with problems
- implements procedures
- fits into the organization
- recognizes constraints
The Will
From a philosophical stance the responsible mover in a task situation is "the Will" (Yalom, 1980).
The Will refers to an aspect of the human spirit by which the individual guides, directs and
determines his own destiny (Watson and Tharp, 1972). Another aspect of the Will is that it is
dynamic. Duns Scotus asserted that it is the freedom of the Will mentally to take a position
(Arendt, 1978). When the individual goes beyond the requirements of his job it is his Will that
enables him to do so. Conversely, when he does not bring the vitality and power of his Will to a
task situation, he is unlikely to have the energy to go beyond the minimum satisficing of the job
required.
Task disposition does not describe the strength of Will an individual devotes to a task, but the
outcomes and/or state of being that his Will is creating movement toward. As in the philosophical
notion of "movement toward something", and Lewin's concept of "valence" (1951), task disposition
looks at how the Will is directed and toward what.
Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus saw the Will as that which commands the intellect to understand
(Arendt, 1978). In this paradigm, the intellect is a subservient faculty that needs the Will to direct
its attention or it has no reason to function. Though not behaviorally observable, this viewpoint
helps to further our understanding about the relationship between knowledge and action. If the
intellect is unable to function without the Will, then perhaps processes of training, supervision and
education have misdirected their focus, and should shift their emphasis from the intellect to the
Will.
Philosophers have often described the Will as having two sides. The spirited side of the Will has
been termed "the wish" while the disciplined side has been referred to as "willpower" (May, 1969).
This distinction provides a theoretical grounding for the purposive and expressive dimensions of
task disposition. The purposive dimension refers to a predilection for will power. Watson and
Tharp give some insight into the way the concept of will power is generally used:
In everyday language, will power often means self-restraint; 'I had the will power not to eat too
much. Sometimes will power means a force that enables one to pass some immediate gratification
in favor of a long-range goal or in favor of personal values. Sometimes will power is used to
explain doing something one expects to be unpleasant. At other times the word is used to explain
doing something that is very difficult or that requires a long wait for positive reinforcement.
(Watson and Tharp, 1972, p.248)
At its best, will power utilizes personal manipulation for the constructive, effortful, critical
application to the productive end. Will power gives an individual the capacity for self-control,
discipline, and diligence so he is not at the mercy of his every whim and urge. Maslow discussed
will power's contribution to the total person:
There are several meanings of self-control, or of inhibition, and some of them are quite desirable
and healthy, even apart from what is necessary for dealing with the outside world. Control need
not mean frustration or renunciation of basic need gratifications. What I would call the
'Apollonizing controls' do not call the gratification of needs into question at all; they make them
more rather than less enjoyable by suitable delay (as in sex), by gracefulness (as in dancing or
swimming), by aestheticizing (as with food and drink), by stylizing (as in sonnets), by
ceremonializing, sacralizing, dignifying, by doing something well rather than just doing it.
(Maslow, A., 1987, p. 68)
The exercise of will power then does not always refer to delaying gratification. When an individual
approaches a task situation with a purposive disposition he may be repressing one desire in favor of
realizing another that he values more highly. Additionally, Sahakian (1965) proposed that if the
ego has successfully resisted a temptation to do something that would be objectionable to the
superego, it feels its self-respect raised and its pride increased. Will power in this sense could be
said to be serving the immediate needs of the individual who is expressing a desire for order,
achievement, comfort or approval in the act of resisting temptation. In this case it might take more
will power for the individual to let go of inhibition then it would to repress his desires.
The more expressive side of the Will is often called "the wish". This conceptualization provides a
foundation for the expressive dimension of task disposition. The immediate nature, high
desirability and excitement of "the wish" exhibits a sort of clarity and desire that transcends logic
and rationality. This clarity helps the individual to avoid the paralyzing affect of competing
alternatives (James, 1896). In a similar vein May asserted that, "when a wish is conscious, and
addresses a presently felt need it is the point when every act of Will starts"(1969). This viewpoint
is akin to Freud's notion that nothing but a wish can set the mental apparatus in motion. Therefore
this dimension of the will is important when considering the beginning or initiation of any activity.
When a work environment feels unimaginative, uncreative, and lacking in enthusiasm it is an
environment characterized by suppression. If an organizational culture is such that it tends to
dampen the expressive side of an employee's will rather than allowing and/or inspiring him to
devote it toward his job, then that culture is likely to lack energy, creativity, and vitality. The
suppression of expressiveness involves an active holding back that can detract from an individual's
attentiveness to a task. To the extent that he must devote energy and attention to suppressing his
Will, the task he is doing is depleted of energy and attention.
Though it is much steadier and more accountable, will power is a slower and less dynamic source
of energy. When a person relies too heavily on will power, he may tend to tire quickly.
Conversely when he relies too heavily on the expressive side of the Will performance can often be
undisciplined and erratic. The Will needs balance because difficulties arise when either of its poles
are acutely overemphasized.
Many individuals are at times lacking in will power. When this side of the Will is underemphasized the result can be a lack of discipline, an inability to follow direction, and/or burn-out.
However, when the expressive side of the Will is under-emphasized the result can be personal
neglect leading to self-alienation, estrangement, and low energy; lacking in creativity, excitement
and imagination. While balance is the ideal, it is made more difficult by the constraint nature of
their relationship.
TASK DISPOSITION
Figure 4
Task disposition is illustrated in Figure 4 as a continuum between purposive and expressive
dimensions. To understand an individual's disposition toward a task situation, the following
questions must be considered: How much discipline and will power does a person bring to the
task?; What does it take for him to get started on the task?; What personal meaning does he ascribe
to doing the task?; and, How does he manage his time and attention?
Table 1
Characteristics - Purposive Dimension Of Task Disposition
self control
strong superego
achievement
steady and accountable
trying to make things
rational assessment
coping with pressure
delayed gratification
desire for order
suppression of expressiveness
seeking
happen instrumental
control of the self
converging of efforts
striving
concern with production
planning oriented
will power
meaning in relation to outcome
active attending
Characteristics - Expressive Dimension Of Task Disposition
passive attending
eupraxia
serendipity
growing
maturing
not striving
immediate nature
minimum of suppression
being
self-actualization
creative
drop controls and defenses
excitement
imagination
the wish
transcends logic and rationality
id
finding
fully experiences the moment invests self
Drawbacks When Purposiveness Is Over-Emphasized




danger of work becoming dry and uncreative
may miss opportunities for creative discovery
less likely to discover a wholly new goal or opportunity
possible alienation from self
Drawbacks When Expressiveness Is Over-Emphasized




lack of discipline, an inability to follow direction
may be prone to procrastination
danger of over-involvement and/or burn-out
behavior may at times be unpredictable and erratic
The distinction between the purposive and expressive dimensions of task disposition is rooted in
the philosophical notion of the Will having two poles. It is also similar to one used by Hare (1976)
who utilized a serious versus expressive dimension in his research on social-emotional behavior.
This distinction is also rooted in Maslow, who differentiated between "striving": doing, achieving,
trying, and purposiveness, and "being": existing, expressiveness, growing, and self-actualization.
Maslow distinguished between the expressive (noninstrumental) and the coping (instrumental,
functional, purposive) components of behavior. He provided inspiration for this research when he
suggested that this distinction had not yet been properly exploited in the literature (1987).
Characteristics of the purposive and expressive dimensions are implied by the literature, and are
compiled in Table 1.
The Expressive Dimension
The concept of an expressive disposition is rooted in "the wish". Employing an expressive
disposition toward a task involves maximizing the pursuit of that task in a way that is an immediate
expression of the meaning that the individual finds in it. To approach a task in this manner requires
that a minimum of effort and attention be devoted to the suppression of the Will. When the
expressive dimension of task disposition is emphasized a person's energy and attention is not split
and his total being can then be directed toward doing the task. Without expressiveness, a person's
energy for an activity must come exclusively from will power.
The concept of an expressive disposition is also grounded in Aristotle's concept of eupraxia.
"There is such a thing as eupraxia, action well done, and the doing of something well, regardless of
its consequences" (Arendt, H. 1978). This is the adult at his most expressive, and is distinguished
from a concern with production or results, where the act has an end other than itself. The
distinction is illustrated in the difference between an expressive flute-player, who plays only to
play, for whom the playing is an end itself, and a purposive, goal-oriented flute-player, who with
rigorous discipline attempts to play each note to perfection. In the first example, action is itself an
end and the flute-player's disposition is one of letting go and following his desire to play, while in
the second example his disposition requires a holding back of immediate desires in the service of
bringing about a perfectly constructed piece of music. It cannot be objectively stated that either
approach would necessarily be better than the other, as this would be a matter of personal taste.
Some jazz music lovers might prefer a flute player that played with the freedom and creativity of an
expressive disposition, while many classical music lovers would prefer the perfection of the
masterly sounds made by a purposive disposition. However it should be noted that an emphasis on
either of these dimensions of task disposition would lead to a very different quality of experience
and output.
There is some evidence in the literature that an expressive disposition can lead to higher job
involvement. Results of a study by Jans (1985) testing the distinctiveness of job and specialization
involvement as constructs have linked self-expression with job involvement. In a study of
Australian Army officer results Jans found that job involvement was associated primarily with selfexpression.
The Purposive Dimension
When an individual has a purposive task disposition, he tends to rely on processes of goal setting
and planning to achieve desired results. The disciplined nature of a purposive tendency is tied to
means behavior, the end being need gratification, threat reduction or a valued outcome. An
emphasis on a purposive approach enables the individual to better control his work and cope with
pressure.
Management as a practice is usually a highly purposive discipline. In Theodore Levitt's description
of a managerial culture he implied what is termed a purposive disposition:
Management consists of the rational assessment of a situation and systematic selection of goals and
purposes (what is to be done?); the systematic development of strategies to achieve these goals; the
marshalling of the required resources; the rational design, organization, direction, and control of the
activities required to attain the selected purposes; and, finally, the motivation and rewarding of
people to do the work. (Levitt, T., 1976, p.73)
In most organizations a purposive disposition is the predominant disposition of choice and social
desirability. In the belief systems of these organizational cultures it is often assumed that the best
work is done by setting goals and then trying to achieve them in a given time frame.
When the individual's task disposition emphasizes the purposive dimension he can often make good
use of goal setting technologies to guide his work. McCaskey discussed the contribution that goal
setting can make when successfully utilized:
If people are committed to the goals, there can be a forceful converging of efforts to meet deadlines
and to achieve goals. People given such plans spend less time exploring alternative futures because
they know what they need to accomplish. After plans have been made, people can take the goals as
a given, which provides a measure of stability and can supply a sense of purpose. This helps
individuals structure their life space, decide what activities should be carried out, and how time
should be spent. (McCaskey, M. B. 1974: p. 282)
Under certain conditions then goal setting can be a potent device for focusing attention and
organizing effort. Locke et al in discussing the utility of goal setting added, "Goals affect
performance by directing attention, mobilizing effort, increasing persistence, and motivating
strategy development" (1981 p. 125).
Locke also noted that studies on individual differences in goal setting have lacked consistency
(1981), but there is reason to suspect that utilization of goal setting techniques would appear to be
more congruent with a purposive disposition than an expressive one. If the task disposition of the
individual involved is expressive, a goal setting framework may prove inappropriate for that task.
Zaleznik stated , "Managers tend to adopt impersonal, if not passive, attitudes toward goals.
Managerial goals arise out of necessities rather than desires" (1977, p. 70). This supports the
notion that the pursuit of goals primarily draws upon the purposive dimension of task disposition.
The very nature of setting goals and trying to meet them is a purposive act. The widespread usage
of these techniques in organizational life then encourages a person to approach his work
purposively rather than the expressively.
A Constraint Relationship
It is proposed that a constraint relationship exists between the purposive and expressive dimensions
of task disposition. To be purposive means to control the self, delay pleasure, while to be
expressive means to forgo controls, inhibitions, and defenses. Therefore by definition the two
poles of this dimension cannot occur in their purest forms at the same time. A task disposition
characterized by the purposive dimension views tasks as instrumental to the desired outcome or
goal, while a task disposition characterized by the expressive dimension sees the act of doing the
task itself to be most meaningful.
Maslow suggested that the expressive behaviors do not occur during purposive activity:
The expressive behaviors tend to occur when people are being themselves, developing, growing
and maturing, not going anywhere (in the sense, e.g., of social climbing), not striving in the
ordinary sense of staining and trying for a state of affairs other that in which they are. (1987, p. 70)
An emphasis on one dimension of task disposition deemphasizes the other. For example, if a
presenter is improvising in a question and answer session he cannot at the same time meticulously
monitor what he is saying, as expressiveness by its very nature requires a certain unguarded quality.
Similarly, if a presenter is delivering a tightly structured written speech, he cannot at the same time
carry on a glib dialogue with his audience. His disposition would not be oriented that way at that
particular time. Even a highly skilled speaker would be unable to maintain both dispositions
simultaneously unless he was in a very exceptional state that will be described later in this thesis.
In a general sense the purposive and expressive dimensions work against each other, with the
dominant pole constraining the other.
This notion is also supported in the goal setting literature. Research has shown a tendency for task
behavior to become valued largely for its instrumentality in reaching task goals rather than for any
intrinsically satisfying qualities when tasks are undertaken as a means for attaining a specific end
(Locke, Cartledge, & Knerr, 1970). Reductions in subsequent intrinsic motivation and
expressiveness could be expected to occur under such conditions.
When an individual approaches a task with a purposive disposition, his focus on the end product of
his actions may preclude him from fully
experiencing the satisfying qualities of the actions themselves. Therefore, as tasks are undertaken
purposively, there is likely to be a reduction in perceived opportunities to satisfy needs for
expression (Lawler, 1973). This is further supported by Mossholder who stated that, "Assigning
specific difficult goals on an interesting task may reduce subsequent intrinsic motivation with
respect to the task" (1980, p. 207). In this way it appears that the purposive and expressive
dimensions of task disposition have a constraint relationship because they serve as a distraction to
one another.
The constraining nature of this relationship between purposive and expressive is similar to Hesse's
conception of the relationship between seeking and finding: i.e., to be goal oriented and seeking
may preclude one from serendipity or finding. Hesse alludes to this conceptualization in the
following passage:
When someone is seeking it happens quite easily that he only sees the thing that he is seeking; that
he is unable to find anything, unable to absorb anything, because he is only thinking of the thing he
is seeking, because he has a goal, because he is obsessed with his goal. Seeking means: to have a
goal; but finding means to be free, to be receptive, to have no goal. You, O worthy one, are
perhaps indeed a seeker for in striving toward your goal, you do not see many things that are under
your nose. (Hesse, 1951, p. 113)
In this passage Hesse illustrated how seeking precludes finding. Finding is an expressive state
where the individual is genuinely open to discovery. If an individual had no history or values, then
finding would be nothing but an aimless drifting. However, since many of his values, life purposes
etc. are internalized, without actively seeking, he may be naturally drawn to a particular direction
without trying to accomplish anything. In particular he may be drawn to learning, to questioning,
to seeing, even when he is not in that moment consciously seeking to do so.
For example many problem solvers have reported that after a frustrating period of looking for a
solution and failing, the solution comes to them later in a moment of rest. In this case the
purposive act of seeking a solution can blind the individual to new information. Because the
problem solver is seeking a particular solution, he sees only what he is looking for; what he already
knows. During the period of rest, a more creative solution may dawn on him because he is more
open to new possibilities without the distraction of the convergent quality of seeking.
A Need For Integration
Given the need for both dimensions if a person is to function in society, questions concerning
which pole of this dimension is better are largely irrelevant. The discussion then should not be,
"which dimension is better, purposive or expressive"? There are strengths and weaknesses
associated with each dimension, and both are clearly important.
There are problems inherent in an overemphasis of either dimension. Without the will power of the
purposive dimension the individual that does not feel inspired may be prone to procrastination. He
will need to "feel his spirit" in his work, or he may not have the discipline to get it done. If his
disposition is strongly oriented toward expressiveness there also may be a danger of overinvolvement. The effects of too much personal involvement in work were examined by
Rimmerman, Portowicz, and Ehlich (1985) in studying burnout among paraprofessional
rehabilitation workers. They found that the degree of personal involvement experienced by a
worker was directly and positively related to the degree of emotional exhaustion he experienced.
While an expressive disposition can help a person to remain open to discovery, it is not often
sufficient for task accomplishment. An individual would seldom take on a task if he did not seek
some desired outcome. Additionally, if his task disposition were weighted too heavily toward the
expressive dimension, he may not have the discipline and diligence required to develop the skills
and do the work necessary to complete many necessary but intrinsically unsatisfying tasks.
Without the ability to be purposive he would be unable to survive in most organizations where the
ability to set a goal and meet it is essential for membership.
There are problems inherent in an overemphasis of the purposive dimension as well. While this
orientation enables an individual to strive toward goals, if the expressive element is largely absent,
there is a danger of work becoming dry and uncreative. Additionally if the person attends to only
what he is seeking, he may miss opportunities for creative discovery. Maslow discussed this
danger:
..it is possible to discern in the attending responses the difference between fresh,
idiosyncratic attending to the unique event, and stereotyped, categorized recognition in the
outside world of a set of categories that already exist in the mind of the attending person.
That is, attending may be no more than a recognition or discovery in the world of what we
ourselves have already put there - a sort of prejudging of experience before it happens.
(1987, p. 195)
Freud also alluded to an overemphasis of the purposive dimension in his distinction between active
and passive attending. He saw that inherent in active attending is an imposing of one's own set of
expectations upon what is perceived (1924). While this act helps the individual to order and make
sense of his world, the danger is that when he experiences the world in this way, he will never
finding anything but what is already known.
Only when an individual is not in the act of trying to make something in particular occur, is his
mind free, open and willing to reframe the situation, explore new options and question basic
assumptions. Active attending implies a purposive disposition that is in movement toward a goal.
McCaskey discussed this phenomenon in relation to planning:
Given man's limited cognitive abilities and energies, less time is available for finding new
possibilities outside those connected to the goal or goal path........ Planners using this process,
therefore, are less likely to discover a wholly new goal or opportunity.
(1974, p 283)
It is not suggested that behaviors are exclusively expressive or purposive. In discussing the
relationship between expressiveness and coping Maslow noted that most acts of behavior have a
component of each, for example, walking has simultaneously a purpose and a style. He also
recognized the theoretical possibility of practically pure expressive acts, such as sauntering instead
of walking; blushing; gracefulness; poor posture; whistling; a child laughing in glee; private,
noncommunicative artistic activity; pure self-actualization, and so on (1987, p. 63). Given the need
for both dimensions of task disposition, the dialectic between purposive and expressive should be
viewed as one of emphasis, rather than the total absence of one or the other. An individual must
have the capacity and opportunity for both if he is to reach his potential.
The constraint nature of the relationship between the purposive and expressive dimensions of task
disposition makes integration difficult. However a person's approach to a task situation could
perhaps be characterized by a back and forth motion - in which he spends some period being
purposive and then another period being expressive, and then goes back to being purposive. While
the possibility of a back and forth quality between these two dimensions of task disposition is
noted, it is not clear how and when these dispositional shifts might occur.
Environmental Disposition
The task environment is the physical and psychological space in which a task takes place. Much of
what a task means to the individual is derived from this social context, and how he sees himself in
relation to it. Studies by Lewin (1948), Berger and Luckmann (1967), and Geertz (1973) support
the notion that what an individual chooses to attend to is to a large extent determined by his
interaction with the environment.
Related to Jacques notions of cognitive complexity (1982), when a person engages with a task he
also adopts a time stance toward it, and a time span of discretion. An individual may do a task in
response to a short term demand from his environment or at the other extreme, as a means for
working toward a long-term effect. The extent to which he adopts either a short or long term
approach influences both his experience of doing the task and the outcomes realized.
When the individual performs a task he and his environment endow it with meaning. A task in and
of itself is meaningless - the meaning comes via the task environment and the individual(s)
performing it. In ascribing meaning to a task environment the individual's conceptual system
simplifies, orders, and makes sense of experiences. His constructions of the task environment
largely determine: the personal meaning he attaches to social norms; the extent to which he
extrapolates on what is given; the degree to which he looks to others for direction and task
definition; whether he is drawn to fit in or instigate change, and the extent to which he bases his
performance expectations on his own standards or takes on those of his environment.
Table 2
Characteristics - Anticipating Dimension Of Environmental Disposition
preparing
long-term focus
exploring options
changing social norms
redefining problems
considering new procedures
open to alternatives
removing constraints
individualism
proposing new ideas
questioning
envisioning
preparing for possible contingencies
Characteristics - Adapting Dimension Of Environmental Disposition
recognizing constraints
fitting into the organization
implementing procedures
dealing with problems
accepting social norms
cooperating
short-term focus
responding
adjusting to external pressure conforming
flexible
good team player
reducing possibility of error aligning contributions with others
Drawbacks When Anticipating Is Over-Emphasized




danger of work becoming irrelevant to one's environment
difficulty in meeting short-term quotas and deadlines
may not comply with organizational norms and directives
inability to satisfy requirements for membership
Drawbacks When Adapting Is Over-Emphasized



may not develop own ideas
fosters dependency relationship
may be unprepared for future

failure to recognize options and alternatives
Figure 5
Environmental disposition is illustrated in Table 2 and Figure 5 as a continuum between
anticipating and adapting. This distinction was suggested by Botkin in regard to anticipatory
learning (1979). Whereas adapting suggests a tendency to respond and adjust to external pressure,
anticipating implies an orientation that prepares for possible contingencies and considers longrange future alternatives. When an individual engages with a task, he adopts an environmental
disposition toward it.
While the sociology literature suggests that all members of a society must conduct themselves
according to the rules of their environment in order to be accepted, Becker noted that not everyone
follows social norms to the same extent (1971). The emphasis an individual places on meeting
social norms can greatly influence how he goes about doing a task. A person's Environmental
disposition refers to his relationship with organizational norms and values. Edgar Schein
distinguished between two types of norms:
Most organizations attach differing amounts of importance to different norms and values. Some
are pivotal. Any member of a business organization who does not believe in the value of getting a
job done will not survive long. Other pivotal values in most business organizations might be belief
in a reasonable profit, belief in the free enterprise system and competition, belief in a hierarchy of
authority as a good way to get things done, and so on.
Other values or norms are what may be called relevant. These are norms which it is not absolutely
necessary to accept as the price of membership, but which are considered desirable and good to
accept. Many of these norms pertain to standards of dress and decorum, not being publicly disloyal
to the company, living in the right neighborhood and belonging to the right political party and
clubs. (Schein, 1984)
Schein (1984) also described 3 basic responses to norms and values. Type 1 is Rebellion. This
signifies a rejection of all values and norms. Type 2 is Creative Individualism. This includes
acceptance only of pivotal values and norms, and rejection of all others. Type 3 is Conformity.
This refers to acceptance of all values and norms.
Type 2 would indicate a preference for the anticipating dimension of environmental disposition,
while types 1 and 3 would most often be concerned with the adapting dimension. Whether a person
conforms or rebels, his environmental disposition could be said to be primarily concerned with
responding to input from his surroundings. However in some exceptional cases he could choose to
conform or rebel due to a personal decision that given a set of circumstances it would be in his best
long-term interests to do so. In this case his environmental disposition could be said to exhibit a
preference for anticipating over adapting, even though he is conforming.
Anticipating
An Environmental disposition that is oriented toward anticipating supports the individual in
thinking about or proposing new ideas, and in recognizing new ways of regarding a problem or
goal. Anticipating can also mean developing a new definition of a problem, or considering how an
idea or suggestion would work out if adopted.
Anticipating may also take the form of considering new procedures or organizing for the task
ahead. It is made more difficult when environments exert pressure on an employee to meet shortterm quotas and deadlines. As a result, long range concerns can easily be put aside unless he has an
orientation that emphasizes the anticipating dimension. Even then there may be a tendency for him
to change his disposition to one more congruent with his environment.
Inherent in this dimension is a concern for the present in relation to the future. In the context of
doing a task, anticipating what comes next fills the present with possibilities and opportunities. An
emphasis on this quality of environmental disposition enables a person to focus on his long range
objectives and explore options and alternatives. It also inspires him to envision alternative ways to
do a task, consider how an idea would work out if adopted, and think about the potential
implications of what is presently happening.
An overemphasis on the anticipating dimension of environmental disposition can be dysfunctional.
Without influence from the adapting dimension, a person may not give adequate attention to fitting
in with his environment. A strong preference for anticipating over adapting may also make it more
difficult for him to comply with organizational norms and be responsive to directives from his
organization. An environmental disposition that looks to comply with regulations may be
fundamentally different and incongruent with one that looks to explore options and alternatives, so
when a person's attention is involved in anticipating his concern for adapting may diminish.
Therefore, an overemphasis on the anticipating dimension gives the individual a frame of mind that
may make it difficult for him to survive in an organization over time.
Adapting
An Environmental disposition that is oriented toward adapting can support the individual in fitting
into an organization as a helpful and amenable force. Adapting suggests a willingness to be
flexible and cooperate with others in the task environment. This tendency can enable him to be a
good team player.
The adapting dimension enables the individual to be attuned to his environment, recognize
constraints, and be attentive to social norms and regulations. The conservative nature of adapting
helps reduce the possibility of error and aligns the contributions of the individual with those desired
by his environment. The individual that emphasizes adaptation is often rewarded with job security
by his organization.
A preference for adapting over anticipating may indicate a philosophical position of external
control (Rotter, 1966) if the individual chooses to adapt because he views himself as controlled by
outside forces. When an individual believes that external factors are powerful and pervasive, it is
most natural for him to adopt an orientation where he looks to adjust and fit in. However, in
choosing to adapt a person could presumably exercise a belief in an internal locus of control. In
this case he might adapt to a situation because he wants to support a cause, or because he expects it
will help him to achieve some desired state or goal.
Freire's Perspective On Environmental Disposition
In formal education students are often taught to value adapting over anticipating. This is implied in
the work of Paulo Freire (1970). Freire discussed contemporary methods of education, and some of
its more serious problems:
Instead of communication, the teacher issues communiques and makes deposits which the students
patiently receive, memorize and repeat.. This is the 'banking' concept of education, in which the
scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the
deposits. (Freire, 1970, p. 58)
Freire observed that formal processes of education often suffer from "narration sickness". He
described a pattern in which the teacher serves as narrator, leading the students to memorize
mechanically the narrated content. The student role then resembles that of a 'container', or
'receptacle' to be filled by the teacher. In Freire's model, the student becomes a "container" when
he is taught to passively write down whatever the teacher says without anticipation or initiative. In
this 'banking' system he learns to adapt and attend to the purposes of the teacher. In this cynical
and frightening view of formal education, if the student is intellectually stimulated by anything the
teacher says, with his mind mobilized to its own process of inquiry, he risks missing out on the next
bit of information the teacher is giving, which he is penalized for on tests that measure only how
well he is adapting. The student learns by experience that to stray from adaptation can be costly in
the credentialing process.
The banking concept, as Freire described it, exemplifies the way in which an adapting disposition is
often encouraged and an anticipating disposition discouraged in many so-called learning
environments. The result is that a natural love for learning is lost and learning instead becomes an
effortful task; an attempt to adapt to other's needs, rather than an exciting drive to meet one's own.
Teachers, of course have little interest in teaching banking concept students. In Freire's model they
too, are victims of a spiraling loop, that punishes teachers that dare to expect higher forms of
education. The teacher that attempts to break the cycle meets students that have been conditioned
to expect a banking concept approach, and may be initially distrustful and uncomfortable with a
different approach.
From the Freire perspective one could argue that it is the environment that is the cause of this
situation. Perhaps anyone thrust into a 'banking system' would logically resort to this type of
approach. However, it is observed that not all students and teachers fall prey to the 'banking
system' to an equal degree. There appear to be individual differences in people that can counteract
even the worst learning environments. What is it that allows some students and teachers to make
the educational process meaningful, while others succumb to the 'banking system'? This inquiry is
an attempt to provide some clarity on these matters.
Research Questions
This exploratory study probes for answers to the following questions:
1. What is the affect of Task Engagement Style on grades?
It is hypothesized that grade point average is related to Task Engagement Style. It would be
expected that students approaching their education with a style consistent with that preferred by
their evaluators would tend to earn higher grades. Freire has noted that pressure is often placed on
students to adapt to the ground rules established by their teachers. If Freire's perspective is correct
then it would be expected that higher grades would tend to be achieved with a task disposition that
is more purposive than expressive, and an environmental disposition that is more adapting than
anticipating.
2. Does an individual's Task Engagement Style change over time?
It is hypothesized that Task Engagement Style will vary given changes in the task environment. It
is suggested that an individual will alter his approach, deviating from his trait-level dominant style
as his construction of the task situation changes. It would therefore be expected that as a task
situation comes to mean different things to a person his Task Engagement Style would naturally
evolve to reflect that new meaning.
3. Can Task Engagement Style be reliably measured?
It is expected that the theory of Task Engagement is such that scales can be constructed to measure
it's two dimensions. The ability to reliably measure Task Engagement would be seen as a
confirmation of the concept. If this theory has substance then it should be possible to develop
reliable scales measuring task disposition (purposive/expressive), and environmental disposition
(anticipating/adapting).
Final Comments
In this chapter literature relevant to a proposed theory of Task Engagement has been
explored. In doing so, two dimensions have been identified; purposive/expressive and
anticipating/adapting. In the next chapter the methodology for studying these dimensions is
discussed.
Chapter 2 - Methodology
This chapter reports on the methodology employed in this study. It begins with a rationale for the
development of a Task Engagement Style Inventory, which is explored along with a history of the
initial development of the instrument. Next, the methodology for both the time series and
reliability studies that inform this research are described, and expected results are hypothesized.
Lastly an overview of the experimental design is presented.
Initial Development of the Survey Instrument
The research questions stated in chapter one cannot begin to be tested without a reliable instrument.
Therefore, a major thrust of this study is to begin the development of reliable scales for the
measurement of Task Engagement. The initial phase of this effort was an exploratory study of the
dimensions of Task Engagement that were identified in the literature review, and is seen as the first
step in building a valid instrument. A Task Engagement Style Questionnaire was constructed
reflecting these dimensions. This preliminary version (TESI 1) of the questionnaire was
constructed through interviews with students in undergraduate and masters level classes, and later
administered to students. It can be located in Appendix C.
The sample utilized in the preliminary study was comprised of two classes at a local University,
with 25 students in each. Interviews were conducted with 10 students to clarify the Task
Engagement concept, determine face validity and begin development of an inventory. The
interview protocol was designed with a qualitative, action research design with the intention of
facilitating a co-inquiry into understanding both the external and internal factors that determine the
subject's Task Engagement Style. This process had a secondary purpose of testing the utilization of
the Task Engagement model as a framework and tool to enhance the supervision process by
providing a catalyst and framework for dialogue. Concurrently, observational data from the
classroom was utilized for face validation of results from the instrument and interviews.
In the 1 hour interviews, students were asked to complete the inventory several times, applying it
toward a range of situational contexts: general style; our class; the part of their job they like best;
their least favorite part of their job, and how they would like to approach their job 5 years from
now. In comparing the scores from the various contexts both a general overall picture of their style
emerged, in addition to various potentials each student had that were more context specific. The
gap between their least favorite part of their job and how they would like to approach their job 5
years from now was particularly fruitful in clarifying a developmental agenda for the student. It
was also confirming that the inventory results for general Task Engagement Style tended to match
the student's own self-perception.
In this preliminary study students completed version 1 of the Task Engagement Style Inventory in a
time series approximately every 10 days. This had a dual purpose of furthering this research and
providing a barometer for how the class was going from the student's perspective. The surveys
proved to be a fruitful feedback mechanism and a forum for student input concerning the class.
This positive experience using the first version of the Task Engagement Style Inventory provided
inspiration for continuing this line of research and the potential utility of a reliable instrument for
encouraging dialogue and assessing how people approach their work.
Time Series Study
Further refinements in the concept and instrument occurred during a management development
program the author was involved in administering to XYZ Inc., a major chemical company.
Among its major lines of products are a line of plastic materials. At the time of this study, the
major thrust of the company was to become more market driven, in order to maintain or improve
market position over time. The program began in response to the company President's assertion
that XYZ Inc.'s culture needed to become more long-range oriented and less reliant on it's present
product line. During the period of administration six project teams were selected by the top
management group. The projects were then focused and implemented by the participants. Each
team had the task of developing a marketing strategy for a product XYZ Inc. might pursue.
The data collection period was conducted in the midst of this management development process.
The subjects were male managers with a technical background, and were studied as they learned
and applied marketing techniques. This sample of 25 managers was administered a 10 variable
version of the Task Engagement Style Inventory (TESI version 2) in a time series design regarding
their Situational Task Engagement Style toward their market project. This version of the
instrument located in Appendix B, includes 10 sets of contrasting statements.
To test the effect of time on Task Engagement Style, a 9 month longitudinal study was conducted.
Participants completed the survey after each of five project workshops that were held off-site in
reference to their market projects. Additionally 5 participants were interviewed before the project
began and project team 1 was observed on a monthly basis to detect changes in the participants
approach to their task.
The Reliability Study
After analysis of the questionnaires from the time series study 14 additional sets of contrasting
statements were added for administration to the larger sample used in the reliability study. These
additional sets were constructed from interview data of the managers in the XYZ Inc. sample and
students at 2 universities. The new questions were tested in a pilot study that included the
administration and analysis of 32 pairs of contrasting statements administered to 60 graduate
students in business at a local university.
The instrument utilized in the reliability study is the Task Engagement Style Inventory version 3,
which can be located in Appendix A. This version of the instrument is composed of 24 sets of
contrasting statements and designed with an ipsitic forced choice format in which each respondent
chooses statements that reflect his general Task Engagement Style. Twelve of the sets contain
contrasting statements descriptive of task disposition (expressive/purposive), and the other twelve
sets are comprised of contrasting statements reflecting environmental disposition
(anticipating/adapting). In this report, items V1 through V12 represent the expressive/purposive
dimension and items V13 through V24, the anticipating/adapting dimension. These items were
created from quotations gleaned from interviews in a preliminary study and extrapolations based on
attributes suggested by the literature.
The analysis of version 3 of the Task Engagement Style Inventory is the primary source of data for
this thesis. In this study 104 questionnaires were completed by MBA students. In most cases the
instrument was administered and collected on site while the subjects were in an organizational
behavior class. It is recognized that the sample size is rather small for an instrument of 24 items
compared to the recommended sample size of 5 to 10 times the number of items (Peters, 1979).
However, since the instrument was actually composed of two separate 12 item scales, the sample
size can be considered adequate.
Hypotheses
It was hypothesized that grade point average would be dependent upon Task Engagement Style and
that it would change over time in relation to external factors. Additionally, it was expected that
Task Engagement Style might be related hours per month reading non-required job related material.
In testing these hypotheses the following factors were utilized as a control: ethnicity; age; sex;
social class; educational background; years of work experience; and years of managerial work
experience. The demographic survey that was administered is exhibited in Appendix E.
The threats to validity are many in this study because of the importance of the level of generality.
Therefore an attempt to establish convergent validity was made by comparing the
anticipating/adapting dimension to Rotter's Locus of Control measure (1966). It was expected that
the environmental disposition dimension might bear some similarity to Rotter's locus of control
scale. Rotter's instrument examines whether an individual is more internally or externally
controlled. It was hypothesized that if an individual is more externally oriented he would also
show a preference for adapting over anticipating. It was also expected that if he was more
internally oriented he would show a preference for anticipating over adapting. This premise is
based on the assumption that in order to anticipate a person also needs to assume a measure of
control over a task environment.
Overview Of The Experimental Design
Preliminary Study
Sample - 2 groups of M.B.A students (n=45)
1. Interviews and observation
2. Create TESI 1
3. Administer TESI 1 bi-weekly 5 times
4. Interviews with and observation of survey recipients
5. Preliminary analysis of instrument
6. Refine instrument
Time Series Study
Sample - 25 managers at XYZ Chemical Inc.
1. Administer TESI 2in a time series (T1 -T5)
T1 - 2/19/88, T2 - 2/26/88, T3 - 4/1/88, T4 - 5/5/88, T5 - 6/27/88
2. Observation of sample at developmental workshops.
3. Observation of 6 managers from sample at regular meetings
Reliability Study
Sample - 104 M.B.A. students
1. 24 questions added to those in TESI 2
2. Administer TESI 3
3. Administer Locus Of Control Instrument and demographic survey
Chapter 3 - Results and Discussion
In this chapter the results of the reliability and time series studies will be examined and
explained. The statistical analysis of results from the Task Engagement Style Inventory revealed a
five item task disposition scale (expressive/purposive) and five and eleven item environmental
disposition scales (anticipating/adapting). These scales are illustrated in Table 3.
Table 3 - TASK ENGAGEMENT SCALES
ENVIRONMENTAL DISPOSITION SCALE
(ANTICIPATING / ADAPTING)
sample = 90
Mode Goodness of Fit
Root Reliability (Alpha)
5 item .89
.07
.69
11 item
.71
.11
.77
-------------------------------------------------------------V15 ____9. I look to others for a way to do the task
____10. I envision alternative ways to do the task
-------------------------------------------------------------V16 ____15. I focus on long range objectives
____16. I focus on the immediate situation
-------------------------------------------------------------V17 ____17. I am concerned with changing my environment
____18. I am concerned with adapting to my environment
--------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------V18 ____23. I explore options and alternatives
____24. I focus on the immediate situation
-------------------------------------------------------------V22 ____37. I comply with rules and regulations
____38. I think about the implications of what is happening
------------------------------------------------------The following items are added to comprise an 11 item environmental disposition
(anticipating/adapting) scale:
------------------------------------------------------V20
____31. I envision alternative ways to do the task
____32. I follow the recommended procedures
-------------------------------------------------------------V13 ____3. I am inclined to comply with rules and regulations
____4. I am inclined to explore options and alternatives
-------------------------------------------------------------V14 ____5. I think about the implications of what is happening
____6. I think about how to fit in with what is happening
-------------------------------------------------------------V21 ____33. I look to my supervisor or teacher for direction
____34. I anticipate the many alternatives I could choose from
-------------------------------------------------------------V23 ____41. I consider how an idea would work out if adopted
____42. I rely on experts for procedures and guidelines
-------------------------------------------------------------V24 ____45. I often experiment with new ways to do a task
____46. I try to reduce the possibility of costly errors
-------------------------------------------------------------TASK DISPOSITION SCALE
(PURPOSIVE / EXPRESSIVE)
Mode Goodness of Fit
5 item .89
V5
Root
.08
sample = 90
Reliability (Alpha)
.70
____19. I allocate specific times each week to work on the project
____20. I work on the project when I feel like it
-------------------------------------------------------------V6
____21. I express my creativity
____22. I try to meet my goals
-------------------------------------------------------------V8
____29. I make a plan and stick to it
____30. I do what feels most important
-------------------------------------------------------------V11 ____43. I prefer a less structured approach
____44 I am goal and planning oriented
-------------------------------------------------------------V12 ____47. I express my creativity
____48. I make a plan and stick to it
Results Of Factor Analysis
At this early stage in the development of the Task Engagement Style Inventory the primary concern
is with the verification of the underlying structure of the anticipating/adapting and
purposive/expressive scales and the evaluation of the individual items. Because the two
dimensions of the Task Engagement Style model are hypothesized to be relatively independent, it
was expected that there would not be a significant relationship between them. Therefore a
Principal Components factor analysis was selected to view their dimensionality (Singh, 1987). It
was expected that a Varimax rotation would offer the best representation of these scales because of
their independence.
Next, alternative models of the reflexive relationship between the items and each dimension in
separate models were tested using restrictive Maximum Likelihood FA in LISREL, based on biserial correlations. This test was chosen because the items are forced choice, dichotomous
variables. In evaluating the items it is of interest to identify shorter versions of each scale, if
possible, so that it might be applied to the various contexts and task situations in a survey
respondent's life.
Table 4 displays the Principal Components Factor Analysis with a Varimax Rotation. As
illustrated in this table, most of the items loaded on the factor that was hypothesized. The first
factor was primarily comprised of environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting) items.
However, a number of items originally presumed to represent task disposition
(expressive/purposive) also loaded on the first factor. In contrast, only seven items clearly loaded
on the second factor.
In examining the results of the reliability study it is clear that the 14 additional sets of items that
were added to the second version of the instrument that was used in the time series study, greatly
improved the scale. Only one of the original version 2 items loaded clearly on the
expressive/purposive dimension. Several of the items expected to load on this dimension actually
loaded on the anticipating/adaptive
Table 4
Principle Components Factor Analysis with Varimax Rotation
Variable
V16 (A/A)
V15 (A/A)
V22 (A/A)
V17 (A/A)
Factor 1(A/A) Factor 2(P/E)
.62 -.11
.59
.10
.58
.29
.55 -.02
V18 (A/A)
V7 (P/E)
V23 (A/A)
V20 (A/A)
V14 (A/A)
V21 (A/A)
V24 (A/A)
V4 (P/E)
V13 (A/A)
V2 (P/E)
V19 (A/A)
V10 (P/E)
V1 (P/E)
.50
.50
.48
.45
.45
.45
.44
.41
.40
.23
.17
.17
.07
.29
-.03
.12
.42
-.06
.25
.41
.04
.31
-.12
.06
-.02
.05
V11 (P/E)
V12 (P/E)
V6 (P/E)
V8 (P/E)
V5 (P/E)
V9 (P/E)
V3 (P/E)
-.12
.03
.18
-.23
-.36
.30
.21
.67
.66
.64
.63
.56
.48
. 28
dimension, with items 4 and 7 being the most extreme cases. It appears that the contrasting
statements in those items are somehow more related to the anticipating/adaptive dimension.
Items 20 and 24 from the environmental disposition scale had particularly strong crossloadings on
the task disposition factor, with loadings of .50 and .44 and crossloadings of .42 and .41
respectively. Other Environmental items that crossloaded at a marginally interesting level were 22,
18, 21 and 13. However they loaded at only the .3 level and therefore cannot be considered to be
significant.
A reflexive relationship between the two scales would have been expected if the questions in the
instrument had been written to focus on Task Engagement Style directly. Instead they focused on
the two scales that provide the foundation for the model. The data reflected this expectation, with a
low correlation between the 2 scales of .03. The data then suggests that the two scales form a
composite known as Task Engagement Style rather than being empirically derived from Task
Engagement Style. Because the scales were not derived from a singular underlying concept the
usual search for the number of factors is in this case inappropriate. At this level of analysis there is
a constraint to only 2 factors, however further factors may be present within each scale for future
analysis.
From the correlation matrix of the items, it was seen that there was a mixture of plus and minus
values of generally low magnitude, ranging from .0 to .49. This indicates that there is much
independence among the
Table 5
Principle Components Factor Analysis with Oblique Rotation.
Variables
V22(A/A)
V15(A/A)
V16(A/A)
V18(A/A)
V20(A/A)
V17(A/A)
V24(A/A)
V21(A/A)
V23(A/A)
V7(P/E)
V13(A/A)
V14(A/A)
V4(P/E)
V3(P/E)
V2(P/E)
V19(A/A)
V10(P/E)
V1(P/E)
V11(P/E)
V8(P/E)
V12(P/E)
V6(P/E)
V5(P/E)
V9(P/E)
Factor 1 (A/A) Factor 2 (P/E)
.63
.21
.60
.02
.58
-.20
.56
.22
.54
.35
.53
-.10
.52
.35
.49
.19
.49
.05
.48
-.09
.46
.26
.42
-.12
.41
-.02
.27
.25
.19
-.15
.18
.04
.16
-.04
.08
.05
.04
-.07
.18
.33
-.22
.41
.68
.66
.65
.61
.61
.43
items and therefore, a common underlying latent factor would not be expected. Bartlett's test of
sphericity was .0 also indicating that there was a significant amount of independence in the matrix.
The communality estimates displayed in the factor analysis exhibited a considerable range among
the items. They ranged from only .01 to .45 again indicating the lack of an underlying general
factor.
Table 5 displays the oblique rotation of the Principal Components extraction. This rotation
produced somewhat clearer results than the Varimax rotation. Here, the items in the environmental
disposition (anticipating/adapting) scale more clearly loaded on factor one. Additionally there was
a clearer loading of the task disposition (purposive/expressive) items on the second factor.
Three factors solutions were also examined utilizing the principle components extraction method to
see if the resulting loadings could find a more complex factor structure. When three factors were
extracted the results were not clear, with the items largely intermixed among the factors. The three
factor analysis does not appear to help in regard to understanding the underlying structure of the
instrument. This substantiates the contention that the model is most clearly explained with two
factors. This was expected since the questions were developed along two dimensions.
Scale Construction
In the restricted factor analysis, twelve item models were analyzed for both scales, however the
poorer items caused procedural difficulties with non-positive definitive correlation matrices.
Several models were examined in an exploratory fashion to obtain task disposition and
environmental disposition scales of 5 items each. The shorter form of the scales is desirable to
enhance their inclusion in various surveys and encourage their use in a variety of situational
contexts.
The Principal Components Factor Analysis originally suggested that there were six items in the task
disposition scale, however, when a six item model was analyzed the resulting fit was considerably
poorer than in the five item model. This was due to the weakness of item 9 (see Table 6).
Therefore the five item model is a better representation of the scale.
The environmental disposition scale had more items loading significantly, thus more work was
needed to hone the scale down to a five item solution. In the end this five item model had the best
overall fit of any of the models for this dimension. The principal components factor analysis
suggested an 11 item environmental disposition model. This model had an acceptable goodness of
fit reading, but overall the goodness of fit improved as the number of items decreased. A revised 5
item environmental disposition scale actually resulted from the reevaluation of the unrestricted
factor loadings in light of restricted
Table 6 - Restricted Factor Analysis Models using LISREL
Mode
Chi2 df
Prob. GOF
Root
6 item e/p
92.83 9
.00
.74
.13
5 item e/p
28.52 5
.00
.89
.08
11 item a/a
326.99 44
.00
.71
.11
5 item a/a
62.60 5
.00
.81
.11
6 item a/a
81.73 9
.00
.80
.11
revised 5 item
a/a
31.73 5
.00
.89
.07
factor results. The first model that was run used the first five items that originally loaded onto the
factor. However, in looking at a restricted factor analysis model that used the first 6 items it was
noticed that item 20 loaded quite poorly in combination with the other items. Therefore another
model was analyzed deleting item 20 and substituting item 17. The resulting combination of
variables appeared to provide a far better fit. As a result the goodness of fit increased from .81 to
.89. In general a goodness of fit value of .90 is indicative of a sound scale. Both of the five item
models came very close to this. Overall, both 5 item scales showed similar indications of
reliability.
Results from the restricted factor analysis for the 5 item task disposition scale showed that the biserial correlation matrix items 5 and 6 had the lowest correlation at .21, while items 8 and 11 had
the highest at .65. Overall, item 6 displayed the lowest correlation with the other items.
The communality of the items as seen in the squared multiple correlations showed all of the items
to be near .4 except for item 11, which was dramatically higher at .83. Item 11 then is indicated to
be a variable more central than the others with regard to this dimension.
Normalized residuals were also examined in an attempt to recreate the correlation matrix, thereby
testing the relative strength of the factors. The normalized residuals were highest for the
relationships between items 5 and 6 at -1.56, and between items 6 and 12 at 1.86. This suggests
that these correlations contain unique variance which is not reflected in the overall model. The
final standardized loadings were .61, .63, .69, .91 and .68 for items 5, 6, 8, 11, and 12 respectively.
This indicates that item 11 was by far the strongest loading item in this item combination as could
be seen throughout the output. Item six is perhaps the weakest or most unique item in the
dimension but shares some of this uniqueness with item 5.
The correlation matrix of the 5 items in the environmental disposition scale was reasonably even in
coefficient values averaging about .4 or .5. Here, the highest correlation was between items 16 and
18 at .67, while the lowest correlation was between items 16 and 22 at .29. The most unique
variance of the five variables was in item 22 and is reflected in a communality of only .37
compared to the other values which ranged between 4 and 6 for all other values. The T-values for
the this scale were all low ranging from 4.91 to 5.91 indicating that statistically significant model
parameter estimates can be made. The highest normalized residual value is for the relationship
between items 16 and 22. As was seen earlier, the relationship between these two items is the most
unique of any two items and consequently fits the model most poorly.
The final factor loadings were .68, .75, .69, .77, and .61 for items 15, 16, 17, 18, and 22
respectively. Being relatively even, this range of loadings was narrower than for the 5 item task
disposition scale. Overall these results appear quite reasonable and indicate an even pattern of
influence among the items.
In conclusion, the goodness of fit measures indicate a reasonable fit for both the 5 item task
disposition (purposive/expressive) model and the (revised) 5 item environmental disposition
(anticipating/adapting) model. The reliability of the scales is reflected in alphas of .70 and .69
respectively indicating a reasonable reliability for this stage in scale development (Nunnally, 1979).
The 11 item environmental disposition scale had a relatively higher reliability at .77 and in this
respect could also be used. However, though the alpha is higher, the fit of the model was not as
good as in the 5 item version. Reliabilities were greatly improved by shortening the scales from the
original 12 item models which had reliabilities of .52 and .76 respectively. Using Nunnally's
method for estimating the increased reliability if more items were added, the task disposition scale
reliability could be increased to .82 if the number of items where doubled with the same degree of
correlation among the items. The scale reliability of the environmental disposition scale could
likewise increase to .82 if its number of items was doubled. If the number of items could be tripled
these reliabilities could increase to about .87 (Nunnally, 1979).
Comparison With Locus Of Control Scale
In comparing the correlations of the scales with Rotter's Locus of Control scale, it is clear that
Rotter's scale is not closely related to the environmental disposition (anticipating/adapting) scale as
had been expected (see Table 7). While the two scales are correlated at the .05 alpha level of
significance, the magnitude (-.20) is very small. Therefore, no convergent validity can be
identified. It is interesting to note that the direction of the relationship is in the opposite of the
hypothesized direction. Though not at a level of magnitude, apparently the anticipating dimension
is actually more related to Rotter's external locus of control than is the adapting dimension.
This finding can be understood if one considers the anticipating/ adaptive dimension to more
closely measure the willingness of an individual to anticipate or adapt in relation to his
environment, rather than the control issue that is addressed in the locus of control instrument.
While Rotter's scale focuses on values and beliefs in relation to fate and control, it does not include
the time orientation that is implicit in the anticipating/adapting scale.
It can be inferred from the data that a belief in external control is apparently not a necessary
condition for an adapting disposition. Some people may choose to adapt to their environment in
order to maintain control over their lives. Similarly, a belief in an internal locus of control may not
be a necessary condition for an anticipating disposition. An individual may anticipate rather than
adapt to offset the pervasive impact of the environment.
This finding is similar to that found in a study by Reddy and Rhaman (1984) examining the
relevance of job involvement and work involvement of managers and blue-collar workers to their
locus of control. Their results similarly showed that job involvement and work involvement were
not dependent upon Locus of Control.
Table 7 - Reliability/Validity Correlation Matrix
(**alpha < .01; *alpha < .05, N=90, except for LOC: N=77)
Model 12 p/e
5 item p/e
12 item a/a
11 item a/a
5 item a/a
LOC -.14
5 p/e
.77**
.44**
.41**
.30**
-.08
12 a/a 11 a/a 5 a/a
.19*
.16
.98**
.07
.86** .90**
-.19* -.21* -.22*
The statistical analysis revealed that as the scales were refined they became increasingly
independent. Table 7 compares the Pearson Product Moment Correlations of the various scale
models. Items marked with an asterisk are significant when significance is assumed at an alpha
level < .05. Items marked with a double asterisk are significant at an alpha level < .01. In
comparing the correlations among the various models, the refined 5 item purposive/expressive
model is minimally correlated with the original 12 item anticipating/adapting scale, but not with the
refined 11 or 5 item versions. The correlation between the initial 12 item purposive/expressive and
anticipating/adapting scales was relatively higher at .44, however when the weak items were
deleted from the purposive/expressive scale, this correlation dropped considerably.
In contrasting the items that loaded best and worst in the factor analysis, it became clear that the
better statements had strong and clear verbs as their second word in the statement: "I _____". For
example: I allocate; I work; I express; I try; I make; I anticipate; I think; and I envision. Items with
weaker verbs did not load as strongly. These included: I often; I have; To get; A good; and I
could. Additionally, when the second word was the same in the two contrasting statements there
was less of a resulting contrast and therefore the data showed these responses to be more
ambiguous. Perhaps this format could be used to develop lengthier and more reliable versions of
the anticipating/adapting and purposive/expressive scales. If so, then the 11 item A/A scale may be
more appropriate than the 5 item A/A scale for use in cases where scale brevity is not necessary.
Relationship Between Task Engagement And Grades
A significant finding of this study is the correlation between undergraduate grade point average and
Task Engagement Style. As hypothesized results showed a significant correlation between grades
and the purposive dimension of task disposition and a moderately significant correlation between
grades and the adapting dimension of environmental disposition.
Pearson's correlation coefficients showed there to be a significant correlation between grades and
the 5-item purposive/expressive scale [.21 (p=.03, n=77)]. The more purposive the individual the
higher his grades, and the more expressive the individual, the lower his grades. A similar
relationship was noted in regard to Environmental disposition. The data suggests a correlation
between grades and the 5 item anticipating/adapting scale that is moderately significant [.17(p=.07,
n=77)]. In this case, the more the student adapts, the higher his grades, while the more he
anticipates, the lower his grades.
It can be inferred from the data that formal education may be encouraging students to approach
their studies with a Task Engagement Style characterized by purposiveness and adapting. Students
taking a functional approach to their studies would likely do best in regard to grades. This can be
explained in that both grades and Task Engagement Style are social constructs that appear to be
interactive within the cognitive frame of the individual. Grades are a societally accepted measure
of student performance. The student perceives which Task Engagement Style will lead to higher
grades when he is positively reinforced for using a particular style, and punished for using other
styles. If every time he employs a particular approach he receives a high grade, then the student
learns to adopt this style in the context of formal education. Therefore the correlation between
grades and Task Engagement Style is not surprising. Students describing their style as similar to
that which is most rewarded by formal education, would be expected to have a higher grade point
average than students with other styles. Alternatively, a future study could look at measures of
intelligence and learning style as intervening variables that might explain the relationship between
Task Engagement Style and grades.
Demographic Data
The median age of the sample of MBA students is between 25 and 26 years old. The median time
since they received their bachelors degree is between two and three years, and the majority have
over two years of full-time work experience. Over 44.3 percent have one year or more of work
experience. As a group they are predominantly male (65.9%) and Caucasian (80.0%). Limitations
of this sample must be noted. The similarity of the respondents make it difficult to generalize the
results to more diverse populations. Additional demographic information is available in Appendix
G.
Relationships between demographic variables and the Task Engagement scales were found to be
non-significant. No significant correlations were found between the scales and degree of
satisfaction in the relationship with the respondent's most recent supervisor, average number of
hours per month reading non-required career related material, or the percentage of potential talent
used in their current job. This suggests that neither scale is dependent upon these factors.
The variables used as a control also did not explain the variance in the data. The items controlled
for were; year of birth, year of undergraduate degree, number of years of work experience, number
of years of managerial work experience, gender and socio-economic class. No significant
correlations were found between these controls and the Task Engagement scales.
Results of the Time Series Study
The time series study described in chapter 2 concerned a group of 25 managers and technical
personal at XYZ Inc. Version 2 of the Task Engagement Style Inventory (see Appendix B) which
consists of the first 20 items of the version 3 instrument was administered at five different times in
the course of the project. Utilizing items from the environmental disposition
(anticipating/adapting) scale that were found reliable in the larger study, a shorter scale of those
items available for analysis was constructed. This scale is shorter than the 11 item scale discussed
earlier because many of those items were not administered in the version 2 instrument utilized for
the time series study. The scale items used are exhibited in Table 8.
TABLE 8
Environmental Disposition Scale used for time series analysis
V13
____3. I am inclined to comply with rules and regulations
____4. I am inclined to explore options and alternatives
-------------------------------------------------------------V14 ____5. I think about the implications of what is happening
____6. I think about how to fit in with what is happening
-------------------------------------------------------------V15 ____9. I look to others for a way to do the task
____10. I envision alternative ways to do the task
-------------------------------------------------------------V16 ____15. I focus on long range objectives
____16. I focus on the immediate situation
-------------------------------------------------------------V17 ____17. I am concerned with changing my environment
____18. I am concerned with adapting to my environment
-------------------------------------------------------------The chart at the top of Figure 6 illustrates the overall time series results. The data exhibited a
significant fluctuation in environmental disposition over the length of the study (from 2/19/88 to
6/27/88), and reflected the patterns that were observed in Team 1. Time series results for this 5
person group are illustrated in the chart at the bottom.
Interviews with members of Team 1 suggested that they formed with a hope that positive change
might occur. This was also reflected in an anticipating scale score of 4.2. In the second week of
the project at the off-site meeting on 2/26 the group through a process of brainstorming in choosing
and defining a project. Their emphasis on anticipating over adapting remained strong, staying at
the 4.2 level. However, anticipating dropped significantly from 4.2 to 2.7 during the period
between 2/26 and 4/1 in a shift away from anticipating and toward adapting.
There are several possible explanations for this shift. Perhaps as the project got under way the
reality of having no release time to work on it became pervasive. The project was to be done in
addition to their regular duties. At the same time it was realized that the project chosen by the
group would take an immense amount of work and might offer no higher payoff than several ideas
that were already awaiting attention. There also was at this time a drop-off in visibility,
participation and contact with the top management group in regard to the market development
process. Another explanation is that perhaps at this time the novelty of the project had worn off
and the relative interest and enthusiasm for change of the various individuals involved began to be
expressed. Lastly there is a possibility that this shift in environmental disposition is a natural curve
that would be expected to happen as a part of the development of any project team.
Anticipating continued to fall further between 4/1 and 5/5, and then rose slightly between 5/5 and
6/27. At this time the team became aware that their project would be ending and they began to
prepare for the next round of the market development process in which some of their subordinates
would be involved.
Table 9 - Anova / T-Test Results From 2/26 to 4/1
The changes observed in group 1 were similar to changes reported by the other staff involved in the
administration of the program as well. The data in the overall sample indicates that the most
significant change occurred between 2/26 and 4/1. Anova and T-Test results revealed the change in
environmental disposition to be significant as illustrated in Table 9 above. During this time period
the mean anticipating score fell from 4.31 to 3.43, while the standard deviation rose from .79 to
1.41 and reflects a movement toward adapting and away from anticipating. The change in standard
deviation suggests that this change was probably localized to particular individuals and/or groups at
an even more significant rate.
Given the large standard deviation it was proposed that the shift from anticipating toward adapting
might be localized to one or two of the project teams. It was unclear if the raise in standard
deviation that accompanied the significant fall in anticipating was a reflection of increased
individual variation or more related to experiences in the project teams. To look more closely a
time series was analyzed for each group, with the results displayed in Appendix G. While the
sample in individual teams is too small to be statistically accurate, the results infer that since each
of the groups followed a similar pattern with varying degrees that the effect was probably an
individual, organizational, or natural phenomenon rather than one that was team specific.
It appears then that the environmental disposition aspect of Task Engagement Style may change
over time as hypothesized. An additional study utilizing the refined scales found in the reliability
analysis would be necessary to reconfirm this result and determine if task disposition changes over
time as well.
While Task Engagement Style can be viewed at the trait level as a personality characteristic or
dominant tendency, it can also be viewed as a situational construct. This approach is found in other
personality constructs as well. For example Kolb's Learning Style Inventory (1981) measures four
styles of learning, but does not assume that an individual always employs his dominant style. In
the Learning Style construct it is assumed that an individual whose trait level style is
Accommodator will occasionally act as Converger, Diverger and Assimilator though perhaps not as
regularly or as comfortably. The Task Engagement Style construct is similar in that an individual's
style is viewed as a general tendency that may change given particular circumstances.
Summary
The major thrust of this study has been to develop a theory of Task Engagement and to develop an
inventory to measure it. From the statistical analysis presented in in this chapter it appears that
overall the modified instrument displays reasonable reliability. Another round of testing is needed
to prepare for confirmatory analysis and to establish validity. In Churchill's scale development
method (1979), this instrument is in the early stages. Therefore it is premature to begin norming
the scale. It will be important in the norming of this scale to include significant samples of people
from different task environments.
Issues of task environment variability could not be adequately addressed in the present study. It is
an area which needs to be clarified by future research with significant samples over a wider range
of task environments. Additional refinements to the scales would greatly enhance this process. In
addition, it will be important to establish the convergent and discriminate validity of these scales by
finding other constructs which might be similar to Task Engagement Style. Also needed are
methods for measuring the fit between environment, task and individual. One future study could
examine the flexibility of environments in changing and/or designing jobs to best fit the style of the
individual.
Another study could look at the Task Engagement Styles that tend to be encouraged or demanded
by particular task environments. Figure 7 illustrates the domain of an Environmental Demand
Model. The style demanded by a task environment may be an important consideration in
understanding the broader set of factors that comprise Task Engagement. This is supported in a
study conducted by Newton and Kennan (1983) designed to measure personal characteristics,
environmental properties, and interactions between person and environmental variables. Using
self-report scales they found that in a sample of 798 undergraduate engineers that work
environment is a more important determinant for work involvement than are personal variables. In
this study a theory about Task Engagement has been formed. Further development of this construct
might illuminate the impact of environmental factors as they interface with individual differences,
and glean results that may prove useful in a variety of applications. Managers, teachers and
consultants may find this theory to be of help in better understanding their subordinates, students
and clients. Human resource professionals may find it relevant to processes of job analysis,
placement, and career pathing. It is this author's hope that this line of research can be continued,
and that it may make a contribution to both practitioners and the literature.
Chapter 4
Further Discussion Of The Concept
This research has explored and studied a theory of Task Engagement and its two
dimensions: task disposition (purposive/expressive) and environmental disposition
(anticipating/adapting). Constructing a two by two table from these dimensions results in four Task
Engagement Styles; Functional, Creative, Social and Intentional. These styles are illustrated in
Figure 8, and can be considered in either a general or situational
level of analysis. Characteristics of the four Task Engagement Styles
are inferred from observations, interviews, personal experience, the literature, and by conceptually
combining the two dispositional scales. Observations of participants in this study suggest that
these descriptions exhibit a face validity. In interviews participants with scores indicating a
particular style reported identifying with the descriptions. Additionally, when discussing their
experience in various task situations, subjects have tended to use similar words to describe their
thoughts and feelings. A future study should be conducted to further establish empirical validity.
Functional Style of Task Engagement
People with a Functional Task Engagement Style would tend to approach tasks with an
orientation that could be characterized as purposive rather than expressive, and adapting rather than
anticipating. Their basic approach would be to aim toward getting the job done, and look to their
environment for help in establishing priorities.
Figure 8
A Functional Style of Task Engagement supports the ability to stick to a task, cope with pressure,
comply with rules and regulations, and stay within the boundaries of an assignment. This style
would enable an individual to do well in traditional hierarchical corporations, as these organizations
often assume that work is approached with this style. A person doing a job with this approach
would tend to work toward organizational goals, and be responsive to direction from others
regarding guidelines and standards. He would tend to place a high value on job security and expect
to be well rewarded for his efforts.
It is expected that a Functional Style of Task Engagement would help a person to fit in with his
work environment and to survive in an organization over time. Very attuned to social norms, this
individual might find meaning in satisfying those norms that are pivotal to his environment because
job security is a major driving force for him. With this style a person could make good use of selfmanagement techniques to discipline himself and diligently do what is required. Therefore a
person with this style has the ability to be content in difficult conditions where others would find it
more difficult to cope.
It is apparent that many corporations are organized around the assumption that their members
approach work with a Functional Task Engagement Style. It is also a style that many motivation
and incentive programs are geared toward. Often, when social scientists leave out personal
differences from their models they seem to make the assumption that people go about their work in
this way. In a self-fulfilling prophesy, by relating to the individual as if he has a Functional Task
Engagement Style, he may feel a pull to adopt it in a situational sense even though his General
Style may be different.
The Functional Task Engagement Style is similar in nature to Douglas McGregor's notion of a
"Theory X" perspective (1962). This individual would likely place a higher priority on
accomplishing his desired result or goal than on pursuing personal fulfillment from the process of
doing the task. Predictable and steady, even in difficult working conditions, an individual with this
style would tend to be adept at coping with pressure, accomplishing what needs to be done and
performing his duties.
Creative Style of Task Engagement
If a person had a Creative Style of Task Engagement his participation would be characterized as
expressive rather than purposive, and anticipating rather than adapting. At his best he would bring
personal commitment, enthusiasm, excitement and vibrancy to the workplace. When an individual
with this style is inspired he would likely be able to engage his work with a total involvement.
When so engaged he would experience little anxiety, distraction or alienation from self.
It is characteristic of the Creative Style of Task Engagement that the act of doing and not the
attainment of goals gives meaning to an activity. Though relatively unconcerned with striving to
produce, this individual might attain high levels of effectiveness. The personal nature of his
involvement in a task could provide him with great natural energy at his disposal. However since
he is not oriented toward self-discipline this individual's output may tend to be unpredictable, and
therefore might have difficulty sticking to goals and deadlines.
There are parallels between the Creative Task Engagement Style and research on the conditions for
creativity. Factors identified as key include: receptivity and immersion (Henle, 1962); flexibility,
spontaneity, originality, and redefinition (Arieti, 1976); and elaboration (Berger, Guilford, and
Christensen 1959). These conditions for creativity require both an expressive disposition toward a
task and an anticipating disposition toward the environment.
Putting one's "heart and soul" into a task personalizes the experience and increases the likelihood
that one will attempt to deal with the dissonance that is experienced through inquiry. Therefore
approaching an activity with a Creative Style of Task Engagement would typically offer
opportunities for personal growth.
An individual approaching his work in this way tends to find little meaning in approval, attainment
of goals, or any extrinsic reward. Therefore he would likely be relatively unconcerned with
authority relationships. While this might make his performance unpredictable and at times erratic,
his output could potentially be very creative.
Social Style of Task Engagement
When approaching a task situation with a Social Style of Task Engagement an individual's
participation could be characterized as expressive rather than purposive, and adapting rather than
anticipating. People with a Social Style of Task Engagement are relationship oriented. Often
intuitive and empathic, they would tend to favor informality and be comfortable communicating at
an emotional level.
A Social Style of Task Engagement is characterized by a high need for inclusion and a willingness
to respond to others. It is expected that a person with this style would have a relationship to
authority that is highly charged; whether it be devoted and supportive, or rebellious and
counterdependent. He would expect personal fulfillment from his work and look to others for
inspiration and support toward getting it. This individual would also have the capacity to be a good
team player, enriching his environment by inspiring and supporting others.
People with this Social Task Engagement Style would tend to be very involved in the informal
system of their department or organization. They would likely place a high value on affiliation
with their co-workers and be particularly attentive to what others do and say. While this could
enable them to build key relationships, it might at times serve as a distraction from attending to the
task at hand. Additionally, since this person is not driven by self-discipline, there might be a
danger that when not inspired by his environment he may be prone to procrastination.
Intentional Style of Task Engagement
Some individuals may approach their work with an Intentional Style of Task Engagement Style. If
a person had an Intentional Style his participation could be characterized as purposive rather than
expressive, and anticipating rather than adapting. What he brings to the task situation is a mental
set that finds its greatest meaning in achievement.
People with an Intentional Style of Task Engagement would tend to be clear, specific and to the
point. Often "Type A" personalities (Friedman & Rosenman, 1974), individuals with this style
might be characterized as being aggressive and competitive, setting high standards, and putting
themselves under constant time pressure.
When a person has an Intentional Task Engagement
Style he tends to be results oriented and can plan and accomplish goals. This style allows for the
diligent establishment of objectives and a willingness to work hard, and it enables the individual to
have the discipline and will power to plan for a desired outcome and accomplish it.
Often good managers, individuals with this style would tend to motivate and persuade others by
concentrating on goals and objectives. While this intense focus on output can limit tolerance for
the ambiguity and serendipity necessary for high levels of creativity and originality, it supports
people in being productive, consistent and efficient.
Synergy of Style, Task and Environment
General Task Engagement Style describes an individual's historical pattern or tendency. This level
of analysis may be useful for capturing an individual's predilections at the trait level, however the
situational application of this theory may eventually prove to be more useful in application.
Regardless of his General Task Engagement Style, in a particular context a task may be approached
with a different Situational Task Engagement Style. Given the apparent importance of context it is
suggested that a comparative analysis be conducted regarding how an individual's Task
Engagement Style varies between various situations. In comparing various contexts it may be
beneficial to produce two relatively short scales so that a variety of task environments may be more
easily measured.
While certain styles might be a better fit for particular situations, it is not suggested here that any of
the four Task Engagement Styles is best or would universally lead to more satisfactory results in
regard to performance and/or satisfaction. The four styles and some of their key characteristics are
illustrated in Figure 9. While it is tempting see Task Engagement as a normative and evaluative
concept, the importance of fit between task,environment and Task Engagement Style in this model
must be recognized. Without this synergy any of the styles could lead to poor productivity and
dissatisfaction.
Four cases illustrate how each of the Task Engagement Styles can potentially lead to poor
performance when they do not match the task situation. Picture an individual with a Creative Task
Engagement Style working in a conservative bank that places a high value on perfection and
predictability. In this event there would likely be a mismatch that could lead to frustration for both
the individual and his organization. With his passion and independence this person would likely
feel stifled, while the organization in question would probably view his performance as haphazard.
In the second case imagine a person with a Social Task Engagement Style in a technical position
where he works alone most of the time. Given his style, the isolation of this work environment
would likely make him feel alienated, making it difficult for him to find meaning in his work. This
would likely harm both his performance and satisfaction.
In a third example suppose an individual had a Functional Task Engagement Style and worked in a
sales organization that placed a high value on self-initiative and an entrepreneurial spirit. Here the
mismatch between this person's adapting environmental disposition and a job that is oriented
toward anticipating, would likely result in the employee feeling unappreciated and producing
unsatisfactory results.
In the fourth case picture an individual with an Intentional Task Engagement Style working in a
utility company where career advancement is based on seniority. The lack of opportunities for
advancement based on performance might become very frustrating for this person, and he would
likely find his job to be unchallenging and uninspiring.
In each of the above cases a mismatch between the individual's Task Engagement Style and the task
or environment would likely lead to undesirable results. For each situation a different style would
have served both the person and organization better. Each of the four Task Engagement Styles
suggests a different approach toward the plethora of situations that are encountered in
organizational life. It might be predictable how an individual with each style might react to diverse
situations like: a job that has been plateaued; working in either a highly disciplined or
undisciplined environment; having a large part of one's job in a team context; or a position with
highly repetitive tasks.
While it appears that Task Engagement varies with respect to particular task situations, it is not
clear to what extent a person can consciously choose the style he will adopt. It would make for an
interesting study to look at how, why and when some people are able to change their style to fit a
particular situation. It seems plausible that an individual's style might be modified by new
challenges in his life such as entry into the working world or starting a family. While often times
he may approach these responsibilities with some variation to the way he may have approached
them in the past, perhaps given the awareness, a person could consciously choose to adopt a
situational Task Engagement Style to suit a particular context. However the influence of an
individual's environment may so pervasive that becomes difficult for him to choose a style that it
does not favor. To do so may mean encountering disaffirmation from his environment on a regular
basis. More research is needed to study the factors affecting an individual's willingness and ability
to do so.
Is There a Place for Expressiveness In Organizational Life?
A person's disposition toward a task situation is not only an individual phenomena but a cultural
one as well. Deep-seated cultural values regarding the meaning of work have a strong influence
over how people learn to engage with tasks.
Expressiveness seems to be under attack as American culture approaches the 1990's. This culture is
dominated by a pragmatic spirit which emphasizes work, accomplishment, and purposiveness.
Illustrations of this phenomenon abound. Even seemingly expressive acts like vacationing can take
on a purposive tone. Lewis and Brissett (1981) in examining vacation literature concluded that the
contemporary vacation is dominated by a purposive disposition. They found that vacation
brochures graphically orient the vacationer telling him both why he needs a vacation and what his
experience will be like when he arrives at his destination. In this contemporary view of vacations
circumstances are defined as much as possible with little left to chance. Other examples of this
culture's predilection toward purposiveness are current trends toward the quantifiable measurement
of scholastic and artistic merit, social scientists emulating physicists, freshmen entering universities
who already know their majors, M.B.O. reports, 'yuppie' social climbing, leaner organizations, the
fall of the liberal arts degree, and an obsession with goals and work planning.
Block (1987) discussed the need for self-expression in entrepreneurship and suggested that
traditional manager-employee contracts have a tendency to deny self-expression. Greely in a
similar vein suggested that while cultural acceptability often requires the pretense of a purposive
disposition that the best work can at times come form a more expressive disposition.
We have observed that the most creative of our colleagues do not seem to work according to the
strict rules of the scientific method. They form explicit hypotheses only when they are ready to
write up the account of their work, and generally they worry about specifying their formal theory
only as they try to figure out how to begin their article. I am not suggesting that theories or null
hypotheses are absent from their works but that theories, hypotheses, scholarly footnotes, and
familiarity with the literature are present in implicit and fundamentally unimportant fashion. What
the creative scholars are doing when they are working in a project has nothing to do with anything
that fits in the neat paradigm of scientific method. What they are doing is dreaming, speculating,
playing with the variables in the model, following their hunches and instincts, and puttering with
their raw materials. None of these activities get into sociological reports because they are not
"science." However neat and precise the professional tone of articles, papers, and monographs, are
they really honest descriptions about how our colleagues went about their work? No, they are
using the approved literary form for communicating with each other and can escape the charge of
dishonesty with the plea that nobody really believes that the analytic process described in an article
is in fact the one that went into its preparation. ........I think the day may come when men are
astonished that there was a generation of scholars that rigorously excluded wit from their work..
These scholars of the future will simply not be able to comprehend why wit, such a marvelous
attribute of the human personality, was considered unscientific and unprofessional. I am arguing
that the sociological act is an exercise in artistic playfulness and that sociologists have all entered
into a mammoth conspiracy to hide the fact. Our papers are obscure, our journal articles are dull
and frequently unintelligible , and our meetings are sluggish and wearisome. (Greeley, A., M.,
1971, p. 224)
Greely suggests that because of the social desirability and convention of the purposive disposition
that people pretend to approach their work in this manner even when their disposition is an
expressive one. The emphasis on purposiveness in the academic community is so great that
scholars systematically try to remove the appearance of expressiveness from their work so it will be
accepted and valued by the academic community. Maslow offered a similar commentary in
discussing contemporary psychology:
Because contemporary psychology is overly pragmatic, it abdicates from certain areas that should
be of great concern to it. In its preoccupation with practical results, with technology and means, it
has notoriously little to say, for example, about beauty, fun play, wonder, awe, joy, love, happiness,
and other "useless" reactions and end experiences. It is therefore of little or no service to the artist,
the musician, the poet, the novelist, to the humanist, the connoisseur, the axioligist, the theologian,
or to other end-or enjoyment-oriented individuals. (Maslow, A., 1987, p. 63)
Results from this study also support the notion that a Task Engagement Style that accentuates
purposiveness and to a lesser extent adapting is favored by educational institutions. In particular,
the relationship found in this study between high purposiveness and high grades suggests that
students must adopt a purposive disposition if they are to be recognized in the way many
educational institutions evaluate excellence. That a preference for adapting over anticipating is also
moderately correlated with grades supports Freire's propositions that educational institutions teach
students to adapt to the world rather than change it.
It appears then that while many individual academics may have values to the contrary, that
academia as a culture places its highest value on the Functional Task Engagement Style. In many
institutions of formal education a good student is seen as one who learns what he is told to learn when he is told to learn it. Students that do otherwise are penalized in the form of a lower grade
point average.
While late 1980's American culture exhibits a strong preference for a purposive disposition there
appears to be at the same time a longing for the qualities that are characteristic of an expressive
disposition. An undercurrent seems to exist that yearns for expressive qualities like: peace of mind;
new and inspiring art and music; true scholarship and new ideas; inspiring leadership; and a sense
of shared values and pride in the culture. It may be that these qualities of life will not be realized
until there is a fundamental shift in this culture toward placing a higher value on expressiveness.
Berlew (1984) has observed that today's individual seeks a more total, value-based involvement
with his organization and its work. LaBier has similarly noted that the latest generation of
managers expect more from themselves and their companies than did their predecessors. He sees
these managers as increasingly wanting personal fulfillment, together with fun and pleasure from
life. For this new management generation, career and self-identity are inextricably tied (1986).
Additionally there are indications that a shift in values from career to family is underway. If these
observations are generalizable then perhaps as the turn of the century approaches a cultural shift
can be anticipated that places a higher value on expressiveness.
Integration
It would seem then that one mark of an individual functioning at peak performance, is the ability to
somehow integrate all of the dimensions of Task Engagement. Maslow discussed the need for
integration:
...healthy persons are not only expressive. They must be able to let themselves go. They
must be able to drop controls, inhibitions, defenses when they deem this desirable. But
equally they must have the ability to control themselves, to delay their pleasure, to be polite,
be able to be either Dionysian or Apollonian, Stoci or Epicurean, expressive or coping,
controlled or uncontrolled, self-disclosing or self-concealing, able to have fun and able to
give up fun, able to think of the future as well as the present. (Maslow, A., 1987, p. 68)
At times one's purposes can be internalized to where they operate at a tacit level (Polanyi, 1966).
When this occurs they function not as goals to achieve, but as values. When an individual
expresses himself these tacit purposes and values naturally come into play as a representation of his
inner most self, and require little conscious attention, discipline, or striving. Perhaps this deeper
internalization and clarity of purpose is a developmental state that allows one to overcome the
constraint relationships between purposive and expressive, and anticipating and adapting. Without
values and internalized life purposes, expressiveness would amount to nothing more than aimless
drifting or childish selfishness. When the individual internalizes and is clear about the broad and
continuing purposes in his life, he perhaps can be freed from a day to day preoccupation with goals,
for they are so well known to him they are a given. If he is clear where he is heading then perhaps
he can choicefully adapt to his environment without giving up the facility for creating change and
considering alternatives.
Dispositional Shifts
Another implication from this study of considerable interest concerns the dispositional shift
phenomenon. It appears that an individual's purposes can be experienced in different ways that
exert great influence on the quality of his work. It is suggested that a shift from "purposes as
objectives or goals" to "purposes as values" may allow a person to overcome the constraint nature
of the relationship between purposive and expressive discussed in Chapter 1. This is important
because this constraint must be overcome if an individual is to be both efficient and creative at
once.
When purposes take on the characteristics of values their personal relevance and importance
becomes clear and internalized. Therefore they do not require the attention or self-management
that the achievement of goals and objectives would usually require. When engaging with a task in
this way the individual's frame of mind is not one of actively seeking a specific desired outcome.
Because he is so familiar with what is important to him that he does not need to systematically try
to make it happen. He will naturally proceed in the direction of his internalized purposes without
actively trying to do so. For example an individual whose purpose is to achieve world peace does
not need to write reminders in his calendar to do so. If he has really internalized this purpose he
will be working toward world peace in everything that he does. In this case his participation in the
task is an expression of his internalized purpose - which then influences his behavior as a value.
As the shift from purposes as objectives to purposes as values occurs the individual's purposes are
clear, but he does not need to operate out of a mental set of self-discipline to achieve them. With
little repression or estrangement from self, he opens himself to finding new possibilities, and
thereby a higher level of originality and creativity. In doing so he approaches the task situation
with a mental set of grounded expressiveness and internalized purposiveness. By freeing the
psyche from the burden of self-management and repression it is enlivened and thereby can attain
great heights of creativity without losing the ability for diligence.
An example of internalized purpose is what Csikszentmihalyi has coined the flow experience. A
"flow experience" refers to a state of being that enables a person to become one with what they are
doing; i.e.,. the rock climber who feels and senses every aspect of the rock and who for the moment
experiences no angst, anxiety or diversion from attention (1976). When in flow the individual gets
totally immersed and thereby loses his sense of time and the distractions that surround the domain
of his task or activity. What follows is an intense centering of attention on the activity. Individuals
in flow do not need to try in order to concentrate, because their concentration comes automatically.
In flow there is a sensation of total involvement in the task.
A special instance of Task Engagement is when an individual first sits down to work. Tasks are
rarely begun in flow. For example many of my colleagues report that they once they get going on a
writing project they write well and effortlessly, but until then, they find it difficult to get started.
They find it frustrating to purposively begin an expressive task like writing, because when they first
sit down to write, they find that the expressive element is missing. Once in motion the mental
apparatus can rely on an intrinsic interest in the task or a desire to finish to stay in motion.
However, before the writer is engaged with the topic he is writing about, there may be little desire
to express his thoughts about it. Therefore many writers report that the only way to get started is
through an act of discipline. This works well for some, especially in tasks that do not require much
personal investment. However, in tasks that require a large measure of creativity like many writing
projects, trying to be express the self through an act of discipline is futile.
The constraint nature of the relationship between purposive and expressive makes it difficult to
exercise discipline and be expressive at the same time. Hence when the writer sits down to begin
writing, if he approaches his task with discipline and finds the creative ideas will not come.
Similarly, if he approached the task with an expressive disposition he might be easily distracted and
soon find himself responding to a stimulus that better corresponds with his immediate wishes. The
problem of how to best get started on a task is not easily solved. Some people report that a shifting
occurs when they begin a task. They may force themselves to sit at their typewriter and begin, but
soon through an act of unconscious forgetting, they lose their disciplined awareness and find that an
expressive disposition has supplanted the purposive one they began with.
The ability to shift back and forth between purposive and expressive is something of a mystery. An
individual might have to force himself to begin working, but as he becomes more interested in what
he is doing, he mysteriously finds that his disposition has changed. Or he might begin a task with a
light, playful attitude, but then unknowingly becomes more disciplined as time pressure increases.
It remains unclear as to how, why, and when these dispositional shifts occur and whether they can
be influenced through external or self control. More work is needed to better understand this
phenomena.
Implications For Supervision
An area of particular interest in this inquiry is the way in which the process of supervision interacts
with and shapes an individual's Task Engagement Style. A pragmatic potential of this line of
research is to make a contribution in the form of a framework to assist in the supervision process.
Huseman et. al. highlighted the importance of the supervisory relationship:
Two of the major relationships in our lives are those with our superior and with our
subordinates. These relationships can determine our commitment to an organization, our
willingness to continue working at a particular place, and our desire to go to work from day
to day. (1988, p.31)
By better understanding how people engage with the multitude of tasks that comprise their
organizational role, a supervisor may be better prepared to understand his employees, address their
needs, and tap into their natural excitement about work. An understanding of Task Engagement
may help them to reduce their own level of frustration through a better understanding of the people
they are dealing with, untap hidden resources and hold onto their best people over time. If
managers can better understand why and how individuals perform as they do, then perhaps they
will be better equipped to supervise, coach and support them in a way that best causes a synergy of
Task Engagement Style, environment and task.
By the very nature of his job the supervisor is concerned with setting the mental apparatus of the
employee into motion. A supervisor's job includes supporting attitudes and behaviors in his
subordinate that are conducive to the accomplishment of organizational goals. He is also
concerned with the outcomes his subordinate produces, and the priorities to which he attends. It is
not enough that the employee be alert and engaged with his work - he must attend to those tasks
that are of most relevance to the organization. Therefore a primary responsibility of a supervisor is
to build bridges between the will of his employees and the collective will of the organization. An
employee may put forth great effort, but if that effort is only directed toward his favorite tasks,
while ignoring other aspects of his job more important to the organization, then even though he is
expending considerable effort he may not be working toward the best interests of his organization.
In studying successful managers Gabarro and Kotter (1980) have observed that a mutual
understanding of strengths, weaknesses and work styles is an essential factor in a good supervisory
relationship. Hopefully the Task Engagement Style Inventory can be a tool to promote this kind of
understanding. It provides a language that could help a supervisor to dialogue with an employee
about the way in which he is applying his knowledge and talent to his job. By better understanding
The Task Engagement Styles of his people, a supervisor may be better prepared to select the most
appropriate supervision method for each employee.
There is a tremendous opportunity in the supervisory relationship for a supervisor to tap into an
individual's natural excitement about work and influence and support him to engage with tasks in a
mutually beneficial way. Unfortunately this opportunity is often wasted. It is hoped that this line
of research can work toward maximizing these relationships and provide a useful tool to better take
into account the broader set of factors that influence performance and give meaning to the
experience of work. There is no intention here of providing a tool for manipulating people or a
"how to" guide for motivating.
Final Comments
A major thrust of this research has been to construct scales to measure an individual's Task
Engagement Style. It is hoped that beyond the furthering of knowledge that a potential result of
this research could be to increase the awareness of individuals regarding their own work patterns.
This awareness might be helpful in choosing work environments that are more likely to bring out
an individual's best, or to reshape existing work environments to better mesh with his style.
The hope of this study has been to develop a framework that could inspire some thinking, dialogue,
and creative consideration about some issues that are important but perhaps difficult to openly
address. Task Engagement may be a relevant concept for many applied disciplines including:
performance appraisal; counseling; job design; career pathing; personal growth; education;
supervision; and productivity improvement. The following are some strategies for getting the most
out of your Task Engagement Style.
1. Awareness
Increase awareness of your natural strengths and tendencies, and your own unique approach to task
situations. Understanding your style can help you to understand why some tasks are particularly
easy or difficult for you. This can be very helpful in making more informed choices.
2. Profiting
Look for situations that will bring out your best and enable you to make use of your natural
strengths and tendencies.
3. Tempering
Avoid overusing your Task Engagement Style. Be aware of your patterns in approaching task
situations and the costs and benefits associated with them.
4. Augmenting
Provide a balance to your own style by collaborating with people that have different Task
Engagement Styles from your own. Appendix I offers some common sense suggestions for getting
the most out of working with people of different styles. Hopefully future studies will focus on
empirically testing these notions.
5. Stretching
Expand your approach to task situations by utilizing the strengths and perspectives associated with
other Task Engagement Styles. Make conscious choices to employ a different style when a
particular situation calls for a different approach than your usual style
Bibliography
Arieti, S. (1976). Creativity: The Magic Synthesis., Basic Books,
New York.
Arendt, H. (1978). Life Of The Mind., Vol 1, 2. New York: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich.
Ashkenas, R.; Schaffer, R.A. (1982). Managers Can Avoid Wasting
Review, Vol 60, 3.
Time. Harvard Business
Bills, A. G.; Brown, C. (1929). The Quantitative Set, Journal of
301-323.
Experimental Psychology. 12,
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency.
1982, 37, 122-147.
American Psychologist,
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory: Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.
Becker, E (1971). The Birth and Death of Meaning, 2nd ed.
New York: Free Press.
Berger, P. L.; Luckmann, T. (1967) The Social Construction of Reality. New York: Doubleday.
Berlew, D., E. (1984). Leadership and Organizational Excitement.,
Psychology, Kolb, Rubin, McIntyre Eds., Prentice Hall.
Organizational
Blau, B.J. (1987). Using a person-environment fit model to predict job
involvement and
organizational commitment. Journal of
Vocational Behavior; Jun Vol 30(3) 240-257.
Block, P. (1987). Empowering employees, Training and Development
34-39.
Journal; Apr Vol 41 (4),
Botkin, J. W. (1979). No Limits To Learning, New York: Pergamon Press.
Boyatzis, R. (1982). The Competent Manager, New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
Churchill, G. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures
Constructs," Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.16,
Feb., 64-73.
of Marketing
Condry, J. (1977). Enemies of exploration: Self-initiated versus other
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
1977, 35, 459-477.
initiated learning.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety, Jossey-Bass, 1976.
DeCharms, R. (1969). Origins, Pawns, and Educational Practice, in
G. S. Lessor (ed.) Psychology and the Educational Process.
Foresman and Co.
Deci, E. L. (1972). Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Reinforcement and
Personality and Social Psychology, 22:
113 -120.
Glenview, Ill.: Scott,
Inequity. Journal of
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L. (1980). The Psychology of Self-determination. Lexington,
Books.
Mass.: Lexington
Drasgow, F.; Miller, H. (1982). Psychometric and Substantive Issues in Scale Construction and
Validation," Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 67, No. 3, 268-279.
Foulkes, F. K. (1969). Creating More Meaningful Work. American
Association.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: The
Company.
Management
Continuum Publishing
French; Kahn. (1962). A Programmatic Approach to Studying the
and Mental Health. Journal of Social Issues 18: 1-47.
Industrial Environment
Freud, S. (1959, 1911). Formulations Regarding the Two Principles in Mental Functioning. In
Collected papers (Vol. 4). New York: Basic
Books.
Freud , S. (1924). Collected papers, Vol. II, London: Hogarth Press.
Friedman, M.; Rosenman, R. (1974). Type A behavior and Your Heart. New York: Knopf.
Furlong, W.B. (1976). The Fun In Fun., Psychology Today, June.
Gabarro, J. J.; Kosher, J. P. (1980). Managing Your Boss.,
Harvard Business Review.
Garland, H. (1985). A Cognitive Mediation Theory of Task Goals and
Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 9, No. 4.
Human Performance,
Geertz, Clifford (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic
Greely, A. M. (1971). Sociology As An Art Form., The American
(August): 223-225.
Books.
Sociologist,Vol. 6
Hare, A. P. (1976). A Category System for Dramaturgical Analysis.
Psychodrama And Sociometry; 29, 1-14.
Group Psychotherapy,
Henle, M. (1962). The Birth and Death of Ideas. In Gruber, H. E.,
Terrell, G., and
Wertheimer, M. (eds.), Contemporary Approaches to
Creative Thinking. New York:
Atherton Press.
Hesse, H. (1951). Siddhartha. New York: New Directions
Publishing Corporation.
Hollenbeck, J. R.; Klein, H. J. Goal Commitment and the Goal-Setting Process: Problems,
Prospects, and Proposals for Future Research.
Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 72, No. 2,
212-220.
Huseman; Lahiff; Penrose (1988). Business Communication
Press.
Strategies and Skills, Dryden
Jacques, E. (1982). The Form of Time. New York: Crane Rusak.
James, W. (1896). Will to Believe. Massachusetts: The Plimpton Press.
Janis, I. L. (1984). Group Think, Organizational Psychology, Kolb,
Prentice Hall, 1984.
Rubin, McIntyre Eds.,
Jans, S.A. (1985). Organizational Factors and Work Involvement.
Organizational Behavior
and Work Involvement; Jun Vol 35 (3)
382-396.
Kanungo, R. (1982). Work Alienation. New York: Praeger
Publishers
Kanungo, R. (1981). Work Alienation and Involvement: Problems
and Prospects. Review
Internationale de Psychologie Appliquee / International Review of Applied Psychology; 30, 1,
Jan, 1-15.
Kelley, G. A. (1955). A Theory of Personality: The Psychology of
New York: Norton and Company.
Personal Constructs.
Keniston, K. (1968). The Psychology of Alienated Students., The Self In Social Interaction, Vol.
1., C. Gordon and K. J. Gergen, Eds. N.Y. Wiley and Sons.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Krech, D.; Crutchfield, R. S. , Ballachey, E. L. (1962). Individual Society. New York: McGrawHill.
LaBier, D. (1986). Madness Stalks the Ladder Climbers. Fortune,
September 1, 78-84.
Latham, G. P.; Baldes, J. J. (1975). The Proactical Significance: of
Setting. Journal of Applied Psychology,
60, 122-124.
Locke's Theory of Goal
Lawler, E. E.; D. T. Hall. (1970). Relationship of Job
Characteristics to Job Involvement,
Satisfaction, and Intrinsic
Motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology 54
Levitt, T. (1976). Management and the Post Industrial Society. The
Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory In Social Science. New York:
Public Interest, Summer.
Harper.
Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on
York: Harper and Brothers.
Group Dynamics. New
Lewis, L.S.; Brissett, D. Paradise on Demand. (1981). Society: 18,
5(133), July-Aug, 85-90.
Locke, E. A. (1968). Toward a Theory of Task Performance and Incentives. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance,
3, 157-189.
Locke, E. A.; Cartledge, N.; Knerr, C. S. (1970). Studies of the Relationship Between
Satisfaction, Goal Setting and Performance.
Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance. 5, 135-158.
Locke, E. A.; Shaw, K. N.; Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal
Performance: 1968-1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 125-152.
Lodahl, T. M.; Kejner, M. (1965). The Definition and
Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 49
Setting and Task
Measurement of Job Involvement.
McGregor, D. (1962). The Human Side of Enterprise
Maslow, A. (1983, 1971). The Farther Reaches of Human Nature,
New York: Penguin Books Ltd.
Maslow, A. (1987). Motivation and Personality, New York: Harper &
Row.
Matsui, T.; Okada, A.; Mizuguchikk R. (1981). Expectancy
Theory
Prediction of the
Goal Theory Postulate, "The Harder the Goal, the Higher the Performance" Journal of Applied
Psychology, 66: 54-58.
Maurer, J. (1969). Work Role Involvement of Industrial Supervisors.
State University, Business Studies.
May, R. (1969). Love and Will, New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
East Lansing: Michigan
McCaskey, M. B. (1974). A Contingency Approach to Planning:
Planning With Goals
and Planning Without Goals. Academy of Management Journal: Vol. 17. #2. (pp. 281-291)
Mischel, W. (1974). Process In Delay of Gratification. in L.
Experimental Social Psychology
(Vol. 7). New York: Academic Press.
Berkowitz (ed.), Advances In
Mischel, W., (1979). On the Interface of Cognition and Personality,
p.740-754).
American Psychologist,
Mischel, W.; Baker, N. (1975). Cognitive Appraisals and Transformations in Delay Behavior.
Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 31, 254-261.
Morrison, T.L. (1985). Personal and Professional Boundary
Attitudes and Effective Group
Leadership in Classrooms. Journal of Psychology; Mar Vol 119(2) 101-111.
Mossholder, K. W. (1980). Effects of Externally Mediated Goal Setting on Intrinsic Motivation:
A Laboratory Experiment, Journal of Applied Psychology Vol. 65. No. 2. 202-210.
Newell, K. M. (1978). Some Issues on Action Plans. In G. E.
Stelmach (Ed.), Information
Processing in Motor Control and
Learning. New York: Academic Press.
Newton, T. H.; Kennan, A. (1983). Is Work Involvement an Attribute of the Person or the
Environment? Journal of Occupational
Behaviour; Jul Vol 4 (3) 169-178.
Nunnally, J. (1979). Psychometric Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension, New York: Doubleday
Porpora, D.V. (1983). On the Post-Wittgensteinian Critique of the Concept of Action in Sociology.
Journal for the Theory of Social
Behaviour; 13, 2, July, 129-146.
Reddy, N. Y.; Rahman, M. A. (1984). Relevance Of Job Involvement and
Work
Involvement of Managerial Employees and Blue-Collar Workers to their Locus of Control.
Journal of Human-Ergology;
Sep Vol 13(1) 15-22.
Rimmerman, A; Portowicz, D. J.; Ehrlich, N. (1985). An Analysis of
Factors Pertaining to
Burnout Among Paraprofessional
Rehabilitation Workers in Israel. International Journal of
Rehabilitation Research; Vol 8(4) 455-458.
Robinson; John P.; Shaver, Phillip R. (1973). Measure of Social Psychological Attitudes,
Institute of Social Research, University
of Michigan.
Rogers, C. R. (1961). On Becoming a Person. Boston, Mass.:
Houghton-Mifflin.
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized Expectancies for Internal Versus
Reinforcement, Psychological Monographs.,
1980.
Ryan, T. S. (1958). Drives, Tasks and Initiation of Behavior.
Psychology, 71, 74-93.
External Control of
American Journal of
Shalley, C. E.; Oldham, G. R. (1985). Effects of Goal Difficulty and
Expected External
Evaluation On Intrinsic Motivation: A Laboratory Study. Academy of Management Journal, 28:
628- 640.
Schein, E. H. (1984). Organizational Socialization and the
Profession of Management.,
Organizational Psychology, Kolb, Rubin, McIntyre Eds., Prentice Hall.
Singh, J. (1987). Measurement Approaches for Consumer Behavior
Constructs: A
Multidimensional Perspective. Advances in Consumer Research, ed. Michael Houston, Volume
XV.
Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond Freedom And Dignity.
New York: Knopf.
Stedry, A. C. (1960). Budget Control and Cost Behavior. Englewood
Hall.
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-
Steers, R. M., Porter, L. W. (1987). Motivation and Work Behavior,
New York: Mcgraw-Hill.
Steiner, George A. (1969). Top Management Planning
New York: MacMillan.
Srivastva, S. (1983). The Executive Mind., San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
Torbert, W. R. (1972). Learning From Experience - Toward
Columbia Press.
Consciousness. New York:
Tough, Allen. (1971). The Adult's Learning Project. Ontario:
Education.
Ontario Institute for Studies in
Verma, O. P.; Upadhyay, S. N. (1986). Organizational
Commitment, Job Involvement and Job
Satisfaction. Indian Journal of Current Psychological Research; Vol 1 (1) 24-31.
Vroom, V. H. (1962). Ego Involvement, Job Satisfaction, and Job Performance. Personnel
Psychology 15: 159-177
Weick, K. E. (1969). The Social Psychology of Organizing.
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Reading, Massachusetts:
Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and Leaders: Are They Different?,
Review, May-June.
Harvard Business
Appendix A
THE TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE INVENTORY (V3)
The Task Engagement Style Inventory describes the way you engage with tasks in day to day
situations in your life. You will be given several pairs of statements. For each pair mark a check
by the statement that you think most accurately describes how you would usually go about doing a
task. Try to recall some recent situations where you did a task, perhaps in your job or at school.
Please do not make ties.
____1. To get started I must impose discipline on myself
____2. To get started requires little or no discipline
--------------------------------------------------------------____3. I am inclined to comply with rules and regulations
____4. I am inclined to explore options and alternatives
--------------------------------------------------------------____5. I think about the implications of what is happening
____6. I think about how to fit in with what is happening
--------------------------------------------------------------____7. I look forward to the end product of the project
____8. I look forward to the doing of the project
--------------------------------------------------------------____9. I look to others for a way to do the task
____10. I envision alternative ways to do the task
--------------------------------------------------------------____11. I am inclined to express my ideas and feelings
____12. I am inclined to clarify what needs to be done
--------------------------------------------------------------____13. I could be described as trying, coping, and striving
____14. I could be described as inquiring, growing, and being involved
-------------------------------------------------------------____15. I focus on long range objectives
____16. I focus on the immediate situation
-------------------------------------------------------------____17. I am concerned with changing my environment
____18. I am concerned with adapting to my environment
--------------------------------------------------------------____19. I allocate specific times each week to work on the project
____20. I work on the project when I feel like it
-------------------------------------------------------------____21. I express my creativity
____22. I try to meet my goals
____23. I explore options and alternatives
____24. I focus on the immediate situation
-------------------------------------------------------------____25. I have to discipline myself to stay on task
____26. I find a way to make the task interesting
-------------------------------------------------------------____27. A good supervisor makes it clear to me what my job is
____28. A good supervisor expects me to decide what to do
--------------------------------------------------------------____29. I make a plan and stick to it
____30. I do what feels most important
--------------------------------------------------------------____31. I envision alternative ways to do the task
____32. I follow the recommended procedures
--------------------------------------------------------------____33. I look to my supervisor or teacher for direction
____34. I anticipate the many alternatives I could choose from
--------------------------------------------------------------____35. I take an efficient approach
____36. I take a creative approach
--------------------------------------------------------------____37. I comply with rules and regulations
____38. I think about the implications of what is happening
--------------------------------------------------------------____39. I get into the flow of the task
____40. I put out the effort to do what must be done
--------------------------------------------------------------____41. I consider how an idea would work out if adopted
____42. I rely on experts for procedures and guidelines
--------------------------------------------------------------____43. I prefer a less structured approach
____44 I am goal and planning oriented
--------------------------------------------------------------____45. I often experiment with new ways to do a task
____46. I try to reduce the possibility of costly errors
--------------------------------------------------------------____47. I express my creativity
____48. I make a plan and stick to it
Scoring The Task Engagement Inventory
add one point for each statement checked
Expressive
Purposive
Adaptive
Anticipating
2. ___
1. ___
3 . ___
4. ___
8. ___
7. ___
6 . ___
5. ___
11. ___
12. ___
9. ___
10. ___
14. ___
13. ___
16. ___
15. ___
20. ___
19. ___
18. ___
17. ___
21. ___
22. ___
24. ___
23. ___
26. ___
25. ___
28. ___
27. ___
30. ___
29. ___
31. ___
32. ___
36. ___
35. ___
33. ___
34. ___
39. ___
40. ___
37. ___
43. ___
44. ___
42. ___
41. ___
47. ___
48. ___
46. ___
45. ___
total _____ total _____
Expressive
Purposive
score score score
Appendix B
total _____
total _____
Adaptive
Anticipating
score
Task Engagement Style Inventory
with self scoring booklet
38. ___
by
Michael B. London
What Is Task Engagement Assessment & Training?
- Confirm who you are, identify your personal strengths, and understand
you make.
the unique contribution
- Discover the factors that help you be most creative, and learn ways to
tasks and make them more interesting.
take boring, mundane
- Understand the factors that enable you to be most effective.
- Find out why goal-setting may or may not work for you.
- Learn to better manage your time and attention.
- Identify the parts of your job where you need more self control, and
discipline might increase your creative output.
where exercising less
- Deal more effectively with procrastination, alienation, guilt and burn-out.
- Learn strategies for developing new ideas, goals, alternatives
and opportunities.
- Know your Task Engagement Style and how particular careers are
more suited to it than
others, and choose a career path that brings out
the best of your natural abilities.
- Get in sync with the Task Engagement Style of your boss and learn
your relationship.
strategies for improving
- Learn strategies for working more effectively with team members that
Engagement Styles different from your own.
may have Task
- Diagnose systems and people for productive and creative potential.
- Discover the unique mix of strengths among your subordinates and how to tailor your
management strategies to bring out the most from their
individual styles.
- Understand why usually competent employees perform poorly on
some tasks.
- Be a catalyst for on-going dialogue about creative ideas and
potential improvements.
TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE WORKSHEET
Choose an example from your own life that best fits each situation, and briefly describe it in the
space provided. Please do not list the same task twice.
________________________________________________________
A.
A task at work in which you are highly competent.
________________________________________________________
B.
A task at work in which you need to improve.
________________________________________________________
C.
A situation at work with time pressure.
________________________________________________________
D.
A time you learned something new.
________________________________________________________
E.
A task you often delay doing.
________________________________________________________
F.
A task you do as part of a team.
________________________________________________________
G.
A time you were involved in causing change.
________________________________________________________
H.
A meeting you often attend.
I.
How you generally approach most task situations.
J.
How you would like to approach your job in 5 years
THE TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE INVENTORY
The Task Engagement Style Inventory describes the way you engage with tasks in day to day
situations in your life. You will be given several pairs of statements. For each pair mark a check
by the statement that you think most accurately describes how you would usually go about doing
the task you described for each situation listed in the worksheet. Give a response for each of the 4
task situations represented here by columns A - D. Please do not make ties.
A
B
C
D
1.
I look to others for a way to do the task
____ ____ ____ ____
2.
I envision alternative ways to do the task
____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3.
I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____ ____ ____
4.
I do what feels most important
____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
I focus on long range objectives
____ ____ ____ ____
6.
I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7.
I express my creativity
____ ____ ____ ____
8.
I try to meet my goals ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9.
I am concerned with changing my environment
____ ____ ____ ____
10.
I am concerned with adapting to my environment ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11.
I allocate specific times each week to work on the project____
____ ____
12.
I work on the project when I feel like it
____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13.
I explore options and alternatives
____ ____ ____ ____
14.
I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15.
I prefer a less structured approach ____ ____ ____ ____
16.
I am goal and planning oriented
____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17.
I comply with rules and regulations ____ ____ ____ ____
18.
I think about the implications of what is happening ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19.
I express my creativity
____ ____ ____ ____
20.
I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____ ____ ____
____
THE TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE INVENTORY (page 2)
For each pair mark a check by the statement that you think most accurately describes how you
would usually go about doing the task you described for each situation listed in the worksheet.
Give a response for each of the 4 task situations represented here by columns E - H. Please do not
make ties.
E
F
G
H
1.
I look to others for a way to do the task
____ ____ ____ ____
2.
I envision alternative ways to do the task
____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3.
I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____ ____ ____
4.
I do what feels most important
____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
I focus on long range objectives
____ ____ ____ ____
6.
I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7.
I express my creativity
____ ____ ____ ____
8.
I try to meet my goals ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9.
I am concerned with changing my environment
____ ____ ____ ____
10.
I am concerned with adapting to my environment ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11.
I allocate specific times each week to work on the project____
____ ____
12.
I work on the project when I feel like it
____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13.
I explore options and alternatives
____ ____ ____ ____
14.
I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15.
I prefer a less structured approach ____ ____ ____ ____
16.
I am goal and planning oriented
____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17.
I comply with rules and regulations ____ ____ ____ ____
18.
I think about the implications of what is happening ____ ____ ____ ____
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19.
I express my creativity
____ ____ ____ ____
20.I make a plan and stick to it
____ ____ ____ ____
THE TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE INVENTORY (page 3)
____
For each pair mark a check by the statement that you think most accurately describes how you
would usually go about doing the task you described for each situation listed in the worksheet.
Give a response for each of the task situations represented here by columns I - J. Please do not
make ties.
I
J
1.
I look to others for a way to do the task
____ ____
2.
I envision alternative ways to do the task
____ ____
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3.
I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____
4.
I do what feels most important
____ ____
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
I focus on long range objectives
____ ____
6.
I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7.
I express my creativity
____ ____
8.
I try to meet my goals ____ ____
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9.
I am concerned with changing my environment
____ ____
10.
I am concerned with adapting to my environment ____ ____
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11.
I allocate specific times each week to work on the project ____
____
12.
I work on the project when I feel like it
____ ____
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13.
I explore options and alternatives
____ ____
14.
I focus on the immediate situation ____ ____
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15.
I prefer a less structured approach ____ ____
16.
I am goal and planning oriented
____ ____
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17.
I comply with rules and regulations ____ ____
18.
I think about the implications of what is happening ____ ____
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19.
I express my creativity
____ ____
20.
I make a plan and stick to it ____ ____
Scoring The Task Engagement Inventory
add one point for each statement checked
Expressive Scale
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
4.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
7.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
12.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
15.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
19.
____ ____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____ ____ ____
A
B
C
expressive totals
____
D
____
E
____
F
____
G
____
H
____
I
____
J
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purposive Scale
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
3.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
8.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
11.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
16.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
20.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____ ____ ____
A
B
C
purposive totals
Anticipating Scale
A
B
C
____
D
____
E
____
F
____
G
____
H
____
I
____
J
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
2.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
5.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
9.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
13.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
18.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____ ____ ____ ____
A
B
C
D
anticipating scale totals
____
E
____
F
____
G
____
H
____
I
____
J
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adapting Scale
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
1.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
6.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
10.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
14.
____ ____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
17.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____ ____
A
B
adapting totals
____
C
____
D
____
E
____
F
____
G
____
H
____
I
____
J
Plot Your Expressive/Purposive Scores
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Expressive - Purposive = Task Disposition score
A task at work in which you are highly competent. ____ - ____ = ____
A task at work in which you need to improve.
____ - ____ = ____
A situation at work with time pressure.
____ - ____ = ____
A time you learned something new.
____ - ____ = ____
A task you often delay doing.
____ - ____ = ____
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
A task you do as part of a team.
____ - ____ = ____
A time you were involved in causing change.
____ - ____ = ____
A meeting you often attend.
____ - ____ = ____
How you generally approach most task situations. ____ - ____ = ____
How you would like to approach your job in 5 years.
____ - ____ = ____
Reacting To Your Task Disposition Scores
A positive Task Disposition score indicates an emphasis on expressiveness. A negative Task
Disposition score indicates an emphasis on purposiveness. Answer the following questions to
determine how your Task Disposition affects your work in the various situations you identified.
1. In which 2 situations are you most expressive (+ score)?
__________________________________________________________________
2. In which 2 situations are you most purposive (- score)?
__________________________________________________________________
3. What factors make you more purposive or expressive in particular situations?
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
4. In which situations would being more purposive make you more effective?
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
5. In which situations would being more expressive make you more effective?
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________
Plot Your Anticipating/Adapting Scores
Anticipating - Adapting = Environmental Disposition score
A.
A task at work in which you are highly competent. ____ - ____ = ____
B.
A task at work in which you need to improve.
____ - ____ = ____
C.
A situation at work with time pressure.
____ - ____ = ____
D.
A time you learned something new.
____ - ____ = ____
E.
A task you often delay doing.
____ - ____ = ____
F.
A task you do as part of a team.
____ - ____ = ____
G.
A time you were involved in causing change.
____ - ____ = ____
H.
A meeting you often attend.
____ - ____ = ____
I.
How you generally approach most task situations. ____ - ____ = ____
J.
How you would like to approach your job in 5 years.
____ - ____ = ____
Reacting To Your Environmental Disposition Scores
A positive Environmental Disposition score indicates an emphasis on anticipating. A negative
score indicates a preference for adapting. Answer the following questions to determine how your
Environmental Disposition affects your work in the various situations you identified.
1. In which 2 situations are you most anticipating (+ score)?
__________________________________________________________________
2. In which 2 situations are you most adapting (- score)?
__________________________________________________________________
3. What factors make you more anticipating or adapting in particular situations?
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________
4. In which situations would being more adapting make you more effective?
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
5. In which situations would being more anticipating make you more effective?
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________
TASK ENGAGEMENT STYLE GRID
Plot a letter (A - J) on the Task Engagement Style Grid to represent each of your contextual scores.
To find the point for each letter take your scores for each of the dimensions of Task Engagement,
expressive, purposive, anticipating and adapting, and subtract as follows to get two combination
scores:
Expressive - Purposive = Task Disposition score
Anticipating - Adapting = Environmental Disposition score
Reacting To My Task Engagement Style Scores
1. What I like about my Task Engagement Style.
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
2. What I dislike about my Task Engagement Style.
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
3. Refer to the Task Engagement Grid. In which contexts and task situations does you Task
Engagement Style best serve you in terms of performance and satisfaction.
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
4. Refer to the Task Engagement Grid. In which contexts and task situations does your Task
Engagement Style most limit you in terms of performance and satisfaction.
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________
5. For each context listed in #4 suggest a different Task Engagement Style that might lead to better
results in that particular situation.
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________
6. What do you think Task Engagement Style of your boss is? How does this influence the way
he/she manages and supervises you and your peers?
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
7. Given your Task Engagement Style, what do you think is the unique contribution you make to
your organization?
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
8. What do you think are the Task Engagement Styles of each person you regularly deal with at
work? How might you deal with each of them differently if you were to take their styles into
account?
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________
Appendix D - Locus Of Control Survey (Rotter, 1966)
For each pair of statements place a check by the item you most agree with:
____1. a.
____ b.
them.
Children get into trouble because their parents punish them too
The trouble with most children nowadays is that their parents are
____2. a.
____ b.
Many of the unhappy things in people's lives are partly due to bad luck.
People's misfortunes result from the mistakes they make.
____3. a.
One of the major reasons why we have wars is because people
enough interest in politics.
____ b.
There will always be wars no matter how hard people try to
____4. a.
____ b.
he tries.
much.
too easy with
don't take
prevent them.
In the long run people get the respect they deserve in this world.
Unfortunately, an individual's worth often passes unrecognized no matter how hard
____5. a.
The idea that teachers are unfair to students is nonsense.
____ b.
Most students don't realize the extent to which their grades are
accidental happenings.
influenced by
____6. a.
Without the right breaks one cannot be an effective leader.
____ b.
Capable people who fail to become leaders have not taken advantage of their
opportunities.
____7. a.
____ b.
others.
No matter how hard you try some people just don't like you.
People who can't get others to like them don't understand how to
____ 8. a.
____
b.
Heredity plays the major role in determining one's personality.
It is one's experiences in life which determine what one is like.
____ 9. a.
I have often found that what is going to happen will happen.
____
b.
Trusting to fate has never turned out as well for me as making a
definite course of action.
get along with
decision to take a
____10. a.
In the case of the well prepared student there is rarely if ever
an unfair test.
____
b.
Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to course
studying is really useless.
such a thing as
____11. a.
with it.
____ b.
Becoming a success is a matter of hard work, luck has little or
nothing to do
Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the right place at
the right time.
work that
____12. a.
The average citizen can have an influence in government decisions.
____
b.
This world is run by the few people in power, and there is not
much the little
guy can do about it.
____13. a.
When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can make them
____
b.
It is not always wise to plan too far ahead because many things
matter of good or bad fortune anyhow.
work.
turn out to be a
____14. a.
____
b.
There are certain people who are just no good.
There is some good in everybody.
____15. a.
____
b.
In my case getting what I want has little or nothing to do with
luck.
Many times we might just as well decide what to do by flipping a coin.
____16. a.
Who gets to be the boss often depends on who was lucky enough to be in the right
place first.
____
b.
Getting people to do the right thing depends upon ability, luck
has little or
nothing to do with it.
____17. a.
As far as world affairs are concerned, most of us are the victims
neither understand, not control.
____
b.
By taking an active part in political and social affairs the people
world events.
of forces we can
can control
____18. a.
happenings.
____
b.
Most people don't realize the extent to which their lives are controlled by accidental
____19. a.
____
b.
One should always be willing to admit mistakes.
It is usually best to cover up one's mistakes.
____20. a.
____
b.
It is hard to know whether or not a person really likes you.
How many friends you have depends on how nice a person you
____21. a.
ones.
____ b.
three.
In the long run the bad things that happen to us are balanced by the
Most misfortunes are the result of lack of ability, ignorance,
laziness, or all
____22. a.
____
b.
office.
With enough effort we can wipe out political corruption.
It is difficult for people to have much control over the things
politicians do in
____23. a.
____
b.
Sometimes I can't understand how teachers arrive at the grades
There is a direct connection between how hard I study and the
they give.
grades I get.
____24. a.
____
b.
A good leader expects people to decide for themselves what they should do.
A good leader makes it clear to everybody what their jobs are.
There really is no such thing as "luck".
are.
good
____25. a.
____
b.
my life.
Many times I feel that I have little influence over the things that
It is impossible for me to believe that chance or luck plays an
happen to me.
important role in
____26. a.
____
b.
like you.
People are lonely because they don't try to be friendly.
There's not much use in trying too hard to please people, if they
like you, they
____27. a.
____
b.
There is too much emphasis on athletics in high school.
Team sports are an excellent way to build character.
____28. a.
What happens to me is my own doing.
____
b.
Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control over the direction my life is
taking.
.
____29. a.
Most of the time I can't understand why politicians behave the
way they do.
____
b.
In the long run the people are responsible for bad government
on a national as
well as on a local level.
Appendix E -
Demographic Survey
1. Date of birth ____________________
2. Current position
____________________
3. Average hours per month reading non-required career related
material ______
For each item place a check by the phrase that best describes you:
4. Ethnic group: caucasian___ black___ hispanic___
asian___ other___
5. Sex:
____male
____female
6. What % of your potential talent do you think is utilized in your
current job?
10%___ 20%___
60%___ 70%___
30%___ 40%___ 50%___
80%___ 90%___ 100%___
7. In which of these socio-economic classes would you say your parents belonged:
upper_____ upper-middle_____ middle-middle_____
lower middle_____ working_____
8. Your working relationship with your current supervisor could best be described as:
excellent___
good___ fair___ strained___ very poor___
In the blank spaces to the left of each item, fill in the numbers 4, 3, 2 and 1, according to the
characteristics that are usually most important to you in a job (4) and least important to you in a job
(1).
9. a.____Security
(Being reasonably sure that the job is fairly permanent)
b.____Originality
(Working with new ideas--being original--using initiative)
c.____Good personal relations
(Being with people who are congenial--easy to work with)
d.____Getting ahead professionally
(Furthering one's career--being with people who can help one get ahead)
10a.____Work enjoyment
(Enjoying one's assigned work)
b.____Getting ahead in the organization
(Having a chance to get a better job in the organization)
c.____Opportunity to learn
(Developing new skills and knowledge of personal relevance)
d.____Salary
(Getting the job done and earning enough money for a good living)
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA RESULTS - Appendix F
APPENDIX G - TIME SERIES ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL TEAMS
samples in subgroups (N=5) is too small for significance
Appendix I
Strategies For Working With People Of Various Styles
Working With A Person Who Has A Creative Task Engagement Style
- How To Influence And Motivate
- Appeal To Principles
- Provide opportunities for learning
- Allow to be a catalyst for change
- Emphasize self-development
- Encourage him/her to exercise leadership
- An Effective Boss For A Person With A Creative Style
- Gives room to be creative
- Helps in getting started on tasks
- Allows mistakes and follow up on 'half-baked' ideas
- Doesn't expect too much self-discipline
- Selectively provides discipline and focus where needed
- When Working For A Boss With A Creative Style
- Discover what this person values and appeal to it
- Understand what interests this person about his/her work
- Be supportive of his/her leadership
- Understand the changes he/she is trying to instigate and help
- Be enthusiastic when this person helps you to grow
- Be self reliant - Don't expect him/her to manage your work closely
- Most Effective Environment
- Where individuality is respected
- Informal
- Where creativity is valued
- Least Effective Environment
- Tightly controlled
- Time pressure
- Conservative
Working With A Person Who Has A Social Task Engagement Style
- How To Influence And Motivate
- Show loyalty
- Help to feel part of a team
- Inspire by offering ideas to consider
- Collaborate
- An Effective Boss For A Person With A Social Style
- Creates a team atmosphere
- Assigns work to be done in pairs or groups
- Develops a close personal supervisory relationship
- Is empathic
- Gives very clear direction to prevent procrastination
- Shows how work fits in with employee's values, goals
- When Working For A Boss With A Social Style
- Demonstrate your loyalty
- Give attention - be responsive and empathic
- Become close friends
- Work along with them
- Be open - express your values and feelings
- Most Effective Environment
- Respecting
- Supportive
- Reassuring
- Informal
- Least Effective Environment
- Distrusting
- Formal
- Demanding initiative
- Lack of support
Working With A Person Who Has A Functional Task Engagement Style
- How To Influence And Motivate
- Be very clear
- Offer direction
- Explicitly state rules and regulations
- Give positive or negative reinforcement based on results
- An Effective Boss For A Person With A Functional Style
- Discovers which rewards he/she finds meaningful
- Reduces stress
- Is detail oriented
- Asks for exactly what is needed
- Closely monitors results
- Is fair and consistent
- When Working For A Boss With A Functional Style
- Respond to directives with results
- Don't challenge
- Look for inspiration elsewhere
- Do your work
- Be consistent and meticulous
- Demonstrate competence
- Most Effective Environment
- Clear rules, regulations
- Predictable reward structures
- Practical
- Conservative
- Least Effective Environment
- Constantly changing rules and policies
- High demand for initiative and creativity
- Unstable
Working With A Person Who Has An Intentional Task Engagement Style
- How To Influence And Motivate
- Delegate as much responsibility as possible
- Offer challenges
- Provide resources to allow achievement
- Appeal to this person's own view of success
- Define opportunities
- An Effective Boss For A Person With An Intentional Style
- Gives recognition for work well done
- Utilizes goal-setting techniques
- Makes sure their view of success is in sync with your own
- When creative output is required helps them to loosen up
- Provides autonomy
- Appreciates initiative
- When Working For A Boss With An Intentional Style
- Make sure you understand their goals
- Demonstrate how you can be supportive of his/her goals
- Help them to expand their influence
- Be systematic
- Use logic
- Most Effective Environment
- Demanding
- Challenging
- Risk-Taking
- Fast-Paced
- Least Effective Environment
- Low-pressure
- Promotion based on seniority
- Highly emotional