Robert C. Miljus

Individual differences in preferences for intrinsic versus extrinsic aspects of work

Abstract We examined individual differences in preferences for intrinsic versus extrinsic aspects of work among two representative national samples of males from the Ohio State University National Longitudinal Surveys: young men, aged 14 to 24, and middle-aged men, aged 45 to 59, when first interviewed in 1966. The statistical technique utilized to measure systematic preference differences was Multiple Classification Analysis, a nonlinear form of multiple regression analysis. Findings suggest that preferences are significantly related to age, occupation, class of worker, job satisfaction, educational attainment, and race. After simultaneously controlling for all explanatory variables, very little consistent evidence of preference differences was found between white-collar and blue-collar workers, rural and urban workers, or among individuals with different levels of income.

Anomie and vocational-technical education

Abstract Graduates from a public, postsecondary vocational-technical school are compared with a control group of individuals without such education in order to assess differences in level of anomie (via Srole Scale). While differences in some cases were minimal, vocational-technical graduates generally revealed a more positive attitude about the present and future. It is suggested that since their education is more job-centered, and they have already experienced some occupational “success”, they are more likely to have internalized and reflect traditional societal norms. The control group, while possessing similar demographic backgrounds, still are in transition-attending college, looking for work, etc.

The Elements of Industrial Relations

The article presents a review of the book “The Elements of Industrial Relations,” by Jack Barbash.

Book Review: Organizational Behavior: A Sociology of Work in IndustryA Sociology of Work in Industry. By FoxAlan. London: Collier-Macmillan, Ltd., 1971. vi, 218 pp.

A more pertinent criticism is that there is an implicit assumption that the managerial psychologist and/or specialist in organizational development is unerringly accurate in his evaluations. Throughout the work, DuBrin intersperses hort case histories of successful practices by managerial psychologists; only minimal attention is given to failures. Also, some of the successful case histories lack, at least to this reviewer, a sense of reality. DuBrins pedagogical intents may have necessitated such a simplified treatment of reality, especially for students with minimal exposure to the workings of ongoing organizations. In addition, DuBrin includes only questions at the end of each chapter; no short cases are presented for class discussion to reinforce the material which the student has covered. Overall, DuBrin has presented a balanced view of the field of managerial psychology. The shortcomings noted in this review may, in fact, be sources of strength when the users of this book are students who lack extended experience in ongoing organizations, familiarity with the concepts of behavioral science, and elementary understanding of statistics.