Executive Personality Types

Western Michigan UniversityScholarWorks at WMU

Dissertations Graduate College

4-1986

Executive Personality Types: A Comparison ofMilitary and Civilian Leaders in a SingleOrganizationJohn Edward DeWaldWestern Michigan University

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations

Part of the Educational Administration and Supervision Commons, and the EducationalPsychology Commons

This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open accessby the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted forinclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorksat WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Recommended CitationDeWald, John Edward, "Executive Personality Types: A Comparison of Military and Civilian Leaders in a Single Organization"(1986). Dissertations. 2299.https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/2299

http://scholarworks.wmich.edu?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2299&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages


https://scholarworks.wmich.edu?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2299&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2299&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/grad?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2299&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2299&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/787?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2299&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages



https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/2299?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2299&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]



EXECUTIVE PERSONALITY TYPES: A COMPARISON OF MILITARY AND CIVILIAN LEADERS IN A SINGLE ORGANIZATION

by

John Edward DeWald

A Dissertation Submitted to the

Faculty of the Graduate College in partia l fu lfillm en t of the

requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education

Department of Educational Leadership

Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan

April 1986

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

EXECUTIVE PERSONALITY TYPES: A COMPARISON OF MILITARY AND CIVILIANLEADERS IN A SINGLE ORGANIZATION

John Edward DeWald, Ed.D.

Western Michigan University, 1986

Differences between comparable m ilita ry and c iv ilian

upper-level leaders in a single m ilita ry organization were examined

in terms of personality types. The survey instrument used was the

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBIT), which was developed for use in

personality assessment of normal individuals through the practical

application of C. G. Jung's (1921/1971) theory of psychological

types. Thirty pairs of executives were surveyed. Each

participating pair consisted of a chief and his deputy, one m ilitary

and one c iv ilia n , who shared the same o ffice , authority, and

responsibilities. Response to the survey was 100 percent.

Two sets of findings emerged from this study, the f i r s t

covering the relationship between m ilita ry and c iv ilian MBTI types,

and the second concerning MBTI type representation in d ifferent

organizational units.

The distributions of MBTI types and type processes for the

m ilita ry officers in this study were essentially similar to those

for the c iv ilia n executives. The most striking s im ilarity was the

large and identical percentage (B0%) of both m ilita ry and c iv ilian

participants who were thinking-judgers (TJs). The MBTI type and

type process distributions for the m ilita ry participants were


generally in line with expectation, as they closely paralleled those

in prior studies of m ilita ry program managers. The distributions

for the c iv ilia n participants, however, were significantly d ifferent

from those published for c iv ilia n managers and administrators, and,

in fac t, were more in accord with published distributions for

m ilita ry program managers.

Although the data did not indicate d ifferent distributions of

personality types for the four organizational units studied, there

was a significant difference in the expected direction on the

sensing-intuition (SN) dimension. Research and Development and

Support units were highly represented by in tu itives , while the

Readiness unit and Program Managers' Offices consisted chiefly of

sensors.

I t was concluded that the close s im ilarity in types between the

m ilita ry and c iv ilian executives has evolved from the m ilitary

requirements of the organization. That is , the situational demands

have dictated the selection of particular personality types for

executive positions. In the same way, each of the four

organizational units has attracted personality types compatible with

its focus. Thus, situational demands are also responsible for the

gravitation of particular personality types to organizational units

having correspondingly sim ilar orientations.


INFORMATION TO USERS

This reproduction was made from a copy of a manuscript sent to us for publication and microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this manuscript, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. Pages in any manuscript may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify notations which may appear on this reproduction.

1. Manuscripts may not always be complete. When it is not possible to obtain missing pages, a note appears to indicate this.

2. When copyrighted materials are removed from the manuscript, a note appears to indicate this.

3. Oversize materials (maps, drawings, and charts) are photographed by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is also filmed as one exposure and is available, for an additional charge, as a standard 35mm slide or in black and white paper format. *

4. Most photographs reproduce acceptably on positive microfilm or microfiche but lack clarity on xerographic copies made from the microfilm. Fbr an additional charge, all photographs are available in black and white standard 35mm slide format.*

*Por more information about black and white slides or enlarged paper reproductions, please contact the Dissertations Customer Services Department.

UMI Dissertation Information Service

University Microfilms InternationalA Bell & Howell Information Company300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106


8625598

DeWald, John Edward

EXECUTIVE PERSONALITY TYPES: A COMPARISON OF MILITARY AND CIVILIAN LEADERS IN A SINGLE ORGANIZATION

Western Michigan University Ed.D. 1986

University Microfilms

I nternstionsl 300 N. zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

Copyright 1986

by

DeWald, John Edward

All Rights Reserved


Copyright by John Edward DeWald

1986


A man's reach should exceed his grasp.

Robert Browning

DEDICATED TO;

My parents, John A. and L illia n E. DeWald

My wife, Ruth E. DeWald

My brother, George F. DeWald

My daughter and son-in-law, Diana and Stan Beckettand granddaughters, Hope and Beth Beckett

My daughter and son-in-law, Sue and Ron Cook,grandson, John Edward Cook, and granddaughter, Sarah Ann Cook

Without their loving support and influence, this grasp could not have been achieved.

John E. DeWald

n


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

There seemed to be two c ritic a l stages in this study where a

considerable number of people were needed for idea formulation and

for guidance in idea consolidation. Evolution of the problem and

evolution of the fin a l document were those two crucial stages.

Approval of the idea for this study was obtained in i t ia l ly from

Major General Oscar Decker, with final approval granted by Major

General Arthur Holmes, J r . , Commanders, U. S. Army Tank-Automotive

Command; without th e ir approvals, this study would not exist.

Particular appreciation is extended to Dr. Harold Boles,

Dr. Richard E. Munsterman, Dr. Carol Sheffer, and Dr. David Cowden,

a ll of whom served at one time or another as my doctoral committee

chairperson, for th e ir patient counseling and persistent

encouragement throughout the process of dissertation preparation

for Western Michigan University. My gratitude is also extended to

my doctoral committee members. Dr. Uldis Smidchens, Dr. George

DePillo, and Dr. Herbert H. Dobbs, for their guidance, support, and

friendship.

Appreciation is also extended to Dr. Loretta Church and to

Dr. Genevieve Gangler-Brown for providing sterling examples of

achievement, to Major John K. Stake for help with the s ta tis tica l

analysis, and to Dr. Carol A. Vale for editing the document. My

classmates in the Selfridge Air National Guard classes have earned

my sincere thanks for the ir camaraderie and support.i i i


Recognition and appreciation of a ll those scholars who provided

references. Ideas, and quiet beckoning via the lite ra tu re must be

expressed. Complete response to a study survey Is most unusual, so

appreciation Is due the sixty unidentified, but self-knowing,

participants.

IV


TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION.............................................................................................. i i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................... i i i

LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................... v i i i

CHAPTER

I . PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY . . . 1

Introduction ................................................................... 1

Statement of the Problem ........................................... 2

Significance of the Study ........................................... 4

Limitations of the Study ........................................... 4

Overview of the Dissertation ................................... 5

I I . REVIEW OF THE PERTINENT LITERATURE ............................... 8

Leaders and Leadership ............................................... 8

The Great Man Theory ............................................... 9

The T ra it Theory of Leadership ............................ 9

Situational Leadership Theory ............................ 11

Behavioral and Environmental LeadershipT h e o ry ........................................................................... 11

Present Status of Leadership Theories . . . . 12

Theories of Personality ............................................... 13

Sigmund Freud and Psychoanalysis ........................ 13

C. G. Jung and Psychological T y p e s .................... 14

Murray's Contribution to Personality Theory . 19

Maslow's Theory of Self-Actualization . . . . 19


Table of Contents—Continued

The T ra it Theories of All port and Cattell . . 20

Personality Measurement Instruments ........................ 22

Woodworth's Personal Data Sheet ........................... 22

Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) ........................ 23

Self-Report Inventories ........................................... 24

Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) ................ 24

Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire(16PFQ) 25

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) ...................................................................... 26

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) . . . 27

Selection of the MBTI as the Survey Instrument . . 28

R e lia b ility of the M B T I ........................................... 30

V alid ity of the MBTI ............................................... 31

MBTI Correlations with Other Instruments . . . 32

Extraversion-Introversion (E l) ........................ 33

Sensing-intuition (SN) ....................................... 33

Thinking-Feeling (TF) ....................................... 33

Judgment-Perception (JP) ................................... 33

Summary of MBTI Advantages ................................... 34

Personality Characteristics of M ilita ryand C ivilian Leaders ....................................................... 34

C ivilian Managers and Executives ....................... 34

Quasi-Military Personnel ....................................... 35

The M ilita ry M in d ....................................................... 36

VI



M ilita ry Program Managers ....................................... 37

MBTI Typing of M ilita ry and C ivilianPersonnel ...................................................................... 39

MBTI Types Associated with Executivesand Managers ...................................................................... 42

ISTJ .............................................................................. 42

ESTJ .............................................................................. 43

INTJ .............................................................................. 44

ENTJ .............................................................................. 44

Summary .............................................................................. 45

I I I . METHODOLOGY.............................................................................. 47

Formulation of the Research Hypotheses .................... 47

Research Question 1 and Hypotheses .................... 47

D isc u ss io n ............................................................... 47

Research Hypotheses forResearch Question 1 48

Null Hypotheses for Research Question ! . . 49

Research Question 2 and Hypotheses .................... 49

D isc u ss io n ............................................................... 49

Research Hypothesis forResearch Question 2 5D

Null Hypothesis for Research Question 2 . . 50

Research Design ............................................................... 51

Independent Variables ............................................... 51

Dependent Variables ................................................... 51

vn



Method of Analysis ................................................... 52

Selection of the Participating Executives . . . . 52

Survey Instrument: The Myers-BriggsType Indicator ............................................................... 53

P ilo t Testing .................................................................. 54

Data Collection Procedures ....................................... 55

Summary.............................................................................. 56

IV. RESULTS ................................................................................... 57

Comparison of M ilitary and C ivilian MBTI Types . 57

Comparison of MBTI Types across TACOMOrganizational Units ................................................... 64

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................... 68

M ilita ry and C ivilian MBTI Type Comparison . . . 68

MBTI Type Comparisons across TACOMOrganizational Units ................................................... 70

Recommendations for Future Investigation . . . . 71

APPENDICES

A. General Decker's Permission (Signed) ............................. 74Memorandum of Understanding ........................................... 75

B. Introductory Letter ............................................................ 77Questionnaire Procedure ................................................... 78Thank-You Letter .................................................................. 79

BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................... 80

v m


LIST OF TABLES

1. MBTI Personality Types for M ilita ry and C ivilianExecutives at TACOM ...................................................................... 58

2. MBTI Personality Functions for M ilita ry and C ivilian Executives at TACOM ...................................................................... 60

3. Comparison of Present Study Data with Myers andMcCaulley (1985) and Nid iffe r (1984) Data ............................. 61

4. Chi-Square Tests for Comparisons of Present Study Datawith Myers and McCaulley (1985) andN id iffer (1984) Data........................ ................................................ 62

5. Distribution of MBTI Personality Types in TACOM Units . . 65

I X


CHAPTER I

PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY

Introduction

The concept of leadership has long been important to

philosophers, who have attempted to understand the personal tra its

and mental qualities that characterize leaders (Runes, 1959). In

early times, a leader was either a hereditary ruler or a superhuman

being, a demi-god or fo lk hero, who was capable of tremendous feats

that no ordinary man could hope to achieve. When Carlyle (1858)

conducted the f i r s t formal study of leadership in the nineteenth

century, he based his theory on historical records that appeared to

support his premise that the lives of great men have altered the

course of history. Later researchers tried to discover what

qualities distinguished leaders from followers, an inquiry which

produced the t r a i t theories of leadership. More recently, the 1920s

saw the beginning of sc ie n tific , empirical, data-based studies using

structured tests.

M ilita ry studies of leadership have continued to emphasize the

importance of the individual's personal qualities . During World War

I I , a new method of personality assessment was developed by Murray

and his colleagues (US OSS, 1948) to determine whether a recruit had

the potential to perform satisfactorily in future quasi-m ilitary

assignments. The evaluation consisted of personality tests,1


exhausting physical exercise, and performance in re a lis tic a lly

simulated combat situations requiring both in it ia t iv e and teamwork

in support of the designated leader. Selection was based on the

recru it's personality and leadership potential, as determined by

Murray's testing procedure.

The present study compared m ilita ry and c iv ilian upper-level

executives in terms of the ir personality types. Thirty pairs of

executives were selected from within the same organization, the

U. S. Army Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM) in Warren, Michigan.

Each pair consisted of a m ilita ry officer and a c iv ilian executive

in comparable organizational positions, where responsibilities and

authority were e ffective ly equal. This duality is standard Army

management practice, established to ensure both an input to the

organization from m ilita ry fie ld experience and maintenance of

organizational continuity when the m ilita ry officers are reassigned,

which happens about every three years. This practice results in a

m ilita ry -c iv ilia n check and balance system which also provides dual

lines of communication.

Statement of the Problem

A general opinion is prevalent at TACOM that there are

appreciable differences in personality characteristics between

m ilita ry and c iv ilia n leaders in the upper levels of the

organizational hierarchy. Professional training and career paths of

the two groups are divergent. M ilita ry personnel within TACOM

usually serve a three-year tour, which has been carefully planned so


that the officers gain managerial experience and leadership training

at ever-increasing levels of responsibility. C ivilian executives,

on the other hand, progress by transfer into d ifferen t assignments,

not necessarily related, within the overall organization. Assignment

of c iv ilians is constrained by the authorized number of employees

for the particular department. Although these practices suggest a

basis for the presumed personality differences, when nineteen

civ ilians and officers were questioned about actual experiences with

recognizable personality differences, no evidence could be offered.

In order to either substantiate or negate the existence of the

disparate personality types, the researcher was granted the

opportunity to survey those particular chief executives at TACOM

with deputies who actually shared the same executive

responsibilities and thus had tru ly comparable status.

The research questions which provide the basis for this study

were generated by the researcher's professional associations at the

TACOM organization and from extensive review of the academic and

m ilitary lite ra tu re described in Chapter I I . These questions have

been phrased as follows: (1) Are there differences in personality

types between m ilita ry and c iv ilian leaders? and (2) Are there

differences in personality type associated with assignment to

different organizational units? To address the questions, the

participants' personality types were determined by the Myers-Briggs

Type Indicator (MBTI), a widely used survey instrument for such

purposes (Myers & McCaulley, 1985).


significance of the Study

Comparison of the personality type profiles of m ilitary and

c iv ilian leaders at equivalent levels of authority has not been

pursued previously to any extent, a data void indicated by the

re la tive ly few references discovered during the lite ra tu re search.

Guidance for selection and training of executives may evolve from

such studies, with resulting impact on management practice and

planning. In addition, the individuals who participated in this

study may receive personal benefit through new understanding of

their own individual leadership styles.

Limitations of the Study

This study surveyed a m ilita ry organization, highly structured

hierarchically, but with an unusual executive upper level of

comparable m ilita ry officers and c iv ilians sharing the same

managerial responsibilities. Chiefs of directorates or divisions

and key s ta ff officers were selected, together with their designated

deputies. Persons holding lesser positions were not surveyed

because individuals in those positions are not readily comparable

and are lik e ly to be more heterogeneous.

While such a study is unusual, the study conclusions may be

directly generalizable to a number of other similar U. S. Army

Command populations. However, such an extension of the results

obtained here is outside the scope of this study, which has been

limited solely to the TACOM organization. The mission orientation.


organizational policies and climate, and operational methodologies

can be quite d ifferen t for other organizations, even for other

research-oriented Commands, when the ir technical work and products

d iffe r significantly from those of the groups studied here.

The survey instrument used, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

(MBTI), is to some degree subjective in nature because the answers

to the questionnaire are the participants' own qualitative choices.

Nonetheless, the judgment and thinking patterns indicated by

extensive application of the MBTI have been found to be re liab ly

indicative of personality type (Carlyn, 1977; Carskadon, 1979;

McCaulley, 1980; and Myers & McCaulley, 1985).

Overview of the Dissertation

Chapter I . Problem Statement and Rationale for the Study

Chapter I introduces the subject matter and provides the

context needed to understand the research problem. The U. S. Army

Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM), the single organization studied,

is described to provide a general understanding of a government

(m ilita ry -c iv ilia n ) operation. A delineation of the study its e lf ,

i . e . . Statement of the Problem, Significance of the Study, and

Limitations of the Study, rounds out the chapter.


Chapter I I . Review of the Pertinent Literature

Chapter I I presents a review of pertinent leadership litera tu re

relevant to the topic of personality differences between m ilitary

and c iv ilian leaders. The following four principal theories of

leadership are examined: (1) the great man theory; (2) theory of

personal tra its ; (3) situational demands theory; and (4) theories

based on behavioral concepts. Personality theories and Instruments

are next addressed, followed by an extensive review of the

characteristics of the MBTI, which led to Its selection as the

personality Instrument for this study. Personality characteristics

of m ilita ry and c iv ilians leaders are reviewed. Including selections

which Introduce the Idea of the m ilitary mind and describe the

m ilita ry and c iv ilia n MBTI types. The fin a l section Includes a

discussion of MBTI types associated with executives and managers.

Chapter I I I . Methodology

The litera ture review leads to the logical development of the

research hypotheses regarding relationships. Identifiab le

characteristics, and predispositions derived from personality types.

The resultant research hypotheses are formulated. The research

design Is presented, along with the method of analysis used. The

Implementation of the survey also Is examined In d e ta il. Including

selection of participants, scoring procedure for the MBTI, p ilo t

testing, and data collection procedures.


Chapter IV. Results

Findings based on the research data are presented. Each of' the

hypotheses identified in Chapter I I I is examined.

Chapter V. Conclusions and Recommendations

Conclusions and recommendations are presented.


CHAPTER I I

REVIEW OF THE PERTINENT LITERATURE

This chapter reviews the topics basic to an understanding of

the question of personality differences between m ilitary and

c iv ilia n leaders. Thus, the lite ra tu re review f i r s t examines the

principal theories of leadership. Next, the major theories of

personality are addressed, with special emphasis on Jung's typology.

The several tests developed to assess personality from the

perspective of the various theories are discussed, and the survey

instrument, the MBTI, is extensively reviewed. Research on

personality characteristics of leaders in both c iv ilian and m ilita ry

sectors is discussed next, along with MBTI type data from a data

bank of a quarter m illion individual MBTI records. An examination

of MBTI types associated with executives and managers concludes the

chapter.

Leaders and Leadership

Four defin itive studies of leadership are the primary sources

for this discussion: Smith and Krueger (1933), Stogdill (1948),

Jennings (1960), and Bass (1981). These studies are particularly

valuable because th e ir findings are applicable not only to

leadership in the f ie ld of education but also to leadership in

business, m ilita ry , and governmental organizations.

8


The Great Man Theory

According to Jennings (1960), "The parent of our modern

approach to leadership is the great man theory" (p. 3 ). This

theory, formulated by Carlyle (1858), is based on the premise that

historical events are the direct result of the influence and

ac tiv ities of a handful of outstanding individuals. American

philosopher William James (1880) subscribed to a modified version of

the great man theory but emphasized in addition that leaders are

characterized by boundless energy and by an extremely strong w ill to

succeed. Woods (1913) studied the progress of several European

countries and concluded that a particular country's success,

relative to that of other nations, was tied to the personal

attributes of that country's hereditary ruler or king. There arose

a philosophical requirement to identify what there was about great

men that made them great, as well as to learn whether they possessed

identifiab le personal attributes, characteristics, or tra its which

distinguished them from ordinary individuals and enabled them to

manifest leadership qualities .

The T ra it Theory of Leadership

Ross and Hendry (1957) stated that the earliest studies of

leadership concentrated on the leader as a person. For centuries,

leadership was considered to be a matter of inheritance; leaders

were born, not made. However, when Napoleon ended the feudal system

in Europe, the French egalitarian democracy demonstrated that


10

leaders could be made, and were not solely born to that status. An

individual's personal qualities were primarily responsible for his

success in becoming a leader and in remaining in a leadership

position. Thus, the great man theory was followed by the t r a i t

theory, instigating studies which purported to identify those

elusive, distinctive qualities which were resident in the individual

leader.

Smith and Krueger (1933) devoted ten fu ll pages of their

pioneering study on the lite ra tu re of leadership to the subject of

tra its of leaders. The personality tra its they identified included

knowledge, substantial physical as well as mental energy,

enthusiasm, o rig in a lity , in it ia t iv e , imagination, purpose,

persistence, and speed of decision. One of their references, Cowley

(1931), in his paper on leaders in face-to-face situations, stated

that speed of making decisions, coupled with the a b ility to grasp

the situation quickly and make a firm decision based on the

circumstances, characterized dynamic leaders, particularly m ilita ry

officers.

Stogdill's (1948) monumental work on leadership focused

particularly on tra its and personality. In spite of his very

thorough investigation, however, Stogdill could not formulate a l is t

of defin itive leadership tra its that were the exclusive property of

leaders. All of the tra its he was able to define were also found in

individuals who in no sense could be said to be leaders. This

apparent lack of exclusive leadership tra its led to rejection of the

t r a i t theory in its entirety (Fiedler, 1967).


11

Situational Leadership Theory

Smith and Krueger (1933) anticipated future studies with the

question, "Are the tra its of leaders general or are they specific

with reference to the type of situation?" (p .72). Jenkins (1947)

noted that wide variations in the tra its of m ilita ry leaders

occurred even in sim ilar situations, and an even greater divergence

appeared evident in leadership behavior in d ifferent situations.

Fiedler's (1967) contingency leadership model provided a widely used

situational continuum that related the leader's power not only to

leader-follower relations but also to the task structure. Fiedler

and Chemers (1974) subsequently concluded that there was no such

thing as an ideal leader whose a b ilit ie s and leadership style would

be successful under a ll circumstances. These authors recommended

the management practice of moving leaders into suitable situations,

rather than trying to change the leaders' personalities or

leadership styles.

Behavioral and Environmental Leadership Theory

Leadership studies conducted during the 1950s recognized that

the leader did not operate in complete isolation. Organizational

goals, objectives, norms, and other variables were inherent in

leader positions. Expectations and viewpoints of superiors,

subordinates, and peers also constrained the leader's behavior

(Gordon, 1984). Mersey and Blanchard (1972) developed their

life -cy c le , three-dimensional, situational leadership model, which


12

related the leader's task and relationship behaviors with the

maturity level of his followers. Thus, the leader's style could

vary from authoritarian to laissez-fa ire within the task and

socio-emotional dimensions, depending on the psychological maturity

level of the followers in relation to a specific task.

Present Status of Leadership Theories

In S togdill's Handbook of Leadership. Bass (1981) summarized

the characterisitics of a leader by enumerating the manifold

personal attributes of leadership as follows:

The leader is characterized by a strong drive for responsibility and task completion, vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals, venturesomeness and o rig ina lity in problem solving, drive to exercise in it ia t iv e in social situations, self-confidence and sense of personal identity , willingness to accept consequences of decision and action, readiness to absorb interpersonal stress, willingness to to lerate frustration and delay, a b ility to influence other persons' behavior, and capacity to structure social interaction systems to the purpose at hand. (p. 81)

Bass thus recognized that leadership theory has shifted once again

to the revitalized concept of the leader's personal and intellectual

leadership qualities which are also the outward observable signs of

his personality. The next section w ill outline the major

personality theories and review the interrelationships of leadership

and personality.


13

Theories of Personality

The measurement of personality, and particularly personality

differences, provides the means to compare individual leaders from a

common psychological base. Personality theories are fu lly as

diverse as the leadership theories discussed ea rlie r. I t is thus

again necessary to concentrate on those most representative of the

major thrusts. The personality theorists whose work w ill be

reviewed are Freud, Jung, Murray, Maslow, A llport, and C atte ll.

This review w ill follow Hergenhahn's (1980) lead in

categorizing the main personality theories into generalized

paradigms or models which express the viewpoint held by the

particular theorist. Hergenhahn included Freud and Jung in his

psychoanalytic paradigm. All port and Cattell in his t r a i t model, and

Maslow in his existential-humanistic viewpoint. Murray, with

degrees in medicine, biochemistry, and psychology, applied his

unusual talents to the development of psychological screening,

testing, and personality assessment procedures for the U. S. Army

during World War I I . Despite their diversity, the underlying aim of

these theories has been to derive an explanation of human nature and

behavior.

Sigmund Freud and Psychoanalysis

L. M. M ille r (1978), writing from the perspective of a manager

who aimed to build a productive organization, described Freud's


14

psychological influence as follows:

The most popular of the major influences in current psychological thought that may be viewed among the indirect approaches to behavior are the personality theories derived primarily from the work of Sigmund Freud. Our entire culture has been strongly influenced by Freudian psychology, (p. 22)

Freud was the f i r s t to recognize the influence of the

unconscious mind, in which reside an individual's innermost desires

and basic instincts (Munn, 1966; Bugelski, 1960). Freud fe l t that an

individual's personality was a direct result of his basic instincts,

that he was governed by a desire for pleasure and the avoidance of

pain, and that he grew from infancy through various sexual stages

until adolescence, the maximum level of maturity (Lauzan, 1962).

The French neurologist, Jean-Martin Charcot, with whom Freud

studied in 1865 (Gatchel & Mears, 1982), and who used hypnosis to

trea t patients suffering from hysteria, made the statement that this

malady always had a sexual basis (Freud, 1914/1957). Freud

discarded hypnosis as a method of treatment, but retained the

conviction that human sexuality was the underlying cause of mental

problems. This insistence on the role of sexuality eventually

caused Freud to break with his most famous student, Carl G. Jung

(Gatchel & Mears, 1982).

C. G. Jung and Psychological Types

Jung received a medical degree from the University of Basel in

1900 and shortly thereafter was appointed to the position of


15

psychiatrie resident in a public hospital in Zurich, headed by Eugen

Bleuler, a psychiatrist. Under Bleuler's guidance, Jung worked to

develop a word association test to aid in the treatment of patients.

During this same time (about 1905), Jung read Freud's (1900/1953)

Interpretation of Dreams. These two events led to a very close

association and correspondence with Freud which lasted until 1913.

Their friendship ended over Jung's disagreement with Freud's

insistence that the instinctive driving energy of the human

personality, the lib ido , was essentially sexual in nature. Jung was

equally adamant in his stand that the lib ido was a creative l i f e

force that applied to the continuous psychological growth of the

person throughout his life tim e (Mattoon, 1981).

In contrast with Freud, who believed that an individual's

maximum mental growth was reached with adolescence, Jung (1939) was

convinced that people could continue to grow and mature into middle

l i f e . Consequently, the individual can achieve his personal goals

through self-actualization , which Jung considered an inner driving

force of the personality. The concept of self-actualization would

be rearticulated by Maslow (1954, 1970) as the outstanding

individual's primary motivation to work.

In his seminal work, Psychological Types. Jung (1921/1971)

enunciated a theory of personality based upon the postulate that

everyone uses one or the other of two basic attitudes toward the

world: extraversion or introversion. Mattoon (1981), a Jungian

psychologist, explained the concept of extraversion, as follows:


16

The extravert concentrates his attention (his psychic or mental energy) on the outside world. He shows an interest in events, people, and things; a relationship with them, and a dependence on them. (p. 55)

Isabel Briggs Myers, co-developer of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

(Myers & Myers, 1980), contrasted the difference in outlook between

the two basic Jungian attitudes of extraversion and introversion:

The in trovert's main interests are in the inner world of concepts and ideas, while the extravert is more involved with the outer world of people and things. Therefore, when circumstances permit, the introvert concentrates perception and judgment upon ideas, while the extravert likes to focus them on the outside environment, (p. 7)

In order to account for a ll dimensions of conscious

personality, Jung (1921/1971) expanded his theory of psychological

types to include four mental functions: sensing, in tu ition ,

thinking, and feeling, as well as the dimensions of extraversion and

introversion.

Sensing is the use of the five physical senses to gather and

evaluate facts, whereas the in tu itive function integrates facts with

memory and experience to enable a person to see possible

applications for those facts. Individuals characterized by the

sensing function tend to be very practical, "m atter-of-fact,

down-to-earth, fascinated with facts and with discovering and

observing how things work" (Mattoon, 1981, p. 63). In tuition was

defined by Jung (1938/1959) as "the function of unconscious

perception. I t is represented by a certain attitude of expectation.


17

a perceptive and penetrating vision" (p. 211). Myers and McCaulley

(1985) have amplified Jung's concept of in tu ition by stating:

Jung characterized in tuition as perception by way of the unconscious. Intuitions may come to the surface of consciousness suddenly, as a "hunch," the sudden perception of a pattern in seemingly unrelated events, or as a creative discovery . . . Intu ition permits perception beyond what is v is ib le to the senses, including possible future events, (p. 12)

Jung (1938/1959) termed the thinking and feeling functions

rational "because they are characterized by the supremacy of the

reasoning and judging functions" (p. 207). Corsini and Marsella

(1983) have stated that the Jungian thinker tends to base his

judgment on recorded past experience with factual data, which

follows an orderly, log ica l, structured procedure that can give the

impression of appearing impersonal and cold to those inclined toward

the feeling function. McCaulley (1981) has described the thinking

individual thus:

Persons who are oriented to l i f e primarily through thinking typ ica lly develop strong powers of analysis, objectively weighing events with regard to logical outcomes, a time perspective concerned with connections from past through present to the future, and a tough-minded skepticism, (p. 300)

By contrast, the person who is oriented toward the feeling function

tends to arrive at decisions through value judgments in line with

his own personal set of values. He relates well to other people and

easily expresses warm consideration for their welfare. He is adept

at negotiations and compromise and can be an invaluable


18

member of a team e ffo rt (Jung, 1938/1959; Myers & Myers, 1980;

E llis , 1982).

Corsini and Marsella (1983) have emphasized the point that

Jungian typology provides a way to understand individual

differences. Everyone uses both extraversion and introversion

attitudes, as well as a ll four functions of sensing, in tu ition ,

feeling, and thinking, but in varying degrees. Each person, as he

matures, develops a preference for one of the two attitudes and for

two of the four functions. Since he w ill use his preferred attitude

and functions more often, they become highly developed and thus are

indicative of how he relates to his inner se lf and to the outside

world.

When Jung's Psychological Types was published in English in

1923, the value of his typology as a basis for personality theory

was immediately recognized by Katharine Cooke Briggs and her

daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, developers of the Myers-Briggs Type

Indicator (MBTI), an instrument for identifying Jungian

psychological types (Myers, 1962; Myers & McCaulley, 1985). During

this same time, the English translation was being avidly read by

another young American, Henry A. Murray, a doctoral student in

biochemistry at Cambridge University in England. Murray spent a

month v is iting Jung in Switzerland and became convinced that

psychology would become his l i f e work (Murray, 1938).


19

Murray's Contribution to Personality Theory

While director of the Harvard Psychological C lin ic, Murray

published his Explorations in Personality in 1938, in which he

outlined his own theory of personality, closely related to Jung's

theory, since i t was humanistic, addressed the normal individual,

and was optimistic about the future (Hergenhahn, 1980). Murray was

the f i r s t to identify the brain "as the focus of personality and a ll

its component parts" (Hall & Lindzey, 1970, p. 161).

Murray's most important contributions to the fie ld of

psychology were his Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) and his

personality assessment techniques. These were developed while

Murray was the senior m ilita ry o fficer in charge of the assessment

s ta ff of the U. S. Army Office of Strategic Services in World War

I I . His work became the springboard for further study of the

relationships among leadership, personality, biological factors, and

the environmental situations in which the individual may be called

upon to operate during conditions dictated by m ilita ry requirements.

Maslow's Theory of Self-Actualization

Abraham Maslow is most closely associated with his hierarchy of

needs, published in 1954. These needs follow a pattern within which

each of five levels of human needs serves as a motivational stimulus

to achieve satisfaction before the person reaches the top level,

where he is self-actualized and requires no outside stimulation.


20

Later, Maslow (1954, 1970) rediscovered Jung's concept of

self-actualization. Maslow (1970) continued his investigation and

identified several de fin itive personality characteristics manifested

by self-actualized individuals. He found them to be well

integrated, creative, inventive; problem solvers; open to new

experiences; independent; tolerant of others' d iffering opinions,

yet oriented toward democratic values; re a lis tic in outlook;

genuine, with strong social consciousness, even to the extent of

nonconformity; and possessed of strong moral values and friendships.

Thus, Maslow takes his place as the optimistic leader of

humanistic psychology (Hergenhahn, 1980). Maslow studied the

personalities of normal, healthy individuals with a view toward

helping them express th e ir potential as human beings to the greatest

extent possible. Maslow believed that everyone is capable of being

motivated by his self-actualizing inner drive.

The T ra it Theories of A llport and Cattell

While All port and Cattell are both considered t r a i t theorists

(Hall & Lindzey, 1970; Geiwitz, 1969), their perspectives are very

differen t. A llport (1965) studied the personalities of a re la tive ly

few individuals in depth, whereas Cattell (1983) accumulated

personality t r a i t data from large numbers of people and used factor

analytic techniques to categorize his voluminous data.

A llport's theory is ho lis tic , humanistic, and motivational

(Geiwitz, 1969). A llport's most frequently quoted definition of


21

personality reflects his own views:

Personality is the dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his own unique adjustment to his environment.(1937, p. 48)

From his study of the whole man, All port (1960) identified

several personal tra its that are evidenced in the lives of healthy,

mature adults. Such individuals tend to be compassionate; tolerant

of other be liefs , frustration, change, and uncertainty; adaptable;

emotionally stable; re a lis tic in their appraisals of both their own

a b ilit ie s and those of others; friendly , with a noncynical sense of

humor; and goal-directed with a purpose in l i f e (Hergenhahn, 1980).

Many of these characteristics are also found in Maslow's (1971)

description of self-actualizing , successful individuals. A llport's

personality theory can be classified as both humanistic and

optim istically oriented toward the future.

Raymond B. Cattell (1983) has studied personality t r a it data

chiefly by means of factor analysis. Cattell founded the Laboratory

of Personality Assessment at the University of I l l in o is , where he

developed the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PFQ), a

written test for identifying personality tra its . Cattell (1946)

placed major emphasis on the study of groups and the identification

of personality tra its pertinent to large numbers of people. He fe lt

that tra its common to a ll individuals could be identified by a

combination of methods: the person's l i f e history, questionnaire

data from the 16PFQ, and observational test data. Once an


22

individual's tra its have been identified , C attell believed that i t

would be possible to predict the individual's future behavior with

reasonable accuracy (C attell & Dreger, 1977). Although Cattell is

respected as a dedicated sc ien tific researcher (Pervin, 1975;

Hergenhahn, 1980), some psychologists consider his factor analytic

approach and his 16PFQ to be not entire ly satisfactory as a means of

assessing personality tra its .

The next section discusses a number of instruments used for the

study of personality.

Personality Measurement Instruments

Each of the personality theorists used certain experimental

approaches in consonance with his own particular theory. Freud and

Jung both relied heavily on the clin ical interview to learn about

their patients' mental problems. Since they each were trained as

physicians prior to their work as psychiatrists, they tended to use

both physiological and mental measurement methods. Jung developed

an early version of the word association test as a diagnostic tool.

Such a test uses the projective technique of giving the patient

ambiguous stim uli. The patient's answers are scored subjectively by

the tester.

Woodworth's Personal Data Sheet

The f i r s t so-called personality test ever used by the U. S.

Army was Woodworth's Personal Data Sheet (Kleinmuntz, 1975), which

was designed to screen the large number of draftees in World War I


23

(1914-1918) to identify emotionally maladjusted male recruits and

prevent their induction into the armed forces.

Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)

Murray and his colleagues (US OSS, 1948) used several data

sources in recruitment and training of World War I I Office of

Strategic Services overt and covert agents. They were the f ir s t

group of psychologists and psychiatrists to expand their test

battery by the introduction of re a lis tic situational tests. Murray

(Morgan & Murray, 1935) developed his projective Thematic

Apperception Test (TAT) to assess the personalities of healthy,

normal individuals, rather than those with mental disorders.

The TAT is a projective personality test in which several

ambiguous pictures are shown to the participant, who is told to make

up a story about each picture. The participant is asked to describe

what the people in the picture are doing, what they are probably

thinking about, what th e ir feelings are, and what would be the

results of the situation shown in the picture. From the content of

these stories, psychologists trained in personality theory and

projective testing should be able to learn something about the

mental processes of the participant and make reasonable assumptions

about the participant's needs, wants, ambitions, conflicts, and

values.

Murray and his associates were very successful in using the

TAT. However, because i t is a projective tes t, the TAT has the


24

disadvantage of being heavily dependent for its interpretation upon

the background and experience of the psychologist.

Self-Report Inventories

All port (1937) studied the personality of individuals by use of

their personal records, historical documents, and data acquired by

face-to-face interviews. Since both interviews and the various

projective techniques tended to be too time-consuming, several

different self-report personality inventories or questionnaires were

developed to assist in the studies. Their objectives were to deal

with "the problem of personal adjustment" or to study the

"conceptions of the structure of individual difference stemming from

theoretical concepts about the nature of personality" (Lanyon &

Goodstein, 1982, p. 12). Four prominent self-report inventories

were reviewed for possible use in th is study. These are the Eysenck

Personality Inventory (EPI), the Sixteen Personality Factor

Questionnaire (16PFQ), the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality

Inventory (MMPI), and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).

Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI)

In 1947, Eysenck introduced the Maudsley Personality Inventory,

la ter t it le d the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI), to measure

what he considered to be the two major dimensions of personality:

the Jungian extraversion-introversion dimension and neuroticism

operating along a continuum. Eysenck considered neuroticism to be

"the inclination to respond with excessively high levels of


25

emotionality" (Corsini & Marsella, 1983, p. 386). This research was

conducted with a group of 700 neurotic soldiers during his

assignment as a psychologist in the Maudsley hospital.

Lingoes (1970) and Tellegren (1978) critic ized the design of

the EPI on the basis that using only two or three dimensions would

be insufficient to analyze a patient's personality in a clin ical

situation.

Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF0)

Cattell (C a tte ll, Eber & Tatsuoka, 1970) developed his Sixteen

Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PFQ) to provide researchers with

an instrument to evaluate the personality of individuals through

identification of second-order tra its or factors. Cattell used

factor analysis to derive and consolidate these factors. According

to Corsini and Marsella (1983), C a tte ll's prodigious work in the

f ie ld of personality assessment has not yet received wide acceptance

"because of his reliance on quantitative methods (e .g ., factor

analysis), the complexity of which exceeded the understanding of

many psychology professors" (p. 394). Nonetheless, Lanyon and

Goodstein (1982) recognized the 16PFQ as one of only two personality

inventories that they consider to have a sound theoretical base, the

second being the Myers-8riggs Type Indicator.

Harsh (1970), a U. S. Navy research psychologist, expressed

dissatisfaction with the 16PFQ test manual because of the absence of

re lia b il ity data for the various personality factors. Harsh also

objected to the complicated scoring method presented, which he


26

considered a potential source of error. Lubin (1970) warned against

the use of the 16PFQ without further validation of the instrument.

Wittenborn (1970) did not consider the 16PFQ "a finished tool"

(p. 562).

Adcock (1970) disagreed with the reviewers just cited. For his

applications of the instrument, Adcock considered the 16PFQ easy to

administer and score. He particularly valued the av a ila b ility of

"average profiles for 28 occupational groups and 6 behavior

disorders" (p. 820).

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) was

orig inally developed by Hathaway and McKinley (1951) as a diagnostic

test instrument for c lin ica l psychologists to use in a medical

setting in order "to diagnose or detect individuals whose behavior

patterns were psychopathological" (Kleinmuntz, 1975, p. 10).

When the MMPI has been used in other than clin ical settings,

the results have not been uniformly satisfactory. King (1978) cited

the Congressional hearings in 1964, during which te s tifie rs

denounced "the use of the MMPI as a selection instrument for

employment" (p. 935). King further stated that the attempted use of

the MMPI to predict industrial job performance or to anticipate

success or fa ilu re in m ilita ry training could be expected to produce

negative consequences. Although the MMPI ranks very high as a

clin ica l tool, much less support has been found for its use in


27

management situations for personality assessment of normal, healthy

human beings. ^

The Mvers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

Briggs and Myers (Myers, 1962; Myers & Myers, 1980) based their

development of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), an instrument

for use in personality assessment of normal individuals, on Jungian

typology. As stated by Myers and McCaulley (1985), "The purpose of

the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is to make the theory of

psychological types described by C. G. Jung (1921/1971)

understandable and useful in people's lives" (p. 1). The MBTI has

been recognized by Lanyon and Goodstein (1982) as one of only two

personality inventories constructed from a sound basis in

personality theory (the other being the 16PFQ). The MBTI measures

the two Jungian attitudes, extraversion (E) and introversion ( I ) , as

well as the four basic mental processes or functions: sensing (S),

in tuition (N), thinking (T ), and feeling (F ).

After years of research and observation, Briggs and Myers

(Myers, 1962) added the judgment-perception (JP) preference, implied

by Jungian type theory, to the exp lic it Jungian dimensions of El,

SN, and TF. Myers and McCaulley (1985) have explained the

importance of the JP preference as follows:


28

The JP preference has two uses. F irs t, i t describes indentifiab le attitudes and behaviors to the outside world. Second, i t is used, in conjunction with El, to identify which of the two preferred functions is the leading or dominant function and which is the auxiliary. The recognition and development of facts about the JP function are a major contribution of Briggs and Myers to the theory of psychological types, (p. 13)

Thus, a person's orientation to the outer world is determined by his

JP preference, which also determines his dominant function. Only

one of the four functions, S, N, T, or F, can be dominant in an

individual's mental processes. I f his JP preference is for J, his

dominant function w ill be either thinking (T) or feeling (F ).

Should he show a P preference, his dominant function w ill be either

sensing (S) or in tuition (N). Direction and consistent focus for

the individual's personality are provided by his dominant function.

The second preferred function, the auxiliary , balances the effect of

the dominant function. For example, a dominant perceptive function

(S or N) is balanced by an auxiliary judgment function (T or F), and

vice versa.

Selection of the MBTI as the Survey Instrument

Five major personality instruments have been discussed for

possible use in this study. The TAT, the only projective test,

could not be used because the test must be administered and

interpreted by a trained psychologist with wide experience in

personality assessment. The EPI has only one scale devoted to the

El dimension. Its other two scales are related to abnormal


29

psychology and thus are unsuitable for th is application. The

frequently used MMPI is also primarily a diagnostic tool for

clin ica l psychologists, and for th is reason is not considered

applicable for the purpose of this study. The 16PFQ, in spite of

its theoretical base, was not used because of its complicated

scoring procedures and the applicab ility of only certain selected

scales.

The MBTI, on the other hand, is a self-report inventory which

is easy to administer and score and also has a strong theoretical

base. I t uses a forced-choice format in which answers to each

question are paired, thus guiding the participant to select the one

answer he thinks is more nearly correct. The forced choice

technique avoids the phenomenon of response set, i . e . , inappropriate

answers to the question content (Maddi, 1980).

The MBTI personality type is measured by questions structured

to ascertain the re la tive strengths of the person's preference along

the four dimensions. The symbology used by Myers-Briggs to describe

these dimensions is alphabetical. Basically, the f i r s t le tte r of

each of the eight preferences is used to designate the person's

preference for that particular mental process: extraversion is

represented by (E); introversion by ( I ) ; sensing by (S); intuition

by (N); thinking by (T); feeling by (F); judgment by (J); and

perception by (P). Thus, a fo u r-le tte r combination may be used to

represent one of the sixteen possible MBTI psychological types. For

example, the MBTI type designation, ESTP, represents a person who

uses the mental processes of extraversion, sensing, thinking, and


30

perception as his dominant preferences for dealing with his

environment. In Myers-Briggs terminology, these preferences

translate into his personality type (McCaulley, 1980).

Before the MBTI was selected, however, its re lia b il ity and

va lid ity were extensively researched.

R e lia b ility of the MBTI

Mendelsohn (1970) commented on the large amount of re lia b il ity

and va lid ity data that had been accumulated for the MBTI at that

time. He reported internal consistency re lia b ilit ie s ranging from

.75 to .85 for the E l, SN, and JP scales, but somewhat lower

coefficients for the TF scale. Strieker and Ross (1963) reported

similar re lia b ility coefficients in the .70 to .80 range for the El,

SN, and JP scales, but a lower range (.64 to .74) for the TF scale.

Since the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT)

was established in 1975, more specific research on testing with the

MBTI has been achieved. Carlyn (1977) conducted a thorough

assessment of the MBTI and concluded that the internal consistency

studies which she had reviewed had "usually produced acceptable

re lia b ilit ie s for both continuous and dichotomous scores" (p. 465).

With regard to tes t-re test r e lia b il ity , Myers and McCaulley

(1985) have stated that:

The practical questions revolve around the likelihood that on retest a person w ill come out the same MBTI type, that is , a person w ill choose the same pole of a ll four dichotomous preferences, (p. 170)


31

In other words, the r e lia b il ity of the MBTI is dependent on how

consistently i t can indicate a person's type. In her 1977 review,

Carlyn found that professional adults upon retest showed l i t t l e or

no change in their MBTI type designation. For both male and female

college students, however, she observed ranges of .73 to .83 for the

El dimension, .69 to .78 for SN, .48 to .82 for TF, and .69 to .82

for JP. Carlyn offered the opinion that "s tab ility of scores is a

function of occupation or age" (p .467). Carskadon's (1979) findings

showed similar ranges, based on student data.

Myers (1962) anticipated that correlations might not be so high

with the thinking-feeling (TF) dimension because thinking (T) and

feeling (F) are judgment functions. Myers believed that fa c il ity in

judgment tended to be related to the age, maturity, and experience

of the individual, whether his decisions were reached through the

logical thinking mode or through the feeling and personal value

system process. Myers' contention thus agrees with Jung's

(1921/1971) theory that individuals continue to mature well into

middle l i f e .

The preponderance of accumulated data in the revised MBTI

Manual corroborates the a b ility of the MBTI to give consistent

results upon retest of participants.

V alid ity of the MBTI

Kerlinger (1973) has stated that the significance of construct

va lid ity "is its preoccupation with theory, theoretical constructs

and sc ien tific empirical inquiry involving the testing of


32

hypothesized relations" (pp. 461-462). The MBTI was developed by

Briggs and Myers (Myers, 1962; Myers & McCaulley, 1985) with the

avowed purpose of making Jung's (1921/1971) psychological types

measurable and thus of practical importance. Lanyon and Goodstein

(1982) have attested to the sound theoretical basis for the MBTI.

Bradway's (1964) study supported the construct va lid ity of the

MBTI. He reported the views of 28 Jungian analysts toward the MBTI

with regard to identification of their own types. The analysts

typed themselves and then compared their self-typing with the types

indicated by the MBTI. The comparison showed substantial agreement,

especially for the El preference. Carskadon and Cook (1982)

reported that two-thirds of their college students, even though

unfamiliar with type theory, were able to recognize and identify

their own type from a random group of type descriptions, only one of

which was correct for each student.

MBTI Correlations with Other Instruments

Because the MBTI purports to measure strengths of Jungian

constructs, i . e . , the El, SN, TF, and JP scales, the MBTI can be

compared with other personality instruments which are measuring

similar constructs. Myers and McCaulley (1985) have correlated MBTI

preference dimensions with relevant scales on each of the other

three prominent personality instruments already reviewed, the EPI,

the MMPI, and the 16PFQ. These correlations, a ll significant at the

.01 level, are discussed below.


33

Extraversion-Introversion (El)

The EPI has only one dimension in common with the MBTI, i .e . ,

Extraversion-Introversion. The EPI shows a correlation range of .63

to .74 with the MBTI (E ), but .27 with MBTI ( I ) . Two of the MMPI

scales are correlated with the MBTI ( I ) preference, i . e . , .63 for

Social Introversion and .39 for Depression. Two of the 16PFQ

second-order tra its correlate with the MBTI (E ), i . e . . Extraversion

(.51 to .74) and Leadership (.44 to .58). The 16PFQ's Anxiety Index

correlates .35 with the MBTI ( I ) .

Sensinq-Intuition (SN)

The MMPI Masculinity and Femininity scale correlates .33 with

the MBTI SN preference. The 16PFQ Independence factor correlates

from .33 to .46 with SN, its Leadership factor correlates .35 with

SN, and its Creativity factor correlates .50 with SN.

Thinking-Feeling (TF)

The MMPI Masculinity and Femininity scale shows a correlation

of .22 with the MBTI TF scale. The 16PFQ shows a correlation with

TF of .28 for its A lert Poise factor and of .26 for its Leadership

factor.

Judgment-Perception (JP)

The 16PFQ shows correlations with JP in the range of .32 to .36


34

for its Independence factor and in the range of .25 to .39 for its

Creativity factor.

These accumulated findings give support to the construct

va lid ity of the MBTI and to its a b ility to identify types in

accordance with Jungian psychological type theory.

Summary of MBTI Advantages

Three advantages of using the MBTI have been noted by Sundberg

(1970): the simple procedures for administrating and scoring the

instrument; the sound Jungian psychological base; and the MBTI's

evidential relationship with measures of "creativ ity , achievement,

and success at certain jobs" (p. 1127). Sundberg further reported

that a c lien t, when counseled, could easily comprehend how the

results from the MBTI could enable "the person to see and understand

his own preferences" (p. 1130). The importance of this particular

aspect of the MBTI is apparent i f the test results must be clearly

explained to and understood by each participant. Selection of the

MBTI as the survey test instrument is thus considered ju s tifie d by

its cited advantages and its su ita b ility for application to this

study.

Personality Characteristics of M ilita ry and C ivilian Leaders

C ivilian Managers and Executives

Based on interviews with 36 c iv ilia n executives in U.S. Army

logistics ac tiv itie s , Holland (1973) found three pragmatically


35

useful c r ite r ia for determining executive potential: knowledge of

the job, s k ills required to perform the job, and the personal

attitudes of the candidates.

In his study for the Office of Naval Research, England (1973)

analyzed the value systems of industrial managers and

administrators. England's findings indicated that U. S. industrial

managers in the private sector showed a consistent profile of being

highly pragmatic, having a low concern with po litica l and social

values, and being actively goal-oriented. Similar results were

found by Pinder, Pinto, and England (1973) in their study of 200

American business managers relating behavioral style with

personality characteristics.

Hackman, Oldham, and Purdy (1975) found that leadership and

executive status were closely associated with personality

characteristics. Holland (1973) postulated a relationship between a

leader's personality and his job role. Church (1982) supported

Holland's postulate in a study of personality types of middle- and

high-level industrial leaders. McGregor (1967) summarily observed:

The role of the manager can be visualized as a dynamic interplay between environmental forces and pressures operating on the manager . . . and forces originating from within the manager, his values, personality, and aspirations, (p. 55)

Quasi-Military Personnel

The Office of Strategic Services (OSS) was organized by the

U. S. Army during World War I I to provide a worldwide network of


36

U. S. agents and in-country foreign sympathizers to support A llied

and U. S. m ilita ry operations (US OSS, 1948). The OSS was

responsible for recruiting and training personnel to operate the

network. Because the assignment of the OSS operative could easily

have changed before he arrived at his station, the OSS Assessment

Staff decided to rely upon the ho listic psychological approach: use

of both the projective TAT to assess the recru it's personality and

simulated m ilita ry situations to analyze his potential operational

performance. Ten selected personality tra its and individual sk ills

were evaluated in less than two days: "motivation, energy and

in it ia t iv e , effective intelligence, social relations, leadership,

physical a b ility , security, observing, reporting, and propaganda

sk ills" (p. 511).

The M ilita ry Mind

Flanagan (1984), a retired three-star general, advocated the

existence of the so-called m ilita ry mind and addressed the alleged

difference between m ilita ry and c iv ilia n leaders from an

organizational point of view. Flanagan argued that the m ilitary

organizational system was more e ffic ie n t than its c iv ilian

counterpart. Basic m ilita ry features that he identified were:

chain of command, s ta ff specialization, efficiency reports,

punctuality, and regulatory authority. The corporate rebuttal

pointed out that the well-defined m ilita ry charter included clearly

specified goals, which made the means of accomplishment

straightforward. Flanagan replied that the m ilita ry must be in a


37

constant state of readiness to respond to goals (usually spontaneous

and urgent) dictated by the p o litica l environment. He added that

combative actions usually require quick reaction, often without

adequate preparation time or warning.

M ilita ry historian Dyer (1985a, 1985b) has claimed that the

m ilita ry mind is the result of combat tra in ing , during which

soldiers are taught to follow orders without question:

To be able to do such extraordinary things, m ilita ry men need very special beliefs and attitudes . . . in order to survive and function in combat. I t makes them a group apart, for i t 's the nature of combat that shapes the m ilita ry world and the m ilitary mind. (1985a, p. 1)

Dyer has observed that the m ilitary society is separate from that of

c iv ilian s , i . e . , separate family housing, separate schools, e tc .,

and that this a r t i f ic ia l separation can result in a disorientation

with respect to c iv ilia n attitudes.

Both Flanagan (1984) and Dyer (1985a) have postulated the

existence of the m ilita ry mind, together with a difference in

thought, outlook, and personal value systems for m ilita ry personnel

as compared with c iv ilians .

M ilita ry Program Managers

Specific personality tra its that project managers should

manifest were identifed by Lockwood (1973) through his research at

the U. S. Army War College. These personality tra its included

in tegrity , intelligence, emotional s ta b ility , drive and motivation,

and a basic managerial aptitude. The five most significant


38

attributes of U. S. A ir Force program managers were found by Brahany

(1976) to be essentially similar to Lockwood's, i . e . , high

motivation, self-confidence, sensitiv ity , in teg rity , and s e lf-

discipline.

Successful programs in the defense acquisition f ie ld , which

includes m ilita ry , c iv ilia n , and industrial leaders, have been shown

by Baumgartner, Brown, and Kelley (1984) to depend upon the

leadership a b ilit ie s of the m ilitary program manager, along with

good management practices, careful selection of competent personnel,

and the consistent maintenance of rapport and goal-sharing with the

program's industrial contractors. R. C. Smith (1982) noted that

successful program managers were also people-oriented and in tu itive .

Characteristic attributes for success as a program manager were

identified by Kelley (1984), who found examples of Department of

Defense program managers with the same attributes as those of

successful managers in private industrial companies found by Peters

and Waterman (1982). All the program managers that Kelley

interviewed stressed the importance of good, open communications

with s ta ff and contractors and of the existence of a working team.

Kelley noted that program managers enjoyed their jobs, were

enthusiastic, and were patrio tic m ilitary officers who believed they

were doing a good job for their country.

The decision-making process within management is substantially

influenced by the behavior and attitude, i . e . , the personality, of

the decision maker. N id iffer (1984) found the program manager to be

a "tough-minded, technical and business person who approached


39

problems in a similar way to a systems engineer" (p. 14). However,

he warned against the concept of the optimum of one particular

personality type because the program manager must adjust his

management style to f i t the situation.

MBTI Typing of M ilita ry and C ivilian Personnel

E llis (1982) administered the MBTI to three successive classes

(N = 450 approximately) of the Program Manager's Course at the

Defense Systems Management College, Ft. Belvoir, V irginia, for the

purpose of building more effective student work teams. The purpose

was achieved because the student managers at th is graduate-level

government educational fa c il ity , upon learning their types,

enthusiastically studied type theory in order to promote even better

working relationships within their own groups and with the other

student groups in their classes.

Stake (1985) administered the MBTI to a random sample (N=80) of

his chaplain's constituency at TACOM during February 1983. The

composite profile developed from the entire sample showed ISTJ to be

the most representative type. The sample included ten m ilitary

officers whose composite pro file was ESTJ. Both profiles showed

strength in each of the functions S, T, and J, but l i t t l e difference

on the El attitudinal dimension. Stake (1985) reasoned that the

officers ' p ro file was "closely balanced in the El dimension, and

could be interpreted as ESTJ or ISTJ" (p. 21).

N id iffe r's (1984) research was aimed at determining the

probable MBTI type for a program manager. He analyzed data from the


40

Industrial College of the Armed Forces and the Defense Systems

Management College (N=803) covering the period from 1981 to 1984.

N id iffer found that, while the ISTJ type was manifested by 30% of

the program management students, three other MBTI types (ESTJ, INTJ,

and ENTJ) accounted for 33% more of these students. In other words,

two-thirds of the future executives and program managers were

characterized by the thinking-judging (TJ) type grouping.

P o ll it t (1982) studied type differences in a sample of

approximately 300 industrial middle- and upper-level managers in the

fie lds of finance and comptrollership, manufacturing, engineering,

science and research, personnel, and overall general management.

P o llit t found that both engineering and finance had 80% TJs and thus

were heavily represented by ISTJ, ESTJ, INTJ, and ENTJ types.

P o llit t commented on the surprisingly greater than expected numbers

of in tu itives (from 40% to 50%) which finance, engineering, and

manufacturing included to meet the need for long-range corporate

planning. Although the major concentration of feeling types was in

the corporate personnel departments (55%), manufacturing showed 26%,

because, as P o llit t explained, "manufacturing must always be done

through people—and people who are highly motivated and feel well

treated" (p. 8 ). The scientists and researchers were 80% intuitives

and 60% introverts. Most of the scientists were INTJ, INTP, ENFP,

and ENTJ types. Even though the scientists and researchers included

more in tu itives than did engineering and manufacturing, the

scientists were equally balanced between perceptive and judging

types. Both engineering and manufacturing were low in perceptives


41

(13%). The Individuals In general management who were tested were

heads of large divisions or general managers who were responsible

for corporate growth of th e ir organizations. These managers were

generally extraverts. In tu itives , thinkers, and about equally

divided between judgers and perceptives. P o ll it t concluded that:

The Myers-Brlggs does seem to fa c ilita te an Improved climate In organizations. When people can understand themselves better, and also understand others, the normal conflicts can be resolved more quickly and easily. I t becomes more natural for people to work out a problem rather than avoid one another or cover things up. Having a rational set of concepts for what has often been the mystery of human differences seems to be enormously useful to people, (p. 19)

The Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT) has

established a computer-accessible data bank containing over a

quarter of a m illion MBTI records, which have been coded to Indicate

the age, occupation, and education of Individuals completing the

MBTI. Myers and McCaulley (1985) have reported on the compiled CAPT

data for various occupations, Including c iv ilia n managers and

administrators (N=7,463). They found that a majority (57%) of the

managers and administrators preferred extraversion (E) over

Introversion ( I ) . About the same percentage (56%) preferred sensing

(S) over In tu ition (N). Thinking (T) was favored over feeling (F)

by 61% of the managers, and over two-thirds (69%) preferred judging

(J) to perception (P). The three MBTI types most heavily

represented among the managers were ESTJ (17%), ISTJ (15%), and ENTJ

(10%). The remaining 58% of the managers were scattered over the

other thirteen MBTI types at levels of about 2% to 7%. Although


42

Myers and McCaulley also reported on m ilita ry personnel, the number

of these in the data bank is much smaller (N=264), and the m ilitary

are not identified specifically by responsibility level, rank, or

job classification. In other words, they are not a well-defined

population for comparison with the m ilita ry executives in the

present study.

MBTI Types Associated with Executives and Managers

Myers and Myers (1980) analyzed each of the sixteen personality

types identified by the MBTI and showed how the type characteristics

tend to be manifested by various professions or occupations. Four

MBTI types are prominently represented in business and technical

fie lds . These types, ISTJ, ESTJ, INTJ, and ENTJ, are located on the

four corners of the standard Type Table format and constitute a

pattern of management types. These four thinking-judging (TJ) types

are recognized by Myers and McCaulley (1985) as "logical decision

makers, tough-minded, executive, analytical, and instrumental

leaders" (p. 36).

ISTJ

Myers and Myers (1980) have characterized the introverted

sensing type, ISTJ, as representative of managers who are practical,

responsible, "systematic, painstaking, thorough, and can absorb and

enjoy using an immense number of facts" (p. 104). Myers has noted

that, in addition to the ir responsible attitude, they are very

stable.


43

Their use of experience contributes to their s ta b ility . They habitually compare present and past situations. Used in an executive capacity, this quality makes for consistent policy and for care in the introduction of changes, (p. 105)

Elston (1984) noted that ISTJs are "excellent at maintaining and

keeping an operation functioning" (p. 43), and that comptrollers,

accountants, bankers, and lawyers, as well as technical managers,

generally manifest the ISTJ type.

ESTJ

The ESTJ has been called by Myers and Myers (1980) "the

standard executive type" (p. 86). These extraverted thinking

executives or technical managers tend to have very high

organizational capability. Elston (1984) has stated that ESTJs are

goal- and achievement-oriented individuals who can

put people, things, and ac tiv ities in order and tune them with an efficiency that is what every organization of any size needs, and needs very much. . . . [They] strongly dislike slip-shod, in e ffic ien t ways or people, (p. 22)

Myers has further described ESTJs as

analytical, and impersonal, . . . decisive, logical, strong in reasoning power, . . . [who] value truth in the form of fac t, formula, and method, (p. 85)


44

INTJ

"Originator" is the term used by Elston (1984) to describe the

introverted in tu itive INTJ type, which includes "scientists,

researchers, scholars and inventors" (p. 37). Strongly independent

and consistently innovative, they welcome challenges. They are

particu larly good at solving complicated problems in a practical

way. Myers and Myers (1980) have pointed out that

In business, they are born reorganizers. Intuition gives them an iconoclastic imagination and an unhampered view of the possib ilities; extraverted thinking supplies a keenly c ritic a l organizing faculty, (p. 115)

ENTJ

Elston (1984) has designated "Leader" as the single word to

describe the ENTJ type, characterized as a "very disciplined,

conscientious, re liab le , work-oriented individual" (p. 12) who

performs ably as an administrator, "especially in the fie lds of

business, education or government" (p. 12). Myers and Myers (1980)

have emphasized that th is type expresses extraverted thinking

supported by in tu ition and consequently is "mainly interested in the

possib ilities beyond the present, obvious, or known" (p. 88).

Because ENTJ executives tend to select other in tu itives for their

organizations, Myers and Myers recommended that they balance their

perspective with the deliberate addition of some sensing types "to

keep them from overlooking relevant facts and important details"

(p. 89).


45

Summary

The purpose of th is chapter was to examine both public and

m ilita ry lite ra tu re for relevant studies of the personality link to

leaders. Theories of leadership were examined in the order in which

they evolved, beginning with the theory of hereditary a b ility , and

followed by the great man theory, theory of tra its , situational

theory, and current behavioral theories. The lite ra tu re review

indicated that additional research is required to c la rify these

leadership theories, especially in terms of parallel developments in

the fie ld of personality research.

Personality theories were then surveyed. These included Freud

and psychoanalysis, Jung and psychological type theory, Murray and

personality assessment, Maslow's theory of self-actualization , and

the t r a i t theories of All port and C a tte ll. Jung's theory of

psychological types was deemed the most appropriate personality

theory applicable to th is study.

Personality instruments were reviewed next. Most of those

examined were shown to re flec t a rb itra r ily selected tra its or

characteristics extrapolated from observations of abnormal

individuals in c lin ica l settings. C a tte ll's Sixteen Personality

Factor Questionnaire (C a tte ll, 1946; 1983), Eysenck's Personality

Inventory (Eysenck, 1967), and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality

Inventory (Hathaway & McKinley, 1951) are representative of

instruments which are primarily c lin ic a l. Murray's Thematic


46

Apperception Test (Morgan & Murray, 1935) 1s a projective test which

must be administered and scored by a highly trained professional.

The Myers-Brlggs Type Indicator (Myers, 1962) was chosen as the

test Instrument to be used In th is study because I t was developed

specifically to Identify personality type In accordance with the

psychological type theory originated by Jung (1921/1971). The

preponderance of evidence showing the wide and continually growing

use and acceptance of the MBTI (CAPT, 1985) Indicated that I t would

readily meet a ll the requirements (Carlyn, 1977) of a suitable test

Instrument for this research Into personality types.

Research on the personality characteristics of m ilita ry and

c iv ilian leaders was reviewed next, followed by a discussion of the

MBTI types found In studies of c iv ilia n and m ilita ry executives.

The chapter concluded with a description of MBTI types

characteristic of executives and managers.

The next chapter details the hypotheses developed from the

litera ture review and outlines the research methodology.


CHAPTER I I I

METHODOLOGY

Formulation of the Research Hypotheses

Specific research hypotheses evolved from the analysis of the

study problem reviewed in Chapter I and from the lite ra tu re search

in Chapter I I . These research hypotheses and the research questions

they address are presented below.

Research Ouestion 1 and Hypotheses

Are there differences in personality types between m ilita ry and

c iv ilia n upper-level leaders?

Discussion

The related lite ra tu re search outlined in Chapter I I showed a

prevailing consensus (Flanagan, 1984; Dyer, 1985a) on the existence

of personality differences between c iv ilian and m ilita ry executives.

Stake (1985) and N id iffer (1984) have shown that there is

support for the hypothesis that m ilita ry officers would tend to

manifest psychological characteristics corresponding to the

introversion ( I ) attitude, the sensing (S) function, and the

thinking-judgment (TJ) type grouping as measured by the MBTI. The

N id iffer (1984) data are particularly applicable to this study.

47


48

N id iffer found that over half of the m ilita ry officers in his study

were introverts ( I ) and about two-thirds were sensors (S) and

thinking-judgers (TJs). These officers (N=803) consisted of three

classes at the Defense Systems Management College and one class from

the Industrial College of the Armed Forces. When these officers

were graduated, they were immediately assigned as m ilita ry program

managers or industrial managers of large m ilitary-industria l

complexes. Their assignments would thus be comparable in

responsibility level to those of the m ilita ry officers in the

present study.

The hypothesis that c iv ilia n executives would tend to be more

extraverted (E) in th e ir attitud inal dimension and more feeling (F)

in their mental processes than their m ilita ry counterparts is

supported by the manager and administrator data from the CAPT MBTI

data bank reported by Myers and McCaulley (1985).

Research Hypotheses for Research Question 1

1. The distribution of MBTI types for m ilita ry executives w ill

d iffe r from that for c iv ilia n executives.

2. Differences w ill be found between m ilita ry and c iv ilian

executives with regard to the type attitudes (El) and the type

processes (SN, TF, and JP). I t is hypothesized that a higher

percentage of m ilita ry than of c iv ilia n executives w ill be

classified by the MBTI as introverts ( I ) , sensors (S), thinkers (T ),

and judgers (J ).


49

3. The distributions of MBTI types for the c iv ilia n executives

In this study w ill be sim ilar to those for the c iv ilia n managers and

administrators described In the data from Myers and McCaulley

(1985), while the distributions of MBTI types for the m ilitary

executives In th is study w ill be sim ilar to those found by N id iffer

(1984).

Null Hypotheses for Research Question 1

1. No difference w ill be found In the distribution of MBTI

types between m ilita ry and c iv ilia n participants.

2. There w ill be no difference In the percentage of m ilitary

and c iv ilia n executives classified by the MBTI as Introverts ( I ) ,

sensors (S ), thinkers (T ), or judgers (J ).

3. The distribution of m ilita ry and c iv ilia n MBTI types found

In this study w ill d iffe r from those for m ilita ry personnel reported

by N id iffer (1984) and for c iv ilian managers and administrators

reported by Myers and McCaulley (1985), respectively.

Research Question 2 and Hypotheses

Does the distribution of MBTI types d iffe r across TACOM

organizational units (Research and Development, Readiness, Support,

and Program Managers' Offices)?

Discussion

The second Research Question concerned the possibility that the

Individual TACOM units would a ttract leaders of a particular type.


50

The approximately 300 participants in P o ll it t 's (1982) research

covered industrial middle- and upper-level managers in the fie lds of

finance and comptrollership, manufacturing, engineering, science and

research, personnel, and overall general management. His study

supported the conceptual hypothesis that Research and Development

would tend to a ttract in tu itive introverts. Readiness would have

more judging extraverts, Support would have more in tu itive

extraverts, and the Project Managers' Offices would be represented

by sensing introverts.

Research Hypothesis for Research Question 2

The distribution of type attitudes and type processes w ill

d iffe r among the four TACOM organizational units. Research and

Development and Project Managers' Offices are expected to include a

higher proportion of introverts than are Readiness and Support. In

addition. Research and Development and Support are expected to

attract a higher percentage of in tu itives than are Readiness and

Program Managers' Offices.

Null Hypothesis for Research Question 2

There w ill be no difference in the distribution of MBTI type

attitudes and type processes among the four TACOM organizational

units.


51

Research Design

This research was designed to obtain information from a

selected population of m ilitary and c iv ilia n executives regarding

their predispositions and innate attitudes in order that their

individual personality types might be identified and studied.

Information was gathered by questionnaire, using the Myers-Briggs

Type Indicator (MBTI) as the survey instrument.

Independent Variables

There are two independent variables in th is study. The f i r s t

is the category of participating executives, the m ilitary officers

and the ir c iv ilian deputies. The second is the category of TACOM

organizational unit to which each participant belongs.

Dependent Variables

The dependent variables are the representations of the sixteen

MBTI types and the type preferences (processes and groupings)

manifested by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). As postulated

in the hypotheses relating to the two research questions, the

c iv ilia n and m ilita ry participants are expected to manifest

d ifferent representation among the sixteen MBTI types as well as

differences in their individual preferences for particular mental

processes in accordance with Jungian type theory. Moreover, the

MBTI types are expected to d iffe r as a function of the TACOM

organizational unit assignment.


52

Method of Analysis

This research generated data in categorical form. Thus, the

chi-square test of association was applied to test the differences

in representation of the various MBTI personality types and type

processes for the study participants as a function of their

classification as m ilita ry or c iv ilia n . In addition, the chi-square

test was used to compare the distributions found in this study with

those drawn from other MBTI studies reported in Chapter I I , in

particular, the investigations by Myers and McCaulley (1985) and by

N id iffer (1984).

Selection of the Participating Executives

Participants were selected from among upper-level executives

whose jobs were identified as executive caliber by their positions

on the TACOM organizational chart. Chiefs and the ir deputies were

each chosen from the same organizational unit in order to insure

that the work climate experienced by each of the two paired

executives would be essentially identical. Organizational duties,

responsibilities, and authority are shared by these paired

executives, a situation in which similar decision requirements and

behavioral demands could be presumed to occur. Thus, the work

environments were kept re la tive ly constant. Since these paired

executives' positions and responsibilities were equivalent, any

personality type differences between the participants could be

expected to be based upon their status as m ilita ry or c iv ilia n .


53

In most cases, the TACOM organizational unit chiefs were

m ilita ry officers with the rank of colonel or lieutenant colonel.

Deputies were usually c iv ilians of high C ivil Service grade level:

General Service (Merit Pay) or members of the Senior Executive

Service (SES), having salary levels higher than the maximum possible

under the General Service schedule. In a l l , th irty pairs of

m ilita ry and c iv ilian executives, the total testable population

within TACOM, were identified . The th irty pairs of participants in

th is study were presumed to be representative of Army

m ilita ry -c iv ilian executive pairs in the Federal service. All sixty

executives participated in the study.

Survey Instrument: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

Briggs and Myers (Myers & Myers, 1980; Myers & McCaulley, 1985)

developed their personality type indicator, the MBTI, as a means of

measuring Jung's (1921/1971) psychological types. Because the MBTI

is a self-report inventory using the forced-choice format, the

participant is forced to select the one answer he thinks is more

nearly correct. The 126 items in Form G of the MBTI, the survey form

in current use, are phrased in everyday, nonthreatening language to

encourage the participant to respond with answers which w ill

consistently tend to re flec t his true preferences (Myers, 1976).

The time required to f i l l out the MBTI averages one-half hour.

The score for each preference dimension is a le tte r and a

number. The le tte r identifies the direction of the bipolar

dimension, e .g ., E or I , whereas the number is an indication of the


54

relative strength of the preference for that direction. Four such

letter-number combinations become the type score. For example, the

scores: 110, S20, T15, and J3G, w ill correspond to the ISTJ type,

which may be described very b rie fly as one who prefers the

introverted attitude, who makes his judgments through logical

thinking, balanced by sensing perceptions (McCaulley, 1980). In a

similar manner, the MBTI type of each participant can be identified

as one of the sixteen possible combinations of the four bipolar

preference dimensions, E l, SN, TF, and JP.

Myers (1962) devised a standard format, called a Type Table, to

organize data on the number and percentage representation of the

type attitudes, functions, groupings, and the sixteen MBTI types.

This is the preferred method of data presentation for studies using

the MBTI as the test instrument in order to achieve better

comparability of results (Myers & McCaulley, 1985).

P ilo t Testing

Selected upper-level TACOM executives participated in the p ilo t

testing. These leaders did not qualify for the main study because

their offices did not include a deputy or counterpart at the same

executive level. The p ilo t test group contained eleven

participants, of whom seven were m ilitary officers and four were

civ ilians.

The purposes of th is p ilo t test were to (1) obtain a qualified

jury review of the proposed survey methods to convince the

Commanding General at TACOM that the proposed research was


55

worthwhile, (2) establish administrative procedures, and (3) ensure

that the survey instrument (the MBTI) could identify d ifferent

personality types among the respondents. Results of the p ilo t test

confirmed that the administrative procedures were satisfactory and

complete. The professional caliber of the Myers-Briggs Type

Indicator (MBTI) as a survey instrument particularly impressed the

executives in the p ilo t program, who commented favorably on the

entire survey packet.

The Commanding General of TACOM received a favorable report of

the p ilo t study. He directed his legal s ta ff to formulate a

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which would specify the details of

protocol to be followed, and he issued the general authorization to

proceed with the research.

Data Collection Procedures

Each survey packet contained an introductory le tte r to the

participant which outlined the study, its purpose, and its potential

benefits. A second sheet provided general instructions for s e lf

administration of the survey instrument. The MBTI questionnaire

booklet with a separate answer sheet completed the contents of the

survey packet.

All sixty survey packets were personally handcarried to each

executive within a period of two days. Each packet consisted of an

envelope stamped "Exclusively For", upon which each participant's

name and rank had been carefully lettered. This assured that only

the designee himself would open the envelope. Thus, confidentiality


56

was maintained, and each participant's right to privacy was

respected.

When the questionnaire was completed, the participants notified

the researcher, who picked up the completed packet to preserve

confidentiality. All questionnaires were completed within fifteen

working days, thus enabling this study to achieve a 100% response

rate. Each participant was furnished a copy of his own results on

the standard MBTI form, accompanied by an explanation of his

particular personality type and its associated characteristics.

The sixty MBTI answer sheets were coded to maintain

confidentiality. The coded sheets were hand-scored, using the MBTI

authorized keys, and then summarized in a type table giving the

frequencies not only of each of the MBTI types represented, but also

of the attitudes, functions, and processes.

Summary

The study hypotheses were formulated within the framework of

the two research questions. Next, the research design was

described. The selection procedure for the TACOM participants was

discussed, along with some pertinent information about the survey

instrument. Next, the p ilo t test was discussed, followed by a

description of the data collection and scoring procedures.

The resultant data are analyzed in the next chapter.


CHAPTER IV

RESULTS

The study findings are presented in th is chapter. Data from

the standard MBTI Type Table provided the basic information for

analysis. Both research questions and the ir hypotheses are

addressed.

Comparison of M ilita ry and C ivilian MBTI Types

Hypothesis 1 postulated that the distribution of MBTI types for

m ilitary and c ivili9.n^executives would d iffe r . The MBTI type data

for the entire survey population of 30 m ilita ry and 30 c iv ilian

participants are presented in Table 1. Each participant is

classified into one of the sixteen MBTI personality types. Because

of the small numbers of participants represented by most of the

types, a chi-square test of the difference between the MBTI type

distributions was not va lid . Nonetheless, i t is evident from

inspection that the type distributions for the m ilita ry and c iv ilian

executives are essentially identica l. The highest representation

for the m ilitary was in Type ISTJ (36.7%) and Type ESTJ (20.0%).

For the c iv ilians , representation was about equal for Type ESTJ

(26.7%), Type ISTJ (23.3%), and Type ENTJ (20.0%). For the numbers

involved, these percentage differences amount to only one or two

participants, except for Type ISTJ, where the difference is larger,

but s t i l l not significant at the .05 level.

57


58

Table 1

MBTI Personality Types for M ilita ry and C ivilian Executives at TACOM

Total M ilita ry CivilianMBTI Type Identification N % N % N %

Judging Introverts

ISTJ Sensing w/Thinking 18 30.0 11 36.7 7 23.3

ISFJ Sensing w/Feeling 0 0 0 0 0 0

INFJ In tu itive w/Feeling 1 1.7 0 0 1 3.3

INTJ In tu itive w/Thinking 6 10.0 3 10.0 3 10.0

Perceptive Introverts

ISTP Sensing w/Thinking 1 1.7 1 3.3 0 0

ISPF Sensing w/Feeling 0 0 0 0 0 0

INFP In tu itive w/Feeling 0 0 0 0 0 0

INTP In tu itive w/Thinking 3 5.0 1 3.3 2 6.7

Perceptive Extraverts

ESTP Sensing w/Thinking 4 6.7 2 6.7 2 6.7

ESFP Sensing w/Feeling 0 0 0 0 0 0

ENFP In tu itive w/Feeling 0 0 0 0 0 0

ENTP In tu itive w/Thinking 3 5.0 2 6.7 1 3.3

Judging Extraverts

ESTJ Sensing w/Thinking 14 23.3 6 20.0 8 26.7

ESFJ Sensing w/Feeling 0 0 0 0 0 0

ENFJ In tu itive w/Feeling 0 0 0 0 0 0

ENTJ In tu itive w/Thinking

Total

10

60

16.7 4

30

13.3 6

30

20.0


59Thus, while the hypothesized outcome for the m ilita ry

executives was somewhat supported by the data (36.7% were ISTJs, the

largest single type represented), the hypothesized outcome for the

civ ilians was convincingly refuted by the data (only one of the 30

c iv ilian participants manifested the feeling (F) process).

Hypothesis 2 postulated that a higher percentage of m ilitary

than of c iv ilian executives would be classified on the MBTI-measured

personality attitudes and functional processes as introverts ( I ) ,

sensors (S), and thinking-judgers (TJs). Table 2 presents the data

on the individual personality functions, i . e . , the eight MBTI

attitudes and processes, and the TJ type grouping. While there were

some minor, but nonsignificant, differences between the m ilitary and

c iv ilian leaders, the most striking finding in Table 2 was the large

and identical proportion (80%) of both m ilita ry and c iv ilian

participants who were thinking-judgers (TJs). Therefore, the data

did not support hypothesis 2.

Hypothesis 3 postulated that the data from the present study

would be similar to the data from prior studies, in particular, the

Myers and McCaulley (1985) data for the c iv ilians and the Ni d iffe r

(1984) data for the m ilita ry . Table 3 compares the MBTI types and

type processes from this study with those of Myers and McCaulley

(1985) and N id iffer (1984). Table 4 presents the chi-square tests

of association for the MBTI type attitudes and type processes for

the present study versus the Myers and McCaulley and N id iffer data.

(Again, the small cell numbers prevented use of the chi-square test

for comparison of type distributions.)


Table 2

MBTI Personality Functions for M ilita ry and C ivilian Executivesat TACOM

60

MBTIAttitude

or Total Mi 1i tarv C ivilianSymbol Function N % N % N %

E Extraversion 31 51.7 14 46.7 17 56.7

I Introversion 29 48.3 16 53.3 13 43.3

Total 60 100.0 30 100.0 30 100.0

S Sensing 37 61.7 20 66.7 17 56.7

N In tuition 23 38.3 10 33.3 13 43.3

Total 60 100.0 30 100.0 30 100.0

T Thinking 59 98.3 30 100.0 29 96.7

F Feeling 1 1.7 0 0 1 3.3

Total 60 100.0 30 100.0 30 100.0

J Judgment 44 81.7 24 80.0 25 83.3

P Perception 11 18.3 6 20.0 5 16.7

Total 60 100.0 30 100.0 30 100.0

TJ Thinking-Judgers 48 80.0 24 80.0 24 80.0

Non-TJ Other 12 20.0 6 20.0 6 20.0

Total 60 100.0 30 100.0 30 100.0


61

Table 3

Comparison of Present Study Data with Myers and McCaulley (1985)and N id iffer (1984) Data

MBTITypeor

TypeProcess

Civilian Executives Mi 1i tarv ExecutivesPresent Study

(N = 30) N %

Myers & McCaulley® (N = 7463) N %

Present Study

(N = 30) N %

Nidiffer^ (N = 803) N %

ISTJ 7 23.3 1115 14.9 11 36.7 242 30.1ISFJ 0 0 469 6.3 0 0 28 3.5INFJ 1 3.3 232 3.1 0 0 14 1.7INTJ 3 10.0 421 5.6 3 10.0 82 10.2

ISTP 0 0 201 2.7 1 3.3 43 5.4ISFP 0 0 189 2.5 0 0 9 1.1INFP 0 0 340 4.6 0 0 20 2.5INTP 2 6.7 267 3.6 1 3.3 63 7.9

ESTP 2 6.7 202 2.7 2 6.7 29 3.6ESFP 0 0 209 2.8 0 0 5 0.6ENFP 0 0 517 6.9 0 0 15 1.9ENTP 1 3.3 365 4.9 2 6.7 38 4.7

ESTJ 8 26.7 1272 17.0 6 20.0 116 14.4ESFJ 0 0 546 7.3 0 0 22 2.7ENFJ 0 0 367 4.9 0 0 8 1.0ENTJ 6 20.0 751 10.1 4 13.3 69 8.6

E 17 56.7 4229 56.7 14 46.7 302 37.6I 13 43.3 3234 43.3 16 53.3 501 62.4

S 17 56.7 4203 56.3 20 66.7 494 61.5N 13 43.3 3260 43.7 10 33.3 309 38.4

T 29 96.7 4594 61.6 30 100.0 682 84.9F 1 3.3 2869 38.4 0 0 121 15.1

J 25 83.3 5173 69.3 24 80.0 581 72.4P 5 16.7 2290 30.7 6 20.0 222 27.6

Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Mvers-Briggs Type Indicator, by I . 8. Myers and M. H. McCaulley, 1985, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

^"The Personality Factor: Software Technology and the 'ThinkingStyles' of Program Managers," by K. E. N id iffe r, Program Manager. (July-August 1984), pp. 10-18.


Table 4

Chi-Square Tests for Comparisons of Present Study Data with Myers & McCaulley (1985) and N id iffer (1984) Data

62

Chi-Square Tests of Association Chi-Square ^

Civilians

T N = 29 N = 459496.7% 61.6%

F N = 1 N = 28693.3% 38.4%

Present Study Myers & McCaulleyJ N = 25 N = 5173

83.3% 69.3%P N = 5 N = 2290

16.7% 30.7%

Present Study Myers & McCaulleyTJ N = 24 N = 3559

80.0% 47.7%Non- N = 6 N = 3904TJ 20.0% 52.3%

Mi 1i tarv

Present Study N id ifferE N = 14 N = 302

46.7% 37.6%I N = 16 N = 501

53.3% 62.4%

Present Study N id ifferTJ N = 24 N = 509

80.0% 63.4%Non- N = 6 N = 294TJ 20.0% 36.6%

15.58

2.77

12.49

1.01

3.46

<.001

n.s.

<.001

n.s.

n.s.


63

For the c iv ilian data, the percentage of extraverts (57%) and

the percentage of sensing individuals (56%) were the same in the

present study as in the Myers and McCaulley data. However, the

major expected finding that the civ ilians would be predominantly

feeling (F) and perceptive (P) individuals was unsupported by the

present study, with only 3.3% Fs and 16.8% Ps. As can be seen from

Table 4, the difference between the present study c iv ilians and the

Myers and McCaulley c iv ilians with respect to the thinking-feeling

(IF ) dimension was highly significant. However, the difference for

the judging-perception (JP) dimension was not significant at the .05

level. The difference for the thinking-judging (TJ) type grouping

was also highly significant, with 80% of the c iv ilians in the

present study being TJs. In the Myers and McCaulley data, although

thinking-judging (TJ) was the most prevalent type grouping, only 48%

of the c iv ilian administrators and managers were TJs, whereas 52%

were either feeling individuals (Fs) or perceptives (Ps) or both.

The representation of perceptives (Ps) in the Myers and McCaulley

data was about twice as high (30.7%) as that in the present study

(16.8%), while the representation of feeling (Fs) individuals in the

Myers and McCaulley data was about ten times as high (38.4%) as that

in the present study (3.3%).

For the m ilita ry executives, the results presented in Tables 3

and 4 indicate close agreement between the participants in the

present study and those in N id iffer's study. More than half (53%

for the present study and 63% for N id iffer study) were introverts

( Is ) ; about the same percentage (34% vs. 38%) were in tu itives (Ns);


64

a ll of the present study m ilitary participants vs. 85% of the

N id iffer participants were thinkers (Ts); and about the same

percentage (80% vs. 72%) were judgers (Js). The difference between

the thinking-judging (TJ) representation in the present study and

the N id iffer study is shown in Table 4 to be nonsignificant at the

.05 level. Interestingly, the c iv ilian TJ data in the present study

are identical to the m ilita ry TJ data and thus are also not

significantly d ifferen t from the N id iffer m ilita ry data.

Thus, the results for hypothesis 3 are mixed. The m ilita ry

data are consistent with expectation, as represented by the N id iffer

data. However, the present study c iv ilian data are not completely

consistent with the Myers and McCaulley c iv ilia n data, particularly

with respect to the thinking-feeling (TF) dimension and the

thinking-judging (TJ) type grouping. In fac t, the c iv ilian data in

the present study show more s im ilarity to the N id iffer m ilitary data

than to the Myers and McCaulley c iv ilian data.

Comparison of MBTI Types across TACOM Organizational Units

The hypothesis for Research Question 2 postulated that the

organizational units a t TACOM would tend to a ttrac t MBTI personality

types similar to the type distribution found in other organizations

performing comparable ac tiv ities (e .g ., ISTJ was the predominant

personality type among program managers as reported by Kelley (1984)

and N id iffer (1984)).

Table 5 presents the data on personality types in the four

TACOM organizational units to which the participating executive


65

Table 5

Distribution of MBTI Personality Types in TACOM Units

MBTIType

TACOM Unit

TotalR & D Readiness PMO SupportN % N % N % N % N %

ISTJ 5 27.7 5 35.7 8 33.3 0 0 18 30.0

INFJ 0 0 1 7.1 0 0 0 0 1 1.7

INTJ 2 11.1 3 21.4 1 4.2 0 0 6 10.0

ISTP 0 0 1 7.1 0 0 0 0 1 1.7

INTP 1 5.6 0 0 2 8.3 0 0 3 5.0

ESTP 1 5.6 0 0 2 8.3 1 25.0 4 6.7

ENTP 1 5.6 0 0 1 4.2 1 25.0 3 5.0

ESTJ 2 11.1 4 28.6 7 29.2 1 25.0 14 23.3

ENTJ 6 33.3 0 0 3 12.5 1 25.0 10 16.7

Total 18 100.0 14 100.0 24 100.0 4 100.0 60 100.0

E 10 55.6 4 28.5 13 54.2 4 100.0 31 51.6I a 44.4 10 71.5 11 45.8 0 0 29 48.4

S 8 44.4 10 71.5 17 70.8 2 50.0 37 61.7N 10 55.6 4 28.5 7 29.2 2 50.0 23 38.3


66

leaders were assigned. There appears to be essentially no

difference in the distribution of MBTI types among the four

organizational units. (Chi-square tests were inappropriate because

of small cell sizes.)

The expected outcomes for the extraversion-introversion (E l)

dimension were generally not supported by the data. Although

expected to be heavily represented by introverts, the Research and

Development unit and the Program Managers' Offices were almost

equally divided between introverts ( I ) and extraverts (E). The

executives in the Support group were 100% extraverts (E), as

expected, but the Readiness unit, contrary to expectation, consisted

of 72% introverts ( I ) .

The hypothesized outcome for the sensing-intuition (SN)

dimension was, however, supported by the data. More than half of

the Research and Development unit and half of the Support unit

participants were in tu itives (N), versus less than 30% intuitives

(N) for the Readiness unit and Program Managers' Offices, a

difference that was significant at the .05 level by chi-square test.

The hypothesis for Research Question 2 thus has mixed results.

Because the data are sparsely scattered over th MBTI types in a ll

four units, no convincing analysis of the distributional differences

was possible. For the extraversion-introversion (E l) dimension,

there were no significant differences between the Research and

Development unit and the Program Managers' Offices, on the one hand,

and the Readiness and Support units, on the other. The single

supported expectation was for the sensing-intuition (SN) dimension.


67

where the Research and Development and the Support units were

significantly higher in representation by in tu itives (N) than were

the Readiness unit and the Program Managers' Offices.


CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Two important findings have resulted from this study. F irs t,

the expected differences between m ilitary and c iv ilia n executives in

MBTI personality type were not found in the survey population. In

other words, the personality types manifested by the m ilita ry and

c iv ilia n executive participants in this study were essentially

sim ilar. Second, the MBTI types of the executives assigned to the

four TACOM organizational units did not follow the expected

distribution associated with particular orientations. There was,

however, a significant difference in the predicted direction for the

sensing-intuition (SN) dimension.

M ilita ry and C ivilian MBTI Type Comparison

Not only were there essentially no differences in MBTI

personality types between the m ilitary and the c iv ilian executives,

but the types represented, whether m ilitary or c iv ilia n , closely

paralleled N id iffe r's (1984) m ilita ry program and industrial

managers. Thus, the type distribution for the c iv ilian executives

in this study follows the m ilita ry model reported by N id iffer,

rather than the private sector type pattern based on the Myers and

McCaulley (1985) data for managers and administrators.

68


69

A possible explanation for this very evident s im ilarity of

personality types between m ilita ry and c iv ilians may l ie in the fact

that the U. S. Army Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM) is a m ilitary

organization, commanded by m ilita ry officers but supported by a

large c iv ilian workforce. TACOM is charged with responsibility for

the procurement and production of m ilita ry vehicles and repair parts

to be supplied to the U. S. Armed Services within budget and on

schedule. The m ilita ry officers at TACOM are consequently under

continuing heavy pressure to produce m ilita ry equipment for the Army

quickly and at lowest possible cost. Flanagan (1984) emphasized the

strong management qualifications which m ilita ry officers need in

order to perform th e ir duties. However, because m ilita ry officers

are assigned to TACOM for a period of three years and then rotated,

the c iv ilian executives must provide the continuity—the m ilitary

corporate memory, as i t were—to maintain the m ilita ry production

program.

I t is understandable that m ilita ry officers would choose

c iv ilian managers whose comprehension of the TACOM production

mission duplicates th e ir own m ilita ry outlook. The personnel

selection process at TACOM has resulted, over a period of years, in

the development of a body of executives within TACOM who, although

c iv ilian in c lassification , are imbued with the m ilitary

perspective, and therefore re flec t the distribution of personality

types manifested by the m ilita ry executives. This situation can be

regarded as an operational example of Jungian type theory in action.


70

even as Carskadon and Cook (1982) have shown that persons untrained

in type theory could s t i l l recognize and identify the ir own types.

I t is therefore concluded that the close s im ila rity in types

between the m ilita ry and the c iv ilian executives has evolved from

the need to f u l f i l l the TACOM mission through formation of a

c iv ilian work force oriented closely to m ilita ry organizational

practices and viewpoints. Thus, the situational demands have

dictated the selection of particular personality types for executive

positions at TACOM.

MBTI Type Comparisons across TACOM Organizational Units

Even though the results did not support the hypothesis that

each of the four TACOM organizational units would a ttract d ifferent

MBTI types, the Program Managers' Offices did show the largest

number of ISTJ managers and ESTJ executives. This is in accord with

N id iffe r's (1984) prediction that the most probable type for a

program manager would be an ISTJ. Of the nine types represented,

most are distributed throughout a ll four TACOM units.

The strongest and only significant finding for this hypothesis

relates to the sensing-intuition (SN) dimension. As predicted, the

Research and Development and the Support units were staffed chiefly

by in tu itives (N), while the Readiness unit and the Program

Managers' Offices were represented mainly by sensors (S). Each

particular unit attracts personality types compatible with its

orientation. Just as the lack of d ifferentiation of m ilita ry and

civ ilian personality types was due to the overall m ilita ry


71

situational requirements, so also are situational demands

responsible for the gravitation of particular personality types to

organizational units having correspondingly similar orientations.

Recommendations for Future Investigation

Although the purpose of this study was to investigate

differences between m ilita ry and c iv ilian upper-level executive

leaders in a single organization, the process actually determined

personality differences among the participants. Understanding those

personality differences could improve selection and assignment of

individuals and thereby benefit the organization. Organizational

goals and implementation of management objectives could be enhanced

by thorough knowledge of personality types and the derived

implications. Therefore, i t is recommended that the Myers-Briggs

Type Indicator (MBTI) be considered as a management tool; i . e . , that

the MBTI be used for individual (executive) self-improvement and for

improvement of interpersonal sk ills ; and that findings from such

applications be added to the lite ra tu re .

A second recommendation concerns extension of this study: to

identify the personality types and to study the interpersonal

relationships within the particular organizations in terms of

personality differences. Such a study would benefit both

manufacturing and service organizations while contributing to a

greater understanding of personal effectiveness in leadership

situations.


72

APPENDICES

A. General Decker's Permission (Signed)

Memorandum of Understanding

B. Introductory Letter

Questionnaire Procedure

Thank You Letter


73

APPENDIX

A. General Decker's Permission (Signed)

Memorandum of Understanding


DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYUNITED STATES ARMY TANK-AUTOMOTIVE COMMAND

WARREN. MICHIGAN 4 8 0 9 0

74REPLY TO ATTENTION OF

26 August 1982

DRSTA-L

Dr. Richard Munsterman Doctoral Committee Chairman Department of Educational Leadership Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan 49008

Dear Dr. Munsterman:

Mr. John E. DeWald has requested permission to conduct a study of my upper level management for use in a dissertation. The purpose is to address the personality characteristics of both military and civilian executives in relation to their leadership roles.

Research of this nature may be highly beneficial to the US Army, not only in providing valuable information to this Command, but in stimulating additional informative studies.

It is a pleasure for me to grant permission for this study in accordance with the attached Memorandum of Understanding between Mr. DeWald and the US Army Tank-Automotive Command.

Sincerely,

/s/ Oscar C. Decker, Jr.

1 Incl OSCAR C. DECKER, JR.As S t a t e d Major General, USA

Commanding


75MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

Between JOHN E. DeWALD

andU.S. ARMY TANK-AUTOMOTIVE COMMAND

(TACOM)

I , John E. DeWald, agree to indemnify, and to hold harmless the United States for any damage or injury to persons or property of any third person or of the undersigned arising from the negligence or w illfu l misconduct, of the undersigned while participating in the study regarding behavioral patterns and personality characteristics of m ilita ry and c iv ilia n managers at TACOM.

John E. DeWald further agrees to abide by any and a ll regulations, directives, and other guides promulgated by the United States, the Department of the Army and any other agency with jurisdiction over the premises or ac tiv ities involved.

In consideration of John E. DeWald's compliance with the above stated requirements, TACOM agrees to permit John E. DeWald to conduct the Study of Behavioral Patterns and Personality Characteristics of M ilita ry and C ivilian Managers at TACOM.

John E. DeWald agrees to provide the US Army Tank-Automotive Command with a copy of the results of his study at no cost to TACOM and further agrees that i f the results of the study are published in any form whatsoever the US Army Tank-Automotive Command w ill not be identified as sponsoring or concurring in the results of this study.I t is noted, there are copyright implications should this study be published since Mr. DeWald is an employee of the United States Government. Results of the study w ill not be used for any commercial purpose.

This permit is revocable by the Commander, US Army Tank-Automotive Command at any time without prior notice required.

JOHN E. DeWALD/s / Oscar C. Decker, Jr.

OSCAR C. DECKER, JR. Major General, USA Commanding

DATE

28 Aug 1982

DATE


76

APPENDIX

B. Introductory Letter


Thank You Letter


77

Participant:

A research study is being conducted at TACOM to determinewhether m ilita ry and c iv ilia n managers in executive positions haveparticular personality types.

Quite obviously, people d iffe r in their thinking, manner of judging, beliefs and values. Knowing your own personalitycharacteristics can be beneficial to you in your professional career, as well as in your interpersonal relations in business and at home. Recognizing the characteristics of other personality types can help you judge strengths and weaknesses in others and increase your own success in dealing with people.

As an upper-level executive, you are being asked to participate in this study. Your fu ll cooperation is needed to assure tru ly representative data for the study. Information concerning your own personality type, as well as the characteristics of other types, w ill be provided upon return of your completed questionnaire.Later, you w ill be provided with an overview of the study results. TACOM upper management in general, and the survey participants in particular, are expected to p ro fit from this study.

To maintain confidentia lity , your name w ill not appear anywhere in the study. Your reply is identified only by the number in the upper right hand corner of the answer sheet. All answer sheets w ill be destroyed after the study analysis has been completed.

HERBERT H. DOBBSColonel, OrdCC, Sys & Tech Ping Ofc


78


We suggest that you reserve suffic ient time (approximately 30

minutes), without interruptions, to complete the Demographic Data

Sheet and the MBTI Questionnaire. An environment conducive to

concentration, with a minimum of distractions, is recommended. Such

a location might best be found outside the TACOM workplace.

1. There are two parts to this survey:

a. Demographic Data (personal information) Sheet.

b. A printed questionnaire, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), with Answer Sheet

2. You are requested to completely f i l l out both parts of the survey.

a. Reply to each question on the Demographic Data Sheet and show your answer on the Data Sheet its e lf .

b. Please do not write in the MBTI Printed Questionnaire Booklet, so that i t may be used again.

c. Mark your answers to the MBTI Printed Questionnaire Bookleton the separate MBTI Answer Sheet.

d. Please be careful to answer a ll questions.

e. Do not skip any questions.

3. Return the three items (Demographic Data Sheet, Printed MBTI Questionnaire Booklet, and the MBTI Answer Sheet) in the envelope provided to you.

NOTE: Please telephone John E. DeWald (Ext. 4-5455), orRuth E. DeWald (Ext. 4-8669)

for pickup of your completed Questionnaire Packet.

We w ill not allow your valuable data to be lost.


79

SUBJECT: Thank-You Letter to Survey Participants

Participant:

Thank-you for participating in the survey of TACOM executives to determine personality types.

As promised, an overview of the study results w ill be provided to you in the near future. Your answer sheet and demographic information sheet w ill be destroyed, following s ta tis tica l analysis. The Report Form you have now received w ill be the only record of your p ro file .

Upon completion of the entire project, a copy of the published dissertation, "Personality Characteristics of M ilita ry and C ivilian Executives in Equal Hierarchical Levels within the Same Organization," w ill be provided to the TACOM lib ra ry for reference.

Again, your cooperation has been most appreciated.

JOHN E. DEWALD


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adcock, C. J. (1970). The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. In 0. K. Buros (E d .), Personality tests and reviews including an index to the Mental Measurements Yearbooks (pp. 817-820). Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

Alker, H. A. (1978). The MMPI, In 0. K. Buros (Ed.), The eighth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 931-935). Highland Park, NO: Gryphon Press.

A llport, G. W. (1937). Personal i ty : A psychological in terpretation .New York, NY: Henry Holt.

A llport, G. W. (1960). Personality and social encounter: Selectedessays. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

A llport, G. W. (1965). Letters from Jenny. New York, NY: Harcourt,Brace and World.

Anderson, A. H. (1980, March 26). Interview with Brigadier General Anderson at the U. S. Army Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM). Directorate for Engineering Support, Fabrication Division, Warren, MI.

Anderson, J. F ., & Cooper, R. W., Jr. (1976). Analysis of the correlation between psychological variables and U. S. Navy_officer promotion" Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School. (NTIS No. AD-A0È7 239)

Armed Forces Information Services (AFIS). (1983). Defense almanac 83. Washington, DC: Author.

Babbie, E. R. (1973). Survey research methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc.

B all, D. D. (1984, August 17). Speech by Major General Ball on the occasion of his retirement dinner, H illc res t Country Club.Mount Clemens, MI.

Barker, L. J ., Campbell, C. P ., Dixon, H. M., Finkbiner, G. M.,Center, G. C ., H all, J. R ., J r . , Huck, N. S ., Koutmann, J. A., McCormick, R. L ., & McKnight, D. (1975, May 25). Professional development of the m ilita ry executive (under the OfficerPersonnel Management System). Carlisle Barracks, PA: U. S. Army War " College.

Barnard, C. I . (1968). . The functions of the executive.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

80


81

Barnes, H. W. (1965). An in tellectual and cultural history of the western world. New York, NY: Dover Publications, Inc.

Bass, B. M. (1960). Leadership, psychology, and organizational behavior. New York, NY: Harper.

Bass, B. M. (Ed.). (1981). S togdill's handbook of leadership:A survey of theory and research. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Bass, B. M. & Barrett, 6. V. (1981). People, work and organizations: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology.Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. '

Baumgartner, J. S ., Brown, C ., & Kelley, P. A. (1984, January- February). Successful programs: Can we learn from th e ir experience? Why have some programs succeeded where others have failed? A recent study came up with some surprising answers. Program Manager, pp. 31-38.

Belensky, G. L ., Tyner, C. P ., & Sodetz, F. J. (1983). Is rae li , battle shock casualities: 1973 and 1982. (Report No. WRAiR NP-83-4, August, 1983). Washington, DC: U. S. Walter Reed Army Institu te of Research, Division of Neuropsychiatry.

Bellingrath, G. C. (1930). Qualities associated with leadership in extra-curricular a c tiv itie s of the high school. New York, NY : Teachers College Contributions to Education, No. 399.

Bentley, A .' F. (1954). Inquiry into inquiries: Essays in socialtheory. Boston, MA: The Beacon Press.

Bernard, L. L. (1926). An introduction to social psychology. NewYork, NY: Holt.

Bingham, W. V. (1927). Leadership. In H. C. Metcalf, Thepsychological foundations of management. New York, MY: Shaw.

Bischof, L. J. (1964). Interpreting personality theories. NewYork, NY: Harper &. Row, Publishers.

Bloch, D. L. (1978). The developmental properties of Jungianpsychological type as measured by the Myers-Briggs Jype Indicator* (Doctoral dissertation, Mississippi State University, 1978). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 39, 1429A. (University Microfilms No, 7814858) '

B o rg , W. R. & G a l l , M. D. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . E d u c a t io n a l r e s e a r c h : An introduction (4th ed .). New York, NY: Longman, Inc.


82

Bowling, C. E., (1974). The Jungian personality function type of pathologists and selected medical technologists in the State of Florida. (Doctoral dissertation. University of Florida, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 34, 6404A. (University Microfilms No. 74-9Sy4)

Bradway, K. (1964). Jung's psychological types : Classification by test versus classification by s e lf. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 9, 129-135.

Brahany, J. H. (1976). Significant personal qualities desired ofAir Force program managers. Ft. Bel vo ir, VA: Defense SystemsManagement College. (NTIS No. AD A035 933)

Brogdon, H. E. & Thomas, W. F. (1943). The primary tra its in personality items purporting to measure so c iab ility . Journal of Psychology, 16, 85-97.

Bronowski, J. (1973). The ascent of man. Boston, MA: L i t t le ,Brown and Company.

Budahn, P. J. (1985, January 7). Army theme for 1985 is leadership. Army Times, p. 25.

Bugelski, B. R. (1960). An introduction to the principles of psychology. New York, NYî Holt, Rinehart and Winston..

Burlem, W. S. (1976). The recognition and characteristics of effective executives. Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School.

Burney, C. E ., Jr. (1975). A study of Jungian psychological type, body characteristics, value preference, and behavorial preference. (Doctoral dissertation. United States International University, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 36, 3025B-3026B. (University Microfilm No. 75-29, 371)

Buros, 0. K. (Ed.). (1970). Personality test and reviews. HighlandPark, NJ: Gryphon Press.

Buros, 0. K. (Ed.). (1972). The seventh mental measurement yearbook(Vols. 1 -2). Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

Buros, 0. K. (Ed.). (1974). Tests in prin t I I : An index tO tests,test reviews, and the lite ra tu re on specific tests . Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

Buros, 0. K. (Ed.). (1978). The eighth mental measurements yearbook(Vols. 1-2). Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.


83

Buros Institu te of Mental Measurement. (1983a). Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF). In Buros In s titu te of Mental Measurements, Tests in prin t I I I (pp. 371-375). Lincoln, NE: The University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Buros Institu te of Mental Measurements. (1983b). Tests in prin t I I I : An index to tests, test reviews, and the lite ra tu re on specific tests, J. V. M itchell. Jr. (Ed.). Lincoln, NE: The University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Canale, J. A. (1976). The effect of s ituationally controlled suggestibility on Jungian personality types (Doctoral dissertation, Boston University, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts In te rnational , 37, 1398A. (University Microfilm No. 76-21, 222) "

Carlyle, T. (1858). Heros and hero worship. London, England: Clarendon Press.

Carlyn, M. (1977). An assessment of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Journal of Personality Assessment. £1_(5), 461-473.

Carskadon, T. G. (1975, October). Interpreting results of the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator. Paper presented at the F irs t National Conference on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Gainesville, FL. Mississippi State, MS; Author.

Carskadon, T. G. (1979). Test-retest r e lia b il it ie s of continuous scores on Form G of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Research in Psychological Type, 2, 83-84.

Carskadon, T. G. & Cook, D. D. (1982). V a lid ity of MBTI descriptions as perceived by recipients unfamiliar with type. Research in Psychological Type, 89-94.

C atte ll, R. B. (1946). Description and measurement of personality. New York, NY: World Book.

C atte ll, R. B. (1965). The sc ien tific analysis of personality. Chicago, IL; Aldine.

C atte ll, R. B. (1983). Structured personality-learning theory :A ho listic m ultivariate research approach. New York, NY:Praeger Publishers.

C atte ll, R. B. & Dreger, R. M. (Eds.). (1977). Handbook of modernpersonality theory. Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing Corp.

C atte ll, R. B., Eber, H. W. & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1970). Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and A b ility Testing.


84

Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT). (1985). Myers- Briggs Type Indicator bibliography. Gainesville, FL: Author.

Church, L. M. (19jB2). Relationships in organizations between leaders' personality characteristics and the ir hierarchical levels and role fo c i. (Doctoral dissertation. Western Michigan University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 43(2 ), 5488.

Coan, R. W. (1978). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. In 0. K. Buros (Ed.) , The eighth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 973-975).Highlahd Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

Collins, j . A. (1966). Individual personality and organizational . climate. (Doctoral dissertation, Claremont Graduate School, 1965).

Dissertation Abstracts, 27, 623A. (University Microfilms No. 66-3361) ~

Condit, D. 0. & Duty, B. D. (1984, May-June). Greet that new lieutenant. Program Manager, pp. 36-37; 47.

Corsini, R. J. & Marsella, A. J. (1983). Personality theories, research, and assessment. Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock Publishers.

Cowley, W. H. (1931). Traits of face-to-face leaders. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 304-313.

Cox, C. M. (1926). The early mental tra its of three hundred geniuses. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Dal bey, S. B. (1972). A p ilo t study of the personal value systems of U. S. Air Force o ffice rs . Wright-Fatterson AFB, OH: Air Force Institu te of Technology. (NTIS No. AD 779 346)

Damice, J. U. (1974, November). Developing executive ta lent.Manpower, pp. 23-28.

Deinhardt, C. L. (1983). Personality assessment and psychological in terpretation. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher.

Dehner, F. T. (1982, January-February). Attributes of an effective program manager. Program Manager, p. 24.

Drake, R. M. (1944). A study of leadership. Character & Personality, 12, 285-289.

Drucker, P. F. (1982). The changing world of the executive. New York, NY: The New York Times Book Co., Inc.

Dubos, R. (1968). So human an animal. New York, NY: CharlesScribner's Sons.


85

Durant, W. (1933). The story of philosophy: The lives and opinions of the .greater philosophers. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Dyer, G. (1985a). The profession of arms. Kent, OH: PTV Publications.

Dyer, G. (1985b). War. New York, NY: Crown Publishers.

Eisenstadt, J. W. (1969). Personality style and sociometric choice. Washington, DC: NTL In stitu te for Applied Behavorial Science.

E llis , G. J ., Jr. (1982). Brain sidedness: Using awareness to build more effective teams. Exchange: The Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal, 7 (4 ), 33-36.

E llis , P. V ., I l l , & Welch, R. J. (1975). An investigation and analysis of perceived conflic t between m ilita ry and c iv ilia n personnel in an Air Force.combined work group. Wriqht-Patterson Air force Base, OH: School of Systems and Logistics.

Elsasser, T. E. (1976). Development of executive success.Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School.

Elston, L. (1984). Square pegs & round holes: How to match the personality to the job . San Diego, CA: F irs t Step Enterprises.

Emerson, R. W. (1940). The works of Emerson. New York, NY: TudorPublishing Company. (Original work published 1883)

England, G. W. (1973). Personal value systems of managers and administrators. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Study of Organiza- tional Performance and Human Effectiveness.

Evered, R. D. (1973), Conceptualizing the future: Implications for strategic management in a turbulent environment (Doctoral dissertation , University of. C aliforn ia , 1973). Dissertation Abstracts International, 34, 3625A-3626A. (University Microfilms No. 73-32, 6ET)

Eysenck, H. J. (1957). The dynamics of anxiety and hysteria. NewYork, NY: Praeger Publishers.

Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality.Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Eysenck, H. J. (1975). The inequity of man. San Diego, CA:Edits Publishers.

Eysenck, H. J. & Eysenck, S. B. C. (1964). Eysenck Personality Inventory. London, England: Hodder & Stoughton.


86

Eysenck, H. J. & Eysenck, S. B., (1968). Manual ; EysenckPersonality Inventory. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.

Eysenck Personality Inventory. (1970). In 0. K. Buros (Ed.), Personality tests and reviews including an index to the Mental Measurements Yearbooks (pp. 1 o 2 O - 1 0 2 2 ) . Highland Park, NJ:Gryphon Press.

Ferguson, G. A. (1981). S tatis tica l analysis in psychology & education (5th ed .). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Ferguson, L. W. (1952). Personality measurement. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Feshbach, S ., & Weiner, B. (1982). Personality. Lexington, MA:D. C. Heath and Company.

Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness.New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Fiedler, F. E. & Chemers, M. M. (1974). Leadership and effective management. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Fitton, B. A. (1983). M ilita ry leadership and values. M ilita ry Review, 63(10), 56-61. '

Flanagan, E. M., Jr. (1984). The m ilita ry mind. Army, 34(2),29-33; 36. ~

Freud, S. (1953). The interpretation of dreams. In The standard edition (Vols. 4 -5 ). London: Hogarth Press, (Original work published 1900)

Freud, S. (1957). On the history of the psychoanalytic movement.In The standard edition (Vol. 14). London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1914)

Galton, F. (1892). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences. London, England: Macmillan and Company.

Gatchel, R. J. & Mears, F. G. (1982). Personality theory, assessment, and research. New York, NŸ1 St. Martin's Press.

Gay, L. R. (1981). Educational research: Competencies fo r analysisand application (2nd ed .}. Columbus, OH: Charles E. M errill . Publishing Company.

Geiwitz, P. J. (1969). Non-Freudian personality theories.Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.


87

Georgoulakis, J. M. & Fox, L. J. (1982). Personality tra its of U. S. Army prisoners. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the M ilita ry Testing Association (pp. 405-409). San Antonio, IT : U. S. A ir Force Human Resources Laboratory and U. S. Air Force Occupational Measurement Center.

Gibb, C. A. (1969). Leadership. In G. Lindsey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (2nd e d .). Volume 4, Group psychology and phenomena of interaction (pp. 205-2827. Reading, MA: AddTSon-Wesley. '

Gochman, I . , & Fiedler, F. E. (1975). The effect of situational favorableness on leader and member perceptions of leader behavior. (ÔNft Technical Report No. 75-64). Arlington, VA: Office of Naval Research. (NTIS No. AD-A 013 976)

Goldstein, K. (1942). A fter-effects of brain in juries in war.New York, NY: Grune and Stratton.

Goodenough, F. L. (1930). Interrelationships in the behavior.of young children. Child Development, 7, 29-48.

Gordon, R. F. (1984, March-April). Beyond the "born leader" concept. Program Manager, pp. 32-34.

Gough, H. (1976). Personality and personality assessment. In M. D. Dunnette (E d.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 571-6077! Chicago, IL: Rand McNally College Publishing Company.

Gouldner, A. W. (1950). Studies in leadership. New York, NY:Harper.

Guentner, W. C. (1965). Concept of s ta tis tic a l inference. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Hacking, I . (1984, November). Tria l by number: Karl Pearson'schi-square test measured the f i t between theory and re a lity , ushering in a new sort of decision making. Science 84, pp. 69-70.

Hackman, J. R ., Oldham, R. J. & Purdy, K. (1975). A new strategy for job enrichment. California Management Review, 17, 57-71.

H all, C. S. & Lindzey, G. (Eds.). (1970). Theories of persona lity (2nd ed .). New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.

H all, S. C. & Norby, V. J. (1973). A primer of Jungian psychology. New York, NY: New American Library, Mentor Books.


88

Harnell, T. W. & Harnell, M. S. (1974). The importance of situations versus personal qualifications fo r"general manager development. Arlington, VA: Office of Naval Research.

Harriman, P. L. (1947). Dictionary of psychology. New York, NY: The Philosophical Library, Inc.

Harrison, N. W. (1976). Validation of Jung's typological framework. (Doctoral dissertation. University of Mississippi, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 37, 1467A. (University Microfilms No. 76-20, 525)

Harsh, C. M. (1970). The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. In 0. K. Buros (Ed.), Personality tests and reviews including an index to the Mental Measurements Yearbooks (pp. 560-561).Highland Park, NJ: The Gryphon Press.

Hathaway, S. R. & McKinley, J. C. (1951). Manual fo r the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Hay, J. E. (1964). The relationship of certain personality variables to managerial level and job performance among engineering managers. (Doctoral dissertation. Temple University, 1964). Dissertation Abstracts, 25, 3973. University Microfilms No. 64-13, 684)

Heidrick & Striggles. (1984a). CEO: Findings of a survey of thechief executive officers of America's largest industrial and service organizations. Chicago, IL: Autnor.

Heidrick & Struggles. (1984b). Thé changing board: 1984 pro file of the board of directors. Chicago, IL: Author.

Hergenhahn, 8. R. (1980). An introduction to the theories of personality. Englewood C lif fs , NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. H. (1972). Management of organizational behavior (2nd ed .). Englewood C lif fs , NJ: Prentice-HiTT-----------------

Herzberg, F ., Mausner, B. & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

H i l l , D. 0. (1971). Extraversion - introversion: An investigation of typological theory. (Doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University, 1970. Dissertation Abstracts In ternational,6257B. (University Microfilms No. 75-3498)


89

H je lle , L. A. & Ziegler, D. J. (1976). Personality: Theories basic assumptions, research, and applications. New York, NV: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Hmara, J. L. (1982, January-February). Army program manager development: The problem of shaping the o ffic e r to f i t the job. Program Manager, pp. 3-7.

Holland, J. G. (1973). ADP executive development system. Fort Lee, VA: U. S. Army Logistics Management Center, In s titu te of Logistics Research.

Hovey, F. E. (1974). Group composition, group cohesiveness, and several process variables. (Doctoral dissertation. Temple University, 1974). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 35,3087B-30888. (University Microfilms No. 74-28, 173)

Hughes, G. (1973). The relationships of attitude factors to the career decision of f i r s t term m ilita ry members. (Technical Report No. 73-5. Washington, DC: U. S. A ir Force, Office of S cientific Research.

Hunter, E. C.. & Jordan, A. M. (1939). An analysis of qualities associated with leadership among college students. Journal of Educational Psychology. 30. 497-509.

Inkeles, A .. & Levinson, D. J. (1969). National character: The study of modal personality and sociocultural systems. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Thé handbook of social psychology (2nd ed .). Volume 4 . Group psychology and phenomena of interaction (pp. 418-5067! Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

James, W. (1880). Great men, great thoughts, and the environment. Atlantic Monthly. 46, 441-459.

Jenkins, W. 0. (1947). A review of leadership studies with particu la r reference to m ilita ry problems. Psychological B ulletin ,44, 54-59.

Jennings, E. E. (1960). An anatomy of leadership: Princes, heroes, and supermen. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Jennings, E. E. (1971). The mobile manager: A study of the new

generation of top executives (2nd ed .). Ann Arbor, MI: m versity of Michigan.

Jennings, E. E. (1984a). Review and forecast: Is world-class leadership returning? In Heidrick & Struggles, CEO; Findings of a survey of the chief executive officers of America's largest industrial and service organizations (p. T7! Chicago, IL: Heidrick & Struggles.


90

Jennings, E. E. (1984b). Review and forecast: I t seems quietout there. In Heidrick & Struggles, The changing board: 1984profile of the board of directors (p. 1). Chicago, IL: Heidrick & Struggles.

Jones, E. (1953). The l i f e and work of Sigmund Freud, volume 1 :The formative years and the great discoveries, 1856-1900. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.

Jones, J. H. (1967). Faculty perceptions of university students (Doctoral dissertation. Auburn University, 1967). Dissertation Abstracts, 27, 41GOA. (University Microfilms No. 67-7351)

Jung, C. 6. (1971). Psychological types (H. G. Baines, Trans,revised by R. F. C. H u ll). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1921)

Jung, C. G. (1959). The basic writings of C. G. Jung (V. S. de Laszlo, Ed.). New York, NY: The Modern Library. (Original work published 1938)

Jung, C. G. (1939). The integration of the personality (S. D ell, Trans.). New York, NY: Farrer & Rinehart, Inc.

Kelley, P. A. (1984, July-August). Searching fo r excellence in the program office : A look a t the way successful program managers manage—and an analysis of the attributes they share. Program Manager, pp. 20-25.

Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research (2nd ed .). New York, NYl Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Kilbourne, C. E. (1935). The elements of leadership. The Coast A rtille ry Journal, 78, 437-439.

King, G. D. (1978). The MMPI. In 0. K. Buros (Ed.). The eighth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 935-938). Highland Park, NJ: The Gryphon Press.

Kinget, G. M." (1952). The drawing-completion test: A projective technique for the investigation of personality based on the Warteqq test blanE New York, NY: Grune & Stratton, Inc.

Kleinmuntz, B. (1975). Personality measurement: An introduction. Huntington, NY: Robert E. Kreiger Publishing Company. ~

Knowles, H. P. & Saxburg, B. 0. (1971). Personality and leadership behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Koontz, R. D. & Kaplan, I . T. (1983). Communication and leadership styles of battalion commanders. M ilita ry Review, (10 ), 11-20.


91

Kotnick, G. (1984, November 8 ). Keeping societies relevant.Machine Design, p. 244.

Kotule, L. J. & Haggerty, H. R. (1966). Research on the selection of o fficer candidates and cadets. Washington, DC: U. S. Army Personnel Research Office. (NTIS No. AD 634 31.4)

Lanyon, R. I . , & Goodstein, L. D. (1982). Personality assessment (2nd ed .). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Lau, A. W., Pavert, C. M., & Newman, A. R. (1982). Public and private sector managers: Are they re a lly that different?San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and DevelopmentCenter.

Lauzân, G. (1962). Sigmund Freud: The man and his theories.(P. Evans, Trans.). Greenwich, CT: Pawcett Publications, Inc.

Lawrence, G. D. (1982). People types and tig er stripes (2nd ed .). Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.

Lester, D. (1974). A psychological basis for personality tra its :A new theory of personality. Springfield, IL: Charles C.Thomas, Publisher.

Lindzey, G., & Aronson, E. (Eds.). (1969). The handbook ofsocial psychology (2nd ed .): Volume 4, Group psychology and phenomena of interaction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing company.

Lingoes, J. C. (1970). Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPÏ). In 0. K. Buros (Ed.), Personality tests and reviews including an index to the Mental Measurements Yearbooks (pp. 1021-1022). Highland Park, NJ: The Gryphon Press.

Livingston, G. B. (1971). A correlational analysis of modes of perception and judgement and measures of self-concept (Doctoral dissertation, Washington State University, 1971). Dissertation Abstracts International, 32, 182A. (University Microfilms No. 71-18, 578) '

Lockwood, K. E. (1973). A proposed method for the selecting and training of future project managers" Carlisle Barracks, PA:U. S. Army War College. (NTIS No. AD 779 346)

Lubin, A. (1970). The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. In 0. K. Buros (Ed.). Personality tests and reviews (p. 561). Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

Machiavelli, N. (1908). The prince. (W. K. M arrio tt, Trans.).New York, NY: E. P. Dutton and Company.


92

Maddi, S. R. (1980). Personality theories: A comparative analysis (4th ed .). Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.

Maddi, S. R. & Costa, P. T. (1972). Humanism in personology:AlTport, Maslow, and Murray. Chicago, IL: Aldine-Atherton, Inc.

Marcus, S. K. (1976). Jungian typology and time orientation (Doctoral dissertation. University of C alifornia, 1970). Dissertations Abstracts International, 37, 1409B. (University Microfilms No. 76 19, 756)

Marsh, J. 0 ., Jr. and Wickham, J. A ., Jr. (1985, January 7).Army Times, p. 25.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York, NY:Harper and Row, Publishers.

Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being (2nd ed .).New York, NY: D. Van Nostrand Company.

Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed .).New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Maslow, A. H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature.New York, NY: Viking Press.

Mattoon, M. A. (1981). Jungian psychology in perspective.New York, NY: The Free Press.

McCaulley, M. H. (1976). Psychological types in engineering:Implications for teaching. Engineering Education, 66, (7 ), 729-736.

McCaulley, M. H. (1978). Application of the Myers-Briggs TypeIndicator to medicine andother health professions (Contract No. 231-76-0051). Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.

McCaulley, M. H. (1980). Introduction to the MBTI for researchers. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.

McCaulley, M. H. (1981). Jung's theory of psychological types andthe Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. In P. McReynolds (Ed.).Advances in psychological assessment (Vol. 5) (pp. 294-352).San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

M cG regor, D. M. ( 1 9 6 0 ) . The human s id e o f e n t e r p r i s e . New Y o r k ,NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

McGregor, D. M. (1967). The professional manager. New York,NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.


93

Mendelsohn, G. A. (1970). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)In 0. K. Buros (E d.), Personality tests and reviews (pp. 321-322), Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

M errifie ld , C. W. (Ed.). (1961). Leadership in voluntary enter-prise. New York, NY: Oceana Publications, Inc.

Metcalf, H. C. (1927). The psychological foundations of management. New York, NY: Shaw.

Meyer, E. C. (1983). Thoughts on leadership. M ilita ry Review,63 (5 ), 46-50.

Middleton, W. C. (1941). Personality qualities predominant in campus leaders. Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 199-201.

M ill , J. S. (1963). John Stuart M ill; Essays on po litics and culture (G. Himmelfarb, Ed.). Garden C ity, NY: Doubleday.(Original work published 1863)

M ille r , G. A. (1984, November). The test: Alfred Binet's method of identifying subnormal schoolchildren sired the IQ test and its incendiary implication that intelligence is inherited.Science 84, pp. 55-57.

M ille r , L. M. (1978). Behavior management:. The new science of managing people at workl New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. New York,NY: Harper & Row, Publishers. '

Mintzberg, H. (1976, July-August). Planning on the le f t side and managing on the righ t. Harvard Business Review, p. 53.

Mischel, W. (1976). Introduction to personality (2nd ed .).New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Mischel, W. (1981). Introduction to personality (3rd ed .).New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Morgan, C. D ., & Murray, H. A. (1935). A method for investigating fantasies: The Thematic Apperception Test. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry. 34, 289-306.

Munn, N. L. (1966). Psychology: The fundamentals of human adjustment (5th ed .). Boston, MÂ1 Houghton M ifflin Company.

Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality. New York,NY: Oxford University Press.


94

Murray, H: A. (1951). Some basic psychological assumptions and conceptions. D ialectica. 266-292.

Murray, H. A. (1968). Components of an evolving personological system. In D. L. S ills (E d .), International encyclopedia of the social sciences. Volume 12. (pp. 5 - l3 ) . New York, NY:Macmillan.

Myers, I . B. (1962). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Palo Alto,CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Myers, I . B. (1976). Introduction to type (2nd e d .). Gainesv i l le , FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.

Myers, I . B. & McCaulley, M. H. (19B5). Manual: A guide to thedevelopment and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Myers, I . B. & Myers, P. B. (19B0). Gifts d iffe r in g . Palo Alto,CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Newman, A. S. (19B1). Follow me: The human element in leadership. Novato, CA: Presidio Press.

N id iffe r, K. E. (19B4, July-August). The personality factor: Software technology and the "thinking styles" of program managers. Program Manager, pp. 10-lB.

Osgood, J. A". (1972). The relationship between friendship bonds andpsychological type (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, 1972). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 32, 6625B-6626B. (University Microfilms No. 72016, 2B4)

Pervin, L. A. (1975). Personality: Theory, assessment, and research(2nd ed .). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Peters, T. J. (19B5, January). An explosion of excellence. D ial,pp. 21-23; 55. “

Peters,, T. J ., & Waterman, R. H ., Jr. (19B2). In search of excellence: Lessons from America's best-run companies. New York, NY : Harper & Row, Publishers.

P fe iffe r, J. E. (1963). The search fo r early man. New York, NY: Amercian Heritage Publishing Co., Inc.

Phillips, M. (1967). Trends in a visual satiation effect in relation to extraversion (Doctoral dissertation. New York University, 1966. Dissertation Abstracts, 27, 4132B.(University Microfilms No. 67-4905)


95

Finder, C., Pinto, P. R ., and England, G. W. (1973). Behavorial style and personal characteristics of managers. Minneapolis, : Center for Study of Organizational Performance and Human Effectiveness.

Poe, C. A. (1967). Placement in Heath's model of personality: re lia b il ity and assessment (Doctoral dissertation. University of Missouri , 1967). Dissertation Abstracts, 27, 32768.(University Microfilms No. 67-2871)

P o ll i t t , I . (1982). Managing differences in industry. Research in Psychological Type, 5̂ 4-19.

Putzel, R. (1977). Seeing d ifferen tly through language:Grammatical correlates of personality (Doctoral dissertation. University of C alifornia, Los Angeles, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International, 37, 53708-53718. (University Micro-

. films No. 77-7679)

Radin, P. (1957). Primitive man as philosopher (2nd. ed.)New York, NY: Dover Publications.

Remmelin, M. K. (1938). Analysis of leaders among high school seniors. Journal of Experimental Education, 6̂ , 413-422.

R iccuiti, H. N ., & French, J. W. (1952). The development o f - personality tests fo r naval o ffice r selection. Washington, DC: Chief of Naval Research.

Rifkind, L. J. (1976). An analysis of the effects of personality type upon the risky sh ift in small group discussions (Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 36 (12 ), 7734A. (University Microfilms No. 76-13, 830) '

Ross, M. G., & Hendry, C. E. (1957). New understanding of leadership: A survey and application of research. New York, NY: Associated Press.

Ross, M. G., & Hendry, C. E. (1961). Leadership theory: Theoriesof leadership. In C. W. M errifie ld (E d .), Leadership in voluntary enterprise (pp. 100-108). New York, NT: Oceana Publications,Inc.

Runes, D. D. (1959). P ictorial history of philosophy. New York,NY: Philosophical Library.

Saville , P., & Blinkhorn, S. (1976). Undergraduate personality by .factored scales: A large scale study on C a tte ll's 16PF and the Eysenck Personality Inventory! Windsor, England: nFeR


96

Scheme!, G. J. & Borbely, J. A. (1982). Facing your type. Wernersville, PA: Typrofile Press.

Schenck, 6. (1961). The history of man. New York, NY: ChiltonCompany, Book Division.

Scholl, J. N. (1975). Task performance of small groups composed, on the basis of Jung's psychological types (Doctoral dissertation , Temple University, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts In te r- national, 36, 3128B-3129B. (University Microfilms No. 75-28,T4TJ-- - - - - - - - - - -

Schwartzentruber, A. M. (1977). Personality predictors of communication sk ills (Doctoral dissertation, the University of British Columbia, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational,37, 3588B.

Sheldon, W. H. (1954). Atlas o f men. New York, NY: Harper andBrothers.

Shenk, P ., Watson, T. W. & Hazel, J. I . (1973). Relationship between personaTfty tra its and o fficer performance and retention

. c r ite r ia . (Report No. AFHRL-TR-73-4). Lackland Air Force Base,TX: U. S. Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, Personnel Research Division. (NTIS No. AD-767 198)

Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PFQ). (1970). In0. K. Buros (Ed.), Personality tests and reviews including an index to the Mental Measurements Yearbooks (pp. 127-133;559-562; 817-820; I l7 1 - I l7 3 ) . Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

Smith, N. P. (1976). The influence of the structural information characteristics of Jungian personality typé on time horizons in decision making (Doctoral dissertation. University of C alifo rnia, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 37, 2297A- 2298A. (University Microfilms No. 76-22, 215)

Smith, R. A. (1971). The relationship between the type theory and the personality growth theory of Carl Jung and the helping re la tionship theory of Carl Rogers (Doctoral dissertation. University of California, 1971). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 31 4344B. (University Microfilms No. 71-703)

Smith, R.,C. (1982, July-August). Appraising the successful programmanager. Program Manager, 19-21.

Smith, H. L ., & Krueger, L. M. (1933). A brief summary of lite ra tu re on leadership. Indiana University, School of Education. B ulletin , 9 (4 ), 1-80.


97

Spare, G. H. (1968). A study of the Law of Enantiadromia, as i t relates to the attitudes of introversion-extraversion (Doctoral dissertation, Washington State University, 1968). Dissertation Abstracts, 29, 18508. (University Microfilms No. 68-15, 799).

Stake, J. K. (1983). Understanding the Army chapel constituency. Unpublished master's thesis, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.

Stake, J. K. (1985, Summer). Understanding the Army chapel constituency. M ilita ry Chaplains Review. 14(3), 17-30.

Steele, R. S. & Kelly, T. J. (1976). Eysenck personality questionnaire and Jungian Myers-Briggs Type Indicator correlation of extraversion-introversion. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 44(4), 690-691.

Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership; A survey of the lite ra tu re . Journal of Psychology, 25, 35-71.

Stoner, J. A. F. (1978). Management. Englewood C liffs , NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

S to ttle , L. J. (1971). Personality tra its of the FY72 USAMC class. Carlisle Barracks, PA: U. S. Army War College. (NTIS No.AD-A026 924)

Strieker, L. J. & Ross, J. (1963). Intercorrelations and r e l ia b i l i ty of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator scales. Psychological Reports. 12, 287-293.

Sundberg, N. D. (1970). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. In 0. K. Buros (Ed.), Personality tests and reviews (pp. 321-325). Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

Sutter, D. W. (1982, November 1-5). Officer occupational surveys in the Marine Corps. In the Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the M ilita ry Testing Association (pp. 148-151).San Antonio, TX.

Sward, K. (1933). Temperament and direction of achievement.Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 405-429.

Tead, 0. (1933). Human nature and management: The applicationsof_psychology to~ixecutive leadership (2nd ed .T New York, NY: McGraw-Hi11 Book Company.

Tellegren, A. (1978). EPI (Eysenck Personality Inventory). In 0. K. Buros (Ed.), The eighth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 802-804). Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.


98

Terman, L. M. (1925). Mental and physical tra its of a thousand gifted children. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Thomas, J. D. & Armstrong, G. E. (1976). O fficer dual specialty allocation system. Bethesda, MD: U. S. Army Concepts AnalysisAgency.

Thurstone, L. L. (1944). A factoral study of perception.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Tzu, S. (1957). The a rt o f war: The oldest m ilita ry treatisein the world. (L. Giles, Trans.) Harrisburg, PA:The M ilitary Publishing Company.

U. S. Office of Strategic Services Assessment S ta ff. (1948). Assessment of men: Selection of personnel fo r the Office ofStrategic Services. New York, NY: Rinehart & Company, Inc.

V a ill, P. (1980). High performing systems. Washington, DC:George Washington University.

Waite, D. E. (1976). Relationships between Jungian typologies and Rorschach patterns (Doctoral dissertation. United States In te rnational University, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts In ternational, 37 (2 -8 ), 995. (University Microfilms No. 76-18, 367).

Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organizations (A. M. Henderson & T. Parsons, Trans.j. New York, NY: The FreePress.

Wehrenberg, S. 8. (1980). An evaluation of_leadership and manage-ment training in the United States Coast Guard. Yorktown, VA:USCG Leadership and Management Program.

Wittenborn, J. R. (1970). The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. In 0. K. Buros (E d.), Personality tests and reviews including an index to the Mental Measurements Yearbooks (p. 561-562). Highland Park, NJ: The Gryphon Press.

Woods, F. A. (1913). The influence of monarchs: Steps in a newscience of history. New York, NY: The Macmillan Company.

Wrightsman, L. S. (1977). Social psychology (2nd ed .). Monterey,CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Yoe, M. R. (1984). MBTI in the workplace: Type theory defines personality as the way you prefer to see and react to the world. Does that affect the way you work? Common sense—and the theory-- say yes. Rensselaer Alumni Magazine Consortium, 84(1 ), 1-4.


Executive Personality Types

Documents

Transcript of Executive Personality Types