How effective is the militaryclassification and assignment system?

Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic)

Authors Wunder, William H.

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this materialis made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona.Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such aspublic display or performance) of protected items is prohibitedexcept with permission of the author.

Download date 16/03/2021 06:52:26

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/551897

HOW EFFECTIVE IS THE MILITARY CLASSIFICATIONAND ASSIGNMENT SYSTEM?

by

Major William H. Wunder

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCEIn the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

1 9 6 7

STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in The University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in their judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permis­sion must be obtained from the author.

SIGNED: £ 2 * r \y

APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR

This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:

JOHN H. TRIMM sistant Professor of

Management

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to express his sincere gratitude and appre­ciation to Mr. John H. Trimm, Assistant Professor of Management, who provided immense assistance, guidance and constructive criticism in directing the preparation of this thesis.

The cooperation of the military units which participated in this research is also acknowledged with appreciation.

To his wife, Dorothy, the author wishes to express his admiration and appreciation for her limitless enthusiasm and patience During those periods when frustration and despair prevailed, she supplied the requisite inspiration for the completion of this manu­script.

To these, and all others who supported him in this work, the

author extends sincere appreciation.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . .

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

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS........ .. . .A B S T R A C T o o e o o o o o o o e o o o

o o o o o e ill0 0 - 0 0 6 0 VI

o o o o o o V11.......... viii

Page

Chapteri. 'introduction ....................................... 1

' . - - .

II. DEVELOPMENT OF TME CLASSIFICATION. AND ASSIGNMENT SYSTEM . . 8Military Classification and Assignment . . . . . . . . 8

General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Definition of Classification and Assignment . . . . 9Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 9

The Enlisted MOS Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Grouping of Related Duty Positions Into an MOS . . 10Development 10The Enlisted MOS Code .............. 13

, Special Coding Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17MOS Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Enlisted Classification Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21The Amed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) . = , , 22The Army Classification Battery . . . . . . . . . . 23

Job Specifications . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . 26General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Standards of Grade Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . 28General . . . . . . .............. . . . . . . . . 28

• Classification Structure for Commissioned Officers . . 28General . . . . . . * . . . . . . . * . # . . . . . 28

The Profiling System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * . . . . 31

The Need for Additional Research . . . . . .......... 32

III. METHQDQLOGY . . o o o 33Selection of Participating Units . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Basis for Selection of Personnel . . . . . . . . . 34Number of Personnel Participating . . . . . . . . . 34

Personnel Record Data . . . . . . . . ........ . . . . 34iv

V

TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued

Chapter PageThe Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

The Major Hypothesis . .......... . . . . . . . . 35Inter-Related Questions ........................... 35

Job Satisfaction . . . . . . . . .......... . 35Morale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Guidance Available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Education Development Program . . . . . . . . . 38

IV. QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Classification of Participants . . . . ..............Group. Is Total Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . .Group II, Responses of Army Personnel . . . . . . .Group III, Responses of Air Force Personnel . . . .

Response to the Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . .Job SatisfactionMorale « . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... Guidance Available . . . . . . . . o . . * * . . .Education Development Program.......... .. . . . .

404040414142 47 50 55

V. QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58Job Satisfaction 58Morale . . * . * . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . . . . . 61Guidance Available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64Education Development Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

VI. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68General Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . . . 68

Job Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68Morale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69Guidance Available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69Education Development Program . . . . . . . . . . . 70

General Conclusion ‘ 70Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

A. PARTICIPATING UNITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73B. INTER-RELATED QUESTION ASSOCIATION . . . . . . . . . . . . 74G. QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75D. QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LIST OF TABLES

I o Response Comp air is on o o 0 o e 9 o o o 6 o o o o » o 6 o o o 4b

II o Level of Moirale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47

IIIo Factors Affecting Morale . 0 0 0 . 0 0 . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49IVo Comparison of Educational Intent and Effort . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57

Table Page

vi

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

1. Grouping of Duty Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112. Occupational Areas--Titles and Characters . . . . . . . . 153. Organization of Career Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

4. Development of Career Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185. Special Qualification Characters . . . . . . . . ........ 196. Utilization of Capabilities and Experience; In Area

and Out of Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

7. Military Career . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458. Disciplinary Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 519. Comparison of Morale Between Job Satisfaction and

Dissatisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . ■. . . . . . . 52

10. Lack of Confidence in Supervisor . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Figure Page

vii

ABSTRACT

Thousands of men are processed*each month into the military services. These men are given various aptitude tests in order to, determine the occupational area in which they are most proficient, and once determined, they are then trained and assigned in this occupational area.

The purpose of this thesis is to determine and evaluate the degree of effectiveness in the existing Military Classification and Assignment System, and to study the resulting implications thereof.

For the collection of data, the close proximity of two military installations prompted this author to develop a question­

naire and to process the completion thereof on an individual basis. The collected data was then portrayed and analysed in various tables

and figures throughout the questionnaire response analyses,‘ -r

The results indicate that the Military Classification and Assignment System is highly effective. The results also indicate

that many personnel and internal organizational conflicts are

directly related to personnel being classified and assigned to an

occupational area in which they are not proficient. It is suggested that the Department of Army pursue additional research in this area

in an attempt to resolve these conflicts.

viii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The author of this study has been associated with the military

service for the past eight years, during which he has heard numerous

lectures on the effective manner in which men are selected, tested, trained, and placed on a job based on their individual qualifications. However, during several years of experience as a Unit Commander, the

author encountered several incidents which refuted this effective

system. For example, a man with three years of college training in electrical engineering had been trained and classified as a cook.

Another man with four years experience as a cook had been trained and

classified as a mechanic,In processing thousands of men each month into the military

service, it is understandable that mistakes may occur in attempting to

place the "right man on the right job," but how predominate are these mistakes in the classification and assignment of personnel? This

question has troubled the author for some time, thus the reason for

selecting this subject as a basis for study.The major hypothesis tested in this study, is to determine and

evaluate the degree of effectiveness in the existing Military Classifi­

cation and Assignment System.To the knowledge of the author, a study of this type has never

been conducted within the military complex. Hence the nonexistence of1

other relevant work makes it impossible to utilize the results of this study for comparison purposes.

Due to the immense size of our military structure, the author determined that it was not feasable, or even possible, to conduct this

study on the entire military populace. Therefore, it was decided to

conduct this study within the limits of two local military installations, assuming that the results of this study will reflect the picture of the entire military establishment.

\In order to realize the importance of the Military Classifica­tion and Assignment System, one must have an understanding of the over­all Military Personnel Management System, of which classification and

assignment is only a portion thereof.Military Personnel Management is the process of planning,

organizing, directing, and controlling the selection, classification, assignment, and utilization of all personnel in military duties. The

efficient utilization of men, as individuals, is the primary objective of the Military Personnel Management System.*' While formulation of

personnel policies occurs at the department level of each respective

service, it is at the unit level that these policies become daily

practices which directly affect the individual.Given the need for a system of personnel management, the military

utilizes five fundamental principles in this system, all of which merit

*Department of the Army, Personnel Management, Regulation Number 345-5, January 3, 1952, p. 1.

2

osome consideration. The first is the placement of the right man on the right job, always considering the needs of the service. By "the right

man on the right job," means placing a man with qualifications in a job

where those qualifications can best be used. The needs of the service must be kept in mind because frequently the job that needs doing does not have a corresponding man to fill it. One must then realize that,

because in the military the mission comes first, a man who demonstrates the ability to perform a job, is then placed in it, regardless of

whether he wants that job or has any previous qualification for it.The second principle ties in closely with the first. The

military must capitalize on the individual's abilities by training him.A man who was a mechanic in civilian life may show an ability to cook, but unless he is taught how to cook, he will not know how to go about it. So he must be trained in order to be a useful part of the military

team.Having identified his abilities and trained him to do a par­

ticular job, the third principle is then applied, namely, stimulate his

desire to produce. This is accomplished by such things as pay, pro­

motions, awards, opportunities for additional education, rewards, and so on. If the man can see that his work is appreciated, and that he, as

well as the military, will benefit, he will be more likely to produce

worthwhile efforts.At the same time, his professional development must be con­

sidered. This is the fourth principle. Very few people want to do the

2Ibid., p. 2.

same job for the rest of their lives or the rest of their careers <. As

our soldier produces worthwhile efforts, he learns more about his job.It is the task of every supervisor to be sure that his men get the

chance to learn more about their jobs, by giving additional schooling

and assignments in related areas, The cook, for example, will be a better cook if he has a chance to learn something about baking, meat cutting, food inspection, and so on.

Lastly, the soldiers should be used only in essential tasks. A lot of things can be considered essential in the military, so one must

be careful and not let the definition get too large. To continue the story of the cook, he can best be used in the preparation of food. Itwould be foolish to develop him into a first-rate cook and then require

/him to paint signs. It would be just as foolish to make him spend all

his time repairing tents, although this is an essential task. The individual soldier will do better work, and get more satisfaction from it, if he is fully utilized and permitted to do the job he was trained

to do.A brief look at some of the specific portions of the Military

Personnel Management System will reveal how these principles are put

into play. Before a man enters the service, he is given a series of

tests to determine his basic intelligence, physical condition and

abilities. After he enters the service, he is given additional tests

to determine his ability to learn a job in the occupational area in which he is most proficient. This is part of the classification process

5Once the man is trained and classified, he is then assigned to a

job. He must then be stimulated to perform that job. As mentioned previously, this is accomplished by such things as pay, awards, pro­motions , opportunities for additional education, and rewards.

Pay comes in several different categories, with base pay as the starting point. This is the amount paid to every man for normal

performance of duty, according to his grade or rank. Within each pay

grade there are steps, called longevity steps, which means that as a

man spends more time in the military, his pay increases periodically even though his grade may not change.

There are also some special-purpose pay items. For enlisted

men, foreign service pay fits into this category, as does proficiency pay. These items are called special pay because they are given under

specific conditions and are taxable as pay. In addition, incentive pay

is given for hazardous duty, such as parachute or demolition duty.In addition to pay, a soldier also receives allowances. The

principle difference between pay and allowances lies in the fact that allowances are given in lieu of something, such as a uniform allowance, while pay is earned for the performance of duty, whatever that duty may

be. Also, pay is taxable, whereas allowances are not. Examples of

other allowances are ration allowance, quarters allowance, and clothing

maintenance allowance.Another form of stimulation present in the military is "time-

off" or authorized absence. The most common types of authorized absence

are the pass and leave. Leave is similar to what the civilian world

6calls vacation. Every man in the military, be he officer or enlisted, is entitled to 30 days of leave annually. This is a right, and no restric­tion can be placed on the taking of leave, except that the time of leave should not conflict with military necessity. The decision as to what constitutes military necessity rests with the commander,^ A pass is a privilege, rather than a right. It is awarded for meritorious duty, or

exceptional achievement, or for any other reason which the commander may

desire. It is for a limited period of time, not to exceed 72 hours APromotion is another form of stimulation, and also ties in with

increased professional development. In official language, the officer is promoted, while the enlisted man is appointed to a higher grade,

Actually, there is not much difference, because each means an increase

in rank. For an enlisted man, minimum periods of time are specified before he can be considered for promotion. His appointment is then based

on job vacancy in the unit to which he is assigned, and his qualifica­

tions to hold the next higher rank. This has its advantages and its disadvantages» It does permit an enlisted man to move up rapidly if he

is qualified, but it also can hold him in one position for years if no job vacancy happens to exist in his unit. Officer promotions, on the

other hand, are relatively independent of job vacancies within the unit,

and are based on vacancies within each respective branch of service,

•^Department of the Army, Personnel Absences, Regulation Number 630-5, October 1965, p, 3,

^Department of the Army, Passes, Regulation Number 630-20,January 3, 1966, p, 2,

Additional education, an excellent stimulation, is available to all personnel in the service. This is available to personnel that have performed their duties in a superior manner and have demonstrated the ability to increase their level of education. Various educational programs are available in both military and civilian schools»

A detailed study of all the specific portions of the Military Personnel Management'System is beyond the scope of this research. How­ever, the most important portion, that of classification and assignment, will be discussed in detail. The degree of effectiveness of the Military Classification and Assignment System can best be determined through an

evaluation of the following criteria: Job Satisfaction, Morale, Guidance

Available, and Education Development Program. These criteria are to be

evaluated as they exist within each participating unit, and utilized in

the latter portion of this study in making the determination of the degree of effectiveness. However, in order to understand the results of this study, one must have an understanding of military aptitude tests

and the elements that comprise the military occupational speciality (MOS)

codes. Hence a detailed discussion of the development of the MOS codes and aptitude tests is contained in the following chapter.

The information on the development of the classification and

assignment system will be followed with a discussion of the methodology utilized in collecting the various sources of data, and the manner in

which the data will be utilized in testing the hypothesis of this study.Following the methodology, the remaining portion of this research

will include a discussion and an analysis of the questionnaire response.

7

and the conclusion thereof

CHAPTER II

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT SYSTEM

The classification and assignment portion of the Military Person­

nel Management System is basically the same in each branch of service. Therefore, to keep this study void of duplication, only the Army Classification System will be discussed. References will be made to

other branches of the service as needed for clarification of data in the study.

Military Classification and Assignment

General.— This study concerns itself with only one element of

our military--manpower. When the Army has only a limited supply of this vital element and an increasingly constant demand for its use in more

complex tasks, it must ensure that it procures, trains, and retains the

best talent possible. The method through which this is accomplished is

called the Army Classification System, This personnel management system of the Army is comprised of the military occupational specialty (MOS)

5structure, personnel classification procedures, and personnel records. The Air Force personnel management system is comprised of the Air Force

Specialty Classification (AFSC) structure, personnel classification

^Department of the Army, Personnel Selection and Classification, Regulation Number 611-201, June 2, 1960, p. 1.

8

9procedures, and personnel records.** Under these systems, the welfare of personnel is a matter of primary concern and major responsibility of the command at all echelons.

Definition of Classification and Assignment.— Classification is the initial evaluation of individual skills, knowledge, duty perform­

ance, and medical fitness capabilities. Assignment is the placing of an individual in an authorized duty position.''

Responsibilities.— It is the individual soldier's responsibility to maintain proficiency in all aspects of his primary MOS and secondary MOS, making known his desires for duty position assignments and further training which will enhance his MOS proficiency.

Commanders and supervisors are responsible for assigning indi­viduals to authorized duties and recommending classification, re­

classification, or reassignment actions.Major and intermediate commanders establish and maintain high

standards for operation of the enlisted occupational classification system. Some of the enlisted occupational classification system func­

tions are: classification testings, medical examinations and coding,personnel interviews, and computation of aptitude area scores.

Factors used in the individual classification include military

and civilian training and experience, mental and physical fitness and capabilities, aptitude, education, hobbies, clerical skills, individual

^Department of the Air Force, Airman Classification, Manual Number 39-1, June 30, 1963, p » 2,

7Army, op. cit., p. 1,

preferences, and needs of the service. With the proper designation of

responsibilities and utilization of classification procedures, the goals of the Army can be obtained more efficiently.

The Enlisted MOS Structure

Grouping of Related Duty Positions Into an M0S.--M0S is the term used to identify a grouping of duty positions possessing such close occupational or functional relationship that an optimal degree of inter­

changeability among persons so classified exists at any given level of skill. Based on job analysis studies, related duty positions are grouped to form an MOS (Figure 1).

Development.--The current enlisted MOS system is based upon

field experiences. Information on the experience of field commanders, of specialists, and of noncommissioned officers was gathered by means

of field job analysis and surveys. Technical experts were consulted asgwell as personnel, organization, and training staff agencies.

Data on the experience of personnel in the field were gathered

by trained job analyst teams. These analysts studied the jobs where

they occurred in units and prepared a detailed breakdown of duties, skills, knowledges, physical requirements, mental and special require­

ments, supervision given, supervision received, and training required for adequate duty performance, These analysts also performed organiza­

tional analyses and surveys to ascertain job relationships, personnel

interchangeability, and training needs.

8Ibid., p. 3.

10

Duty Positions MOS Title

Ward Specialist \

Medical Aidman

Dispensary Specialist \ Medical Specialist

Medical Platoon Sergeant

Wardmaster j

FIGURE 1. Grouping of Duty Positions

12The experience and knowledge of experts on various occupational

specialties were utilized to ensure the technical accuracy of job

specifications and position grading. These technical matters were

checked and double checked with subject matter experts of the various arms and services to assure basic soundness and applicability of tech­nical material in various MOS specifications,

Various specialties in the enlisted MOS structure were coordi­nated with interested organization and training staff personnel to ascertain the effect of the structure on organizational tables and its impact on training, Every effort was made to reduce the number of MOS's authorized in a unit to a minimum consistent with good practices

of manpower utilization, to provide for increased opportunity for progression within the unit.

Current and projected personnel resources were given fullest

consideration in conjunction with development of the current MOS structure. The current primary source of enlisted personnel for the

Army is the short-term draftee who must be made available for assign­

ments to a unit in the shortest time possible. The reenlistment rate

and qualifications of the usual reenlistee were taken into consider­

ation. Tabulations were made by age groups, civilian skills usable to

the Army within age groups, and the statistical probabilities of the portion of particular groups likely to be inducted into the Army, as well as the usable skills occurring within these portions. Included in those coming into the Army through selective service are a number

of individuals with subprofessional and professional training and

13experience whose utilization poses special problems, yet who should be utilized to the fullest extent of their potentials consistent with the Army's needs.

In development, certain assumptions had to be made; the general organization of the present replacement system would be retained; the

Army would continue to make extensive use of the short-term draftee who

must be made available for assignment to a unit in the shortest possible time; there would be a continued need for the broadly-trained soldier in order to facilitate distribution of personnel; there would be a need for flexibility in assignment to allow for sudden shifts in requirements; and the new structure must be serviceable under peacetime, partial

mobilization, or full mobilization. The number of MOS's was reduced in consonance with Department of Army policy to authorize only the

minimum number compatible with Army needs and military personnel manage­

ment system concepts.

The Enlisted MOS Gode.--A five-character coding system is used in the current enlisted MOS structure, with each character given a

specific meaning and serving a specific purpose. Both numeric and alphabetic characters are used. This method of codification provides

for expansion or contraction at each level. The flexibility of this code makes possible identification of broad entry training for purposes

of distribution and precise identification of specialists and non­

commissioned officers. The five characters are utilized as follows:

14First Character (numeric)“-Occupational AreaThe first character of the MOS code represents the broad occupational area into which all MOS's are incorporated for purposes of initial selection. There are nine occupational areas, each directly related to an aptitude area of the Army Classification Battery of tests. A tenth area, designated as "Special Assignment" and for which special selection instru­ments must be applied, is also provided. Broad planning and initial selection are feasible on the basis of the first character of the code (Figure 2)«Occupational areas are also characterized by their individual relationship to aptitude areas and by commonality of physical abilities and job skills. Thus these occupational areas serve as selection factors which simplify initial classification at the reception station and allocation of personnel to training. An occupational area is equivalent to a major element of the structure.

Second Character (numeric)--Career GroupThe second character, in combination with the first, normally identifies a career group which is a major division of an occupational area. Career groups are designed to facilitate the substitution of personnel when necessary to meet fluctuat­ing requirements and to permit broad initial occupational training for a number of entry level positions in closely related MOS's (Figure 3).9Third Character (alphabetic)— Specialty Identification

The third character, in combination with the first two, repre­sents the job specialty without regard to level of skill.There are two types of MOS: entry MOS and advanced MOS. Allthree-character MOS's ending in "A" are entry MOS's which identify the apprentice-level positions common to two or more advanced MOS's. Advanced MOS's are those three-character MOS's ending in "B" through ”Y." They identify those military jobs at the level of journeyman.or higher. An MOS with a third character of "Z" represents a "capper" MOS, which is a term used to identify specialties which normally involve supervision over two or more advanced MOS's of the same career group. MOS specifications are provided for the three-character MOS stage of classification. Each of these three-character

^Ibid., p. 4.

15

Occupational Area Title Occupational Area CharacterTactical Operations ................................ 1Missile and Fire Control

Electronic Maintenance .......................... 2General Electrical Maintenance .................... 3

Precision Maintenance........ ......................4

Auxiliary Services ................................ 5Motors ............................................ 6Clerical .......................................... 7

Graphics . . . . . ................................ 8General Technical .................................. 9

Special Assignment ................................ 0

FIGURE 2. Occupational Areas— Titles and Characters*

*Department of the Army, Personnel Selection and Classification, Regulation Number 611-201, June 2, 1960, p. 4.

16

Related Career Groups Occupational Area Aptitude Area

Medical Care and x \Treatment (91)

Laboratory Procedures (92)

Technical EquipmentOperation (93)

\Food Service (94) y General General

Law Enforcement (95) ( Technical ^— ---- Technical

General Intelligence (96) | (9) (GT)

Special Intelligence (97)Signal Intelligence (98) J

FIGURE 3. Organization of Career Groups

17MOS's represent a significant and distinct job requirement calling for diverse skills, knowledges, and abilities.^Individual jobs are isolated and arranged to form career groups containing specialties related to one another by common basic skill requirements. On the basis of these groupings, an entry MOS is established for each group, thus permitting training of recruits at a low and broad entry level rather than confining it rigidly to a narrow and higher specialized level. Such entry training can be given in training divisions or training centers and the bulk of replacement stream input can be shipped to fill any of the specialist positions supported by the entry MOS (Figure 4).Fourth Character (numeric)--Skill LevelThis character, in combination with the three basic characters, indicates the skill levels within the MOS, These skill levels indicate the level of proficiency required in a specific job and the corresponding qualifications present in the individual and are identified by characters "1" through "5.” Each char­acter has a specific meaning, as follows: l--apprentice;2--journeyman; 3— advanced journeyman; 4— leader; 5— super­visor. The last two, 4 and 5, are reserved for noncommissioned officers only.^^Fifth Character (alphabetic)— Special Qualifications

This character indicates special qualifications or individual qualifications not generally associated with a single MOS but which are generally common to a large number of diverse specialties (Figure 5)

Special Coding Problems.--Some coding problems require special treatment. Among these are instances in which an individual is dual-

qualified insofar as special qualifications are concerned, for example the fifth-character codification; instances in which a soldier possesses

10Ibid., p. 5.11Ibid.12Ibid., p. 6

18

Related MOS( Medical Specialist (91B)

Operating Room Specialist (9ID)Medical Care and Medical j Dental Specialist (91E)

Treatment (91)-----> Corpsman ^ Neuropsychiatric Specialist (91F)(91A) Clinic Psychology Specialist (91G)

y Social Work Specialist (91H)

FIGURE 4. Development of Career Group

19

MOS Title and Code

Medical Specialist

91B4

Special Qualifications Character f A--Technical Intelligence

B— Drill Sergeant C--CBR

<

D— Dog HandlerE— Enlisted Aide

F— Flying StatusG— RangerH— Instructor

K— Logistics NCOL--LinquistN--Nuclear Operations0— No Special QualificationsP— Parachutist

R--Research and DevelopmentS— Special Forces

T— TransitionW--Psychological Warfare

X— Experimental

FIGURE 5. Special Qualification Characters

20linguistic qualifications sufficiently significant to warrant identifi­cation; and those military occupational specialties of a classified nature»

Coding of dual qualifications with the fifth character often requires special treatment« In those instances where an individual is qualified by training or experience in more than one special qualifica­tion, his MOS classification will reflect the most significant of those

special qualifications depending upon the specific conditions applicablein each case. Current regulations are used to determine the priority

13on assignment of special codes.

In the coding of linguists, two additional numeric characters are authorized for use with the five-character MOS code to identify the specific language in which a soldier is qualified. This will permit the Army to better identify those individuals possessing such qualifications.

While the language code characters will not be used in official organiza­tional tables, they will be used in individual and position classifica­

tion. Significant use is to be made of these language characters when the basic MOS is in the military intelligence, general intelligence,

communications security, or radio code entry groups. Codes for specific languages are contained in specific regulations.̂

MOS Categories.--The MOS may be categorized into several types

as follows:

1 Q Department of the Army, Enlisted Personnel Management System, Regulation Number 600-200, March 24, 1965, p. 4.

■^Army, op. cit., p . 6.

21Advanced MOS (ADVMOS)An advanced MOS identifies those military jobs at the journeyman or higher skill level.

Entry MOS (EMOS)An entry MOS identifies a grouping of jobs at the apprentice skill level which relate to two or more advanced MOS's in the same career group,Primary MOS (PMOS)

The primary MOS is the MOS (entry or advanced) representing the highest or most significant job skill which the individual can best perform.

Secondary MOS (SMOS)An MOS, in a specialty other than PMOS, representing the second most significant job skills which the individual can perform.

Additional MOS (AMOS)An additional MOS is an awarded MOS other than those designated as primary or secondary.Duty MOS (PMOS)

The duty MOS is the MOS of the position to which the soldier is actually assigned and in which he is performing duty.

Enlisted Classification Tests

Development.— Initially, testing was able to contribute most

directly to the solution of the classification problems of the Army by

providing a single, uniform measure to indicate a soldier's general

usefulness to the service. The Army General Glassification Test (AGCT)15was developed during World War II to provide such a measure. However,

^Department of the Army, Provisions Governing Qualifications, Regulation Number 715-63, June 17, 1958, p. 1.

22it became evident that a. greater contribution would be made by a variety of different measures designed to indicate the soldier's specific useful­

ness to the service in particular kinds of Army jobs or training assign­ments as well as his general mental ability. Tests of specific kinds of

aptitudes, knowledge, or skills have been developed and incorporated into a battery of tests administered to recruits for initial classifica­tion. This battery of tests is known as the Army Glassification Battery (AGB), and includes tests of abilities related to most kinds of jobs performed by enlisted men in the Army. A separate screening test (AFQT)

has been developed to measure general intelligence.̂

The Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT).--The Armed Forces Qualification Test is by law administered to all applicants for enlist­

ment into any one of the branches of service and to all registrants ordered for induction. The purpose <Sf the test is to determine whether the individual has sufficient general learning ability to become a

satisfactory soldier. The test is scored in a percentile basis and17divided into the following groups:

Percentile Score Group

93 or higher I65-92 II31-64 III10-30 IV

9-less V

16Ibid., p. 2.

17Ibid., p. 4.

23For many years the minimum acceptable score for a Regular Army

applicant ranged between 20 and 31, depending upon the number of

applicants available and required. The minimum score for induction

has been fixed by Federal law at 10, Currently, an applicant for enlistment in the Regular Army must score 31 or higher on the AFQT, if

single, and 50 if he has dependents; a registrant for induction must

score 31 or higher on the AFQT, or between 10 and 30 on the AFQT plus90 or higher on two aptitude areas in a separate battery of tests

18called the Army Qualification Battery (AQB),

The Army Classification Battery.— Aptitude tests have been introduced as an aid in classification so that men can be better placed and Army jobs can be better filled. It has long been recognized that a

man could do better work in one type of job than another» One man may

be better fitted for the job of company clerk than for a machinist specialty. Another may make a better mechanic than a clerk. During World War II the four-part scores of the Army General Classification Test (AGCT) were supplemented by other tests which were useful for

certain groups of occupational specialties. Now all enlisted personnel are given a standard battery of tests immediately upon entering the Army (or prior to entry in the ease of registrant for induction who

score between 10 and 30 on the AFQT). The Army Classification Battery

presently consists of the following:^

18Ibid,, p. 5.^Department of the Army, Administering and Scoring the Army

Classification Battery, Pamphlet Number, 611-100, August 8, 1961, p. 3.

Name of Test AbbreviationVerbal VE*Arithmetic Reasoning AR*

Shop Mechanics SM*Pattern Analysis PA*Army Clerical Speed ACS

Army Radio Code ARCAutomotive Information AI

Mechanical Aptitude MAElectronics Information ELI

Classification Inventory ClGeneral Intelligence Test GIT

*(Part of the Army Qualification Battery as discussed on page 23 of this manuscript«)

In working but a method for selecting men who can be expected

to do well in a given job, a large number of tests are tried out to

find which ones work together best to predict likelihood of success in that job. The same combination of tests turn out to be the best pre­

dictor for many Army jobs. This is the basis on which aptitude areas were formed. Each aptitude area represents a set of tests and a group

of Army jobs. This particular combination of tests provides the best means presently available in estimating whether or not a man will do

well in any of the jobs in the group. There are eight such aptitude areas, each made up of two tests from the Army Classification Battery

25and the Army jobs for which this set of tests is the best predictor of

20success. These areas are:Aptitude Area FormulaInfantry (IN) AR * 2Cl

3Armor, Artillery, and Engineer (AE) GIT + AI

2Electronic (EL) MA + 2ELI

3General Maintenance (GM) IPA + 2SM

3

Motor Maintenance (MM) MA -r 2AI 3

Clerical (CL) VE + ACS 2

General Technical (GT) VE + AR 2

Radio Code (RC) VE + ARC 2

Each of the eight composite aptitude area scores indicates likelihood of success in a field of work known as the occupational

aptitude area. For example, the following MOS's are grouped with

others in aptitude area GT:91J Physical Therapy Specialist

94B Cook

96D Image InterpreterEach man’s score shows at a glance the area or areas in which he has

best prospects of success. Classification may be narrowed down to a

20Ibid., p* 5.

26specific job or training assignment by reference to the list of MOS's included in each aptitude area. For example, if an individual makes his highest score in aptitude area GL and has an interest in personnel or clerical work, he could be recommended for training in one of the administrative MOS's. Aptitude areas are most useful in making recommendations for training of individuals without prior military or

civilian experience.

Job Specifications

General.--Job specifications includes the duties the individual

is expected to perform, the skills and knowledges required, and physical

and mental requirements, and the related civilian occupations, if any. Extracted from current regulations, the following describes the

specifications of a job:SOCIAL WORK SPECIALIST

MOS Code 91HDuties

Assists social worker in obtaining information for social case histories and in helping individuals to carry out instructions of professional staff. Interviews individuals to obtain background information relative to family life, early childhood adjustment, economic status, schooling, occupation, illnesses, hospitalization, marital adjustment, and difficulties and experiences encountered in military service. Extracts pertinent information from military records. Assists in requesting information from social agencies, law enforcement agencies, penal institutions, hospitals, and persons familiar with individual's background. Explains to individuals services that may be obtained through public and private welfare agencies <» Submits detailed case reports to social worker. Plans and organizes work schedules, assigns duties, and instructs subordinate specialists in proper work techniques and procedures.

Skills and KnowledgesSpecialist:

Code 91H2. Must know techniques in conducting interviews and gathering social history information- Must understand dynamics of human behavior and importance of contacts with patients. Must be able to secure historical facts from cooperative, communicative and undisturbed patients. Must be able to distinguish between relevant and irrelevant information. Must be able to assist patients in personal matters such as letter writing, telephone calls, and referring for pay and baggage problems. Must be able to prepare clear, concise, and accurate reports. Must be able to make collateral contacts to corroborate data. Must be able to establish rapport and deal effectively with more emotionally disturbed patients. Must be able to secure full social histories from patients having complicated medical and social problems- Must be able to assist individual in understanding treatment and disposition and in making use of treatment and welfare facilities. Must be able to contact patients returned to duty to ascertain their adjustment.

Noncommissioned officer:Code 91H4. Must be qualified as Social Work Specialist

(91H20). Must know administrative channels and organizational structure of unit to which assigned. Must know application and use of regulations and forms used in reports covering unit activ­ities. Must be able to instruct and supervise subordinate personnel in proper work techniques and procedures.

Physical RequirementsRequires good vision and auditory acuity in extracting informa

tion from records and communicating with patients. Requires considerable standing and walking. Requires ability to speak clearly in communicating with patient and in delivering occasional lectures.

Mental RequirementsAptitude Area 6T. Requires good reasoning and verbal ability,

memory, adaptability, attentiveness, effective interpersonal relations, and emotional control in dealing with patients to obtain desired information for the professional staff.

Related Civilian Occupations

DOT classification CodeCase Aide - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0-27.50

28Federal Civil Service Classification Code

Social Worker GS 185The above constitute the job specifications of a Social WorkSpecialist.21

Standards of Grade Authorization

General.--In the final section of the specification for each MOS is a table called Standards of Grade Authorization. It does not authorize positions. Instead, it provides the basis for determining

grades in all organizational tables after the number of positions and MOS classification have been determined. The table provides typical

duty position titles, and also indicates how grade levels should be distributed within the total established number of positions. Excep­tions to the standards are authorized only when warranted by local

conditions or unusual requirements that do not have Army-wide implica-22 'tions, and are subject to review by the Department of the Army.

Glassification Structure for Commissioned Officers

General.— Current regulations contain the authorized commis­

sioned officer military occupational specialties. These MOS's only are to be used for classifying positions in all organization tables and

identifying individuals qualified to perform in these positions. They

O IArmy, Personnel Selection and Classification, p, 937.

22Ibid., p. 8.

29provide a means for determining manpower occupational requirements and

93resources and for matching of men and jobs =

Officer military occupational specialties are generally broad in scope and relatively few in number» This is in accordance with Depart­ment of the Army policy, which requires commissioned officer personnel

to be as broadly trained and as widely qualified as possible in order to ensure maximum flexibility in their assignment and utilization.^

Proper occupational classification will facilitate the follow­ing; Conservation of available skills through maximum utilization of

experience, education, training, and other pertinent individual qualifi­cations; development of a sound career pattern for commissioned officer

personnel; development and construction of tables of organization and tables of distribution; effective requisitioning and assignment of commissioned officer personnel on an Army-wide basis; and the accurate

reporting and inventorying of personnel by specialty and authorized

strength by position.Generally, the military occupational specialty for commissioned

officers defines the scope of an occupational area without regard to the level of skill, grade, echelon, or responsibility involved. For example, command of infantry troops is a functional group of duties

performed at various echelons ranging from platoon to brigade; and

positions involving command of platoons, companies, or battalions are

^Department of the Army, Personnel Selection and Classifica­tion, Regulation Number 611-101, June 2, 1960, p . 1.

^Department of the Army, Career Planning for Army Officers, Pamphlet Number 600-3, June 30, 1964, p. 4.

30all classified as Infantry Unit Commander regardless of the particular

25echelon of command«,

The commissioned officer job consists of tactical, technical, and administrative duties that involve broad command authority, direct staff responsibility, or specialization of a professional nature.

The MOS is designed solely as a classification instrument and, as such, does not preclude the broadest possible utilization of the

officer« This applies not only to certain administrative duties common to all commissioned officer assignments but to additional tactical and technical duties as well. These MOS's are not intended,

nor should they be regarded, as a limitation of the authority of the commanding officer to change or prescribe additional duties and responsibilities for subordinate officer personnel.^

Additional detailed information concerning the composition and

organization of the officer MOS specifications is not considered essential for the successful completion of this study, as it is very

difficult to determine if an officer is being utilized effectively or not. This difficulty arises from the fact that the officer is not normally trained in any one speciality and is utilized in various

occupational duties.

25Department of the Army, Officer Qualifications and Classifi­cation, Regulation Number 611-103, November 6, 1962, p. 5.

^Army, Personnel Selection and Classification, p. 4.

31The Profiling System

General.--The physical profiling system is a personnel classi­fication tool that assists in the assignment and distribution of personnel and the compiling of statistics relevant to medical fitness standards. The system is based primarily upon the functional ability of individuals to perform military duty.

The current profiling system was developed during World War II

as a gross screening tool to assure equitable distribution among theservices. It was developed too late to be used extensively for itsoriginal purpose. After World War II attempts were made to use it forclassification into individual military occupational specialties;however, the system was insufficiently definitive for this purpose. It

is currently used to classify personnel for initial assignment to two-

digit MOS training. A long-range study is underway now to develop a27sufficiently definitive system for use with individual MOS1s.

Human functions are considered under six factors, PULHES, which

are as follows:P— Physical capacity or stamina

U--Upper extremities

L--Lower extremitiesH— Hearing

E— EyesS--Psychiatric

^Department of the Army, Standards of Medical Fitness, Regula­tion Number 40-501, January 18, 1965, p. 3.

32Numerical designators of "1" through "4” are used to evaluate an

individual's functional capacity under each factor. The "1” and ”2"designators will indicate degrees of fitness above procurement standards.The "3" will indicate conditions below procurement but above retention

standards. The "4" will indicate unfitting conditions below retentionstandards. These designators are entered on the individual personnel

record, which provide guidance to unit commanders regarding individual28assignment limitations.

The Need for Additional Research

The content of this chapter has presented the descriptive find­

ings from the secondary research necessary for the understanding of the research that follows. The foregoing data has described the manner in which the classification and assignment system should function;

however, before one can make a final determination as to the degree of effectiveness, the end result of placing "the right man on the right job" must be evaluated. The purpose of subsequent research is to make

this evaluation and determine the degree of effectiveness of the system,

the underlying problems, and what efforts, if any, are being made to

correct these problems.

28Ibid., p. 5

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

It is appropriate to continue a discussion of the purpose of

this research by reviewing the questionnaire used in the collection of data, its development and research procedure» In determining the medium to be utilized in the collection of data, the close proximity

of two military installations prompted this author to develop a questionnaire and to process the completion thereof on an individual

basis o

Selection of Participating Units

It is not possible to find civilian related experience for

each of the military occupational positions; for example, there is nocivilian experience that will qualify a man as an infantryman. For

the purpose of this research, two medical units were selected, since

all of the occupational positions within these units have related

civilian occupations» Thus making it possible to determine if civilian29experience was being utilized. Appendix A, contains a list of the

units which participated in the survey,

See Appendix A, "Participating Units," p, 73.

33

(

34Basis for Selection of Personnel

The military officer is not normally trained in any one

specialty, and thus receives the broadest possible training and utili­

zation o The enlisted man is trained for a particular job, thus making it possible to determine if he is being properly utilized in a specific occupational field. For the purpose of this research, only the enlisted men were selected to participate in the survey,

Number of Personnel Participating

The assigned strength of the participating units total 196

enlisted men. Every possible attempt was made to secure 100 percent

participation, but because of leave and duty requirements, only 183 (93 percent) of the enlisted men completed the questionnaire,

Personnel Record Data

Civilian occupational experience and aptitude test scores are

entered on all individual personnel records. Information regarding

civilian experience will be utilized and discussed in Chapter V.

Aptitude test scores, as discussed in Chapter II, indicate the occupa­tional area in which the individual has the best prospect for success.

After receiving special permission from the installation com­

manders concerned with this study, this author extracted test scores from personnel records of each of the participants in the survey, which

will be used in the collation of data in Chapter IV, The various

branches of the military consider individual test scores to be

35classified data, which prohibits the presentation of the test scores in this study. Therefore, upon completion of the collation of dath in Chapter IV, the material containing the test scores will be destroyed.

The Questionnaire

The Major Hypothesis

The major hypothesis, upon which the questionnaire is founded, is to determine and evaluate the degree of effectiveness in the exist­

ing Military Classification and Assignment System, The questionnaire

was designed to determine this degree of effectiveness, the underlying

problems, and the efforts, if any, being made to correct these problems.

Inter-Related Questions

A brief review of the questionnaire will readily reveal relatedquestions designed to investigate the validity of subsidiary hypothesescontained in the major hypothesis. Questions were also interrelated

30for the purpose of cross-checking responses. Other questions merely

investigate subsidiary hypotheses related to the major hypothesis.

Study in four areas, which are indicators in determining the degree of

effectiveness of the Military Classification and Assignment System, is

accomplished in the questionnaire.

Job Satisfaction.— Questions 8, 10, and 18, are designed to

seek individual responses in regard to satisfactory utilization of

^See Appendix B, "Inter-Related Question Association," p. 74.

36personal capabilities and civilian occupational experience. Question 1 was included to determine the percentage of personnel desiring to make a career of the military service, as related to the responses of the

preceding three questions. A subsidiary hypothesis, that individuals not being properly utilized will make an attempt to change their occupa­

tional speciality, is tested in question 14; this question is designed to measure individual efforts to change their MOS or AFSC.

Question1. Do you plan to make a career of the military service?

YES/__/ ; NO/__/ ; UNDECIDED/__/

8. Do you feel that your capabilities are being satisfactorily_utilized in your present duty MOS or AFSC? YES/__/; NO/__/

10. Are you working in the MOS or AFSC that you requested upon entry into the military service? YES/__/ ; NO/__/

14. Have you ever requested a change in your MOS or AFSC?YES/__/ ; NO/__/

18. Is your primary civilian occupational experience being utilizedon your present duty assignment? YES/__/; NO/__/ ; NOTAPPLICABLE/ /

Morale.--Question 3 is designed to reveal the impression of respondents' regarding the morale of the unit to which they are assigned.

Questions 5, 6, and 16, are designed to determine if other morale

factors, such as the promotion system, sports program, and leave policy,

are having any effect on the overall unit morale. A cross-check of

responses is made through the use of question 19, which is designed to determine the relationship of disciplinary action and the responses from

question 3.

37Question

3. Which of the following do you feel would describe the morale ofyour Detachment or Squadron? EXCELLENT/__/; GOOD/__/;FAIR/__/ ; POOR/__/

5. Is it difficult to get "leave" in your Detachment or Squadron?YES, BECAUSE OF SHORTAGE OF PERSONNEL/__/ ; YES, FOR REASONSUNKNOWN/ / ; NO/__/

6. Does your Detachment or Squadron participate in any type of acompetitive sports program? YES/__/; NO/__/

16. Which of the following do you feel best describes the promo-tion system in your Detachment or Squadron? EXCELLENT/__/;GOOD/__/ ; FAIR/__/ ; POOR/__/

19. Have you received any official disciplinary action while_assigned to your present Detachment or Squadron? YES/__/;NO/ /

Guidance Available.--Commanders are required to keep their personnel informed of the assistance available to them; question 4 is designed to determine if this requirement is being fulfilled. A lack

of confidence in discussing personal problems with the immediate

supervisor, is a situation which often causes problems to remain un­solved; question 9 is designed to determine if this situation exists. Question 12 is designed to determine the difficulty encountered in

securing advice and assistance from the immediate supervisor. Ques­tion 15 and 17, are designed to determine if additional supervisory

guidance, such as job briefing and promotion requirements, is being

provided to all personnel.

Question4. If you received notice to report immediately to the Legal

Assistance Officer of your unit, would you know whom to report to? YES/__/; NO/__7

38Question

9. If you were to express a personal problem to your immediatesupervisor in confidence, do you feel that it would remain in confidence? YES/__/; NO/__/

12. Have you experienced any difficulty in securing advice andassistance from your immediate supervisor? DIFFICULT/__/;LITTLE DIFFICULTY/ /; NO DIFFICULTY/ /

15. Upon arriving at your present duty station, were you given a briefing of your new duty assignment? YES/ / ; NO/ /

17. Are you aware of the requirements you must meet in order to be qualified for your next promotion? YES/ / ; NO/ /

Education Development Program.--Current recruiting programs are

promoting the educational advantages and opportunities available in the military service. Question 13 is designed to measure the per­

centage of personnel that have entered the service with the intentions of raising their level of education. Question 11 is designed to deter­mine if the individual has attempted to increase his level of education

through his own initiative. A subsidiary hypothesis, that personnel are not enrolled in "off-duty" educational courses, either because of

the lack of information concerning the benefits to be derived from the

additional education or the lack of permission to enroll, is tested in

questions 2 and 7. The opportunity to obtain additional education at civilian schools, an excellent job stimulation, is available to

qualified military personnel; question 20 is designed to determine if

the awareness of this opportunity is being made available to all

personnel.

39Question

2. While assigned to your present unit, have you ever been refused permission to enroll in "off-duty" educational courses?NO/__/; YES, FOR REASONS UNKNOWN/ /; YES, BECAUSE OF DUTYREQUIREMENTS/__/

7. Has anyone discussed the benefits you might receive by raising your educational level? YES/__7; NO/__/

11. Are you currently enrolled in any "off-duty" educational courses? YES/__1; NO/__/

13. Did you enter the service with the intentions of increasing your level of education? YES/__/ ; NO/__/

20. Are you aware of the opportunity to attend civilian schools while on active duty? YES/__/ ; NO/__/

CHAPTER IV

QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE

Glassification of Participants

In collating responses, three categories were utilized in the

classification of respondents for the purpose of enabling group com- 31parison. Although additional separation of data could easily have

been accomplished, the three group categories selected provide the

best classification for comparative purposes and simplicity of

analysis.

Group I, Total Responses.--Group I, merely contains total

responses to each question.

Group II, Responses of Army Personnel, — Group II, contains responses to each question for the Army personnel. Responses are

further separated into two areas: (1) contains 81 percent of the personnel that are classified in the occupational area in which they

are most proficient, and (2) contains 19 percent of the personnel

that are classified out of the occupational area in which they are

31It is suggested that the reader refer to Appendix D, "Questionnaire Response Analysis," p, 77, with regard to the group classification of respondents =

40

41most proficient, with the area of occupational proficiency being

32determined through prior classification tests.

Group III, Responses of Air Force Personnel.— Group III, con­tains responses to each question for the Air Force personnel. Responses are further separated into two areas: (1) contains 79 percent of thepersonnel that are classified in the occupational area in which they are most proficient, and (2) contains 21 percent of the personnel that are

classified out of the occupational area in which they are most proficient. The area of occupational proficiency is determined in the same manner

as discussed in Group II.

33Response to the Questionnaire

As noted in Chapter III, the questionnaire was developed in a

manner enabling inquiry into four areas. Each of the areas serve as

indicators in determining the degree of effectiveness of the Military Glassification and Assignment System. Interrelated questions are

grouped under these areas to facilitate a review of responses and simplify evaluation of subsidiary hypotheses. The same classifications

are used to present responses to the questionnaire. Responses are

discussed in percentage figures and only perfunctory attention is

given to responses numerically.

^The methods utilized to classify and assign personnel into specific occupational areas, based on classification test scores, are discussed in Chapter II.

33Appendix D, ’’Questionnaire Response Analysis,” p. 77, con­tains a delineation of responses to the questionnaire.

42Job Satisfaction,— Questions 8, 10, and 18, deal with the

problem of satisfactory utilization of personal capabilities and civilian occupational experience. Figure 6 presents a comparison of In Occupational Area and Out of Occupational Area for questions 8, 10, and 18, since they are closely related.

Viewing the response to question 8, it was noted that 63 percent

of the respondents indicated that their capabilities were being satis­factorily utilized in their present duty MOS or AFSC. In Group II, 81 percent of the In Area participants and 25 percent of the Out of Area participants expressed this view. In Group III, 64 percent of the In Area participants and 29 percent of the Out of Area participants expressed this view.

Question 10, Group II, indicates that 68 percent of those In the Area, in contrast to 32 percent Out of the Area, are working in

the occupational area requested upon entry into the military service. Regarding Group III, 31 percent of the In Area responses and 19 percent of the Out of Area responses stated that they were in the occupational

area requested upon entry into the service.It is noted in viewing the response to questions 8 and 10, that

the Army personnel appear to have a higher rate of satisfactory utiliza­

tion of their capabilities and are more successful in obtaining their

requested area of occupation upon entry into the military service, as

compared to the Air Force personnel.Question 18 deals with the utilization of civilian occupational

experience. For Group II, 25 percent of the In Area participants

43

IN AREA OUT OF AREA -

FIGURE 6. Utilization of Capabilities and Experience In Area and Out of Area

I

44indicated that civilian job experience was being utilized, 22 percent

indicated that it was not being utilized, while 53 percent stated that their civilian experience was not applicable in the service„ Of those Out of the Area in Group II, 44 percent stated that their experience was not being utilized and 56 percent stated that their experience was not applicableo In Group III, 9 percent of In Area responses indicated experience was being utilized, 27 percent stated it was not, while 64 percent indicated it was not applicable. Of those Out of the Area in

Group III, 57 percent indicated that their civilian experience was not being utilized, and 43 percent stated that their experience was not

applicable.Closely related to the preceding three questions, question

number 1 attempts to determine the percentage of personnel desiring to

make a career of the military service. Figure 7 contains the response to question 1. In total responses, 47 percent of all participants

indicated that they were not planning to make a career of the military

service. The decision of making a career of the military, as affected

by improper classification, is sharply reflected when comparing responses between the In Area and Out of Area participants in Group II and Group III. The highest percentage opposed to a military career is

noted in Group III, where 76 percent of the Out of Area participants

expressed this opinion.Question number 14 was inserted in the questionnaire to measure

individual efforts to change their MOS or AFSC. Percentage distribu­

tion of responses to this question, in the three groups contained

45

FIGURE 7. Military Career

46therein, was approximately the same for each area used in the separation of respondents. In total responses, 30 percent of all participants indicated that an attempt had been made to change their MOS or AFSC.In order to determine the validity of the subsidiary hypothesis, that personnel dissatisfied in their present duty MOS or AFSC will request a change to a different occupational area, a comparison of response data

is necessary. Table I contains the total number of negative responses to question 8, which indicates those participants dissatisfied with their present duty MOS or AFSC, and makes a comparison to the response

of the same participants in question number 14, to determine if an attempt has been made to change to a different occupational area. The validity of this subsidiary hypothesis will be discussed in the

questionnaire analysis in Chapter V.

TABLE IRESPONSE COMPARISON

Response to QuestionsQuestion 8 Question 14Negative Response of Participants AnsweringResponses Question 8 NegativelyTotal Yes No

Groups Number No. % No. 7.Group II 25 9 36 16 64

Group III 43 18 42 25 58

47Morale.--Question 3 is designed to reveal the impression of

respondents' regarding the level of morale of the unit to which they are assigned. The response to question 3 is contained in Table II.

TABLE II LEVEL OF MORALE

Percent ResponseGroup I Group II Group III

Morale Totals In AreaOut of Area In Area

Out of Area

Excellent 9 22 6 1 0Good 32 50 50 19 5Fair 31 21 25 45 19

Poor 28 7 19 35 76

Factors normally affecting the morale of a military unit, include such factors as leave policy, sports program, and promotion systems. These factors are tested in questions 5, 6, and 16.

The military services consider the opportunity of individuals to participate in a competitive sports program, a vital element in

attempting to maintain a high level of unit morale. Question 6 was designed to determine if a problem exists in this area. The response to this question revealed very little variation between the three group classifications, with approximately 98 percent of all parti­

cipants indicating that their unit does participate in a competitive

sports program. Hence it appears that no problem exists in this area.

48In the military organization, ’’leave1’ is considered to be one of

several forms of job stimulation, and will normally affect the morale of a unit if it is difficult to obtain. Question number 5 was included in the questionnaire to determine if this difficulty exists. In Group II,

68 of the respondents stated that ’’leave” is not difficult to obtain, while 13 stated that a shortage of personnel is the cause of the dif­ficulty in obtaining ’’leave,” In Group III, 52 of the respondents stated that ’’leave” is not difficult to obtain, while 45 stated that it is difficult to obtain because of a shortage of personnel. Table III

contains the response of all the respondents that stated ’’leave” was difficult to obtain because of a shortage of personnel, and their

corresponding evaluation of unit morale. Does difficulty in obtaining ’’leave” affect the morale of a unit? In viewing the response to question 5, it appears that difficulty in obtaining leave does have

an affect on morale.Question 16 was designed to measure the value of the promotion

system of each unit, as expressed by each participant. The response

to question 16 is contained in Table III, which also contains the manner in which the same respondents evaluated the morale of the unit

to which they are assigned. For example in Group III, where 19 of the

respondents stated that their promotion system was ’’Poor,” also eval­

uated the morale of their unit as ’’Poor.” It is notid that the overall

evaluation of the promotion system is lower in Group III, as compared to

Group II,

TABLE IIIFACTORS AFFECTING MORALE

Levelsof

Morale

Number of ResponsesQuestion 5 Question 16 Question 19

LeaveDifficult Promotion System by Values Disciplinary

ActionYes, Shortage of Personnel Excellent Good Fair Poor Yes

Group Group Group Group Group GroupII III II III II III II III II III II III

Excellent 2 1 11 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 1 0Good 1 9 6 4 17 9 13 1 6 5 2 1Fair 3 16 2 3 3 16 8 13 5 10 3 6Poor 7 19 0 1 1 3 2 15 5 19 5 10

Total 13 45 19 8 25 28 23 29 17 34 11 17

4>VO

A cross-check of responses is made with question number 19, which is designed to determine if a relationship exists between the rate of disciplinary action and the evaluation of morale in question 3» The response to question 19 is revealed in Table III, which indicates the number of personnel that checked "Yes" to having received disciplin­

ary action, and their corresponding evaluation of morale» A subdivision of the response from question 19, by In Area and Out of Area, is

provided in Figure 8. A review of this chart reveals a higher rate of disciplinary action in the Out of Area categoryo

What affect does job dissatisfaction have on morale? This question is answered in Figure 9, which contains the response to ques­tion 8 and its corresponding evaluation of morale in question 3« It will be recalled that the response to question 8, indicated the

respondents satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their present duty MOS or AFSCo The response in Figure 9 will be analysed in Chapter V.

Guidance A v a i l a b l e Questions 4, 12, 15, and 17 were included

in the questionnaire to determine the extent of guidance available to

the personnel.Unit Commanders are required to keep their personnel aware of

the legal assistance available to them; question number 4 is designed to determine if this requirement is being fulfilled. In Group I, 52

percent of all respondents indicated that they knew who to contact for

legal assistance. The response in Groups II and III does not vary

significantly from the percentage in Group I,

50

51

Percent

of P

articipants

That

Check

Yes

lOO90-

80*7rv/ uOU1

5040*30"

-

120"10 $ 1O'

TOTAL IN AREAOUT OF AREA IN AREA

OUT OF AREA

GROUP I GROUP II GROUP III

FIGURE 8. Disciplinary Action

Dissatisfied SatisfiedPercent Response Percent Response

50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50

4

21

31 Fair

44 Poor

Exce

Good

FIGURE 9. Comparison of Morale Between Job Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction

53Normally, if personnel are improperly classified, they will

attempt to change to the occupational area in which they are most

proficiento However, if they distrust their immediate supervisor, there will be a certain amount of reluctance in requesting a change, Question 9 was inserted in the questionnaire to determine if distrust or a lack of confidence exists in discussing personal problems with the immediate supervisor. Figure 10 presents the response to question 9, which reveals the percentage of respondents that do not feel their personal problems would remain in confidence, should they discuss it with their immediate supervisor.

The military has experienced that one of the first requirements in resolving classification problems, is the presence of an atmosphere

where personnel will feel free to seek advice and assistance, without difficulty or restrictions being placed upon them. Question 12 was included in the questionnaire to determine the degree of difficulty encountered in securing advice and assistance from the immediate super­

visor. In Group II, 95 percent of all participants stated that they had encountered little or no difficulty in securing advice or assist­

ance from their immediate supervisor, and in Group III, 90 percent of the participants responded in the same manner. The response between

the In Area and Out of Area participants was not significant, as little

variation exists in either Group II or Group III.The military services have discovered that briefings on duty

assignments for newly assigned personnel, will often prevent the

problem of job dissatisfaction. Question number 15 attempts to

54

100r

T3Q)(0M2X

<UcO 3

M *H 4Jti <Um oS'g4-i mn ti tc oPh U <44 4-1O O

r X

3

90-80-70-60-50-

40-30-20-

10-

0-TOTAL IN AREA

OUT OF AREA IN AREA

OUT OF AREA

GROUP I GROUP II GROUP III

FIGURE 10. Lack of Confidence in Supervisor

55determine if these briefings are being provided to the personnel reporting for their initial assignment. In total responses, 89 percent

of all participants indicated that briefings on duty assignments are being conducted upon initial assignment. Percentage distribution of

responses to this question, in the three groups contained therein, was nearly the same for each area used in the separation of respondents.

The lack of information regarding the requirements personnel must meet for their next promotion, has often caused the lowering of

morale in many military units. Question number 17 attempts to determine if the personnel are being informed of the requirements they must meet in order to be qualified for their next promotion. In Group I, 90 percent of all respondents indicated an awareness of their promotion requirements. The response in Groups II and III does not vary significantly from the response in Group I.

Education Development Program.—-Additional education, as men­tioned in Chapter I, is an excellent job stimulation. Hence the need

for educational development programs is recognized and promoted in the

military services. Questions 2, 7, 11, 13, and 20, are designed to determine if educational programs are being provided to the personnel,

and the extent to which they are being utilized.

Are personnel being refused permission to enroll in "off-duty" educational courses? This question is answered in question number 2.

Ninety-one percent of all respondents checked "No," and 7 percent

checked "Yes, because of duty requirements=" Response percentage

distribution among Groups II and III does not vary significantly from the total response percentage c

Regarding responses to question number 7» very little variation

exists between responses in all three group classifications« The large majority of respondents indicated that they had been informed of the increased benefits that are possible by raising their level of educa­

tion oQuestion number 13 attempts to determine the number of personnel

that have entered the service with the intentions of raising their

level of educationo Table IV reveals the total number of affirmative answers to question 13, which indicates the number of participants that have entered the service with these intentions <,

Question 11 was inserted in the questionnaire to measure the individual effort towards obtaining a higher level of education. Table

IV contains the total number of affirmative answers to question 13, and makes a comparison to the response of the same participants in question

11, to determine the number of personnel that have actually carried through with their intentions for more education.

Question number 20 is designed to determine if the personnel

are aware of the opportunity to attend civilian schools while on

active duty. Approximately 95 percent of all participants indicated

an awareness of this opportunity.

56

57TABLE IV

COMPARISON OF EDUCATIONAL INTENT AND EFFORT

Groups

Response to QuestionsQuestion 13 Question 11AffirmativeResponses

Response of Participants Answering Question 13 Affirmatively

TotalNumber

Yes NoNo. 7. No. 7,

Group II

Group III

52

68

6

18

1226

46

5088

74

CHAPTER V

QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE ANALYSIS

It will be recalled that the major hypothesis tested in this study, is to determine and evaluate the degree of effectiveness in the existing Military Classification and Assignment System. To simplify review of the major hypothesis, the questionnaire was developed to provide inquiry into four areas. Each of the areas serve as indi­

cators in determining the degree of effectiveness, underlying problems, and the efforts being made to correct these problems. Inter-related questions were grouped within these areas and are considered simul­

taneously in evaluating the validity of subsidiary hypotheses under the major hypothesis. Responses to the questions are discussed

individually and in relation to other questions in the inter-related group. Emphasis is placed on comparing responses in the three group categories, and special attention given to response comparisons between In Area and Out of Area participants.

Job Satisfaction

It was not surprising that the majority of all Out of Area

respondents stated that their capabilities were not being satisfac­

torily utilized in their present duty MOS or AFSC, as revealed in

question 8. The majority of In Area respondents stated that their

58

59capabilities were being satisfactorily utilized. These results tend to emphasize the importance of efficient classification and assignment procedures as related to job satisfaction.

Are personnel classified and assigned into the occupational

area requested upon entry into the military service? Question 10 reveals the response to this question. Regarding In Area participants, an interesting contrast exists since 68 percent of those in Group II, compared with 31 percent of Group III, checked "Yes" to this question.It was not possible to determine the cause of this contrast in response. The majority of all participants, however, responded with a negative

answer. One of two factors could possibly cause this trend of nega­tive responses, and are as follows: (1) personnel are requestingassignment into occupational areas for which they are not qualified or lack the mental ability to be trained to meet the qualifications, or

(2) there are no existing vacancies in the occupational area requested. Aptitude test scores extracted from the personnel records, indicated

that approximately 80 percent of all respondents have been classified into the area in which they are most proficient.^ A comparison of the

response to this question to the data extracted from the personnel

records, tends to support the inference that factor (1), as discussed

above, is predominate.In reviewing the response to question 18, it was noted that 57

percent of all respondents indicated that their civilian occupational

experience was not applicable in the military service, and 30 percent

^Refer to Appendix D, "Questionnaire Response Analysis," p. 77.

60indicated that it was not being utilized» The validity of theseresponses were checked with information on individual personnel

35records <, Of the personnel in the 30 percent category, it was found that only five had civilian occupational experience in areas applicable to the military. The remaining personnel either had no occupational

experience or what they had was not applicable to the military. It was pleasing to note that all personnel with an occupational experience in the field of medicine, were classified and assigned to a related posi­tion within the military service.

How does efficient classification and assignment procedures

affect the individual's desire to remain in the service? The response

to question 1 reveals that 16 percent of Out of Area participants intend to remain in the service, compared to 38 percent of In Area

participants responding in the same manner. The highest percentage opposed to a military career is noted in Group III, where 76 percent

of the Out of Area participants expressed this opinion. There was

little variation of the In Area responses between Groups II and III.It must be recognized that a correlation exists between the desire to remain in the service and the dissatisfaction caused by improper

classification and assignment.A subsidiary hypothesis, that personnel dissatisfied in their

present duty MOS or AFSC, will request a change to a different occupa­

tional area, is tested in question 14. Table I contains a comparison

^Chapter III, ’’Methodology, ’’ p. 33, discusses this subject.

61of the negative responses to question 8, which indicates those parti­cipants dissatisfied with their present duty MOS or AFSC, and the response of the same participants in question 14.^ A study of this data reveals that only 9 of 25 participants in Group II, and 18 of 45

participants in Group III have attempted to change to a different occu­

pational area. Hence the subsidiary hypothesis must be considered invalid.

Morale

Question 3 is designed to measure the level of morale within

the military units participating in this study. In Group I, the morale categories of "Good," "Fair,” and "Poor," each contain approximately 30 percent of the total response, A wide variation in response, however,

exists between Groups II and III. The majority of the Group II parti­cipants indicated that morale was "Good," compared to Group 111

participants where the majority indicated that morale was "Fair." The

causes of the wide variation of response between Groups II and III, as determined by this author, will be discussed throughout this section on

morale.In Figure 9, a comparison is made of the responses from ques­

tions 3 and 8, to determine the effect of job dissatisfaction on morale.̂ A review of Figure 9 reveals that as job dissatisfaction

■^Refer to Table I, "Response Comparison,” p . 46.

^Refer to Figure 9, "Comparison of Morale Between Job Satis­faction and Dissatisfaction," p. 52.

increases, the level of morale decreases. Thus it appears that job dissatisfaction has a serious effect on morale.

Questions 5, 6, and 16, determine the effect of certain morale factors on the overall unit morale. Regarding the response to question 5, the majority of all participants indicated that "leave" was not dif­ficult to obtain. A sharp contrast is noted, however, between Groups II and III. In Group II, 13 of the participants indicated that "leave" was difficult to obtain because of a shortage of personnel, and 45 of the participants in Group III responded in the same manner. The response to this question indicates that the shortage of personnel is one of the causes of a lower evaluation of morale, and particularlyin Group III, which has a higher number of participants in this

38category.The opportunity to participate in a competitive sports program

is considered a vital necessity in maintaining a high level of morale

in a military unit. In viewing the response to question 6, it may be

concluded that both military units have this opportunity, as indicated by 98 percent of all the respondents.

As discussed in Chapter I, promotion is a form of stimulation, and is related directly with increased professional development, and

individual morale. Question 16 measures the value of the promotion system of each unit, as expressed by each participant. The response

to question 16 is contained in Table III, which also includes an

■*®Refer to Table III, "Factors Affecting Morale," p. 49.

62

63evaluation of unit morale by the same p a r t i c i p a n t s A review of the response reveals a variation between Groups II and III, with Group II rating their promotion system higher in nearly every category. It is

also noted, that as the participants opinion regarding the value of

their promotion system declined, their corresponding opinion of the level of morale also declined. It is the opinion of this author, based on the response to this question, that the low evaluation of morale in Group III is caused partially by the existing promotion system.

Is there a correlation between the rate of official disci­plinary action and the level of unit morale? A portion of the response

to question 19 is revealed in Table III, which indicates the number ofpersonnel that checked "Yes" to having received disciplinary action,

40and their corresponding evaluation of morale. An analysis of this

data reveals that as the rate of disciplinary action increases, the

evaluation of morale decreases. Hence it appears that a correlation

does exist between the rate of disciplinary action and the manner inwhich the same participants evaluate unit morale. Figure 8 contains a

41subdivision of the response to question 19, by In Area and Out of Area. It is noted that approximately 10 percent of all In Area parti­

cipants have received disciplinary action, as compared to approximately

39Ibid.

40Ibid.^Refer to Figure 8, "Disciplinary Action," p. 51.

6432 percent of all Out of Area participants. This data brings to our attention, that personnel in the Out of Area classification appear to be more of disciplinary problem in both Groups II and III.

Guidance Available

Personnel with classification, personal, or legal problems, must have guidance and assistance available to them in order to resolve these problems. Legal assistance, as an example, is one of several sources of guidance and assistance available to the military service man. The response to question 4 revealed that 52 percent of all

participants were aware of the available legal assistance, with only a small variation of response in Groups II and III, as compared to the

total response. The results of this response indicate a need for improvement in this area of guidance.

Personal problems are often solved through a confidential discus

sion with a supervisor. However, if there is a lack of confidence in the discussion remaining confidential, the problem will not even be discussed, and hence unresolved. It was noted in the response to

question 9, that 18 percent of the Group II participants and 35 per­cent of the Group III participants expressed a lack of confidence to

discuss personal problems with their immediate supervisor. It is

noted that a higher percentage of distrust exists in Group III, how­

ever, this author was unable to determine the cause of the variation

existing between these two groups.

65Supervisors must make every effort to establish an atmosphere

where personnel will feel free to seek advice and assistance when

needed, since it is valuable only if utilized. Question 12 determines

the degree of difficulty encountered in securing advice and assistance.

In reviewing the response to this question, it is noted that only 7 percent of all participants checked ’’Difficult.” Hence it may be con­cluded that advice and assistance is available to a majority of the personnel.

Is supervisory guidance provided to all personnel reporting to the unit for initial assignment? Question 15 attempts to determine if briefings on duty assignments are provided to personnel on their initial assignment. Eighty-nine percent of all respondents indicated that these

briefings are being conducted. Thus it appears that briefing programs are being provided in both Groups II and III.

In order for personnel to be qualified for their next promo­

tion, they must be informed of the requirements that they are expected to meet. The response to question 17 revealed that 90 percent of all

respondents indicated an awareness of their promotion requirements. Therefore, it may be concluded that a majority of the personnel in

both military units are aware of the requirements they must meet to

qualify for their next promotion.

Education Development Program

The number of personnel that have entered the service with the

intentions of raising their level of education, is determined in

66question 13. Table IV contains the total number of affirmative responses to question 13, which is approximately 65 percent of the

total r e s p o n s e T h i s response indicates a favorable acceptance of current recruiting programs that are promoting the educational

opportunities available in the military services. However, one question still remains. Considering only those respondents that answered ques­tion 13 affirmatively, how many are actually attempting to increase

their level of education? This question is answered in question

number 11, which determines the number of personnel that are applying individual effort towards raising their level of education. A com­parison of response from questions 11 and 13, as noted in Table IV, reveals that only 12 percent of Group II and 26 percent of Group III

are making this e f f o r t A variation of response is noted between

Groups II and III, however, this author was unable to determine the

cause of this variation. The response to question 11 presents a striking contrast to the response of question 13, where 65 percent of

all participants indicated that they had entered the service with intentions of raising their level of education.

What has caused this contrast in response? A subsidiary

hypothesis, that personnel are not enrolled in "off-duty" educational

courses, either because of the lack of information concerning the benefits to be derived from the additional education or the lack of

permission to attend, is determined in questions 2 and 7.

^Refer to Table IV, "Comparison of Educational Intent and Effort," p. 57.

Regarding responses to question 2, 91 percent of all respond­ents indicated that permission to enroll in "off-duty-’ educational

courses had not been refused, and 7 percent of all respondents stated that duty requirements had prevented them from enrolling in these

courses.In viewing the response to question 7, it is noted that 82 per

cent of all respondents indicated that they were aware of the benefits to be derived by raising their level of education.

The results from questions 2 and 7 negate the subsidiary hypothesis, that the lack of permission to enroll or the lack of information on educational benefits, are the causes of the low rate of participation in "off-duty" educational courses. Thus it appears that a majority of the personnel say "Yes," they would like additional

education, but lack the initiative to pursue it.The opportunity to obtain additional education at civilian

schools, an excellent job stimulation, is available to qualified personnel. However, the personnel must be aware of this opportunity

before it can be determined if they meet the qualifications. The

response to question 20 reveals that 94 percent of all participants indicated an awareness of the civilian educational program. Hence it

may be concluded that an educational development program is being

conducted in both Groups II and III.

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSION

General Remarks

An essential ingredient in the accomplishment of any military

mission is competent personnel- Therefore, in order to assure the presence of competent personnel, the Military Personnel Management

Program must include an effective Classification and Assignment System.

The major hypothesis tested in this study, is to determine and evaluate the degree of effectiveness of the existing Military Classification and

Assignment System. Tests of the effectiveness of the system can be inferred from Job Satisfaction, Morale, Guidance Available, and Educational Development Program awareness. Personnel record data,

which contains information regarding the occupational area in which the individual is most likely to succeed, are also utilized in

determining the effectiveness of the system.

Summary

Analysis results, of the four criteria utilized in determining the effectiveness of the system, are summarized individually.

Job Satisfaction.--The subsidiary hypothesis, that personnel

dissatisfied in their present duty MOS or AFSC will request a change

68

69to a different occupational area, was determined to be invalid. Data derived from the questionnaire dictated the conclusion that the desire

to remain in the service is greatly reduced by improper classification and assignment. Regarding civilian occupational experience, it appears

that the experience is being utilized in most instances. However, the

failure of personnel record data to support the percentage of response indicating that civilian experience is not being utilized, prevents forming a definite conclusion in this area.

Morale.--It will be recalled that a higher level of morale

exists in Group II than in Group III. Interpretation of questionnaire data prompted the conclusion that the shortage of personnel and the

present promotion system, are responsible for the low evaluation of

morale in Group III. It is also concluded that personnel classified out of their area of occupational proficiency, as compared to those classified in it, are more of a disciplinary problem. The results of comparing the rate of job dissatisfaction to the evaluation of morale,

enables this author to conclude that job dissatisfaction is related

directly to the low evaluation of morale.

Guidance Available.— Data derived from the questionnaire

dictated the conclusion that supervisory guidance and assistance is

provided to a majority of the respondents. However, an exception is noted in the area of legal assistance, which revealed a need for

improvement in this area.

70Education Development Program-'--The subsidiary hypothesis, that

personnel are not enrolled in "off-duty” educational courses, either because of the lack of information concerning th§ benefits to be de­rived or the lack of permission to attend, was concluded to be invalid,

A wide variation was found between the percentage of participants that indicated a desire for additional education, and the percentage of participants actually enrolled. Conclusive determination of the cause of this variation was not possible from data obtained in the question­naire, Data derived from the questionnaire dictated the conclusion that the majority of respondents are aware of the Education Development Program.and the benefits to be derived thereof. It was also concluded

that permission to enroll in the "off-duty” courses is not difficult to obtain,

General Conclusion

To the extent then that the four criteria are accurate indica­tors, and that the two units sampled are representative microcosms of

the military establishment and how it functions, the following can be concluded: that the Military Classification and Assignment System is

highly effective, with approximately 80 percent of the personnel being

assigned to the occupational area in which they are most proficient. Response to the questionnaire revealed several underlying problems for

those classified out of their area of occupational proficiency, such as

a lower rate of military retention, greater job dissatisfaction, and a

higher rate of disciplinary action, all of which result in a waste of

military funds and a loss of overall efficiency.

The results of this study emphasize the necessity for UnitCommanders to know the effects of improper classification and assign­ment, factors affecting morale, importance of supervisory guidance, and the courses of action necessary to resolve the problems involved«

Additional research is essential to fully determine the

validity of the major hypothesis as applied to the entire military structure. Perhaps the stimulus for such research will be provided by the Department of Army through recognition that objective scrutiny of classification and assignment problems may well lead to valuable

results.

APPENDICES

72

APPENDIX A

PARTICIPATING UNITS

The name and location of the units participating in this

survey are listed below.

Unit Location

1. U. S. Army Hospital Fort Huachuca, Arizona

2. U. S. Air Force Hospital Davis-Monthan A. F. B«, Arizona

73

APPENDIX B

INTER-RELATED QUESTION ASSOCIATION

Chapter III, Methodology, discusses the use of inter-related

questions designed to determine the validity of subsidiary hypotheses

continued in the major hypothesis. Chapters IV and V present responses to, and analysis of, questions by inter-related group classification.

The following is a list of these classifications and inter-related questions contained therein,

QUESTIONS1, 8, 10, 14, 18

3, 5, 6, 16, 194, 9, 12, 15, 172, 7, 11, 13, 20

CLASSIFICATION

JOB SATISFACTION MORALEGUIDANCE AVAILABLE EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

74

APPENDIX C

QUESTIONNAIRE

This questionnaire is part of a study being conducted by a graduate student of the College of Public and Business Administration, University of Arizona. This study is being conducted with the knowl­edge and approval of your Commanding Officer. Extreme frankness is needed in considering all questions. Your cooperation is requested to make this a meaningful and valid study. Please complete all ques­tions .1. Do you plan to make a career of the military service?

YES/__/ ; NO/__/ ; UNDECIDED/__/2. While assigned to your present unit, have you ever been refused

permission to enroll in "off-duty" educational courses?NO/__/; YES, FOR REASONS UNKNOWN/ /; YES, BECAUSE OF DUTYREQUIREMENTS/ 7

3. Which of the following do you feel would describe the morale ofyour Detachment or Squadron? EXCELLENT/__/; GOOD/__/;FAIR/__/ ; POOR/__/

4. If you received notice to report immediately to the LegalAssistance Officer of your unit, would you know who to report to? YES/__/ ; NO/__/

5. Is it difficult to get "leave" in your Detachment or Squadron?YES, BECAUSE OF SHORTAGE OF PERSONNEL/__/ ; YES, FOR REASONSUNKNOWN/ / ; NO/ /

6. Does your Detachment or Squadron participate in any type of acompetitive sports program? YES/__/ ; NO/__/

7. Has anyone discussed the benefits you might receive by raisingyour educational level? YES/__/; NO/ /

8. Do you feel that your capabilities are being satisfactorily___utilized in your present duty MOS or AFSC? YES/ /; NO/ /

9. If you were to express a personal problem to your immediate supervisor in confidence, do you feel that it would remain in confidence? YES/ /; NO/ /

75

7610.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

Are you working in the MOS or AFSC that you requested upon entry into the military service? YES/__/; NO/__/Are you currently enrolled in any "off-duty" educational courses? YES/__/ ; NO/__/Have you experienced any difficulty in securing advice and assistance from your immediate supervisor? DIFFICULT/ /; LITTLE DIFFICULTY/ /; NO DIFFICULTY/ /Did you enter the service with the intentions of increasing your level of education? YES/__/ ; NO/ /Hav ou ever requested a change in your MOS or AFSC? YES/__/;

Upon arriving at your present duty station, were you given a briefing of your new duty assignment? YES/ /; NO/ /Which of the following do you feel best describes the promotion___system in your Detachment or Squadron? EXCELLENT/__/; GOOD/__/;FAIR/__/ ; POOR/__/Are you aware of the requirements you must meet in order to be qualified for your next promotion? YES/__/; NO/ /Is your primary civilian occupational experience being utilizedon your present duty assignment? YES/ /; NO/ / ; NOTAPPLICABLE/ /Have you received any official disciplinary action while assigned to your present Detachment or Squadron? YES/__/; NO/ /

Are you aware of the opportunity to attend civilian schools while on active duty? YES/__/ ; NO/__/

APPENDIX D

QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE ANALYSIS

QUESTION NUMBER & CHOICE OF ANSWERS

; GROUP Ia GROUP IIb GROUP IIIC

TOTALSIN

AREA 81%OUT OF

A R M 19%IN

AREA 79%OUT OF

AREA 21%; No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

1A. Yes 62 34 28 41 3 19 28 36 3 14B. No 86 47 30 44 6 37 34 44 16 76C. Undecided 35 19 10 15 7 44 16 20 2 102A. No 167 91 65 96 15 94 69 89 18 86B. Yes, Reasons Unk„ 4 2 0 0 0 0 4 5 0 0C. Yes, Duty Requir. 12 7 3 4 1 6 5 6 3 143A. Excellent 17 9 15 22 1 6 1 1 0 0B. Good 58 32 34 50 8 50 15 19 1 5C. Fair 57 31 14 21 4 25 35 45 4 19D. Poor 51 28 5 7 3 19 27 35 16 76

4A, Yes 96 52 33 49 7 44 44 56 12 57B. No 87 48 .. 35 51 9 56 34 44 9 43

45A» Yes, Short. Pers. 58 32 10 15 3 19 33 42 12 57B. Yes, Reasons Unk. 5 3 2 3 1 6 2 3 0 0C. No 120 65 56 82 12 75 43 55 9 43

6A. Yes 180 98 66 97 16 100 77 99 21 100B. No 3 2 2 3 0 0 1 1 0 07A. Yes 150 82 54 79 15 94 66 85 15 71B. No 33 18 14 21 1 6 12 15 6 29

8A, Yes 115 63 55 81 4 25 50 64 6 29B. No 68 37 13 19 12 75 28 36 15 71

9A. Yes 133 73 57 84 12 75 51 65 13 62E* No 50 27 11 16 4 25 27 35 8 3810A. Yes 78 43 46 68 4 25 24 31 4 19B. No 1.05 57 22 , 32 12 75 54 69 . 17 81

77

78

QUESTION NUMBER & CHOICE OF ANSWERS

GROUP Ia GROUP IIb GROUP IIIC

TOTALSIN

AREA 817.OUT OF

AREA 197.I

AREAN797.

OUTAREA

OF217.

No. % No. 7. No. 7. No. 7. No. 7.11A. Yes 32 17 7 10 2 13 20 26 3 14B. No 151 83 61 90 14 87 58 74 18 86

12A. Difficult 14 7 1 2 2 13 8 10 3 14B. Little Difficult 46 25 13 19 5 31 22 28 6 29C. No Difficulty 123 68 54 79 9 56 48 62 12 57

13A. Yes 120 65 41 60 11 69 55 71 13 62B. No 63 35 27 40 5 31 23 29 8 38

14A. Yes 54 30 17 25 4 25 25 32 8 38B. No 129 70 51 75 12 75 53 68 13 62

15A. Yes 163 89 63 93 12 75 69 89 19 90B. No 20 11 5 7 4 25 9 11 2 10

16A. Excellent 27 15 18 27 1 6 7 9 1 5B. Good 53 29 22 32 3 19 25 32 3 14C. Fair 52 28 15 22 8 50 22 28 7 33D. Poor 51 28 13 19 4 25 24 31 10 48

17A. Yes 164 90 56 82 15 94 74 95 19 90B. No 19 10 12 18 1 6 4 5 2 10

18A. Yes 24 13 17 25 0 0 7 9 0 0B. No 55 30 15 22 7 44 21 27 12 57C. Not Applicable 104 57 36 53 9 56 50 64 9 43

19A. Yes 28 15 7 10 4 25 9 11 8 38B. No 155 85 61 90 12 75 69 89 13 62

20A. Yes 172 94 63 93 15 94 74 95 20 95B. No 11 6 5 7 1 6 4 5 1 5

aGroup I: Contains total responses to each question from individualsassigned to the two participating military hospitals, one Air Force and one Army.

Group II: Contains responses to each question for the Army person­nel. Based on data extracted from the personnel records, two additional categories are established as follows: (1) contains 81 percent of the

personnel that have been classified in the occupational area in which they are most proficient, and (2) contains 19 percent of the personnel found classified out of the occupational area in which they are most proficient. The area of occupational proficiency is determined through classification tests, as discussed in Chapter II of this study,

CGroup III: Contains responses to each question for the Air Forcepersonnel. Responses are separated into two categories established in the same manner as Group II above, with 79 percent of the personnel in the area of occupational proficiency and 21 percent out of the area of occupational proficiency.

79

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Government PublicationsDepartment of the Air Force» Airman Glassification. Manual Number

39-1. June 30, 1963,

Department of the Army. Administering and Scoring the Army Classifica­tion Battery. Pamphlet Number 611-100. August 8, 1961.

Department of the Army. Career Planning for Army Officers. Pamphlet Number 600-3. June 30, 1964,

Department of the Army. Enlisted Personnel Management System. Regu­lation Number 600-200. March 24, 1965.

Department of the Army. Officer Qualifications and Glassification. Regulation Number 611-103. November 6, 1962.

Department of the Army. Passes. Regulation Number 630-20. January 3, 1966.

Department of the Army. Personnel Absences. Regulation Number 630-5. October 1965.

Department of the Army. Personnel Management. Regulation Number 345-5. January 3, 1952.

Department of the Army. Personnel Selection and Classification. Regu­lation Number 611-101. June 2, 1960.

Department of the Army. Personnel Selection and Classification. Regu­lation Number 611-201. June 2, 1960.

Department of the Army. Provisions Governing Qualifications. Regula­tion Number 715-63. June 17, 1958.

Department of the Army. Standards of Medical Fitness. Regulation Number 40-501. January 18, 1965.

Other SourcesIndividual Personnel Records.

The Questionnaire,

80