THE EFFECT OF TYPE A AND TYPE B PERSONALITY AND …

[Pages:45]79 A1,81>1 t{

THE EFFECT OF TYPE A AND TYPE B PERSONALITY AND LEADERSHIP STYLE ON ABSENTEEISM

THESIS

Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

By

Judith Ann Nichols, B.A. Denton, Texas August, 1987

-

-- l'

'o-

- - -%

komm

Nichols, Judith Ann, The Effect of Typq A AndI eypB Personality and Leadershi Style _jn Absenteeism. Master of Science (Industrial/Organizational Psychology), August, 1987, 41 pp., 10 tables, references, 63 titles.

This study explored the relationship of Type A/B personality and leadership style to absenteeism. Absenteeism data were gathered for 243 male fire fighters and fire engineers. Each subject was administered the Jenkins Activity Scale to measure his Type A characteristics and the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire to measure his perception of his supervisor's leadership style. The results, though non-significant, revealed that: a) Type A's had less absenteeism than type B's; b) Subjects who perceived their supervisors as being low on consideration had less absenteeism than those who perceived their supervisors as being high on this dimension; c) Type A's absenteeism was low and Type B's was high when working under a leader perceived as low on structure. Finally, a weak but significant three-way interaction effect revealed that the highest amount of absenteeism occurred when Type B' s worked under supervisors who were high in consideration and low in structure. The least amount of absenteeism occurred when Type A's worked under supervisors who were high in structure and low in consideration.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

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

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

iv

THE EFFECT OF TYPE A AND TYPE B PERSONALITY AND LEADERSHIP STYLE ON ABSENTEEISM

Introduction-.-.-.-.---.---.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.--

Characteristics of the Organization Job Satisfaction Personal Characteristics of the Individual Type A and Type B Behavior Leadership Style Rationale and Hypotheses

Method-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-17

Subjects Measures Procedure

Results.----.---.-.---.-.---.-.---.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-20

Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 3 Supplementary Analysis

Discussion-.---.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.---.-.-.-.-.-.-27

REFERENCES--- - - ---.--.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- 33

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table

Page

1. Absenteeism by Hours and Frequencies per Year

and Type A and B Personality. ... .....

21

2. Absenteeism by Hours and Frequencies per Year for Subordinates Working Under Leaders Perceived as Being High or Low on Consideration....... 21

3. Mean Number of Absenteeism Hours per Year by

Type A Personality and Structure.. ... ...

23

4. Mean Number of Absence Frequencies per Year by

Type A and Structure .

. ..........

23

5. Summary of Analysis of Variance by Type A

Personality and Structure for Absenteeism

Hours. ....

............

24

6. Summary of Analysis of Variance by Type A and

Structure for Absence Frequencies. . .....

24

7. Mean Number of Absenteeism Hours per Year by Type A/B x Structure x Consideration ...... 25

8. Summary of Analysis of Variance by Type A, Structure and Consideration.. ....... . 26

9. Mean Number of Absence Frequencies per Year by Type A/B x Structure x Consideration. . . . 27

10. Summary of Analysis of Variance by Type A, Structure, and Consideration (Total Frequencies. . .........a- . 28 . . . . . . . . .

iv

THE EFFECT OF TYPE A AND TYPE B PERSONALITY AND LEADERSHIP STYLE ON ABSENTEEISM

Numerous theories address the causes of absenteeism, all of which suggest that it is the result of an integrative process, involving characteristics of the individual, the informal organization, and the formal organization. Adams (1965) relates absenteeism to the employee's perception of inequities at the work place. Thus, an employee may react by missing work if he feels that he is not receiving compensation equal to his efforts. Hill and Trist (1962) view absenteeism as withdrawal from the stress of work situations. Stress may be caused from dissatisfaction with the organization and it policies, supervisor and/or coworker relationships. Other researchers hold that absenteeism is the result of social exchange between the employee and all aspects of the work site. This includes informal agreements such as co-worker and supervisory relationships as well formal ones such as contracts and written policy (Chadwick-Jones, Nicholson, & Brown, 1982).

Previous findings about absenteeism in the literature have been inconsistent and tenuous, due in part to the lack of comprehensiveness of research methodologies. Most studies have focused on only one or two variables and have not measured the effects of moderating variables. When

1

2

statistical relationships have been found, they have been low to moderate (Muchinsky, 1977; Chadwick-Jones, Nicholson, & Brown, 1982; Hacket & Guion, 1985). Nevertheless, some basic trends may be found. Characteristics of the Orgnization

In terms of the formal organization, written policy has been found to influence absenteeism. In a survey of regional and national control practices, it was found that companies which recognized good attendance had lower absenteeism than companies that did not (Scott & Markham, 1982). This general finding has been verified by specific studies performed in various organizations. Scott, Markham, and Robers (1985) compared four types of attendance programs on four plants of the same company. They found that recognition had a stronger impact on reducing absenteeism than financial reward, prize reward, or written feedback. Kopelman and Scheller (1981) found that the attendance of hospital employees improved with the introduction of a policy which included reward for good attendance and punishment for poor attendance. These researchers suggest that policies do affect employee absences, more so if both types of reinforcers are used.

A decrease in absenteeism was also found by Olson and Bangs (1984) when a "no-fault" attendance policy was introduced in a manufacturing company. By giving employees more control over the use of their leave time, by

3

establishing attendance standards, and counseling those who abused standards, absenteeism decreased. In addition, the replacement of a fixed work schedule with a flex time policy was shown to decrease absenteeism in female insurance employees (Krausz & Freibach, 1983).

Though written policy appears to influence absenteeism, the change may also relate to the attention workers receive during the development and implementation of the policy. Porter and Steers (1973) cite several studies which suggest that the impact of a policy may be due to the fact that employees are allowed to participate in its creation. A human factor may be involved here, one of mutual interest and concern on the part of the organization and the employees to work for the common good. Jh atisfaction

Findings in the literature about the relationship of absenteeism and job satisfaction appear to be inconsistent. In some studies, there appears to be no correlation (Popp Belohlaw, 1982; Keller, 1983) while in others, the correlation appears to be negative (Porter & Steers, 1973; Blau, 1985). Blau states that inconsistent findings may be due to the fact that previous research has not addressed the different types of satisfaction and absenteeism. For instance, he found that excused and unexcused absences were affected by different factors of job satisfaction. He recommends studying the various components of satisfaction

&

4

and comparing them to different indices of absenteeism in order to obtain a more accurate picture.

Recent studies have used validity generalization to study the relationship. Terborg et al. (1982) reported an overall negative correlation. They found that satisfaction with promotion, supervision, and organizational commitment was generalizable across situations. However, less consistency was found with satisfaction with co-workers and pay. Scott and Taylor (1985) employed meta-analysis to review 23 studies. They also found an inverse relationship between absenteeism and satisfaction with the job and coworkers.

However, Nicholson et al. (1976) did not find that absenteeism was related to job satisfaction using validity generalization. Hackett and Guion (1985) determined that less than four percent of the variance in absence measures was associated with job dissatisfaction. They argue that correlations found in previous studies do not indicate true relationships, but are due to statistical artifacts. They state that job satisfaction by itself is not enough to warrant absenteeism and recommend that research should be aimed at determining those factors external to the organization which would draw someone away from work as opposed to those organizational factors which inhibit one from going to work.

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download