Profile of Organizational Characteristics

Abstract

The Profile of Organizational Characteristics (POC) is a diagnostic instrument developed by Rensis Likert, designed to evaluate the organizational and administrative behavior within both industrial and educational settings. The scale is fundamentally rooted in Likert’s influential Systems 4 concept of management, which posits a continuum of organizational styles ranging from exploitive-authoritative (System 1) to highly participative-group (System 4). The POC focuses on quantifying perceptions across eight crucial organizational variables, providing a comprehensive assessment intended to describe the nature of managerial systems used within an organization.

The POC is often used in conjunction with related instruments, such as the 64-item *Profile of a School*, which uses parallel forms tailored for various stakeholders (students, teachers, administrators) to compare perceptions of organizational functioning across an entire system.

Keywords

Rensis Likert, Organizational behavior, Systems 4, Management systems, Organizational characteristics, Leadership, Communication, Decision-making, Organizational control, Psychometrics.

Authors

Rensis Likert

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Profile of Organizational Characteristics (POC) is to diagnose and measure the prevailing managerial system within an organization. Likert established four distinct systems of organizational behavior, and the POC helps locate the organization along this continuum.

• System 1: Exploitive-Authoritative, characterized by fear, threats, and centralized decision-making.
• System 2: Benevolent Authoritative, where management is paternalistic but still maintains strict control.
• System 3: Consultative, involving substantial consultation with employees, though final decisions rest with management.
• System 4: Participative Group, which allows for genuine group participation in decision making and highly collaborative organizational activities.

The instrument provides valuable comparative data, allowing organizations to identify where their current practices fall relative to the ideal System 4 model, thereby guiding necessary organizational development and change efforts.

Construct

The central construct measured by the POC is the organizational climate or system of management, as defined by Rensis Likert’s theory of Systems 4. This framework suggests that the effectiveness and productivity of an organization are directly tied to its reliance on participative management practices.

The POC, consisting of 43 items, operationalizes this construct across eight specific organizational variables:

• The leadership process used by management.
• The character of motivational forces within the workforce.
• The character of the communication process (e.g., direction and accuracy).
• The character of the interaction-influence process (how influence flows).
• Aspects of the decision-making process.
• The nature of goal setting or ordering.
• Aspects of organizational control and performance measurement.
• The performance goals and training practices utilized.

Validity

The source documentation indicates that the testing (technical) manuals associated with the instruments developed by Likert provide extensive information regarding their development, including validity data. While specific coefficients or types of validity (e.g., construct, criterion-related) are not detailed in the summary, users are directed to the official technical documentation for comprehensive review of the scale’s empirical support and psychometric qualities.

Reliability

The reliability of the Profile of Organizational Characteristics and its parallel forms is reported as consistently high. According to the available technical information, all reliability estimates for the scale ranged in the low to mid .90s. These high internal consistency coefficients suggest that the instruments are highly dependable and measure the underlying organizational constructs with strong precision.

Factor Analysis

Specific details regarding the factor structure or confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) are not provided in the source summary. Given that the instrument is structured around eight distinct organizational variables derived from Likert’s Systems 4 theory, it is presumed that the technical manual contains information confirming the dimensional structure that underlies these eight factors. Users seeking detailed statistical validation of the scale’s factors should consult the official Rensis Likert Associates technical publications.

Instrument

Test Type: Organizational Survey / Diagnostic Inventory

Format: Multi-item inventory using an 8-point descriptive continuum response format.

Language Available: Typically English (Original language).

Population Group: Employees, managers, administrators, teachers, students, and other organizational stakeholders.

Age Group: Adult organizational members; applicable to students and personnel in educational settings (via *Profile of a School*).

Population Details: Originally developed for industrial organizations; parallel forms (like *Profile of a School*) adapted for educational settings.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their organization across the eight dimensions, typically using a descriptive continuum. The scoring uses a series of descriptive terms to define four broad positions along the 8-point scale: Very Little (1 and 2); Some (3 and 4); Considerable (5 and 6); and Very Great (7 and 8).

Keywords

Organizational diagnosis, Decision-making process, Organizational control, Managerial system, Likert scale, Organizational climate, Psychometric qualities, Survey of Organizations.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source material.

Correspondence Address: Rensis Likert Associates, Inc. (Historical affiliation).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The original publication of related instruments, including the *Survey of Organizations*, was R. (1980). Survey of Organizations. Rensis Likert Associates, Inc. San Diego, CA: University Associates. Permissions and licensing for the use of the scale are typically managed by the copyright holders or associated entities (Rensis Likert Associates).

Test Year: 1980 (Referenced publication year).

Reference’s

• Barney, D. G. (1990). An integrative assessment of department head supervisory system-teacher conflict-teacher job satisfaction. PhD dissertation, Marquette University.
• Blackmon, D. W. (2000). A study of organizational characteristics of South Carolina school districts and the relationship of structure to school district outcomes. PhD dissertation, University of South Carolina.
• Dilly, A. H. (2001). The influence of organizational culture on student achievement in elementary schools. EdD dissertation, Wayne State University.
• Likert, R. (1967). The human organization. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Likert, R. (1980). Survey of Organizations. Rensis Likert Associates, Inc. San Diego, CA: University Associates.
• Mason-Bush, C. L. (2003). Perceptions of school climate in charter schools and teacher motivation levels. EdD dissertation, Wayne State University.
• Peoples, P. J. (1990). The relationship among school context factors and leadership style factors of principals of effective and other high schools in Southern California. EdD dissertation, University of Southern California.

Items of the Profile of Organizational Characteristics

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way. Note that these 64 items are specifically from the *Profile of a School*, the parallel instrument used for educational settings, which demonstrates the type of questions used across the Likert organizational profiles.

1. How often is your behavior seen by your students as friendly and supportive?
2. How often do you seek to be friendly and supportive to your students?
3. How much confidence and trust do you have in your students?
4. How much trust and confidence do your students have in you?
5. How much interest do your students feel you have in their success as students?
6. How free do your students feel to talk to you about academic matters such as their work, course content, teaching plans, and methods?
7. How free do your students feel to talk to you about nonacademic school matters such as student activities, rules of conduct, and discipline?
8. How often do you seek and use your students’ ideas about academic matters?
9. How often do you seek and use your students’ ideas about nonacademic school matters?
10. How much do your students feel that you are trying to help them with their problems?
11. How much influence do you think students have on academic matters?
12. How much influence do you think students have on nonacademic matters?
13. How much influence do you think students should have on academic matters?
14. How much influence do you think students should have on nonacademic matters?
15. To what extent are students involved in major decisions affecting them?
16. What is the general attitude of your students concerning class, school, or personal matters?
17. How accurate is information given to you by your students concerning class, school, or personal matters?
18. How do students view communications from you?
19. How do students view communications from the principal?
20. How well do you know the problems faced by your students in their school work?
21. What is the character and amount of interaction in your classroom?
22. To what extent do your students help each other when they want to get something done?
23. To what extent do your students look with pleasure on coming to school?
24. To what extent do you look forward to your teaching day?
25. To what extent do your students feel excited about learning?
26. How often do you see your principal’s behavior as friendly and supportive?
27. How much confidence and trust does your principal have in you?
28. How much confidence and trust do you have in your principal?
29. How free do you feel to talk to your principal about academic and nonacademic school matters?
30. How often do you try to be friendly and supportive to your principal?
31. How often do you try to be friendly and supportive to other teachers?
32. How often are your ideas sought and used by the principal about academic and non-academic school matters?
33. In your job, how often is it worthwhile or a waste of time for you to do your very best?
34. How much influence do you think teachers have on academic and nonacademic school matters?
35. How much influence do you think teachers should have on academic and nonacademic school matters?
36. How much influence do you think principals have on academic and nonacademic school matters?
37. How much influence do you think principals should have on academic and nonacademic school matters?
38. How much influence do you think central office staff has on academic and nonacademic school matters?
39. How much influence do you think central office staff should have on academic and nonacademic school matters?
40. How often are students’ ideas sought and used by the principal about academic matters?
41. How often are students’ ideas sought and used by the principal about nonacademic school matters?
42. How much do you feel that your principal is interested in your success?
43. How often does your principal use group meetings to solve school problems?
44. To what extent does your principal make sure that planning and the setting of priorities are well done?
45. To what extent does your principal try to provide you with the materials and space you need to do your job well?
46. To what extent does your principal give you useful information and ideas?
47. To what extent are you encouraged to be innovative in developing better educational practices and course content?
48. What is your general attitude toward your school?
49. What is the direction of the flow of information about academic and nonacademic school matters?
50. How do you view communications from the principal?
51. How accurate is upward communication to the principal?
52. How well does your principal know the problems faced by teachers?
53. What is the character and amount of interaction in your school between the principal and teachers?
54. What is the character and amount of interaction in your school among teachers?
55. In your school, it is “every man for himself” or do principal, teachers, and students work as a team?
56. How are decisions made in your school system?
57. At what level are decisions made about academic matters?
58. To what extent are you involved in major decisions related to your work?
59. How much does your principal try to help you with your problems?
60. How much help do you get from the central staff?
61. To what extent are decision-makers aware of problems, particularly at lower levels?
62. How high are your principal’s goals for educational performance?
63. Who holds high performance goals for your school?
64. Who feels responsible for achieving high performance goals in your school?
65. To what extent is there student resistance to high performance goals in your school?