Management Opinionnaire

Abstract

The Management Opinionnaire is a 27-item psychological instrument designed to assess the preferred leadership style of executive educational managers, such as school superintendents. The opinionnaire is structured around three fundamental organizational forces: forces within the manager, forces within the subordinate workers, and forces within the organization itself. Furthermore, it explores seven distinct management styles. Two of these styles are grounded in Douglas McGregor’s seminal Theory X and Theory Y framework, while the remaining five styles are derived from Robert Blake and Jane Mouton’s Managerial Grid (specifically addressing the 1,1; 1,9; 9,1; 5,5; and 9,9 orientations). The scale was originally developed and validated by Webb (1975) and later utilized by Sistrunk and Jenkins (1980) to study the preferences of superintendents in Mississippi.

Keywords

Management Opinionnaire, Leadership Style, Educational Administration, School Superintendents, McGregor, Theory X and Theory Y, Managerial Grid, Organizational Behavior, Executive Management, Educational Policy.

Authors

D. M. Webb (Scale Developer), W. E. Sistrunk, E. R. Jenkins (1980 Study Authors)

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Management Opinionnaire is to measure the values and beliefs held by educational leaders concerning their role, their subordinates, and the organizational structure in which they operate. By quantifying these beliefs, the instrument allows researchers to categorize the preferred management and leadership style of the executive manager, correlating these preferences with established theoretical models of management.

The scale specifically aims to determine how the three identified forces—managerial beliefs about self, managerial beliefs about subordinates, and managerial beliefs about the organization—influence the ultimate leadership approach adopted by the administrator. This analysis provides valuable insights into the psychological underpinnings of decision-making in educational systems.

Construct

The core construct measured by the Management Opinionnaire is the manager’s Preferred Leadership Style, which is conceptualized as being shaped by three interacting internal and external forces. These forces dictate the executive’s orientation toward structure, people, and performance.

• Forces within the Executive Educational Manager (12 items): These items focus on the manager’s intrinsic values, beliefs about their own competence, need for responsibility, and self-perception regarding creativity and problem-solving. This dimension reflects the internal drive and self-concept of the leader.
• Forces within the Subordinate Workers (6 items): This dimension assesses the manager’s beliefs about the capabilities and motivations of their subordinates, including assumptions about their capacity for self-control, self-direction, motivation, and commitment to organizational goals. This aligns closely with the assumptions inherent in Theory X and Theory Y.
• Forces within the Organization (9 items): These items relate to the manager’s beliefs regarding the necessary structure, systems, communication methods, and adaptability of the organization itself, including the role of job descriptions, organizational charts, and objective fulfillment procedures.

Validity

The source documentation indicates that the Management Opinionnaire was developed and validated by D. M. Webb in 1975 using a sample of school superintendents from North Carolina as part of a doctoral dissertation. While specific validity coefficients (e.g., concurrent, predictive, or construct validity metrics) are not detailed in the summary, the structural validity is implied through its direct alignment with two highly regarded theoretical models: McGregor’s Theory X/Y and Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid.

The subsequent study by Sistrunk and Jenkins (1980) utilized Chi square analysis to empirically test the hypothesized relationship, determining the effect that the three types of forces (manager, subordinate, organization) had on the superintendents’ expressed leadership style, thus providing evidence supporting the scale’s utility in differentiating leadership preferences based on underlying beliefs.

Reliability

Reliability was assessed using internal consistency measures. The alpha coefficient reported for the entire 27-item opinionnaire was 0.80. This result was obtained during a pilot study conducted with 30 students enrolled in an educational administration program. An alpha coefficient of 0.80 is generally considered acceptable for research purposes, suggesting that the items within the scale measure the underlying construct consistently.

Factor Analysis

Although a formal factor analysis (e.g., Exploratory Factor Analysis) is not explicitly detailed in the source comments, the scale’s construction is inherently factorial, separating the 27 items into three distinct conceptual domains or “forces.” These domains are: Managerial Forces (12 items), Subordinate Forces (6 items), and Organizational Forces (9 items). This structure suggests that the instrument is designed to measure contributions from these three conceptual factors, which subsequently map onto the seven predefined management styles rooted in established theories.

Instrument

Test Type: Opinionnaire / Self-Report Questionnaire

Format: 27 items using a 5-point Likert-type scale.

Language Available: English (as presented in the source material).

Population Group: Executive Educational Managers / Administrators.

Age Group: Adult (Professionals in educational leadership roles).

Population Details: The initial development sample (Webb, 1975) consisted of school superintendents in North Carolina. The subsequent research sample (Sistrunk & Jenkins, 1980) consisted of 125 school superintendents from Mississippi.

Test Methodology: Respondents indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with statements regarding their beliefs about management, subordinates, and organizational structure, using the following scoring key: Strongly Agree = 1; Agree = 2; No Opinion = 3; Disagree = 4; and Strongly Disagree = 5. Data analysis typically involves computing percentages for response categories and utilizing Chi square analysis to determine the influence of the three force types on the reported leadership style.

Keywords

Educational Leadership, Management Theory, Organizational Forces, Subordinate Motivation, Educational Management, Chi Square Analysis, Psychometrics, Scale Validation, Superintendent Beliefs.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in the source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in the source material.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in the source material.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: Developed in 1975 (Webb); utilized in published research in 1980 (Sistrunk & Jenkins).

Permissions and Fees: Information regarding current commercial permissions or fees is not available in the source document. The 1980 study was presented as a paper at the Mid-South Educational Research Association, and the document is publicly accessible via the ERIC database (ED 197 430).

Reference’s

• Blake, R. R., and Mouton, J. S. (1964). The managerial grid: Key orientation for achieving production through people. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.
• McGregor, D. (1969). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Sistrunk, W. E., and Jenkins, E. R. (1980). The preferred leadership style of school superintendents. Paper presented at the Mid-South Educational Research Association. The original ERIC document (ED 197 430) can be accessed via the ERIC database link here.
• Webb, D. M. (1975). Modern management concepts and practices in North Carolina local school systems. EdD dissertation, Duke University.

Items of the Management Opinionnaire

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. You consider that one of the most important job responsibilities of an executive educational manager is the stimula- tion of his subordinate workers to produce high standards of performance.
2. As an executive educational manager, you feel that those subordinate workers who are affected by the decisions made in a local school system should be allowed to participate in the decision-making process.
3. You feel that a more realistic fulfillment of objectives and attainment of goals can result if the organizational struc- ture provides for a systematic, step-by-step procedure.
4. You feel that the organizational structure of a local school system should provide for the evaluation of executive educational managers on agreed upon competencies which have been stated in measurable terms.
5. You believe that a local system will meet with more success when the behaviors of the organization and the behav- iors of the subordinate workers are developed and directed together.
6. You consider that the establishment of group-written organizational objectives and goals is an effective way for executive educational managers and subordinate workers to communicate.
7. You believe that an executive educational manager should be able to fulfill his responsibility without having to exert his authority.
8. As an executive educational manager, you believe that your subordinate workers are capable of providing self- control in their work.
9. You regard that subordinate workers should realize that certain unavoidable situations occur in any organization.
10. You feel that the subordinate workers in an organization should be evaluated on measurable competencies which they have helped to establish.
11. You regard that the personal satisfaction achieved from the fulfillment of objectives and the attainment of goals are all the rewards needed by an executive educational manager.
12. You believe that executive educational managers in a local school system perform best when they work under agreed upon job descriptions and organizational charts.
13. You believe that the potential needs of subordinates should be provided for by the organizational structure.
14. As an executive educational manager, you believe that your subordinate workers are capable of motivating them- selves in their work.
15. As an executive educational manager, you feel that your subordinate workers will become committed to the pur- poses of a local school system if they can sense a realistic fulfillment of objectives and attainment of goals.
16. You feel that an executive educational manager should be a creative and imaginative person.
17. You believe that subordinate workers in a local school system can perform their best work when they are guided by job descriptions and organizational charts with which they agree.
18. You believe that positive results will occur in a local school system when the behaviors of the organization and the behaviors of executive educational managers are mutually developed and channeled in the same direction.
19. As an executive educational manager, you believe that your subordinate workers are capable of exercising self- direction in their work.
20. You regard that executive educational managers should acknowledge the fact that uncertainties arise in any orga- nizational structure.
21. You believe that an executive educational manager should not only accept responsibility entrusted to him but that he should also seek responsibility.
22. You believe that the organizational structure of a local school system should be adaptable to the potential needs of executive educational managers.
23. You feel that an executive educational manager must be aware of the many ways to organize problems for solutions.
24. As an executive educational manager, you believe that your subordinate workers want to become involved in the activities of a local school system because they like their work.
25. You believe that the most effective communication in a local school system is that communication which flows from subordinate workers upward to executive educational managers.
26. You believe that an executive educational manager must individualize his methods when working with his subor- dinate workers.
27. You feel that an executive educational manager can only become effective through specific knowledge and experience.