motivational analysis of organizations

Validity and Reliability
Establishing validity and reliability of any model and instrument of this type is difficult
or impossible. However, if the face validity is positive and if the learning value is
apparent, then the material should be useful when it fits the training and learning goals.
The results of the instrument are not intended to label the respondents, but simply to
give them feedback on their preferred styles of learning.
Administering the Instrument
Although this instrument is particularly helpful to managers and prospective managers,
it is appropriate for anyone who desires to know more about his or her own preferences
for learning styles. A management-development program, which was built on the model
and utilized the instrument, can be summarized in the following way:
The first session met in order to accomplish two things: (1) to allow the participants
to become acquainted with at least four other participants and (2) to outline preliminary
objectives for the program. During the getting-acquainted process, each person
introduced one other person. Later, triads were formed to develop additional program
objectives, which then became part of the program outline. The facilitator used a
systems framework to explain the relationship of inputs, throughputs, and outputs. The
facilitator also gave special attention to the feedback loop and discussed it in terms of
the need for communication and self-control in order to make sure that the program was
accomplishing its goals and that each participant was receiving what he or she needed.
The next focus was on the learning model. The facilitator explained how the
program activities would by necessity be heavily oriented toward experiential learning
and would deal directly with the feelings and emotions that would emerge as learning
took place in domains II and IV of the model.
The model and instrument were valuable in helping participants to learn something
about one another, which in turn helped them in working together more effectively.
After the instrument was administered, the results of the last half of the instrument were
used to form groups of participants with similar scores. Each group consisted of five to
seven members. Within each group, the members compared their responses and tried to
determine whether or not the scores seemed valid. They also discussed the results of the
first half of the instrument. Then all of the groups held a joint discussion.
Topics for such a joint discussion might include the way men are socialized to be
more cognitive and women are socialized to be more affective; how background or
academic interests can cause a bias; and how individuals can determine which domain
they belong in if their scores place them on an axis. The discussions in both the small
and large groups can help participants to be more aware of themselves, of the other
participants, and of the kind of learning that will take place in the program.
This particular program was designed to place a heavy emphasis on and to give
special skill-building attention to domains II and IV.
The Pfeiffer Library Volume 19, 2nd Edition. Copyright © 1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 61