Personality test scores in the management hierarchy.

Meyer, Henry D.; Pressel, Glenn L.

doi:10.1037/h0056305

Cited by 10 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Compared with Guilford's (1952) findings, our data indicate higher depression and impulsivity in the VA group, with a similar higher tendency toward extraversion. Meyer and Pressel ( 1954) found social expansiveness and emotional self-control important, which our data also show. Our group is closer to the high-rated group than to the low-rated, for union business agents (Rosen and Rosen, 1957).…”

Section: Va Versus Other Management Personnelsupporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of selection procedures for a management development program.

Wiener¹

1961

Journal of Counseling Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Like many private organizations, the Veterans Administration has committed itself to a program of "management development," involving the appraisal, selection, and training of outstanding prospects among its personnel for promotion to supervisory and managerial positions. The problem of finding replacements for high level officials of this agency has become more acute recently as it became apparent that a whole "class" of top officials, many of whom began in federal service shortly after W orId War I, would be retiring. This study represents one attempt to select and train the best available local management prospects. It is closely comparable to the problems and resources of many other public and private organizations.The Literature There are few published studies of systematic research on psychological test variables which differentiate management personnel from other employees. Most of them simply assume that executives are successful by virtue of having reached high position. Their conclusions, however, are quite similar to studies which divide management personnel into "successful" and "unsuccessful." PersonalityThe most extensive study of personality differences between top executives and lower level supervisors is probably Guil-lChief Psychologist, Veterans Administration Mental Hygiene Clinic, St. Paul, Minnesota, and University of Minnesota, with appreciation to personnel at the VA Center, St. Paul, including Dennis Wilson, research psychologist; A. C. Bauer, personnel officer; and the other members of the Management Development Committee: C. E. Obermann, chairman, H. D. Gish, G. L. Holland, and R. E. Smith. The author, however, assumes full responsibility for all opinions and conclusions.

show abstract

Section: Va Versus Other Management Personnelsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Thus, social relationships were more im-pOltant at the upper level, and personal adjustment at the lower level. Meyer and Pressel (1954) studied five different levels in a company hierarchy. Social expansiveness, aggressiveness, and drive appeared to be one cluster associated with higher rank; emotional self-control and adjustment another.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of selection procedures for a management development program.

Wiener¹

1961

Journal of Counseling Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It compares the Z of a group of executives with the Z of lower eschelon occupational groups. It seems clear that executives differ markedly in broad intellectual and other personality traits from other employees (see Meyer & Pressel, 1954). This study asks whether the Z of executives also differs significantly from nonexecutives.…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

What does the Rorschach Z score reflect?

Otis¹

1959

Journal of Consulting Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These studies have utilized various projective measures such as the Rorschach (Piotrowski & Rock, 1963), the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) (Gardner, 1948;Henry, 1949), and the Tomkins-Horn Picture Arrangement Test (PAT) (Miner, 1962;Miner & Culver, 1955). In other instances, self-report personality inventories have been employed (Grimsley & Jarrett, 1973, 1975Guilford, 1952;Meyer & Pressel, 1954;Wald & Doty, 1954). The research typically has included functional vice presidents and even assistant vice presidents as well as those at higher levels.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivation to Manage at the Top Executive Level: A Test of the Hierarchic Role‐motivation Theory

Berman

Miner

1985

Personnel Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measures of managerial motivation (the Miner Sentence Completion Scale ‐ Form H) were obtained from a sample composed of 75 chief executive and operating officers, executive vice presidents, and group vice presidents. Within this sample, 49 individuals had clearly worked their way up a bureaucratic hierarchy, and thus were congruent with managerial role motivation theory, while 26 were either the original entrepreneur or relatives of the entrepreneur. Comparisons were made with a sample of 65 managers in the same companies who, although of similar ages, had not reached the same high levels. The theory congruent top executives proved to have higher managerial motivation than either of the other two groups. These results support the hierarchic role‐motivation theory and reinforce one of its most central propositions; they also support the use of the MSCS‐Form H in the selection of managerial talent and in executive assessment.

show abstract

Personality test scores in the management hierarchy.

Cited by 10 publications

References 4 publications

Evaluation of selection procedures for a management development program.

Evaluation of selection procedures for a management development program.

What does the Rorschach Z score reflect?

Motivation to Manage at the Top Executive Level: A Test of the Hierarchic Role‐motivation Theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About