|
Staffing theory〔Wicker, A. W. (1979) ''An introduction to ecological psychology''. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.〕 is a social psychology theory that explores the effects of behavior settings being either understaffed or overstaffed. Understaffing refers to the idea that there are not enough people for what for the behavior setting promotes, whereas overstaffing is the overabundance of people. The term staffing theory was previously known as manning theory, but was renamed. Staffing theory focused on the idea that when there are fewer people available for a number of behavior settings, there is pressure on individuals to take on responsibilities. A behavior setting is a physical location, temporally or physically bound, that influences the behavior of the people within it. The concept of manning theory comes from research done by Barker & Gump entitled ''Big School, Small School''.〔Barker, Roger & Gump, Paul (1964). ''Big School, Small School''. Stanford: Stanford University Press.〕 Synomorphy, which is the degree of fit between a behavior setting and the individuals within it, is an important concept for understanding Staffing Theory. When a place is high in synomorphy, the number of people and the types of tasks being performed match what the behavior setting provides, and the individuals can achieve maximum productivity.〔Forsyth, D. (2010). Group dynamics. (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning〕 ==Background research== The ideas that led to the development of staffing theory came primarily from Roger Barker and Paul Gump, who were researchers stationed at The University of Kansas. Barker and Gump paved the road for what is now known as ecological psychology, as well as developing concepts such as behavior settings and synomorphy. In Barker and Gump’s 1964 work, Big School, Small School, the two researchers examined environmental factors as well as students’ behaviors in multiple schools in northeast Kansas. More specifically, Barker and Gump were interested in whether the size of high schools had a significant effect on students’ participation in and satisfaction with school activities. They started their investigation by calculating population (P) and the number of behavioral settings, or differentiation (D) values for each school. Some examples of the types of behavior settings are classes, halls, gymnasiums, administrator’s offices, and lunch rooms. The data they collected had one primary interpretation: as P increases, so too does D, but not as fast. In other words, as population increases, the P/D ratio becomes smaller. These findings contradict the idea that big schools offer more opportunities for students.〔Barker, Roger & Gump, Paul (1964). ''Big School, Small School'' (p. 48). Stanford: Stanford University Press.〕 Barker and Gump examined the relationship between school size and number of extra curricular activities reported by graduating Seniors. They did this by examining yearbooks, which recorded the activities that the Seniors participated in for all four years of their high school education. They found that as school size increases, the number of activities that students participate in goes down.〔Barker, Roger & Gump, Paul (1964). ''Big School, Small School'' (p. 72). Stanford: Stanford University Press.〕 A third investigation by Barker and Gump looked at forces that led students toward participation in relation to school size. They divided schools into either the big school or the small school category. They also differentiated students as being either regular students or marginal students. Marginal students were students who had low IQ, poor academic performance as indicated by grades, a father in a nonprofessional occupation, a father who did not finish high school, or a mother who did not finish high school. What they found is that, for external pressures toward participation, the mean number of forces indicated was 7.4 for small school regular students, 7.2 for small school marginal students, 5.6 for large school regular students, and 1.5 for large school marginal students. This pattern clearly indicates that students feel there are more external pressures to participate in small schools compared to big schools, and that large school marginal students perceive by far the fewest pressures to participate.〔Barker, Roger & Gump, Paul (1964). ''Big School, Small School'' (p. 122). Stanford: Stanford University Press.〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「staffing theory」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|