The Values and Value Systems of Governmental Executives

Today there is an increasing societal awareness and scrutiny of public figures and governmental employees. Much of this increased concern has been pessimistic and detrimental in nature. Although societal concern over the administration of public affairs is in general a desired and needed behavioral phenomenon, much of this concern is based on little or no substantial empirical data but instead is a manifestation of preconceived ideas, interpersonal bias, hearsay evidence, political maneuvers, and the like. What is needed today in the investigation of public affairs is not only increased societal concern but also advanced empirical sophistication. Another dilemma of considerable interest today is the identification of effective personnel within various types of organizations. Can individual personalities best fit into one type of organization rather than another? Do certain personality characteristics distinguish potential managerial personnel from other employees? Do the personal attributes required of managers differ according to types of organizations? What personality similarities and differences exist between line and staff personnel or between private-sector managers and public-sector administrators? The information that follows does not precisely answer all of these questions, but it gives an insightful analysis of them and a useful methodology for further empirical research. This report is not intended to be supportive or demeaning in nature. Instead, it is merely descriptive of a relatively new approach that attempts to better measure and understand various forms of human behavior. It provides results of this approach in terms of a relatively unresearched populace -namely, governmental executives. After presenting material on the theory behind the value and value system methodology, the author presents the "values and value systems of governmental executives" and compares these data with those gathered from 11 other private and public career aad occupational groups. "Conclusions and implications" of this study are briefly discussed in the final section of this report.