The effectiveness of office administration programs at the collegiate level as determined by a comparison of those office employees having two years and those having four years of post-secondary education

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the four-year programs in office administration as determined by a comparison of office employees having four years of collegiate education and those office employees having two years of collegiate education in office administration. Comparisons were made using the following variables: (1) productivity ratings--as given by the participants' immediate supervisors, (2) monthly salaries received, (3) job-level classifications--administrative support or word processing, and (4) promotability--as perceived by the participants' immediate supervisors. Procedures Appraisal forms from 15 companies in the Houston Metropolitan Area were examined to secure areas to be included on an employee appraisal form developed for use in this investigation. Members of the Prairie View A&M University Industry Cluster were used as a "Panel of Experts" to check the validity of the areas included on the form. Sixteen companies belonging to the Prairie View A&M University Industry Cluster participated in a pilot study to field test the instrument during the fall of 1974. The 61 participants in this investigation were selected from a population of office employees having four years of collegiate education in office administration and office employees having two years of collegiate education in office administration. These participants were employed by firms in the Houston Metropolitan Area employing over 250 workers. Appropriate statistical analyses were used to test six basic hypotheses--five of which compared differences between the two groups. Comparisons were made in the following areas: (1) monthly salaries received, (2) job-level classifications, (3) promotability--included upward mobility, (4) skills that could be used in other areas--included lateral mobility, and (5) productivity ratings. Areas evaluated for productivity were: (1) adaptability and flexibility, (2) creativity and problem solving. (3) communications and interpersonal relations, (4) demonstrated job knowledge and skills, (5) dependability and job maturity (included cost, planning, attendance, and personal habits); (6) initiative and personal development, (7) quality of work produced, and (8) quantity of work produced. The statistical analyses used were: (1) the Chi-Square Analysis, (2) the Student's t Test, and (3) the Pearson's Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient. All of the hypotheses were tested at the .05 significance level. Findings and Implications A significant difference existed between Group 1 (Four-Year Graduates) and Group 2 (Two-Year Graduates) in their job-level classification. More of the participants in Group 1 were in positions classified as administrative support than those participants in Group 2. Most of the participants in Group 2 were in positions classified as word processing. No significant difference existed between the two groups in promotability (included upward mobility), in the possession of skills that could be used in other areas (included lateral mobility), in the monthly salaries received, and in productivity ratings. No significant correlation existed between monthly salaries and productivity ratings. Companies in the Houston area apparently have criteria other than the productiveness of the employees for determining salaries. Although the data collected could not support the hypothesis that a significant difference existed between Group 1 (Four-Year Graduates) and Group 2 (Two-Year Graduates) in productivity ratings and promotability, the difference in job-level classification was significant at the .05 level. This suggests that graduates of the four-year programs do occupy to a significant degree positions classified as administrative support. These results (if they can be substantiated by further research) direct the attention of individuals in curriculum planning to continue to orient the last two years of the four-year programs toward the development of competencies in administrative and supervisory skills. Broadening the educational background of four-year graduates to include managerial skills should place them in a better position to supervise the office employees working in positions classified as word processing. Companies in the Houston area seem to have a more uniform pattern in paying graduates of two-year programs since only three participants in Group 2 (Two-Year Graduates) earned a salary Less than $700 a month, compared to ten participants in Group 1 (Four-Year Graduates) who earned less than $700 a month. The difference in job-level classification also suggests that having earned a degree in office administration achieves for one more status in the organizations in the Houston area than not having earned one. Therefore, this writer recommends that students seeking to gain positions of an administrative support nature consider completing the four-year degree program in office administration. This writer also recommends that individuals in curriculum planning consider orienting (or continuing to orient) the last two years of the four-year program toward the development of more supervisory skills. Finally, this writer recommends replication of this study using different populations to compare findings.