A SURVEY OF JOB-RELATED ATTITUDES AND OPINIONS OF CAREERISTS IN THE SUPPORT SERVICES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 59
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 11, 2006
• Sequence Number: 3
• Publication Date: May 1, 1970
• Content Type: STUDY

QXcOtive Registry
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-R DP86B00269R00090009
n
A SURVEY OF JOB-RELATED ATTITUDES AND OPINIONS
OF CAREERISTS IN THE SUPPORT SERVICES
Office of Medical Services
Psychological Services Staff
Research Branch
May 1970
MORKIDIF
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006QQ8 146 CIA Zl P86B00269R000900090003-0
Page
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Sample Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Questionnaire and Administration. . . . . . . . . 4
RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Basic Job Dimensions -- Degree
of Satisfaction on Present Job. . . . . . . . . 5
Job-Related Attitudes of DDS Careerists
Comparisons with Other Agency Professionals , . 8
Differential Job Attitudes of Headquarters
and Overseas-Assigned Support Careerists. . . . 25
Summary of Attitudinal Differences Between
New and Relatively Experienced Support
Careerists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Discussion of Comments Made in Response
to An Open-End Attitude Survey Question . . . . 31
Appendix A: Summary of Background Characteristics
of the DDS and Non-DDS Samples . . 38
Appendix B: Distribution of Response Per-
centages to Agency Job Attitude
Questionnaire: DDS Sample Only. . 41
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14
C: CCIA---RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
JOB ATTITUDES AND OPINIONS OF
CAREERISTS IN THE SUPPORT SERVICES
,, SURVEY OBJECTIVES:
.
To
describe
job-related attitudes and opinions of DDS careerists
To
To
To
compare
compare
compare
job views
job views
expressed
of
of
job
DDSers and other Agency professionals
Headquarters- and Overseas-assigned DDSers
satisfaction of experienced and new DDSers
? DDS group consisted of 133 employees who EOD'd approximately 5 or 10
years ago in professional-level jobs and who were under age 30 when
hired. All carried DDS service designations.
- O/S sub-group, numbering 61, consisted of Support officers
who had served overseas for at least 6 months of the year
preceding the survey
- Headquarters sub-group consisted of 72 Support officers
Agency comparison group (non-DDSers) consisted of 415 employees who
met same age and EOD requirements as DDS group. Included were 46%
DDIers, 45% DDPers, 9% DDS&Ters, and 1% from O/DCI
. DDS (1-year) comparison group, numbering 35, was made up of employees
who had entered Agency in -8, at under age 30, in professional-level
jobs. Results for this group were drawn from an earlier attitude
survey.
127 item multiple-choice questionnaire covering respondent's back-
ground, and attitudes toward immediate job and work environment,
career, training and supervision, and the Agency in general
1 open-end question which invited personal comment and suggestions
for change
Survey conducted in Fall 1969 under auspices of the Inspector General
to whom questionnaires, completed anonymously, were returned
133 of 186 DDSers returned questionnaires, yielding 72% return rate
DDS GROUP -- General Job Satisfaction
. 75% claimed satisfaction with their jobs as a iahole
About 15% were "about as satisfied as dissatisfied"
Less than 10% expressed clear dissatisfaction
-i-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
Aspects on which a High Percentage (about 75% or more) Satisfied
Agency Goals - importance and worthwhileness
. Co-workers - cooperation and interpersonal relations
? Intrinsic Aspects of Work Itself
? Personal Work Accomplishments - sense-of"makiftg a contribution
Agency Rules and Regulations - reasonableness
? Treatment by Supervisor
? Competence of Supervisor
? Impression Job makes on Family and Friends
JO Aspects on which a Moderate-Sized Percentage (60 to 70%) Satisfied
? Physical Surroundings and Working Conditions
? Salary Received
? Recognition Received for Work - appropriateness and adequacy
Jod Aspects on which Low or Moderate-Sized Percentage (45 to' 55%) Satisfied
Classroom and On-the-Job Training -(,quality and relevance
e.g., Nearly 1 in 5 felt Agency had provided him with inadequate
training
Opportunities for Advancement
More than one-third felt that promotional opportunities were unfair
and that their rate of advancement would be slower than they were
led to believe
Way Agency is Run (see below)
r1a tors Pertaining to Way Agency is Run Eliciting Unfavorable Comment
Communications
46% claimed communication gap existed between management and
employees
47% felt that management failed to explain adequately to employees
the reasons for its actions
Coordination
37% felt management does not see to it that there is cooperation
between offices
Career Development and Personnel Management
37% indicated that decisions affecting their assignments and
careers were-made with little regard for their own preferences
67% indicated that they were rarely asked to participate in the
planning of their careers
36% felt that Agency is not doing a good job managing its young
professional
35% felt Agency has grown more depersonalized in relations with its
employees
Miscellaneous
About 4 in 10 claimed that they are unable to get enough clerical
help and that they spend too much time themselves on clerical tasks
-ii-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/y/4 CCj gD, 86B00269R000900090003-0
DDS vs. Other Agency Professionals
Slightly larger percentages of DDSers than others satisfied with
intrinsic aspects of their work and with personal work accomplishments
Proportionately more DDSers satisfied with their immediate work
environment, although in absolute terms, sizeable minorities of both
groups noted discontent with their office areas
Percentage-wise more DDSers voiced satisfaction with quality of Agency
training instructors and with the handling of the personnel function'-
77% of the DDSers and 67% of the others indicated long-range career
plans were to remain with Agency
DDS: New vs. Experienced Careerists
Levels of job satisfaction voiced by new (1-year) and relatively
experienced DDSers did not differ on most extrinsic aspects of their
jobs - e.g., supervision, training, co-workers, pay, work setting
A larger percentage of new DDSers viewed opportunities for advance-
ment favorably
Proportionately more of the experienced DDSers satisfied with
intrinsic aspects of their jobs, including how interesting, challeng-
ing, and meaningful they have been
DDS: O/S vs. Headquarters
On the relatively few matters on which differences between Head-
quarters and O/S Support personnel were found, the O/S group tended
to express the more favorable or positive views
Proportionately more O/S employees favorably regarded management's
efforts in the areas of communication and coordination
Most free response comments were expressions of discontent and con-
cerned personnel management and career development in the Agency.
Specific sources of concern in these areas included:
Inadequate or total lack of career planning
Questionable bases on which promotions are made
Limited recognition accorded exceptional performances
Retention of non-productive employees
Lack of truly objective system of performace evaluation
Inefficient utilization of Support CTs
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08 14 : CI R DE 8T B00269R000900090003-0
INTRODUCTION
This report describes some job-related attitudes of a group
of Support Services careerists serving both at Headquarters and
overseas locations. For reference purposes, comparative attitude
data on a group of careerists from the other Agency Directorates
are also provided. Both the DDS and the comparison samples consisted
of employees who had entered on duty approximately five or ten years
ago in professional-level jobs. A complete description of the samples
appears below.
The source of the data for this report was a questionnaire
attitude survey conducted under the auspices of the Office of the
Inspector General in Fall 1969, and involving over 550 Agency
officers. The questionnaire was designed to develop information
concerning employees' attitudes and views about the careers, their
immediate jobs and work environment, their training and supervision,
and the Agency in general.
.r A Psychological Services Staff report dated January 1970 ("A
Survey of Job-Related Attitudes of Five- and Ten-Year Agency Offi-
cers") describes in detail the survey results for the overall
.,. Agency sample. The present report deals more or less exclusively
with the attitudes of the DDSers within this larger Agency sample.
Included are: 1) discussions in absolute terms of the job attitudes
and satisfactions of DDSers as expressed on both objective and
-1-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/1C E : RCI E RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
open-end questionnaire items; 2) comparisons in relative terms
of the stated job satisfaction of DDSers and other Agency pro-
Ifessionals; and 3) comparisons of job views of Support Officers
serving at: Headquarters and overseas.
Sample Description
The Support sample consisted of 133 professional officers
98% male, 2% female -- all of whom carried DDS ("S") career service
esignations. The comparison or non-DDS sample totaled 415.
Most of the DDS careerists were between 30 and 40 years of
gE: at the time of completing the questionnaire survey; all were
tinder age 30 when hired. Sixty percent of the group were college
raduates, with 11% claiming advanced degrees. Nearly all. of the
ion-college graduates in the DDS sample EOD'd 10 years ago and were
mployed in communications specialities. With few exceptions, the
IDS respondents reported EOD grades between GS-05 and GS-08, with
grades 6 and 7 being most frequently cited. Slightly under one-
uarter of the group indicated they had been through either the
OT or CT Programs.
DDS employees with EOD dates in 1963-64 made up 43% of the
ample; the remaining 57% reported EOD dates in 1958-59. A little
ove-r-- half of the DDSers were serving at Headquarters at the time
of the survey.
Appendix A contains a breakdown of the DDS sample and the
nIon?-DDS comparison sample on the above and other background factors.
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006L08114C: CIA--RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
An exact breakdown of the DDS sample by career service
designation is not available as this information was not requested.
However, the number in each Support career service to whom question-
naires were sent is available and allows us to estimate the above
breakdown. This is done by assuming that the proportion of all
returned questionnaires from a given service parallels the pro-
portion of the total number of questionnaires that was initially
sent out to that service. The resulting estimates are displayed
below:
SERVICE DESIGNATION
(by office)
ESTIMATED %
OF SAMPLE
OC
51
OS
16
OL
5
OP
O/DDS
OF
CTP
4
OTR
1
OMS
1
Assigned to CS
10
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
Questionnaire and Administration
A full description of the attitude questionnaire and the
details of its administration both at Headquarters and at overseas
locations; are contained in the PSS Report dated January .1970
referenced above. It suffices to indicate in-the present context
that the questionnaire was to be completed anonymously and returned
directly to the Office of the Inspector General. Self-addressed
envelopes, were provided for that purpose.
Of a, total of 186 questionnaires distributed to personnel
with Support ("S").career service designations, 133 were returned
and included in the analyses. This represents a return rate of
72%, one which is somewhat smaller than the rate of 80% obtained
for the non-DDS group.
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
Basic Job-'Dimensions --
Degree of Satisfaction on Present Job
This section is concerned with the question of how satis-
fied the surveyed DDSers were with various basic dimensions of
their jobs. Responses of the sample to 15 global questionnaire
items are the bases for the remarks that follow: Although
the distribution of responses to these items does not tell the
complete story (inasmuch as 99 additional items explore more
specific job views and opinions) they do provide a good overview
and introduction to sources of job satisfaction/dissatisfaction
among Support Services officers.
Figure 1 shows the percentage of the DDS sample responding
"Satisfied" and "Dissatisfied" to each of the 15 job dimensions.
Generally speaking, these dimensions seem to fall into three
clusters or groups corresponding roughly to three degrees of overall
satisfaction/dissatisfaction. At one extreme are dimensions 'an
which about 75% or more of the group expressed satisfaction. Lead-
ing the list are satisfaction with the Agency's goals and with one's
co-workers. Only slightly smaller proportions found their work
interesting and meaningful, their supervisors competent and fair,
Agency rules and regulations reasonable, their personal work
accomplishments gratifying, and the impression their jobs made on
others satisfactory. On none of the above job aspects did the per-
cent expressing clear dissatisfaction exceed 10%.
-5-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
PERCENT OF DDS SAMPLE EXPRESSING SATISFACTION AND
DISSATISFACTION WITH VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THEIR JOBS
O2 ASPECT
TIm ortance of
P,g ncy goals
PERCENT DISSATISFIED:'
30 20 10 _0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1004M
C o-.workers
i
Work itself---interesting-
nels and meaningfulness
Pefsonal work
accomplishments
'Ircatment by
su ervisor
AgIncy rules
an regulations
Co petence of
supervisor
Ge eral job
satisfaction
Impression job
makes on others
Physical surroundings/
working conditions
Pay;
Rocbgnition re-
coiled for work
CLaosroom and on-
t:ze'-job training
I
Way' Agency
i3 hurt
Opp rt:unities
for advancement
I
33
PERCENT SATISFIED
_ 818
86
8.i
8
r
12
1~3
Dots not include percent responding "About as
~4
79
75
6'?
512
4
^
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: ECIA---RE PT6B00269R000900090003-0
Moderate-sized percentages of DDSers, ranging from about 60
to 70% of the sample, expressed satisfaction on three additional
job aspects: work environment; salary; and recognition received
for work. Typically, only between 10 and 20% of the respondents
expressed clear dissatisfaction on these matters.
Job aspects on which a low to moderate-sized proportion of
the Support group voiced satisfaction included classroom and on-
the-job training, the way the Agency is run, and opportunities
for advancement. The most prominent exception to the picture of
general and widespread satisfaction delineated earlier concerned
the last of these job aspects: one-third of the DDSers were dis-
satisfied with their promotional opportunities.
On an overall job attitude index, fully three-quarters of
the DDS sample indicated that they were satisfied with their
jobs as a whole, and only about 10% claimed dissatisfaction. The
remainder claimed they were "about as satisfied as dissatisfied".
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 20 06/08/14 : CI -RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
JOB-RELATED ATTITUDES OF THE DDS CAREERISTS
Comparisons with Other Agency Professionals
The preceding remarks were intended to provide an overview
of the job satisfaction expressed by DDS professionals toward
various aspects of their jobs. What follows are more detailed
descriptions of the specific job-related attitudes, views, and
opinions of these same careerists. These descriptions are organ-
ized around 18 dimensions or clusters of items into which the
questionnaire was organized to facilitate exposition. Comparisons
between the DDS and non-DDS Agency comparison sample are also
included within each dimension. Noteworthy differences between
the samples are highlighted.1 A complete listing of all the sur-
vey items organized by job dimension and the distribution of
responses of the DDS sample to these items is provided in Appendix B.
Background Characteristics
As noted earlier, both the DDS and the Agency comparison
sample consisted of employees who had EOD'd approximately five or
ten years ago in professional-level. jobs and who were under age 30
when hired. The Directorate most heavily represented in the non-DDS
sample was the Directorate for Intelligence with 46% of the total;
next came the Clandestine Service with 45%; then the Directorate for
Science and Technology with 9%; and finally, the Office of the
1Statistically significant differences were found on a total of
26 of the 114 items. The DDS sample expressed, on the average,
more favorable attitudes than the non-DDSers on 18 of the 26
items where reliable differences were found.
-8--
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006T8/14: CIA-R E DP86B00269R000900090003-0
E
Director with 1%. A total of 415 officers were in the Agency
comparison sample. Nearly all the respondents were male.
Significant difference between the DDS and non-DDS groups
were found on a number of background factors. These are described
below.
Comparison of EOD dates of the groups indicated that a
greater percentage of the DDSers have been in the Agency for
ten years (57 vs. 30%). Far more of the non-DDSers than DDSers
were college graduates (96 vs. 60%); advanced degrees were claimed
by one-third of the non-DDSers, but by only 10% of the Support
group.
The Agency comparison sample enjoyed higher current grades,
on the average, than the Support group. To illustrate, fully 60%
of the non-DDSers but only 44% of the DDSers reported current
grades of GS-11 or higher. Also noted was the fact that entry-
level grades tended to be lower among the DDSers surveyed. A
final difference noted was that proportionately twice as many
non-DDSers as DDSers had been through the CT Program (48 vs. 24%).
Job-Related Attitudes
The Work Itself
Most of the DDSers surveyed felt satisfied, overall, with the
work they have done, although as many as one-quarter reported that
they do not get challenging, important assignments. A small
-9-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T`
minority, roughly between 15 and 20%, claimed that their 'work
bores them or that they have not been given an opportunity to
fully use their abilities and creative talents in their work.
Hardly ever did a respondent serving in a support capacity
feel that the Agency expects too much from him, or that he finds
some aspect of his job too difficult. Some did say, however,
that their jobs were usually so easy they weren't interesting and
some did claim having too much pressure on them -- averaging about
18% in both cases.
As has been found to be the case elsewhere in the Agency,
a large minority (37%) of DDS officers claim they spend too much
,time doing clerical tasks. An even larger percentage reported
that they have had trouble getting enough clerical help.
Overall, it may be concluded that very few DDS professionals
were dissatisfied with the intrinsic aspects of.their work. But,
some, perhaps around 20% of the present sample, seem to be question-
ing whether their time and talents were being used in ways allowing
them to make their maximum contribution to the Agency.
By and large, non-DDSers responded much like DDSers on the
variety of items concerned with intrinsic aspects of their work
and the demands placed upon them. Two minor exceptions to this
pattern were noted. A slightly larger percentage of the Support
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14C CIA- DP86B00269R000900090003-0
group reported they are satisfied with the work they have done,
while a slightly larger percentage of the others thought that
their jobs require them to be creative (81 vs. 69%).
Personal Work Accomplishments
Having a strong sense of personal work accomplishment, of
making a real contribution through one's efforts, was particularly
characteristic of DDSers. Many felt they are performing in jobs
which really count toward the overall Agency mission and relatively
few (about 1 in 5) seem to think that their jobs sometimes matter
very little in the scheme of things.
Consistently, a slightly larger proportion of DDSers than
non-DDSers expressed positive regard for their particular work
accomplishments and contribution to the Agency. In absolute terms,
the level of satisfaction voiced on this job aspect by both groups
was fairly high.
Opportunities for Advancement
For a sizeable number of DDSers, promotional opportunites
were viewed with disfavor; for slightly less than one-half of the
sample they were regarded with clear satisfaction. Typically,
one-third or more of the DDS group asserted that promotional
opportunities are unfair, that their personal chances for promotion
are not good, and that they would advance more quickly in private
-11-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 20Q61E08114 : CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
R E T
!industry. More than one-third of this group intimated that their
;rate of advancement in the Agency would be slower than they ire
led to believe. It would be informative to learn the bases from
which these employees' expectancies regarding promotion had arisen.
Was there a failure in communication or did the expectancies
which were subsequently disconfirmed really represent wishful
thinking or rationalization?
Another clue to some of the discontent referenced above may
be found in the fact that 36% of the DDSers thought that rewards
and recognition in the Agency are based primarily on actual
accomplishments while nearly one-third disagreed. The response
of this latter minority is probably indicative of an unfavorable
lattitude toward the bases on which rewards are made. Typically,
employees would like to see rewards made contingent upon demonstrated
erformance. Within the DDS sample, as many thought that demonstrated
erformance was not the basis for getting ahead as did. "Getting
known by the right people" and "seniority" were the most frequently
cited alternatives to demonstrated performance.
* * * * *
In no significant ways did the pattern of attitudes of the
two Agency groups differ toward opportunities for advancement.
lassroom and On-The-Job Training
Attitudes of the DDSers toward their training experiences
ere at best only moderately favorable. Slightly over ones-half
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08 14 : CIA--E DP86B00269R000900090003-0 T
of the respondents expressed clear satisfaction with the quality
and relevance of the training they had received, while nearly
30% claimed they were "about as satisfied as dissatisfied". More
positive was the finding that about 2 out of 3 respondents felt
satisfied with the quality of Agency training instructors -- 1 in
6 did not.
Although the majority of Support officers could agree that
a well-planned program for people in their positions does not exist,
relatively few (less than 20%) claimed that the Agency has provided
them with inadequate training. It is possible that this apparent
discrepancy arose from the feeling of many that a well-planned
training program cannot (or need not) be designed for their positions.
Nearly two-thirds of the DDS sample indicated that they have
taken academic courses related to their jobs since joining the
Agency. For most this extramural training has been financed entirely
or in part by the Agency.
Except for the finding that satisfaction with Agency training
instructors was more widespread among DDSers than the others (66 vs.
52% satisfied) the overall attitudes of these two groups toward the
quality and relevance of their training were remarkably similar.
P and Benefits
Across the DDS sample satisfaction with salary may be character-
ized as moderate. It does not appear to be one of the more salient
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C :fit E T
sources of job satisfaction cited by DDSers. About 1.in 5 felt
dissatisfied with his present salary, while well over one:-third
claim they are underpaid and getting less than they would outside
of the Government.
Understanding of, and satisfaction with, the program of
benefits ;provided to employees was widespread in the DDS sample.
About three-quarters of all Support officers expressed positive
views in this area, less than 20% did not.
* * * *
Although the overall degree of satisfaction/dissatisfaction
,expressed toward pay and benefits across the two groups was much
the same, a larger proportion of thenon-DDSers (54 vs. 38%)
were of the opinion that they would be better off salary-wise
outside of Government. The fact that this latter differential was
not repeated in the degree of satisfaction noted by the groups
toward their pay is somewhat unexpected. Satisfaction with one's
pay is thought to be conditioned, at least to some degree, by
expectation of what one might receive in alternative jobs.
Co-Workers
As noted earlier, some of the most positive views and opinions
expressed anywhere on the questionnaire concerned one's co-workers.
Nearly all respondents claimed that they both got along well with
and enjoyed the cooperation of their co-workers.
* * * * *
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 200%t0W1 ~ : ill R,pP86B00269R000900090003-0
Virtually identical high regard was expressed by the DDS
and non-DDS groups toward their co-workers.
Recognition Received for Work
About 3 out of 5 DDS respondents claimed they were satisfied
with the amount and kind of recognition -- both praise and criti-
cism -- they have received for their work. A little over 10% of the
sample indicated clear dissatisfaction on this job dimension. Unfair
criticism of one's work was hardly ever cited. On the other hand,
nearly one-third of those surveyed noted they do not usually receive
praise for a job well done.
DDSers and non-DDSers differed in attitudes toward the recog-
nition received for their work only in that the latter group was
more likely to acknowledge that they usually receive praise for a
job well done (74 vs. 61%).
Supervision: Treatment by Supervisor and
Competence of Supervisor
The great majority of DDSers regarded with considerable
satisfaction and favor the quality of the supervision they receive.
Consistently, between 80 and 90% of the sample claimed that they
can trust their supervisor, that he listens to their suggestions,
and that he allows them to make their own decisions. On a slightly
less positive note, it was observed that 70% of the DDSers said
they know what their supervisors think of them and their work.
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 200S/E8/1 :SCE TDP86B00269R000900090003-0
On the average, about 4 out of 5 DDSers thought that. their
supervisors were well-qualified technically and made sound decisions
about 1 in 10 felt otherwise. Overall, it would appear that the
immediate supervision of the DDS employees surveyed is a particularly
well-regarded job aspect.
* * * *
In almost every aspect of the supervisory process that they
were asked to comment upon, DDSers and non-DDSers responded in
a highly similar manner. As noted above, satisfaction with super-
visors was a source of much favorable comment.
Physical Surroundings/Working Conditions
Generally speaking, attitudes of DDSers toward various
aspects of their work environment presented a rather mixed picture
and hence cannot be simply characterized. On such practical
matters as adequacy of parking, availability of office supplies,
starting and quitting times, and access to transportation to and
from work,, favorable attitudes were the rule. More than 80% of
the sample responded positively. Significantly less favorable
attitudes were expressed toward the adequacy of eating facilities
nearly one-third were dissatisfied. Also on a negative note was
the fact that on the average, one-quarter of the Support respondents
described their office areas as "depressing" and offering "too little
r_Lvacy".
11
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 200%01(1~: ~IP-RgP86B00269R000900090003-0
On an overall index designed to assess satisfaction with
physical surroundings and working conditions, a slightly larger
percentage of DDSers than the others responded favorably, Although
sizeable minorities of both Agency groups felt that their office
space affords them too little privacy, this feeling was relatively
more prevalent among non-DDSers (43 vs. 27%). By a reliable
margin, non-DDSers were also more likely to comment that eating
facilities were inadequate.
Impression Job Makes on others
The great majority of DDSers are satisfied with the impression
their job makes on family and friends. Only about 5% were clearly
discontent with this aspect of Agency employment, although far
more (nearly one-third) did acknowledge that generally "the public
looks down on Government employees". It is speculated that some
employees see their jobs as taking on special status by virtue of
their work being done in this and-not some other Government agency.
* * *1 * *..
No reliable group differences were found on any item falling
in this job dimension.
Agency Rules and Regulations
Only about 2% of the total DDS sample felt dissatisfied with
Agency rules and regulations and indicated that they are unnecessarily
strict or rigid.
-17-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2009/001104: l~-VP86B00269R000900090003-0
The accepting attitudes of DDSers toward Agency rules and
regulations were also found to the same high degree among the
non-DDSers surveyed.
The Way the Agency is Run: Adequacy of Communication and
Career Development Personnel Management
A large number of attitude items have been grouped, in what
will no doubt sometimes appear an arbitrary manner, unde:c the
rubric given above. It was felt that these items inquired, one
way or another, into the administration of the Agency. In all
three areas, evidence of discontent or concern was found to signi-
ficant degrees.
As mentioned earlier, on an overall index which assessed
satisfaction with the way the Agency is run, slightly more than
one-half of the DDS sample responded clearly favorably, whereas
slightly less than one-fifth did not; a sizeable minority (31%)
reported they are "about as satisfied as dissatisfied" with the
way the Agency is run. On a more positive note, fully three-quarters
of all those surveyed expressed the opinion that the Agency is run
by people who have good judgment - less than 10% felt otherwise.
In spite of this expression-of confidence in the judgment of Agency
managers, relatively few respondents (37%) felt that management
sees to it that there is cooperation between offices.
Adequacy of Communication. About as many DDSers felt that
management explains adequately to employees the reasons for its
-18-
S E CI2 E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/28/4C CJA 1q)86B00269R000900090003-0
actions as did not (42 vs. 47%). In a closely parallel manner,
more than 40% of the sample asserted that there is a communication
gap between management and employees, while more than 40% did not
perceive such a gap. There is no simple explanation for this
polarization of view, although there is a clue in the fact that
Support personnel at Headquarters are more likely than those
overseas to cite communications as a problem area.
In light of the communication deficit noted by so many it
was somewhat surprising to find that most DDSers felt they can
make their ideas and complaints known to management. Evidently,
many DDSers are not satisfied with the response that their inputs
are eliciting from people above them.
Career Development/Personnel Management. With very few
exceptions, DDSers claimed they have experienced a definite
growth in skills in their present jobs. But this acknowledged
growth in skills does not seem to be associated in the minds of
many DDSers with an altogether satisfactory system for personnel
management and career development. To illustrate, more than one-third
of the Support group felt that decisions affecting their assignments
and careers are made with little regard for their own preferences
and fully two-thirds agreed they are rarely asked to participate
in the planning 66 their careers. Only one-half of the group could
claim that their supervisor has shown an interest in their career
development, while even less than one-half could agree unequivocally
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2005/088/14 :RCIAA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
that the personnel office in the Agency tries to be helpful --
nearly one-quarter felt to the contrary. Part of this negative
attitude may be attributable to the feeling among a sizeable
minority that they are not kept informed of personnel policies
and procedures.
Another problem area cited by a number of DDSers is the
fitness reporting system. Nearly two-thirds agreed that it left
a lot to be desired.
Some indication of the more global. attitudes of the Support
sample toward personnel. management is present in the finding that
better than 1 out of every 3 respondents felt that the Agency has
grown more depersonalized in its relations with its employees.
This response is. complemented by the assertion made by more than
one-half of the sample that the Agency should take more interest
in each employee as a person than it presently does.
* * * *
Generally speaking, the views of DDSers regarding the way
the Agency is run, as detailed above, differed only minimally
from the views of the Agency comparison sample. An exception
to this conclusion was the finding that more non-DDSers than
DDSers (38 vs. 23%) considered the personnel program of the Agency
a hindrance. In a similar vein, reliably larger percentages of
non-DDSers agreed with the statement that, "The personnel. office
-20-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/g81i4cCkA- O 86B00269R000900090003-0
in the Agency tries to be helpful". The fact that DDS officers
are more likely to acknowledge that they are kept informed of
personnel policies and procedures may partially account for this
group difference in attitude.
Caliber of New Prof sional_s
Among DDSers, the belief that young professionals now-entering
the Agency are as capable as those who entered when they did (five
or ten years ago) was fairly widespread (more than 3 in 4 thought
so). However, fewer of these experienced Support officers (only 44%)
MW thought that these young professionals are as motivated, that is,
committed to their work, as they themselves were at the outset of their
careers. Perhaps the most relevant and striking finding on this
topic is that only one-quarter of the DDSers felt that the Agency is
doing a good job of managing its young, recently-hired professionals.
More than one-third of the Support sample expressed the opinion that
the Agency is not doing a good job in this area of personnel manage-
ment.
A greater percentage of non-DDSers than DDSers hold favorable
views of the caliber of new professionals. While the clear majority
of both groups considered the new professionals as capable as they,
themselves, were when they started their careers, proportionately
more of the non-DDSers made this claim. Much more striking was
-21-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
the group difference in opinion on the matter of the motivation
of the new professionals. A significantly greater percentage
of the non-DDSers than DDSers (60 vs. 44%) thought that the new
professionals are as committed to their work as they, themselves,
were. And finally, while relatively few of either group thought
that the Agency is doing a good job of managing young professionals,
this concern was slightly more common among the non-DDSers.
Importance of Agency Goals
The DDSers were close to being unanimous in agreeing that
the goals of the Agency are "worthwhile" and "important".
Non-DDSers shared the same high regard as the DDSers for
the goals of the Agency.
oramitment to Agency Career
A variety of more or less related job and career concerns
I.re grouped under this heading. To begin with, it was noted that
about 7 in. 10 DDS respondents said that they really feel part of
he Agency and that the longer they work here the stronger. becomes
that sense of belongingness. On the average, less than 20% of
i
he Support group claimed they feel neither of these sentiments
Toward the Agency. On one particularly revealing and informative
item, 69% of the DDSers claimed that if they had it to do over
.gain, they would still come here to work; 17%T were uncertain as
-22--
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/g81~4CC&- ZE 86B00269ROO0900090003-0
to what they would do, and only 14% stated that they would probably
not come to work here if given the choice once again.
About 3 of every 4 DDS professionals surveyed claimed that
their long-range career plans were to remain with the Agency. As
might be anticipated, fewer employees plan to remain in their
present jobs (35%) than plan to remain in the Agency. Going into
general management or administration or getting into some specialty
within their field are the most frequently preferred alternatives
to remaining in one's present job -- cited by 40 and 19% respectively.
Reliable group differences in attitudes toward career commit-
ment were found on only two questionnaire items. Whereas slightly
more than three=quarters of the DDSers indicated they plan to
remain with the Agency, two-thirds of the non-DDSers expressed
this intention. A second difference was that a slightly larger
percentage of the DDSers asserted that the longer they work for
the Agency, the more they feel they belong. It is somewhat sur-
prising that this group difference did not obtain on the item
which inquired about feelings of being part of the Agency. About
70% of both groups commented that they "really feel part of the
Agency", about 20% disagreed.
General Job Satisfaction
As noted in a previous section, the proportion of DDSers
expressing clear satisfaction with their jobs as a whole was fairly
-23-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
high (75%); less than 10% of the sample indicated they were
dissatisfied. In what appears to be a contradiction to this
overall picture, nearly one-fourth of the DDSers noted that they
were "discouraged" in their present jobs. It may be that this
last item taps more superficial or transitory aspects of one's
work situation.
* * * * *
No overall difference in levels of expressed job satisfaction
was found between the DDS and Agency comparison sample.
Reactions to Questionnaire
Two items in the questionnaire were designed to elicit
opinions about the value of conducting attitude surveys. The
majority of DDSers (71%) felt that "filling in a questionnaire like
this is a good way to let management know what employees think" --
11% disagreed. A slightly smaller majority -(61%) thought that
"some good may come out of filling in a questionnaire like this" --
16'% disagreed. Thus, for most DDS respondents, the attitude
survey was viewed as a worthwhile endeavor from which real benefit
may derive.
Favorable views toward the attitude survey were more wide-
spread among DDSers than among the non-DDSers. Especially note-
orthy is the.fact that a far larger percentage of the DDSers than
the others believed that benefit would derive from conducting this
purvey.
S E C R P T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2005 /E81~4 CbA-~DP86B00269R000900090003-0
Differential Job Attitudes of Headquarters
And Overseas-Assigned Support Careerists
In planning the data analyses for this survey, it was felt
that the distinction between Headquarters and Overseas (0/S)
Support personnel would be a meaningful one to make. An O/S
DDSer was defined as one who had :served overseas for at least
one-half of the year immediately preceding the survey. Presum-
ably, his attitudes would reflect at least in part any influence
that overseas service might have on general job outlook. It is
recognized that this distinction between Headquarters and O/S
employees is an approximate one and that closer analyses would
reveal considerable overlap of experience and orientation between
these groups.
The focus in this section will be primarily on those survey
items on which responses of the two DDS groups differed to both
a statistically reliable, and, in our judgment, a noteworthy
degree.
Only 12 of the 114 questionnaire items were responded to in
a sufficiently different manner by the O/S and Headquarters
samples to warrant comment. On each of these 12 items it was the
O/S sample which expressed, on the average, more favorable or
positive attitudes. Unless 'specifically mentioned below, it may
be assumed that the O/S and Headquarters Support careerists share
to the same degree the attitudes detailed in the preceding section
giving the results for the overall DDS sample.
-25-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/1 4: CI -RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
Background Characteristics
The O/S sample consisted of 61 DDSers while the Headquarters
group number 72. Minimal differences were found between the groups
on the variables;_of age, sex, EOD dates, and the percent indi-
cating they had been CTs. The groups did differ considerably in
education and grade level. The majority of O/S personnel reported
that their highest level of education is less than a bachelor's
degree. By comparison, slightly under one-quarter of the Head-
quarters sample possess less than a B.A.; 61% have their B.A.'s
while another 15% claim advanced degrees. This differential in
educational level attained was also reflected in EOD and current
grades of the two groups. To illustrate, the most frequently
cited entry-level of the Headquarters Support officers were GS-07
and 8 and for the O/S respondents, GS-05 and 6. Current grade
level for 60% of the Headquarters employees fell at GS-1J. or above.
Less than one-fourth of the O/S groups claimed current grades
at. or above this level. A final point concerning background char
acteristics is that a slightly larger percentage of the O/S
than the Headquarters group (85 vs. 70%) indicated that their
long-range career plans are to stay with the Agency.
Job-Related Attitudes
Although no reliable group differences in expressed satisfaction
toward classroom and on-the-job training were found, significant.
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006ig81~4-C Z9 86B00269R000900090003-0
differences did emerge on two more circumscribed aspects of the
training dimension. Whereas more than 1 in 4 of the Headquarters
group were of the opinion that the training they had received for
their job was inadequate, only slightly over 5% of the O/S group
shared this view. On a related training item proportionately more
O/S than Headquarters Support officers expressed the belief that
the Agency had a well-planned training program for people in their
positions. It should be recalled that'in absolute terms only
modest numbers in either group acknowledged the existence of
well-planned training programs for them.
Generally speaking, both DDS groups expressed the same high
degree of satisfaction on an item dealing with the impression
that their jobs made on their family and friends. The groups
did differ in response, and rather strikingly, on a related item
which read, "The public looks down an Government employees". Forty-
three percent of the Headquarters sample,':?but only 17% of those
overseas, agreed with this statement.
Roughly equal proportions of the two groups (averaging about
one-third) felt that they were getting paid as much as they would
outside the Federal Government. However, a reliably larger pro-
portion of the Headquarters group asserted that their salaries
would be better outside of Government.
The area of communications and coordination was one in which
consistent differences between the DDS groups were found. For
example, more of the O/S employees felt that management both
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
jsees to it. that there is interoffice cooperation and explains
adequately to employees the reasons for its actions. In a similar
vein, proportionately more O/S employees reported that they feel
free to take complaints up the line. Interestingly,,-fewer of the
O/S group thought that there was too much "red tape" in the Govern-
ment. The above set of differences is perhaps best summarized
,and reflected in the finding that O/S officers were much less
likely than those at Headquarters to indicate that a communication
gap existed between management and employees.
Two final group differences concern personnel-type cDnsidera-
tions. it was noted that fewer O/S than Headquarters DDSers agreed
with the statements, "The personnel program of this Agency is
s hindrance" (15 vs. 31%) and "The people who hired me misrepresented
my job" (9 vs. 25%).
Summary of Attitudinal Differences Between
New anff-TelaTively Experienced Support Careerists
Up'-to this point, the job-related attitudes and views of
experienced Support officers have been discussed. To gain
perspective on the thinking of these careerists (and'-how it may
have changed over time) selected comparisons are made in this
section between their item responses and those of a group of
relatively new DDS professional-level employees. This latter group
,of employees, numbering 35, completed an attitude survey, nearly
identical to the one described in this report, approximately one
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14 :R CIE A-RDP86BOO269ROO0900090003-0
year after joining the Agency. They were surveyed in Fall 1968
"(along with 265 young professionals in other Directorates) as
part of the Agency's participation in President Johnson's Program
for Talented Youth in the Federal Service. Included in this DDS
group, referred to below as the 1-year DDSers, were employees
who: 1) EOD'd between July 1967 and June 1968; 2) were under
age 30 when hired; and 3) whose entry-level positions required the
equivalent of a bachelor's degree. In view of the small size
of the 1-year group, the conclusions drawn below must remain
tentative.
The levels of job satisfaction registered by the 1-year and
the experienced DDS groups toward most extrinsic aspects of their
jobs did not differ. Thus, about the same proportions of the
.00
two samples said they were satisfied with such job aspects as
ilia quality of supervision, training, co-workers, pay and work environ-
ment..An extrinsic aspect on which differences did emerge concerned
opportunities for advancement. Where fully one-third of the
experien,c,e.d.DDS careerists indicated clear dissatisfaction with
the opportunities for promotion provided by the Agency, only one
individual in the 1-year sample voiced a similar complaint.
Significant group differences were found on several attitude
items concerned with intrinsic aspects of one's job. For example,
larger percentages of the experienced group expressed satisfaction
S E C R E T
.MO
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14 :RCCIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
with the work they've been doing, including its interestingness
and meaningfulness (85 vs. 60% satisfied). On two related items --
not inquiring about satisfaction per se -- it was found that
the experienced...DDSers were more likely to acknowledge that they
got "challenginq,:*importarxt assignments" and to assert that their
work did not bore them. Evidently, over time the average level
of satisfaction of on-board DDSers toward the intrinsic aspects
of their work is increased to a measurable degree. It was noted
earlier that 77% of the combined five- and ten-year group indicated
that their long-range career plans are to remain with they Agency.
For the 1-year DDSers, the percent planning to make a career
here is nearly as high at 74%. The fact that the differential
in percent currently satisfied with their work is not reflected
in the percent planning to stay may at first glance appear sur-
prising. However, it may result simply from a feeling among new
DDSers that their work will become increasingly involving and
significant as time goes on. Another consideration is that job
factors on which group differences were not found, as for example,
identification with the Agency's goal and mission, may play a
particularly significant role in employees' career planning.
The two DDS groups differed only modestly in their experiences
and views regarding the handling of their career development;
percentage-wise, slightly more in the 1-year group appear satisfied.
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
To illustrate, more agreed that their supervisors had shown
an interest in their career development and more pointed out
that they had been asked to participate in the planning of
their careers. A final point of difference noted was that a
larger percentage of experienced DDSers (46%) than relatively
new ones (24%) felt that a communication gap existed between
management and employees.
Discussion of Comments Made in Response To
An Open-End Atti:tdde Surve Question-
The last section of the attitude survey contained a single
question designed to give the respondents an opportunity to
express more fully in writing reasons for job satisfaction/
dissatisfaction not covered elsewhere in the questionnaire and to
offer specific suggestions for change.
Seventy of the 133 DDsers included in the survey made one
or more comments on the open-end question. The overwhelming majority
of their comments contained some element of dissatisfaction, either
plainly stated or strongly implied. This is not an unusual
finding for an attitude question formated this way, and it does
not cast doubts on the validity of the information (frequently
favorable) developed from the other sections of the questionnaire.
lMrs. assisted in the preparation of this section. 25X1
She was a so responsible for the computer analyses on which this
report was based. Clerical aration of this
report was provided by Miss 25x1
-31-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C .R E T
Typically, people restrict their comments to sources of dissatisfaction 0
and negative concern, leaving unmentioned those areas in which they
are either satisfied or toward which they feel indifferent. There-
fore, to achieve proper perspective and a balanced view of what
.employees are thinking, the results from the open-end question
should not be considered independently of the results from the
multiple-choice items presented earlier in this report.
In preparing this section, emphasis was given to narrative
material which either enlarged and clarified information developed
from other parts of the questionnaire or which introduced novel
(concerns of respondents. Relatively few of the proposals for
change offered by DDSers can be considered new or unique, and they
are therefore not given special treatment in what follows.
Far and away the greatest number of comments made by DDSers
dealt with personnel management in general and the provisions
or lack thereof for career development in particular. Included
nder these broad headings were expressions of concern with what
as perceived as the 1) inadequate or total lack of career planning;
questionable bases on which promotions are made; 3) inappropri-
ate educational requirements placed on certain positions; 4) limited
recognition accorded exceptional performances; 3) retention of
bon-productive employees; and 6) lack of an objective system of
performance evaluation.
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006SQ8 14C: CIAERlP86B00269RO00900090003-0
A small number of respondents, evidently feeling that the
smultiple-choice format did not allow them to really tell what they
thought of their jobs, used the open-end question for that purpose.
Another topic eliciting a handful of comments from Support officers
dealt with their sometimes not so harmonious relations with
operations people in the field. A final topic of more than passing
concern to several DDSers (apparently former CTs) concerned what
they perceived to be the inefficient utilization of Career Trainees
in the Support Services. (Although,lin one sense, a topic subsum-
able under career development/personnel management, it will be
separately discussed because of the especial current interest in
M" Career Trainees.)
Career Development/Personnel Management
Or
"How about some career planning?" was the way one DDSer
began his remarks about what he and many others felt was the out-
standing problem facing professionals in the Agency. Another
ao complained that his "present assignment bears no relationship to
past training, education, or interests". Still another pointedly
.W
commented, "...it is difficult to maintain the proper attitude
toward my job when there is little interest shown in my future".
MO
For many, what career planning they were familiar with was vari-
ously described as hit or miss, non-professional, impersonal, or as
a matter of expediency and luck. Some illustrative quotes follow:
"Too often this office and the Agency in general look upon a person
?r S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2005 / 08/1CI RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
as a body to fill a specific requirement rather than as an indi--
vidual." Another noted that young officers are assigned "on the
basis of expediency with little or no apparent concern for career
development and/or advancement". Another wanted to see "more
emphasis placed on career guidance with individuals on a personal
and a more timely basis".
Not every comment on career development/personnel management
took the Agency to task. Several among the DDSers thought that this
Agency tries, perhaps more than any other Government agency, to
apply "good personnel management", but recognized that this is
difficult, if not impossible, in large bureaucracies.
A cause of concern to several DDSers was the handling of
promotions within the Agency. These individuals stressed that
promotions should be based more on merit and less on seniority
or politics than they presently are.,. One respondent noted that the,.
present policy which does not maximize the relationship between
the performance and reward systems "tends to take away motivation
from the younger professionals". On a somewhat related theme,
four Support officers commented unfavorably on what they perceived
to be the disproportionate weight given to academic degrees in
decisions affecting personnel placement and promotion. These
ffic:ers wanted such deci6ions~to reflect to a greater decree
iow well the man can handle his present job and assume increased
?esponsibility. As one put it, "Some of the things we do are not
taught in the hallowed halls of higher learning."
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
The inadequacy of the present fitness reporting system,
noted by many on a multiple-choice attitude item, was a concern
repeated by a few individuals in their narrative comments. About
the only positive suggestion made was to require supervisors (one
suggested a "career counselor") to periodically meet with super-
visees, review their work, and discuss goals.
Five DDSers suggested that more be done by supervisors and
the Agency in general by way of recognizing and voicing appreciation
for outstanding work accomplishments. A couple of respondents
remarked that non-productive employees are still too frequently
found "...retired 'in place' for years".
Overall Job Satisfaction
As noted earlier, overall job satisfaction, as indexed by
several multiple-choice attitude items, appeared fairly widespread
through the Support sample. This same impression is gained from
the remarks of those few DDSers, about ten in number, whose narra-
tives mentioned job satisfaction. A couple of representative
comments follow: "My job is not perfect, but it'is as close as
I have a right to expect. It provides me with interesting, challeng-
ing work with fair pay. Private industry has offered more money,
but not a better job." Another said, "In summing up my personal
attitude toward this Agency, I feel that I can accept its short-
comings and, balanced with its advantages, maintain a productive
association for many years."
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
'Relations Between Support and Operations Elements
Four DDSers identified as a source of frustration and
iscouragement their relations with operations officers, especially
d
I
in the field. One DDSer expressed general dissatisfaction with
he lack of "respect and cooperation" he received in the field.
Inother's dissatisfaction arose from the "definite inability of
DADS careerists to overrule operations people in support matters --
slpecifically as they affect personnel assignments, etc."
Career Trainees in the Support Services
I Several DDSers, apparently all former Junior Officer or
areer Trainees, made the point that all too often Support CTs --
fter finishing the course in a state of "motivational hi-gear" --
are shunted aside into make-work jobs of a non-professional variety.
One particularly verbal Support Services CT captured this and many
Of the other themes developed in this narrative so well that his
arrative comment is reproduced below, nearly in its entirety.
"...I am presently at the point where I must make
a major decision to stay with or leave the Agency. Up
to this point in my career, I have had no complaints as
far as training, promotions, and future prospects. How-
ever, since leaving the auspices of the JOT program, I
have become increasingly disenchanted with the Agency.
I now feel as though I am an expendable item. Lack of
career planning, slowness of promotions (always excused
by personnel ceilings, lack of 'headroom', etc.) and,
in general, a feeling that even if you do an outstanding
job, you will not be either recognized or rewarded, has
led to this feeling of disenchantment. At this stage of
career development, I believe it is very important for
I management to offer challenging and rewarding jobs to
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2005/08 /1C4 RCIE - TDP86B00269R000900090003-0
those who have put most of their training behind them.
Most of my fellow JOT classmates are tired of training
and are ready to fill exacting and responsible positions.
I consider myself very fortunate to be in my present
position, but I will be the first to admit that knowing
the right people helped me get it. In other words, my
demonstrated abilities were not enough. Also, I had to
seek out the job, it wasn't offered through normal per-
sonnel procedures. It is things such as this that cause
many of the younger Agency employees to feel that estab-
lished personnel procedures have to be circumvented if
they are to obtain the kind of position they desire."
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 200 i0fi11~ :RCI~-F P86B00269R000900090003-0
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE DDS AND NON-DDS SAMPLES
-38-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE DDS AND NON-DDS SAMPLES
DDS SAMPLE NON-DDS SAMPLE
,r Distribution of Sample
by Career Service:
Executive Service (DCI)
--
01
Clandestine Service (DDP)
--
45
Intelligence Service (DDI)
--
46
Research Service (DDS&T)
--
09
Support Service (DDS)
100
--
1958
3..1
16
19'59
26
14
1963
27
50
1964
16
20
.r Have you been through the Career
Training Program (CTP or JOT)?
Yes
24
48
No
75
52
During the past year did you spend
six or more months overseas (PCS)?
Yes
46
35
No
54
65
How old are you?
25-29
11
19
30-34
52
50
35-39
35
28
40 and above
02
04
What is your sex?
Male
98
90
Female
02
10
-39-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
S E C R E T
DDS SAMPLE NON-DDS SAMPLE
What is your highest degree of
education?
Less than a bachelor's degree
40
04
Bachelor's degree
29
30
Bachelor's degree with some
some graduate work
20
32
..r Master's degree, L.L.B., J.D.,
or equivalent
09
31
Ph.D., M.D., or equivalent
02
03
^. What was your grade when you entered
on duty with the Agency? (Do not
consider summer jobs.)
GS-5 or GS-6
41
18
GS-7 or GS-8
44
62
GS-9 or GS-10
13
13
GS-11
01
04
GS-12
--
02
GS-13
01
--
GS-14
01
--
What is your present grade?
GS-9 or GS-10
23
07
GS-11
35
27
GS-12
28
36
GS-13
08
22
GS-14
05
06
GS-15
02
02
GS-16 and above
01
--
-40-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 200WO J/18 : jl -l pP86B00269R000900090003-0
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSE PERCENTAGES TO AGENCY
JOB ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRE: DDS SAMPLE ONLY
-41-
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
I a I I I [ E I n E4 ! t. t t t t l
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSE PERCENTAGES TO AGENCY
JOB ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRE: DDS SAMPLE ONLY
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
I.
THE. WORK ITSELF--INTERESTINGNESS AND
MEANINGFULNESS
18.* How do you feel about the work you have
aQ
Ja
~Q~~
done? (This would include how interesting
1
5
9
47
38
31.
and meaningful it has been.)
My job requires me to be creative.
A
6
12
13
40
29
39.
Some aspects of my job are too difficult
0
2
3
32
63
49
for me .
I have to look outside my work for things
D
.
to make life worthwhile and interesting.
D
8
23
10
37
21
59
I often come home angry or irritable because
.
of something that has happened at work.
D
6
18
7
54
15
D
4
10
3
33
50
69.
My work bores me.
80.
I spend too much time doing clerical tasks.
D
15
22
9
44
10
84.
I have enough work assigned to keep me'-busy.
A
2
10
0
30
58
1For items marked A, "Agree Completely"r=and "Tend to Agree" were considered favorable responses.
For items marked B, "Disagree Completely" and "Tend to Disagree" were considered favorable response
*These items, which cover basic dimensions of job satisfaction, were answered on a five-point scale
ranging from Very Satisfied to Very Dissatisfied.
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
t 1. 1 t r 1 S R I >1 1 I i t
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
a~4~
~Qm
88.
I get challenging, important assignments.
A
-8
17
8
48
18
99.
My job is usually-so easy it isn't
interesting.
D
5
14
3
43
35
105.
There is too much pressure on my job.
D
109.
I have little opportunity to use my
abilities in the-Agency.
D
4
14
8
54
20
123.
The Agency expects too much from me.
D
1
2
7
46
45
II. PERSONAL WORK ACCOMPLISHMENTS
15.* How do you feel about your personal work
accomplishments? (This would include such
.things as whether or not you have success-
fully completed your work assignments or to
what degree you feel you have been able to
make a real contribution.)
40. I rarely see the results of my work.
64. I successfully complete a job or some
aspect of it every week.
75. At the end of the day I wonder what I have
accomplished.
118. Sometimes I feel that my job'counts for
very little in the Agency
27.* How do you feel about the opportunities for
promotion provided by the Agency?
S E C R E T
D
4
18
5
44
37
D
4
11
5
47
33
D
5
16
8
52
20
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
I i l I I St 2 11 T I I t I l
38. Opportunities for advancement are
excellent in my occupation.
57. I would probably advance more quickly
in private industry than in the Federal
Government.
73. My chances for promotion in the Agency
are good.
100. My rate of advancement will be slower
than I was led to believe.
113. Promotional opportunities are fair.
RESPONSE
JUDGED @~ v
FAVORABLE o v ~~0
J~ Jai Q,o
IV. CLASSROOM AND ON-THE-JOB TRAINING
16.* How do you feel about the classroom and
on-the-job training you have received in
and for your present position? (This
would include such things as the quality
of the training and its relevance to the
job.)
44. During the first part of my Agency employ-
ment, I would rather have spent more time
on the job and less in classroom training.
53. The Agency has provided inadequate training
for my job.
79. I am satisfied with the quality of Agency
training instructors.
94. The Agency has a well-planned training
program for people in my position.
A
A
D
A
15
12
4
12
8
28
22
30
25
27
14
46
17
19
18
34
20
39
30
40
9
0
11
14
8
5
12
28
41
14
D
3
15
11
39
32
D
5
13
10
49
23
A
4
13
18
52
14
A
16
39
15
25
5
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
I I I t I I ( S L : R1_ 2 1 l 1 1 l 1 $
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
V. ' P'AY' AND, BENEFITS
25.* How do you feel about the salary you
receive?
34.
I am getting paid as much as I would
outside the Federal Government.
A
77.
For the work I do I am-underpaid.
D
103.
I'm satisfied with employee benefits.
A
112.
I understand what the Agency benefit
program provides for employees.
A
VI. CO-WORKERS
17.* How do you feel about your co-workers?
(This would include how well you get
along with them and how much cooperation
they give you.)
1 ss coo oration
32. My co-workers give me r,
than they should. D
50. I get along well with my co-workers. A
68. In terms of interests and attitudes, I
th m fellow
wi
y
nave a lot in common
workers. A
83. One or more of my co-workers has dis-
criminated against me because of my age. D
V
Q~v
O~
e
av
V
W
~mv
2
17
20
53
9
14`
24
28
27
6
9
28
14
34
15
2
14
7
55
22
3
15
9
53
20
0
1
13
45
41
3
5
3
56
33
0
1
1
50
48
1
14
10
59
17
3
6
2
18
71
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
C I L S(' C _- T ~. l t t
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
VII. RECOGNITION RECEIVED FOR WORK
21.* How do you feel about the recognition you
have received for your work? (This would
include such things as any praise or criti-
cism you might have received for your work.)
85. My work is unfairly criticized. D
89. In this Agency, rewards and recognition
are based primarily upon actual accomp-
v
1 12 26 44 17
lishments. A 5 25 15 51 5
1; 102. I usually receive praise for my work when
I have done a good job.
VIII.
TREATMENT BY SUPERVISOR
20.* How do you feel about the way your
33.
supervisor has treated you?
My supervisor watches me too closely.
D
1
5
3
37
54
43.
My supervisor listens to my suggestions.
A
1
8
8
51
33
52.
There are too many people telling me what
to do.
D
1
14
4
53
29
56.
I can trust my supervisor.
A
3
8
7
42
39
65.
My supervisor gets along well with: his
boss.
A
2
6
16
53
23
67.
I know what my supervisor thinks of me
and my work.
A
2
14
14
52
17
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
I I I I A- C i- T! 4 l ( 1 1
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
74. My supervisor gives me inadequate time
for breaks and lunch. D
78. I feel ill at ease in the presence of my
supervisor. D
82. My supervisor allows me to make my own
decisions.on how I do my work. A
95. My supervisor has little influence on the
people above him. D
121. My supervisor is too interested in his own
success to care about the: needs of his
employees. D
IX. COMPETENCE OF SUPERVISOR
19.* How do you feel about your supervisor's
ability to understand the nature of your
work?
36. My supervisor gives confusing instructions. D
48. My supervisor makes too many technical
mistakes. D
60. My supervisor makes sound decisions. A
90. My supervisor fails to provide me with the
materials, information, or assistance I
need to do my best work. D
98. My supervisor is well-qualified technically. A
IV
ngt
~Qd
QO
oWV
Qv
~o
14
8
1
22
55
1
4
2
30
64
3
5
2
49
41
5
14
25
40
17
2
12
13
49
24
2
10
5
42
41
1
3
8
48
39
0
8
11
67
13
2
12
2
45
39
3
9
11
48
29
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
t ( [ r I I. S. C 1. T I t t l
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
X. PHYSICAL SURROUNDINGS/WORKING CONDITIONS
24.* How do you feel about your physical sur-
roundings and working conditions? (This
would include such things as the appearance
of your office and whether you have adequate
lighting or quiet.)
29. I can get whatever office supplies I need.
35. I have access to inexpensive or free
parking near where I work.
I 47. I am satisfied with the starting and
U) quitting times.
1
54. My-office space gives me too little
privacy.
61. I have adequate transportation available
to and from work.
72. I have had trouble getting enough clerical
help.
81. Eating facilities in this building and
the neighborhood are inadequate.
92. My office area is depressing.
XI_. IMPRESSION JOB MAKES ON OTHERS
23.* How do you feel about the impression
your job makes on your family or
friends?
Sao
J~?~
~Q
3
10
20
"47
20
A
1
4
0
23
72
A
11
3
2
14
69
A
5
9
2
a2
41
D
10
17
6
41
26
A
5
7
3
36
48
D
14
30
11
31
14
D
15
17
3
36
29
D
7
15
5
44
29
1
5
20
59
14
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
C I I t 1 l "i r C I r T I 1. r l
RESPONSE w
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
42. My family and friends think my present
job is a good one. A 2 5 15 51 27
62. The public looks down on Government
employees.
XII. AGENCY RULES AND REGULATIONS
28.* How do you feel about the Agency's rules
and regulations?
1 d ulations are
e
D 4 27 15 39 14
37. The Agency s ru es an r
g 0 2 11 49 38
unnecessarily strict or rigid. D
XIII. WAY AGENCY IS RUN
22.* How do you feel about the way the Agency
is run?
58. The Agency is run by people who have good
judgment.
1 2 19 59 20
1 17 31 47 5
1 8 17 67
63. The Agency is unwilling to act on new
ideas that I think have merit. D 3 14 19 49. 15
71. The Agency has progressive programs.
111. Management here sees to it that there
is cooperation between offices.
A 2 17 33 41 7
A 5 32 26 30 7
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
t I t t S , RrT T I t t I t t t
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
XIII.
(A) ADEQUACY OF COMMUNICATION
41.
Management fails to explain adequately
to employees the reasons for its actions.
D
51.
There is too much "red tape" in the
Government.
D
76.
I can make my ideas known to management.
A
91.
Management makes an effort to solicit my
ideas outside the formal suggestion system. A
97.
There is a communication gap between
management and employees.
D
104.
I know how my job fits in with other work
in the Agency.
A
XIII. (B) CAREER DEVELOPMENT/PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
30. I have experienced a definite growth in
skills since taking my present job. A
45. The personnel program of this Agency is
a hindrance. D
66. I am rarely asked to participate in the
planning of my career development. D
My supervisor has shown interest in my
career development. A
96. The people who hired me misrepresented
my job.
D
qj
Q o
Ja
av
~~
o~~
YP
12
35
11
37
5
21
52
10
15
2
4
6
8
54
28
12
25
18
32
13
16
30
14
31
10
2
3
1
50
44
2
6
0
31
61
5
18
34
33
9
43
24
3
25
5
8
23
18
33
17
6
11
7
44
32
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
t r 1 [ " E , ' i It
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
101. The personnel office in the Agency tries
to be helpful.
106. Decisions affecting my assignments and
career are made with little regard to
my own preferences.
107. The Agency should take more interest
in each employee as a person than it
presently does.
114. Since I've been here, the Agency has
grown more depersonalized in its
relations with its employees.
115. The fitness reporting system leaves
much to be desired.
116. Complaints are-handled poorly in the
Agency.
117. The Agency is doing a good job of
managing the young professionals who
have recently entered on duty.
119. I am kept informed of personnel policies
and procedures.
122. If I have a complaint to make, I feel
free to talk to someone up the line.
XIV. CALIBER OF NEW PROFESSIONALS
124. Overall, young professionals entering
the Agency today are as capable as
those who entered when I did.
w
2P0? 00 0~
o
4e W" a~
A
4
19
32
38
8
D
16
21
20
29
14
D
20
32
22
23
5
D
8
27
30
29
6
D
33
32
13
20
2
D
8
23
44
20
5
A
8
28
39
21
5
A
6
26
5
50
14
A
3
19
4
46
29
A
1
10
13
44
32
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
I E. 1. l ~ICIzT- r l r 1 1 1
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
125. Overall, young professionals entering
the Agency today are as motivated (i.e.,
committed to their work) as those who
entered when I did.
26.* How do you feel about the importance
of the Agency's goals?
86. The goals of the Agency are worthwhile.
L XVI. COMMITMENT TO AGENCY CAREER
N
46. I would turn down a chance to change my
present job for one of equal pay, security,
and status.
87. My present job is in the area of work (not
necessarily the same job) I wish to remain
in permanently.
108. The longer I work for the Agency, the
more I feel I belong.
110. If I had it to do over again, I would
probably not come to work here.
120. I really feel part of the Agency.
XVII. GENERAL JOB SATISFACTION
14.* How do you feel about your job as a whole?
V
2 36 17 32 12
A
A
A
11
10
10
36
34
A
1
14
18
49
18
D
5
9
17
36
33
A
1
8
17
53
22
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 --- Approved For Release 2006/08/14 : CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
1, t t t t t I i S I C It , T t ! t. t
RESPONSE
JUDGED
FAVORABLE
55. My job is as good as I thought it would
be when I was hired.
I I I
A 8 15 12 45 20
93. I am discouraged in my present job. D
XVIII. REACTIONS-TO QUESTIONNAIRE
126. Filling in a questionnaire like this is
a good way to let management know what
employees think.
7 17 11 28 38
4 7 18 50 21
127. I think some good may come out of filling
in a questionnaire like this. A 2 14 24 47 14
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
 Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0
Q
Approved For Release 2006/08/14: CIA-RDP86B00269R000900090003-0