No abstract

Sum?nay.-Personality, as represented by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and its interpretative literature as a means of understanding behavior, is critically analyzed. Specifically, the dichotomous nature of the indices is criticized as is its operationaliza-[ion of Jung's psychological rypes. This paper argues that Jung's stated intentions for understanding individual behavior suggesc chat personality variables exist in various levels of consciousness and unconsciousness which require study to consider the proportions wich which each exists. The paper also considers a reconstrucuon of the measure of Jung's psychological rypes and reconsideration of the descriptions and characterisucs of each personahty function measured.Understanding individual behavior has been a long and exhausting effort in the management literature. While there is much debate between dispositional and situational explanations of behavior (McClelland, 1985; Davis-Blake , a general theme is that behavior involves an interaction of both &spositions and situations (Pervin, 1989;House, et a/., 1996). If an individual perceives a situation to be particularly strong, one which invokes a high motivational force (Vroom, 1964), then this situation wdl have a strong influence on behavior, perhaps over-riding a disposition. Conversely, a person with a strong behavioral disposition will likely behave in a consistent manner across situations. The relative strengths of dispositions and situations account for individual behavior in this model. If two individuals perceive a situation to be the same, what produces differences in behavior? Using the statements above, we would conclude that they must have M e r e n t dispositions or preferences for certain behaviors. Personality theory suggests that the two may have different personality preferences which influenced behavior.A very widely accepted personality measure is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Clawson, Kotter, Faux, & McArthur, 1992). The underlying theory suggests that indviduals displaying different behaviors have ddferent per-'The author thanks &chard W. SchoU, John Boulmeus, Charles F. Hickox, and three anonymous reviewers for their insighdul comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this rnanuscri t ~B d i e s s enquiries toJ. E. Barbuto, Jr., Management Department, 31Za Ballentine Hall, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI 02881 or e-mad (JBAR8161@URIACC.URI.EDU).

This exercise incorporates an innovative teaching approach to demonstrate how motivation sources are evident in behavior and decisions. The exercise is based on the integrative typology proposed by Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholl and validated by Barbuto and Scholl. The taxonomy includes five sources of motivation: intrinsic process, instrumental, self-concept external, self-concept internal, and goal internalization. This article provides a brief summary and review of the five sources of motivation, complete instructions for conducting and processing the class exercise for both instructors and students, and a photocopy-ready handout for students.

Classification of perspectives on motivation and recommendations for measurement are provided. Motivation is classified into four broad categories: content theories, process theories, decision-making theories, and sustained-effort theories--drawing from different theories and measures. Recommendations on measurement are developed for each classification scheme of motivation.

Previously published research is examined, and an alternative scoring method for the Motivation Sources Inventory is proposed. The new method, ratio analysis, provides an empirical assessment more consistent with the theoretical framework of the inventory. Theoretical and empirical support for ratio analysis is provided.