A comparison of formal and non-formal managers within Ohio State University Extension: An examination of self-efficacy, training choices, and job satisfaction

This was a descriptive correlational study that compared the management practices of formal managers and non-formal managers. Non-formal managers are individuals such as engineers, physicians, architects, the clergy, college faculty, and Extension educators who are not formally recognized as managers by their organizations, but who routinely perform manager tasks. Management was studied in terms of self-perception of primary role, self-efficacy, job satisfaction, past and future training choices, and personal and program characteristics. This study utilized county Extension Educators employed by Ohio State University Extension during Autumn 2004 as the eligible population (N = 275). There were 160 complete sets of data for a usable rate of 58%.; Bandura's theory and studies of self-efficacy (1977, 1988, 2001), with additional work done by Bandura and Jourden (1991), Bandura and Wood (1989), and Bandura and Bailey (1990), and Fishbein and Ajzen's (1975) beliefs about the relationships among training, self-efficacy, and job satisfaction provided the theoretical foundation for the study. Data were collected using a web-based survey and organizational personnel records. The self-efficacy portions of the web-based instrument were designed according to Bandura's (2001) guidelines for constructing self-efficacy scales. A DACUM process (Norton, 1997) was used to derive the tasks that comprise an educator's work. Job satisfaction was measured using a Global Satisfaction Scale (Rice, Gentile, & McFarlin, 1991).; The findings showed that most Extension educators perceived their primary role to be two-fold---a combination of both teacher and manager regardless of whether or not they had formal manager assignments as county directors. All educators spent a portion of their time performing manager tasks. They had both high teacher self-efficacy and high manager self-efficacy, but were slightly more confident about their work as teachers than their work as managers. Four variables---undergraduate major, master level major, self-perception of primary role, and county director status---explained approximately 26% of the variance. There was some incongruence between the educators' self-efficacy levels and the types of training they had selected in recent years and the training they anticipated they would need in the near future. Their past and future training selections were related primarily to strengthening their teaching skills rather than trainings that would address their slightly weaker manager skills. They tended to be satisfied with their jobs and believed that all tasks they performed as educators were important.; Consequently, it appears that all Extension educators realized they are performing manager work regardless of whether or not they had a formal manager assignment, were responsible for their own work schedules, for the work of other employees or volunteers, or perceived their primary role to be a manager. Thus, it makes sense for Extension administration to recognize the manager parts of all educators' work, to include the manager work in the job descriptions and to seek job applicants with the necessary manager skills. Further, administration needs to encourage current employees to develop their manager skills by providing them with opportunities to build basic manager skills. Finally, administration needs to provide opportunities for all educators to raise their manager self-efficacy levels. This might be accomplished via educators' participation in various types of mastery experiences such as on-the-job training, mentoring, and practice; vicarious experiences such as observing or reading about effective managers; and by persuasion such as encouragement and positive feedback.