In September 1969, Joseph and Lucile Hollis wrote a paper entitled "Toward Development of Energy Commitment Theory." In this paper the authors stated that man is a dynamic, active, always changing being. As a result of this, man expends considerable energy. Man has the capability of thinking, looking, and planning ahead and does so with the desire of using his energy where it will be most meaningful to him. He thus, is able to project himself into various alternatives and to consider the possibilities and outcomes. Hollis and Hollis stated the commitment of man's energy determines much of what he will and will' not do. The authors also list a number of propositions underlying the theory.The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility of the energy commitment theory as proposed by Hollis and Hollis. The feasibility of the theory was examined by comparing the energy commitments of two widely different occupational groups, residence hall directors and custodians, both working in residence halls at Ball State University. The comparison was made from the common theoretical framework employing the energy commitment concepts currently being developed by Hollis and Hollis. The basic design of the study included two interviews with each of the subjects in the two occupational groups. The purpose of the first interview was to gather data regarding the direction, thrust (priority, force, and amount), and flexibility of the energy commitments of each subject as he projected them from the time of the interview through the next two months. The purpose of the second interview was to determine if the projected energy commitments which each subject expressed in the first interview had been carried out to fulfillment and if not, the reasons therefore. Two Interview Guides (one for providing structure for all first interviews) and two Interview Recording Sheets (one for recording data for each of the first interviews and one for recording data for each of the second interviews) were designed for the research.Due to the nature of the research and considering the limitations and assumptions of the study, all hypotheses were used as guides for the study. The analysis of the data was descriptive in nature and disclosed the following: 1. Residence Hall Directors commit more energies toward people and ideas while Custodians commit more energies toward objects. 2. Residence Hall Directors place people in a higher priority than do Custodians and custodians place objects and ideas in a higher priority than do directors. 3. Residence Hall Directors spend more time and effort toward people while Custodians spend more time and effort toward objects and ideas. 4. Both groups described. themselves as being somewhat inflexible in their ability to change their commitments. 5. Residence Hall Directors expend more energies toward people and ideas while Custodians expend more energies toward objects. 6. Residence Hall Directors place people in a higher priority than do Custodians but custodians place objects and ideas in a higher priority than do directors. 7. Both Residence Hall Directors and Custodians can project their energy commitments into the future with considerable accuracy. 8. Regarding antecedents of energy commitments, Custodians indicated that they had been controlled by their environment while Directors seemed to have made decisions which changed the direction of their lives. The descriptive analysis of the data collected in the study were applicable to substantiated some of the propositions of the Hollis and Hollis theory. Some propositions are substantiated to a higher degree when analyzing that data collected on Residence Hall Directors than on Custodians. From the findings of this study, it appears that energy commitment theory does have potential but further research must be accomplished.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/175829 |
| Date | January 1970 |
| Creators | DeVivo, Paul P. |
| Contributors | Hollis, Joseph W. |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | iv, 116 leaves ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.0029 seconds