ROLE CONFLICT, ROLE AMBIGUITY, AND JOB DISSATISFACTION: A STUDY OF HOSPITAL EXECUTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship of role conflict and role ambiguity to job dissatisfaction among 169 hospital executives in Houston and San Antonio, Texas. Organizational characteristics were studied as moderators.^ Role conflict and role ambiguity scores among respondents were found to be lower than in studies reported in the literature. Job dissatisfaction scores were slightly lower (indicating less dissatisfaction) than those reported elsewhere for the constructs of security, social, and esteem needs; comparable for self-fulfillment; and slightly higher for autonomy needs. Conclusions were that role ambiguity and role conflict were related to job dissatisfaction among the respondents; that the same relationships hold true when controlling for organizational characteristics; that those highest on the organizational ladder were the least dissatisfied; and that those with the greatest amount of budget responsibility had the lowest levels of job dissatisfaction. ^

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FEDERAL FAMILY PLANNING POLICY: AN ANALYSIS OF FACTORS AFFECTING STATE EXPENDITURES, FISCAL YEARS 1976-1981 (WOMEN, BUDGET, POPULATION)

The purpose of this study was to analyze the implementation of national family planning policy in the United States, which was embedded in four separate statutes during the period of study, Fiscal Years 1976-81. The design of the study utilized a modification of the Sabatier and Mazmanian framework for policy analysis, which defined implementation as the carrying out of statutory policy. The study was divided into two phases. The first part of the study compared the implementation of family planning policy by each of the pertinent statutes. The second part of the study identified factors that were associated with implementation of federal family planning policy within the context of block grants.^ Implemention was measured here by federal dollars spent for family planning, adjusted for the size of the respective state target populations. Expenditure data were collected from the Alan Guttmacher Institute and from each of the federal agencies having administrative authority for the four pertinent statutes, respectively. Data from the former were used for most of the analysis because they were more complete and more reliable.^ The first phase of the study tested the hypothesis that the coherence of a statute is directly related to effective implementation. Equity in the distribution of funds to the states was used to operationalize effective implementation. To a large extent, the results of the analysis supported the hypothesis. In addition to their theoretical significance, these findings were also significant for policymakers insofar they demonstrated the effectiveness of categorical legislation in implementing desired health policy.^ Given the current and historically intermittent emphasis on more state and less federal decision-making in health and human serives, the second phase of the study focused on state level factors that were associated with expenditures of social service block grant funds for family planning. Using the Sabatier-Mazmanian implementation model as a framework, many factors were tested. Those factors showing the strongest conceptual and statistical relationship to the dependent variable were used to construct a statistical model. Using multivariable regression analysis, this model was applied cross-sectionally to each of the years of the study. The most striking finding here was that the dominant determinants of the state spending varied for each year of the study (Fiscal Years 1976-1981). The significance of these results was that they provided empirical support of current implementation theory, showing that the dominant determinants of implementation vary greatly over time. ^