Developing strong teams should take into
consideration the various cognitive styles that employees use. Innovators and
adaptors have different approaches to tacking issues and can complement each
other’s styles. Mixing those who work within the system with those who can
change the system may provide higher solutions to problems. The personality of
members is often associated with how they solve problems.
Innovation is based within the employee’s abilities
and their motivation to make such concepts practical. People differ in their
abilities to problem-solve and exist within a continuum ranging from adaption
to innovation (Kirtion, 1994). People who engage in adaptive behavior work
within existing systems while those who are innovators work to create novel
systems.
The personality of employees can have a significant impact
on the overall use of innovative strategies. Personality can be seen as a
cognitive style wherein people prefer to perform similar mental tasks (Goldsmith,
1994). Some personalities are more prone to developing new paradigms and
solutions to existing problems while others are more focused on fixing systems
within current understandings.
In any organization or on any team it is important
to have innovators and adaptors to balance out the two cognitive approaches.
Adaptors weaknesses can be hedged by the innovators strengths and visa versa
for innovators weaknesses and adaptors strengths (Kirton, 1994). An adaptor may
be able to create an efficient program within existing understandings. Yet such
adaptors do not often have the ability to create new ways of solving problems.
A study conducted by
Xu and Tuttle (2012) administered an adaptation-innovation scale with the Big Five personality inventory to 517
accountants with approximately 20 years of prior work experience. Demographic information was also collected on
participants to understand gender and background. Even though the study was
designed to test a new instrument it still came up with a number of important
conclusions.
Results:
-Participants with Openness and Extroversion were
also more innovative.
-Conscientiousness is positively associated with
Approach to Efficacy. People with Approach to Efficacy traits are able to work
longer periods of time toward a goal while adaptors are sloppy and avoid
following routine.
-Accountants have a preference for adaptive styles.
-Female accountants are more prone to be adaptive
styles.
The research indicates that accountants are more
adaptive by nature. As a practical application accountants with a preference
for adaptive styles should be counter-balanced by CEO’s with higher levels of
innovative vision. When profit margins are declining, working within the system
without changing that system may be futile. Organizations and teams should
consider the balance of members with adaptive traits and those with more
extroverted innovative traits in order to effectively hedge cognitive styles.
Kirton, M. (1994). A
theory of cognitive style, in Kirton, M.J. (Ed), Adaptors and Innovators:
Styles of creativity and Problem Solving, Revised edition, Routledge, London.
Goldsmith, R. (1994). Creative style and personality theory,
In Kirton, M.J. (Ed), Adaptors and Innovators: Styles of Creativity and Problem
Solving, Revised edition, Routledge, London.
Xu, Y. & Tuttle, B. (2012). Adaption-Innovation
at Work: A New Measure of Problem- Solving Styles. Jamar, 10 (1).
