In his book
Adaptors and
Innovators, Dr. Michael Kirton described Adaption-Innovation as a cognitive style, a
"preferred mode of tackling problems at all stages." He emphasizes that scores
on the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory (KAI), are
value-free: "Very high, very low or intermediate KAI scores are neither laudatory nor
pejorative." All of us can use both styles of creative problem solving, but we have a preference for either
Adaptive/Resourceful or
Innovative/Original
Creativity.
Adaptive/Resourceful
People who score
on the KAI as
Adaptive tend to accept the paradigm
within which a problem is embedded (current
theories, policies, points of view). They're likely to produce a few ideas that aim at
continuity with the practices, norms, and current way of doing things, but bring about
a better way of doing them. They often (not always) show a preference for
Sensing on the
MBTI. To be successful over time, most
organizations (except the most innovative in their products and/or services) will
necessarily be adaptive in their orientation. It's more costly and risky to continually
do things in a different way. Kirton remarks that
Adaptors are at their best
"in the smooth, efficient operation of an existing system; creatively refining,
improving, and extending the thinking that underlies it."
Innovative/Original
People who score on the KAI as
Innovative
tend to "detach the problem from its cocoon of accepted
thought," to step out of the "box" or paradigm. They tend to redefine a
problem, produce many ideas, break through what the organization perceives as givens and
restraints,
provide solutions aimed at doing things
differently. They often (not always)
show a preference for
Intuition on the MBTI.
While a company is growing and maintaining itself in predictable ways and in a predictable
market, innovative solutions are not necessarily preferable; but organizations cannot
survive if they're unable to break through with new thinking when necessary.
The Dilemma of Differences
Studies at the Center for Creative
Leadership suggest that each problem mode has its
advantages, and the most successful organizations (and leaders) are those able to use both problem-solving styles flexibly.
In many organizations, though,
Innovators experience problems in communication because it's difficult to get others
to see outside the box, and they're often met with skepticism.
Perhaps as a consequence,
Innovators tend to
be condescending to Adaptors, who can be very resourceful and come up with
excellent solutions to ongoing problems, but who tend to work within the rules, to seek
consensus, and to prefer change that occurs gradually. Thus,
Adaptors are often
seen by Innovators as unimaginative, stuck, resistant to change, always focused on
problems vs. solutions, and/or lacking a view of the big picture.
Because innovative solutions are less
easily understood and have unpredictable outcomes, and because such break-through change
is threatening, Innovators are often seen
by Adaptors as undisciplined, impractical, irreverent, abrasive,
and/or insensitive to people. Clearly, a better understanding of
these different creative styles -- and the value of each under
certain circumstances -- can lead to stronger, more flexible teams
and more successful organizations.
No comments:
Post a Comment