Understanding Leader Problem-Solving Style Preferences in an ...
Understanding Leader Problem-Solving Style Preferences in an ... Understanding Leader Problem-Solving Style Preferences in an ...
Understanding Leader Problem-Solving Style Preferences in an Organizational Hierarchy By Heath H Frisch An Abstract of a Thesis In Creative Studies Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science August 2009 Buffalo State College State University of New York Department of Creative Studies
- Page 2 and 3: ABSTRACT OF THESIS Understanding Le
- Page 4 and 5: Dates of Approval: THESIS COMMITTEE
- Page 6 and 7: TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE: DEFI
- Page 8 and 9: Chapter One Defining the Problem In
- Page 10 and 11: While Williams (2004) does not focu
- Page 12 and 13: 47). This statement supports the th
- Page 14 and 15: and organizational settings” (p.
- Page 16 and 17: Purpose of Study If problem solving
- Page 18 and 19: Chapter Two Literature Review Intro
- Page 20 and 21: their right is 87.04” (p.166-167)
- Page 22 and 23: The Implications of Style in Organi
- Page 24 and 25: aware of the implications. It has b
- Page 26 and 27: Isaksen, Firestein, & Dorval, (1994
- Page 28 and 29: “Initial evidence shows FourSight
- Page 30 and 31: leaders within education; teachers
- Page 32 and 33: Chapter Three Methodology Introduct
- Page 34 and 35: 30 entry-level employees 390 total
- Page 36 and 37: Presentation and Analysis of Data I
- Page 38 and 39: FourSight Preference Clarifier 1 2
- Page 40 and 41: would change to .734 which is above
- Page 42 and 43: (1) (J) Dependent Grp Grp Variable
- Page 44 and 45: Chapter 5 Conclusions, Recommendati
- Page 46 and 47: statistically significantly so, als
- Page 48 and 49: studies attempting to gain an under
- Page 50 and 51: Carr, M. (2006). How managers and n
<strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Leader</strong> <strong>Problem</strong>-<strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Style</strong> <strong>Preferences</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> Org<strong>an</strong>izational Hierarchy<br />
By<br />
Heath H Frisch<br />
An Abstract of a Thesis<br />
In<br />
Creative Studies<br />
Submitted <strong>in</strong> Partial Fulfillment<br />
of the Requirements<br />
for the Degree of<br />
Master of Science<br />
August 2009<br />
Buffalo State College<br />
State University of New York<br />
Department of Creative Studies
ABSTRACT OF THESIS<br />
<strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Leader</strong> <strong>Problem</strong>-<strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Style</strong><br />
<strong>Preferences</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> Org<strong>an</strong>izational Hierarchy<br />
This study explored the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles of <strong>in</strong>dividuals <strong>in</strong> leadership positions <strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong><br />
attempt to identify whether specific problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences existed among leaders. The<br />
results <strong>in</strong>dicated that <strong>in</strong> this org<strong>an</strong>ization the leadership team did exhibit a preference toward the<br />
Ideator style of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
In addition to identify<strong>in</strong>g problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences of leaders, this study also attempted to<br />
support other research (M<strong>an</strong>n 2003) <strong>an</strong>d ascerta<strong>in</strong> whether problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is a component of<br />
leadership. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to the results of the study <strong>an</strong>d related literature, evidence supports the theory<br />
that creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is <strong>an</strong> import<strong>an</strong>t component of leadership <strong>an</strong>d that it c<strong>an</strong> be enh<strong>an</strong>ced<br />
by tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g (Wheeler 2001).<br />
This study demonstrates its signific<strong>an</strong>ce as there are various benefits <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>ization or <strong>an</strong><br />
<strong>in</strong>dividual may ga<strong>in</strong> by underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences. For example, org<strong>an</strong>izations<br />
c<strong>an</strong> align similar or different styles when creat<strong>in</strong>g workforce teams, dem<strong>an</strong>ds of specific positions<br />
may be exam<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>an</strong>d compared aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>in</strong>dividual preferences, <strong>an</strong>d personal/professional<br />
development may <strong>in</strong>clude awareness to preferences as well as provide recommendations on<br />
improv<strong>in</strong>g areas of weakness <strong>an</strong>d sensitivity to other styles. Overall, “people should become aware<br />
of their Creative <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> preferences so they c<strong>an</strong> better underst<strong>an</strong>d their strengths <strong>an</strong>d<br />
weaknesses when solv<strong>in</strong>g problems creatively” (Puccio, 1999 p. 172).<br />
____________________________<br />
September 1, 2009<br />
1
Buffalo State College<br />
State University of New York<br />
Department of Creative Studies<br />
<strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Leader</strong> <strong>Problem</strong>-<strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Style</strong> <strong>Preferences</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> Org<strong>an</strong>izational Hierarchy<br />
Dates of Approval:<br />
A Thesis<br />
In<br />
Creative Studies<br />
By<br />
Heath H. Frisch<br />
Submitted <strong>in</strong> Partial Fulfillment<br />
of the Requirements<br />
for the Degree of<br />
Master of Science<br />
August 2009<br />
____________________ ____________________________<br />
Dr. Gerard Puccio<br />
Thesis Adviser<br />
Chairperson of the Creative Studies Department<br />
___________________ ____________________________<br />
Paul G. Theobald, Ph.D.<br />
Interim De<strong>an</strong> of the Graduate School<br />
2
Dates of Approval:<br />
THESIS COMMITTEE SIGNATORY<br />
_____________________ ______________________<br />
Dr. Roger Fireste<strong>in</strong><br />
Thesis Committee Member<br />
Associate Professor of Creative Studies<br />
____________________ ______________________<br />
Dr. Gerard Puccio<br />
Thesis Advisor<br />
Chairperson of the Creative Studies Department<br />
3
DEDICATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS<br />
The author wishes to express s<strong>in</strong>cere appreciation to several people. To beg<strong>in</strong>, I must<br />
acknowledge my immediate family; Susie, Andrew, <strong>an</strong>d Meg, I love you all. Mother; th<strong>an</strong>ks for<br />
always be<strong>in</strong>g there. To Mom, N<strong>an</strong>ny, N<strong>an</strong>a E, Scott, Jackie <strong>an</strong>d kids; th<strong>an</strong>ks for your support. To<br />
all of my friends who patiently waited while I worked on this, I bet you thought it would never<br />
end. And to the Kid <strong>an</strong>d Kid E, this all beg<strong>an</strong> on the ice. F<strong>in</strong>ally, to those who participated <strong>in</strong> this<br />
study, a very special th<strong>an</strong>ks for all of your help. Without all of you, this study would never have<br />
been possible.<br />
Additionally, I would like to extend a very special th<strong>an</strong>k you to Mr. Roger H. Barnes, Mr.<br />
Michael, J. Bullock, Mr. D<strong>an</strong>iel Garey, Mrs. Lynn Pettit, <strong>an</strong>d Mrs. Terri O‟Brien. To Dr. Gerard<br />
Puccio, th<strong>an</strong>k you so much, your patience <strong>an</strong>d support throughout this endeavor will never be<br />
forgotten.<br />
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />
CHAPTER ONE: DEFINING THE PROBLEM<br />
Introduction<br />
<strong>Leader</strong>ship Behaviors<br />
Measur<strong>in</strong>g Personality Type s <strong>an</strong>d <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Style</strong>s<br />
Purpose of Study<br />
Signific<strong>an</strong>ce of Study<br />
Summary<br />
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW<br />
Introduction<br />
<strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong> Th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g <strong>Style</strong>s <strong>an</strong>d <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Style</strong>s<br />
The Implications of <strong>Style</strong> <strong>in</strong> Org<strong>an</strong>izations<br />
Creativity <strong>an</strong>d Creative <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong><br />
FourSight<br />
FourSight Research<br />
Summary<br />
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY<br />
Introduction<br />
Sample<br />
Procedures<br />
Instrumentation<br />
Summary<br />
CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION <strong>an</strong>d ANALYSIS of DATA<br />
Introduction<br />
Descriptive Statistics<br />
Summary<br />
CHAPTER 5: CONLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, IMPLICATIONS<br />
Introduction<br />
Conclusions<br />
Recommendations<br />
Implications<br />
Summary<br />
p. 1<br />
p. 1<br />
p. 6<br />
p. 9<br />
p. 9<br />
p. 10<br />
p. 11<br />
p. 11<br />
p. 15<br />
p. 17<br />
p. 19<br />
p. 21<br />
p. 24<br />
p. 25<br />
p. 25<br />
p. 26<br />
p. 27<br />
p. 28<br />
p. 29<br />
p. 29<br />
p. 35<br />
p. 37<br />
p. 37<br />
p. 39<br />
p. 40<br />
p. 41<br />
REFERENCES p. 42<br />
5
TABLES <strong>an</strong>d FIGURES<br />
Figure 1: Sample Group, Employee Hierarchy Distribution p. 27<br />
Table 1: M<strong>an</strong>n 2003 - Clarifier Preference, particip<strong>an</strong>t group p. 23<br />
Table 2: Demographics, Sample Groups p. 25<br />
Table 3: Descriptive Statistics for FourSight Across All Levels p. 30<br />
Table 4: Cronbach Alpha Analysis – Clarifier p. 31<br />
Table 5: Cronbach Alpha Analysis – Ideator p. 31<br />
Table 6: Cronbach Alpha Analysis – Developer p. 32<br />
Table 7: Cronbach Alpha Analysis – Implementer p. 32<br />
Table 8: Item-Total Statistics – Implementer p. 33<br />
Table 9: Analysis of Vari<strong>an</strong>ce (ANOVA) Among All Groups p. 34<br />
Table 10: Post Hoc Assessment of Differences Among Groups p. 35<br />
6
Chapter One<br />
Def<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the <strong>Problem</strong><br />
Introduction<br />
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss leadership behaviors <strong>an</strong>d address whether problem<br />
solv<strong>in</strong>g is a behavioral component of leadership, <strong>in</strong>troduce research regard<strong>in</strong>g personality traits <strong>an</strong>d<br />
problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles of those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions, <strong>an</strong>d present processes for the measurement<br />
of personality type <strong>an</strong>d creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g. The chapter cont<strong>in</strong>ues with a discussion of<br />
problem solv<strong>in</strong>g as a leadership competence <strong>an</strong>d concludes with the statement of signific<strong>an</strong>ce, the<br />
purpose for the study, the guid<strong>in</strong>g research question, <strong>an</strong>d the chapter summary.<br />
<strong>Leader</strong>ship Behaviors<br />
<strong>Leader</strong>ship has been def<strong>in</strong>ed by m<strong>an</strong>y <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>vestigation <strong>in</strong>to the qualities which comprise<br />
effective leadership is <strong>an</strong> ongo<strong>in</strong>g practice <strong>in</strong> the world of science <strong>an</strong>d bus<strong>in</strong>ess. Although research<br />
has been performed on m<strong>an</strong>y variables related to leadership, such as the exam<strong>in</strong>ation of personality<br />
traits <strong>an</strong>d the <strong>an</strong>alysis of historical experiences of present <strong>an</strong>d past leaders, there is no s<strong>in</strong>gle<br />
<strong>an</strong>swer to the question of what constitutes effective leadership.<br />
In <strong>an</strong> attempt to underst<strong>an</strong>d more about leadership behaviors, Roush <strong>an</strong>d Atwater (1992)<br />
evaluated results from the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) <strong>an</strong>d found similar personality<br />
traits among a select group of tr<strong>an</strong>sformational leaders. The study found tr<strong>an</strong>sformational leaders<br />
used more positive re<strong>in</strong>forcement with followers th<strong>an</strong> their tr<strong>an</strong>sactional counterparts <strong>an</strong>d<br />
tr<strong>an</strong>sformational leaders are more representative of the sens<strong>in</strong>g, feel<strong>in</strong>g types of the MBTI.<br />
Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Bass (1985), tr<strong>an</strong>sactional leaders promote creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong>spire loyalty,<br />
7
<strong>an</strong>d treat followers as <strong>in</strong>dividuals. In a similar study where MBTI scores were used to underst<strong>an</strong>d<br />
leadership traits, Hellreigel <strong>an</strong>d Slocum (1975), discovered similarities among those <strong>in</strong> leadership<br />
positions <strong>in</strong> that “the m<strong>an</strong>agerial occupation seems to be disproportionately represented by<br />
extroverts” (p 31).<br />
Of m<strong>an</strong>y hum<strong>an</strong> behaviors, problem solv<strong>in</strong>g has been repeatedly associated with leadership<br />
<strong>an</strong>d has been def<strong>in</strong>ed by some as “a form of skilled perform<strong>an</strong>ce grounded <strong>in</strong> the leaders‟<br />
capability to solve complex <strong>an</strong>d ill def<strong>in</strong>ed org<strong>an</strong>izational problems”, (Mumford, Zaccaro,<br />
Hard<strong>in</strong>g, Jacobs, & Fleishm<strong>an</strong>, 2000; Mumford, Zaccaro, Hard<strong>in</strong>g, Fleishm<strong>an</strong>, & Reiter-Palmon,<br />
1991; Zaccaro, Mumford, Marks, Connelly, Threlfall, Gilbert, <strong>an</strong>d Fleishm<strong>an</strong>, 1997). Additionally,<br />
Zacarro, Mumford, Connelly, Marks, & Gilbert (2000) assessed leader problem solv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
capabilities <strong>an</strong>d argue that “leader problem solv<strong>in</strong>g skills <strong>an</strong>d knowledge are the most potent of<br />
leader capabilities” (p. 38). Zaccaro, et al. (2000) found that among four leadership behavioral<br />
constructs (complex problem solv<strong>in</strong>g skills, knowledge <strong>an</strong>d cognitive abilities, motives <strong>an</strong>d<br />
personality, <strong>an</strong>d criteria) the highest correlation existed <strong>in</strong> the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g skills measure.<br />
Accord<strong>in</strong>g to their study, “the two correlations between the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g skills measure were<br />
.55 <strong>an</strong>d .60, the highest <strong>in</strong> the matrix of correlations” (p. 59).<br />
Other studies <strong>an</strong>d articles research<strong>in</strong>g leader problem solv<strong>in</strong>g are also available such as<br />
Mosley, Obrien, & Pietri (1999) who said, “If one process <strong>in</strong> particular characterizes the m<strong>an</strong>ager‟s<br />
or entrepreneur‟s job it is that if mak<strong>in</strong>g decisions or solv<strong>in</strong>g problems. And the higher the<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agerial position, the more complex <strong>an</strong>d costly the decisions faced” (p. 6). In a book review for<br />
the IIMB M<strong>an</strong>agement Review, B<strong>an</strong>erjee (2004) said that decision mak<strong>in</strong>g has become one of the<br />
more import<strong>an</strong>t issues <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess studies. Williams (2004) provides the reader with discussion<br />
regard<strong>in</strong>g the process of decision mak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d provides a framework for mak<strong>in</strong>g better decisions.<br />
8
While Williams (2004) does not focus on leadership behaviors he states the import<strong>an</strong>ce of problem<br />
solv<strong>in</strong>g as a component for mak<strong>in</strong>g better bus<strong>in</strong>ess decisions. Marshall (2008), claims, “leaders are<br />
drawn from the best problem solvers” (p. 12) <strong>an</strong>d Population Reports (2008) lists problem<br />
solv<strong>in</strong>g as “one of five essential m<strong>an</strong>agement functions of <strong>an</strong>y healthcare program” (p. 10.).<br />
F<strong>in</strong>ally, Government Executive (2007) also lists problem solv<strong>in</strong>g as one of the criteria to lead<strong>in</strong>g a<br />
comp<strong>an</strong>y when it was said, “You don't have to be <strong>an</strong> expert <strong>in</strong> what <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>ization does <strong>in</strong> order<br />
to lead it. But if you aren't, it helps to know where the operation fits <strong>in</strong> the larger enterprise; how to<br />
<strong>in</strong>teract with experts, other org<strong>an</strong>izations <strong>an</strong>d employees; what to do to solve problems; <strong>an</strong>d how to<br />
w<strong>in</strong> over employees <strong>an</strong>d get them to talk” (p. 9).<br />
In a study <strong>in</strong>vestigat<strong>in</strong>g the relationship between head-teacher leadership behaviors <strong>an</strong>d<br />
their problem solv<strong>in</strong>g skills, Izgar (2008) lists problem solv<strong>in</strong>g (among other skills) as a<br />
component of leadership <strong>an</strong>d said “to be effective leaders, school head-teachers must possess<br />
these leadership skills” (p. 536) <strong>an</strong>d claims “the value of <strong>an</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istrator is measured accord<strong>in</strong>g<br />
to his success <strong>in</strong> solv<strong>in</strong>g problems” (p. 536). Izgar‟s research identified signific<strong>an</strong>t differences<br />
between problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g skills <strong>an</strong>d school type where head-teachers were employed <strong>in</strong> that “<br />
vocational high school head-teachers are more sensible <strong>an</strong>d confident <strong>in</strong> deal<strong>in</strong>g with problems”<br />
(p. 542). The study also found signific<strong>an</strong>t differences between problem solv<strong>in</strong>g skills <strong>an</strong>d<br />
leadership behaviors <strong>in</strong> that “head-teachers who use authoritari<strong>an</strong> behavior deal with problems <strong>in</strong><br />
a more rational way” (p. 543).<br />
In <strong>an</strong>other attempt to research characteristics of leaders <strong>an</strong>d leadership behavior, Mumford,<br />
O‟Conner, Clifton, Connelly, <strong>an</strong>d Zaccaro (1993) exam<strong>in</strong>ed background <strong>in</strong>formation of adolescent<br />
leaders as a predictor of future leadership behavior. While evidence support<strong>in</strong>g the study‟s claim <strong>in</strong><br />
identify<strong>in</strong>g similar traits of early leadership emerged, Mumford, et al (1993) <strong>in</strong>vestigation was a<br />
9
signific<strong>an</strong>t step towards ga<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong> underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of leadership behavior, <strong>in</strong> that specific qualities<br />
of leadership were identified. Among m<strong>an</strong>y qualities <strong>an</strong>d skill sets that necessitate effective<br />
leadership, problem solv<strong>in</strong>g, accord<strong>in</strong>g to Mumford et al (1993), “may represent a crucial<br />
determ<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>t of effective leadership” (p 154).<br />
Shull <strong>an</strong>d Anthony (1978) measured the way <strong>in</strong> which Afric<strong>an</strong> Americ<strong>an</strong> <strong>an</strong>d Caucasi<strong>an</strong><br />
supervisors solve problems <strong>in</strong> order to measure supervisory behavior. They determ<strong>in</strong>ed, “problem<br />
solv<strong>in</strong>g behavior is a key <strong>in</strong>gredient of supervisory behavior” (p. 763). Follow<strong>in</strong>g this l<strong>in</strong>e of study<br />
<strong>in</strong>to problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles <strong>an</strong>d the import<strong>an</strong>ce of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g as <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>gredient of supervisory<br />
behavior, G<strong>an</strong>ster (2005), described decision mak<strong>in</strong>g as “the most critical component of <strong>an</strong><br />
executive‟s job (492). In Harris‟ (2003) article, I Was Born To Be a CEO, he admits the value of<br />
problem solv<strong>in</strong>g to m<strong>an</strong>agement <strong>an</strong>d said, “the MBA exposed me to a wide r<strong>an</strong>ge of discipl<strong>in</strong>es<br />
<strong>an</strong>d bus<strong>in</strong>ess programs, but it didn‟t teach me how to solve problems” (p. 55).<br />
Additional evidence support<strong>in</strong>g the suggestion that problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is a component of<br />
effective leadership comes from Burst<strong>in</strong>er (2001), who found org<strong>an</strong>izations agree problem solv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
as <strong>an</strong> essential characteristic of leadership as “m<strong>an</strong>y large corporations now provide special<br />
tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g for their m<strong>an</strong>agement-level personnel <strong>in</strong> creative approaches to problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g” (p 47).<br />
Burst<strong>in</strong>er‟s f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs demonstrate the need for more research <strong>in</strong>to underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g problem solv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
styles <strong>an</strong>d identify<strong>in</strong>g the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles of those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions <strong>in</strong> order to better<br />
underst<strong>an</strong>d leader effectiveness, creativity, problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style, <strong>an</strong>d the relationships among<br />
these facets. Burst<strong>in</strong>er addressed potential results of creative workshops by stat<strong>in</strong>g that “Research<br />
also <strong>in</strong>dicates that the creative th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d problem solv<strong>in</strong>g abilities of secondary school<br />
department chairmen (educational leaders) c<strong>an</strong> be improved though <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>-service workshop” (p.<br />
10
47). This statement supports the theory that Creative <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> is a not only a core<br />
component of leadership (<strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> educational environment) but c<strong>an</strong> be improved with tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Ev<strong>an</strong>s <strong>an</strong>d Ev<strong>an</strong>s (2001), created <strong>Leader</strong>ship Workshop, a workshop where high school <strong>an</strong>d<br />
college students could learn about leadership <strong>an</strong>d develop leadership skills. <strong>Problem</strong> solv<strong>in</strong>g is<br />
<strong>in</strong>tegrated <strong>in</strong>to the curriculum <strong>an</strong>d as preparation for the course, the teacher, leader, or counselor is<br />
provided with a leadership need situation, pre-workshop questions, leadership styles <strong>an</strong>d<br />
approaches <strong>in</strong>formation, leadership characteristics <strong>in</strong>formation, problem solv<strong>in</strong>g def<strong>in</strong>itions <strong>an</strong>d<br />
processes, <strong>an</strong>d group activities prior to the workshop. The fact that problem solv<strong>in</strong>g processes are<br />
provided as pre-work supports the theory that problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is a key component of <strong>in</strong>dividuals <strong>in</strong><br />
leadership positions. Other colleges <strong>an</strong>d schools who offer leadership or m<strong>an</strong>agement tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g are<br />
also see<strong>in</strong>g the need to provide problem solv<strong>in</strong>g tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to students <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong> Kosicek‟s (2008) essay<br />
on teach<strong>in</strong>g leadership to college undergraduates, he said, “the teach<strong>in</strong>g of m<strong>an</strong>agement exposes<br />
the student to <strong>an</strong>alytical skills for problem solv<strong>in</strong>g” (p. 67). Heijitjes (2007) discusses the<br />
MBA <strong>an</strong>d MSc programs at Universiteit Maastricht, Netherl<strong>an</strong>ds where problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is part<br />
of the curriculum. In her article, Heijitjes adds that not only is problem solv<strong>in</strong>g a skill for<br />
leadership, but also that, “programs that emphasize problem solv<strong>in</strong>g, self-directed learn<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
self-awareness, aims to help students chart their own course toward becom<strong>in</strong>g more responsible<br />
leaders” (p. 32).<br />
By utiliz<strong>in</strong>g a problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g style <strong>in</strong>ventory, called FourSight, which was designed to<br />
measure preferences for the key aspects of Creative <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong>, the current study furthers<br />
previous l<strong>in</strong>es of research <strong>in</strong> that styles of leaders are exam<strong>in</strong>ed, <strong>an</strong>d specifically <strong>in</strong>vestigated<br />
<strong>an</strong>swer<strong>in</strong>g whether a unique problem solv<strong>in</strong>g profile exists among those <strong>in</strong> a leadership position. If<br />
11
a unique profile exists then new <strong>in</strong>sights may be ga<strong>in</strong>ed relative to how leaders prefer to approach<br />
problems that require creative th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Measur<strong>in</strong>g Personality Types <strong>an</strong>d <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Style</strong>s<br />
<strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong> personality type is not a new phenomenon <strong>an</strong>d much research c<strong>an</strong> be found<br />
that has exam<strong>in</strong>ed different aspects of one‟s personality. Early <strong>in</strong>vestigation <strong>in</strong>to this field c<strong>an</strong> be<br />
attributed to Carl Jung <strong>an</strong>d his study <strong>in</strong>to the orientation of personality.<br />
Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Jungi<strong>an</strong> theory there are two personality orientations, extroversion <strong>an</strong>d<br />
<strong>in</strong>troversion <strong>an</strong>d four psychological functions, th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g, feel<strong>in</strong>g, sens<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>tuition. Signific<strong>an</strong>t<br />
research <strong>in</strong>to Jungi<strong>an</strong> personality type theory has been performed by Isabel Briggs Myers, <strong>an</strong>d her,<br />
mother Kathar<strong>in</strong>e Cook Briggs. They developed a tool called the Myers Briggs Type Indicator<br />
(MBTI) which as been used numerous times <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess, education <strong>an</strong>d science. Through the years,<br />
extensive use of this typology has supported its validity <strong>an</strong>d reliability. In its use of exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />
leader personality traits <strong>an</strong>d the <strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong>to leadership that c<strong>an</strong> be ga<strong>in</strong>ed by study<strong>in</strong>g<br />
psychological preferences, Roush <strong>an</strong>d Atwater‟s (1992) study found the Myers Briggs Type<br />
<strong>in</strong>dicator c<strong>an</strong> be used to underst<strong>an</strong>d tr<strong>an</strong>sformational <strong>an</strong>d tr<strong>an</strong>sactional leadership behaviors as well<br />
as the leader‟s self perception accuracy. They discovered tr<strong>an</strong>sformational leaders were more of the<br />
sens<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d feel<strong>in</strong>g types. The study “suggests avenues for improved leadership study <strong>an</strong>d<br />
demonstrates the usefulness of the MBTI <strong>in</strong> underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g how psychological preferences c<strong>an</strong><br />
provide research <strong>in</strong>to leadership behavior” (p. 32) .They further stated the MBTI is a useful tool<br />
that should be utilized <strong>in</strong> future leadership research. Cabral <strong>an</strong>d Joyce (1991) also found the MBTI<br />
a valuable tool <strong>an</strong>d said, “The MBTI has become <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly accepted <strong>an</strong>d used <strong>in</strong> m<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
12
<strong>an</strong>d org<strong>an</strong>izational sett<strong>in</strong>gs” (p. 40). Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Tucker (1991), “The Myers Briggs Type has had<br />
considerable heuristic value for both theoretical <strong>an</strong>d applied research with over 1700 theses,<br />
dissertations, <strong>an</strong>d articles currently listed <strong>in</strong> the MBTI Bibliography of research”(p. 571). Carr<br />
(2006) used the MBTI to dist<strong>in</strong>guish personality types between m<strong>an</strong>agers <strong>an</strong>d non-m<strong>an</strong>gers. The<br />
study found no signific<strong>an</strong>t differences between m<strong>an</strong>agers of different nationalities, sex or <strong>in</strong>dustry<br />
sector, however, there was a difference <strong>in</strong> type between m<strong>an</strong>agers as a whole <strong>an</strong>d non-m<strong>an</strong>agers.<br />
M<strong>an</strong>agers tended to fall <strong>in</strong>to four ma<strong>in</strong> MBTI types - ESTJ, ENTP, ISTJ <strong>an</strong>d ENTJ. This is<br />
different from the most common types found <strong>in</strong> the general population. Data collected by the<br />
Office for National Statistics found these to be ISTJ, ISFJ, ESFJ <strong>an</strong>d ESTJ” (p 48).<br />
One dimension of personality type studied by Dr. Michael Kirton (1977) identifies<br />
<strong>in</strong>dividual problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles. In his Adaption-Innovation (AI) theory, Kirton claims all people<br />
solve problems <strong>an</strong>d are creative. The theory, <strong>in</strong> summary, states that people differ <strong>in</strong> the cognitive<br />
styles <strong>in</strong> which they are creative, solve problems, <strong>an</strong>d make decisions. These style differences<br />
r<strong>an</strong>ge on a cont<strong>in</strong>uum, from high adaption to high <strong>in</strong>novation. The more adaptive prefer their<br />
problems to be associated with more structure. The more <strong>in</strong>novative prefer solv<strong>in</strong>g problems with<br />
less structure. The KAI has been used to enh<strong>an</strong>ce <strong>in</strong>dividual awareness, facilitate problem solv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>in</strong> teams, <strong>an</strong>d help resolve conflict between two people or two teams. AI theory sharply<br />
dist<strong>in</strong>guishes between level (how much) <strong>an</strong>d style (what type) of creativity <strong>an</strong>d Kirton‟s KAI is the<br />
<strong>in</strong>strument used to measure one‟s cognitive style. The current study claims problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is a<br />
key component of leadership <strong>an</strong>d exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g various styles or levels of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is <strong>an</strong><br />
import<strong>an</strong>t part to underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g leadership behaviors. Although previous research specific to<br />
underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d identify<strong>in</strong>g the creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles of executives was not prevalent<br />
similar research such as studies us<strong>in</strong>g the KAI <strong>an</strong>d AI are available <strong>an</strong>d have been used extensively<br />
13
throughout bus<strong>in</strong>ess to measure one‟s style of creativity <strong>an</strong>d provide valuable <strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong>to the way<br />
people prefer to solve problems, make decisions, <strong>an</strong>d display their creativity. As a result, previous<br />
research which utilized the KAI <strong>an</strong>d AI theory has been valuable <strong>in</strong> complet<strong>in</strong>g the current study.<br />
Tullet (1995) measured the KAI scores of 133 project m<strong>an</strong>agers, leaders <strong>in</strong> the realm of<br />
project pl<strong>an</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d found a me<strong>an</strong> score of 109 which <strong>in</strong>dicates a strong preference towards the<br />
<strong>in</strong>novative style of decision-mak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d problem solv<strong>in</strong>g. Another study utiliz<strong>in</strong>g the KAI <strong>an</strong>d<br />
Kirton‟s A-I theory conducted by Buttner <strong>an</strong>d Gryskiewicz found entrepreneurs were more<br />
<strong>in</strong>novative with a me<strong>an</strong> score of 113.9. Begley <strong>an</strong>d Boyd (1986) found risk tak<strong>in</strong>g more prevalent<br />
among entrepreneurs th<strong>an</strong> m<strong>an</strong>agers <strong>an</strong>d Smith, G<strong>an</strong>non, Grimm, <strong>an</strong>d Mitchell (1988) found<br />
entrepreneurs less rational <strong>in</strong> their decision mak<strong>in</strong>g th<strong>an</strong> m<strong>an</strong>agerial counterparts.<br />
Prior studies have utilized th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style measures, personality tests, <strong>an</strong>d creativity style<br />
<strong>in</strong>ventories to help identify behaviors <strong>an</strong>d preferences common among leaders. This study provides<br />
additional <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong>to leader decision-mak<strong>in</strong>g styles by exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the way <strong>in</strong> which leaders<br />
of <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>ization prefer to solve problems. Past research has provided a glimpse <strong>in</strong>to some key<br />
differences <strong>in</strong> creativity <strong>an</strong>d personality styles of leaders versus others, however s<strong>in</strong>ce some<br />
authors (Mumford, et. al 2000, Puccio, Murdock & M<strong>an</strong>ce, 2006, Mosley, O‟Brien, & Pietri 1991,<br />
Buttner, Gryskiewicz, & Hidore 1999) ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> that problem solv<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>an</strong>d more specifically<br />
creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g, is a crucial leadership skill for leadership success, it makes sense to carry<br />
out a study that exam<strong>in</strong>es whether those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions express unique preferences with<strong>in</strong><br />
the fundamental stages of the creative process.<br />
14
Purpose of Study<br />
If problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is a key component of leadership then the results from this study may<br />
prove valuable <strong>in</strong> def<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the way leaders approach problems, provide <strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong>to characteristics<br />
of leaders, <strong>an</strong>d offer areas to explore for further research.<br />
The purpose of this study was to further research <strong>in</strong>to the exam<strong>in</strong>ation of <strong>in</strong>dividual<br />
preferences for aspects of the creative process among those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions. The study<br />
exam<strong>in</strong>ed the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles of leaders with<strong>in</strong> one specific org<strong>an</strong>ization <strong>an</strong>d asked the<br />
question “Is there a unique problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style that is prevalent among leaders?” More<br />
specifically, this study <strong>in</strong>vestigated the distribution of FourSight Profiles among employees <strong>in</strong><br />
different levels of <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>ization‟s hierarchy.<br />
Signific<strong>an</strong>ce of the Study<br />
There are several reasons why the research question posed by this study makes a signific<strong>an</strong>t contribution<br />
to the field of creativity. First, as it would appear that no previous study has <strong>in</strong>vestigated this<br />
specific question, it fills a gap <strong>in</strong> the literature. Second, <strong>an</strong>d more import<strong>an</strong>tly, by explor<strong>in</strong>g<br />
problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles of those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions <strong>an</strong>d identify<strong>in</strong>g whether specific leadership<br />
problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences exist, this study will add to the exist<strong>in</strong>g research performed by<br />
Mumford <strong>an</strong>d his colleagues (2000) <strong>in</strong> which they claim that for leaders to be successful they must<br />
use creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g to address complex org<strong>an</strong>izational problems.<br />
15
Summary<br />
This study attempted to underst<strong>an</strong>d the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles of leaders <strong>in</strong> one<br />
org<strong>an</strong>ization <strong>an</strong>d also identify similarities or differences among those styles with<strong>in</strong> the leaders at<br />
vary<strong>in</strong>g levels of <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>izational hierarchy. It has been suggested that problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is critical<br />
to leadership success; therefore, the results will present valuable <strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong>to the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
styles of leaders, identify the implications of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles <strong>in</strong> org<strong>an</strong>izations, <strong>an</strong>d support<br />
future leadership research <strong>an</strong>d development.<br />
Mosley, O‟Brien, <strong>an</strong>d Pietri (1991), found “a concept ga<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g rapidly <strong>in</strong> popularity as a tool<br />
for develop<strong>in</strong>g m<strong>an</strong>agers <strong>in</strong> areas such as decision mak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d communication focuses on the<br />
elements of <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual‟s problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style” (p. 6). The purpose of this study was to further<br />
exam<strong>in</strong>e this area of leadership research, support problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style research, <strong>an</strong>d add to the<br />
literature with<strong>in</strong> the realm of leadership behaviors.<br />
16
Chapter Two<br />
Literature Review<br />
Introduction<br />
Similar to trait <strong>an</strong>d personality-based research, underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles has become<br />
<strong>an</strong>other area of signific<strong>an</strong>t study. The follow<strong>in</strong>g chapter provides the reader with a general<br />
underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles, measur<strong>in</strong>g styles, <strong>an</strong>d implications of identify<strong>in</strong>g style <strong>in</strong><br />
org<strong>an</strong>izations. In addition, creativity <strong>an</strong>d Creative <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> (CPS) are <strong>in</strong>troduced. The<br />
<strong>in</strong>strument utilized for this study, FourSight, <strong>an</strong>d support<strong>in</strong>g literature for the measure is also<br />
presented.<br />
<strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong> Th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Style</strong>s<br />
M<strong>an</strong>y org<strong>an</strong>izations attempt to identify personality characteristics of their workforce <strong>an</strong>d<br />
the use of paper-<strong>an</strong>d-pencil surveys has proliferated. Other th<strong>an</strong> these typologies, psychology has<br />
also tried to map th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles, a component of personality type. To better underst<strong>an</strong>d personality<br />
type <strong>an</strong>d th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style, Balkis & Isiker (2005), def<strong>in</strong>e personality type as “a remarkable system<br />
which may be used <strong>in</strong> order to underst<strong>an</strong>d purposes <strong>an</strong>d actions of people” (p.286) while th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g<br />
styles, accord<strong>in</strong>g Balkis & Isiker (2005), are “<strong>an</strong> advisable method of us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d express<strong>in</strong>g one or<br />
more abilities” (p. 285). Accord<strong>in</strong>g to their study, Balkis & Isiker (2005) state “this research<br />
identified even closer relationships between the concepts of the th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles <strong>an</strong>d of the<br />
personality types” (p. 291) <strong>an</strong>d predications they made about the relationship between a<br />
particip<strong>an</strong>t‟s th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style <strong>an</strong>d the <strong>in</strong>dividual‟s personality type “generally corresponded to the<br />
results of the correlation <strong>an</strong>alysis” (p. 290). For example, persons with <strong>an</strong> artistic personality type<br />
17
share similar characteristics with liberal, legislative, <strong>an</strong>d <strong>an</strong>archic th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles because<br />
<strong>in</strong>dividuals with these th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles prefer to do th<strong>in</strong>gs their own way <strong>an</strong>d enjoy tasks that require<br />
creative strategies (Balkis & Isiker, 2005).<br />
In a study performed <strong>in</strong> 1981, Coulson <strong>an</strong>d Strickl<strong>an</strong>d employed the use of <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>strument<br />
called the Herrm<strong>an</strong>n Bra<strong>in</strong> Dom<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>ce Instrument (HBDI) to determ<strong>in</strong>e th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles of leaders<br />
with<strong>in</strong> school adm<strong>in</strong>istration. The Herm<strong>an</strong>n <strong>in</strong>strument used by Coulson <strong>an</strong>d Strickl<strong>an</strong>d (1981) is<br />
constructed around the bra<strong>in</strong>‟s cerebral <strong>an</strong>d limbic systems <strong>an</strong>d yields data <strong>in</strong> four quadr<strong>an</strong>ts; (a)<br />
cerebral left, (b) limbic left, (c) cerebral right <strong>an</strong>d (d) limbic right (Boer, 1999). The HBDI makes<br />
use of a paper-<strong>an</strong>d-pencil questionnaire that was developed from results of<br />
electroencephalographic (EEG) measurement of bra<strong>in</strong>-wave activity, which determ<strong>in</strong>es bra<strong>in</strong><br />
dom<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>ce or hemisphericity (Rowe & Waters, 1992). The HBDI questionnaire assesses which<br />
quadr<strong>an</strong>t of the bra<strong>in</strong> is most active--the cerebral left, limbic left, cerebral right, or limbic right.<br />
Recent adv<strong>an</strong>ces <strong>in</strong> the underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of bra<strong>in</strong> function <strong>an</strong>d hemispheric specialization have made<br />
it possible to measure th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style preferences of <strong>in</strong>dividuals <strong>an</strong>d make generalizations about<br />
th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles preferences of the occupational group from which they come.<br />
The HBDI was used to ascerta<strong>in</strong> the th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style preferences of school district<br />
super<strong>in</strong>tendents <strong>an</strong>d chief executive officers. Coulson <strong>an</strong>d Strickl<strong>an</strong>d (1981) stated, “one way to<br />
predict how educational questions will be <strong>an</strong>swered is to look at the th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style preferences of<br />
super<strong>in</strong>tendents of schools” (p. 163). Their study found that when measur<strong>in</strong>g the th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style<br />
preferences of school super<strong>in</strong>tendents <strong>an</strong>d th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style preferences of comp<strong>an</strong>y CEO‟s several<br />
dist<strong>in</strong>ctions c<strong>an</strong> be made.<br />
To beg<strong>in</strong>, “chief executive officers have a higher average right hemispheric dom<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>ce<br />
score th<strong>an</strong> left. The opposite is true for the super<strong>in</strong>tendents. Their average left score is 116 while<br />
18
their right is 87.04” (p.166-167). In this study, the chief executive officers were best characterized<br />
as preferr<strong>in</strong>g right mode th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g over left while the opposite was true for the super<strong>in</strong>tendents.<br />
These are very <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs when one c<strong>an</strong> assume that by def<strong>in</strong>ition of the actual job, it is<br />
expected that these two occupational choices fall under these dist<strong>in</strong>ctions. “Several reasons may<br />
expla<strong>in</strong> why super<strong>in</strong>tendents‟ th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style preferences do not match more closely those of chief<br />
executive officers. One is that super<strong>in</strong>tendents work under the direction of school boards reflect<strong>in</strong>g<br />
a conservative political climate, much of a super<strong>in</strong>tendent‟s time is spent respond<strong>in</strong>g to criticism<br />
<strong>an</strong>d defend<strong>in</strong>g programs”(p 171). The left-bra<strong>in</strong> or <strong>an</strong>alytical bra<strong>in</strong> functions at its best <strong>in</strong> these<br />
situations. On the other h<strong>an</strong>d, chief executive officers daily responsibilities <strong>an</strong>d decision-mak<strong>in</strong>g<br />
may encourage the use more right bra<strong>in</strong> or <strong>in</strong>tuitive bra<strong>in</strong> functions, which permit more <strong>in</strong>novative<br />
solutions to problems <strong>an</strong>d m<strong>an</strong>y times they are rewarded for this “out of the box” th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Sternberg (1988) also evaluated th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles <strong>an</strong>d suggested a theory of mental self-<br />
government. Mental self-government theory establishes a connection with daily activities <strong>an</strong>d<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agement tasks <strong>an</strong>d discusses 13 th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles along five different dimensions. The theory<br />
describes legislative, executive, judicial, hierarchal, oligarchic, monarchic, <strong>an</strong>archic, global, local,<br />
<strong>in</strong>ternal, external, liberal, <strong>an</strong>d conservative mental styles (Balkis & Isiker 2005, p. 284-285).<br />
Another study focus<strong>in</strong>g its attention to determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles was conducted by<br />
Lavack (1991). This study explored cerebral hemispherecity, college major <strong>an</strong>d occupational<br />
choices. Lavack used 275 undergraduate students major<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> hum<strong>an</strong>ities, social <strong>an</strong>d natural<br />
sciences. Each subject completed several th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style <strong>in</strong>struments. The Hum<strong>an</strong> Information<br />
Process<strong>in</strong>g Survey, the Tactual Perform<strong>an</strong>ce Test <strong>an</strong>d the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-<br />
Revised. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Lavack (1991) “object assembly scores for hum<strong>an</strong>ities subjects <strong>an</strong>d right<br />
hemispheric preferences were correlated +89, suggest<strong>in</strong>g that these discipl<strong>in</strong>es depend on a more<br />
19
diffuse, metaphorical, <strong>an</strong>d perhaps divergent th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style” (p. 220). In contrast says Lavack,<br />
“natural science students appear to prefer a more <strong>in</strong>tegrated or left mode of <strong>in</strong>tellectual function<strong>in</strong>g,<br />
a style evident for the social sciences as well” (p220). In his conclusion, Lavack found the<br />
dem<strong>an</strong>ds of <strong>an</strong> occupation as well as a college major necessitates a left, right, or <strong>in</strong>tegrated<br />
cognitive style, but emphasis rema<strong>in</strong>s centered on left <strong>in</strong> most educational <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>dustrial<br />
org<strong>an</strong>izations.<br />
Balkis <strong>an</strong>d Isiker (2005) said, “<strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong> th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles is a good <strong>in</strong>dication of how<br />
we prefer to use the cognitive abilities we possess” (p. 86) <strong>an</strong>d Perry (1970, 1981) studied th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g<br />
styles as well but focused more on cognitive styles <strong>an</strong>d constructed a theory that is aimed at trac<strong>in</strong>g<br />
the development of ways of reason<strong>in</strong>g among university students. Cognitive style may be generally<br />
def<strong>in</strong>ed as the way <strong>in</strong> which hum<strong>an</strong>s process <strong>in</strong>formation. Perry's theory consists of n<strong>in</strong>e positions<br />
<strong>an</strong>d del<strong>in</strong>eates the steps through which students develop from be<strong>in</strong>g dualistic <strong>an</strong>d concrete, to be<strong>in</strong>g<br />
more cont<strong>in</strong>gent <strong>an</strong>d relativistic, <strong>an</strong>d then to be<strong>in</strong>g more committed. Because some of the adjacent<br />
positions are similar, Perry placed the n<strong>in</strong>e positions <strong>in</strong> three sequential categories: dualism,<br />
relativism, <strong>an</strong>d commitment (Zh<strong>an</strong>g, 2002).<br />
If it is true that different occupations or <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual‟s hierarchal position<strong>in</strong>g dem<strong>an</strong>ds<br />
certa<strong>in</strong> th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles or preferences then the results of this study will help <strong>in</strong> underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g if<br />
similar th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles exist among those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions or more specifically, if similar<br />
styles exist <strong>in</strong> the way <strong>in</strong> which leaders go about solv<strong>in</strong>g problems.<br />
20
The Implications of <strong>Style</strong> <strong>in</strong> Org<strong>an</strong>izations<br />
This study made the assumption that if a predom<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>t problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style exists among<br />
leaders then <strong>in</strong>sights <strong>in</strong>to how leaders attempt to solve problems c<strong>an</strong> be atta<strong>in</strong>ed. As this l<strong>in</strong>e of<br />
research is unique <strong>in</strong> nature <strong>an</strong>d previous literature specific to this topic is unavailable, implications<br />
from similar studies provide <strong>an</strong> awareness of differences <strong>in</strong> style <strong>an</strong>d type <strong>an</strong>d also provide<br />
direction for future <strong>in</strong>vestigations.<br />
<strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong>, measur<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>an</strong>d utiliz<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual‟s personality type or style<br />
<strong>in</strong>formation may pose several implications. To beg<strong>in</strong>, it is import<strong>an</strong>t to differentiate between<br />
abilities <strong>an</strong>d preferences. A person‟s ability def<strong>in</strong>es the capacity he or she has to complete a task<br />
(physical or non-physical) <strong>an</strong>d a preference or style may be considered a person‟s preferred me<strong>an</strong>s<br />
of complet<strong>in</strong>g a task. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to The Americ<strong>an</strong> Heritage Dictionary (2001), style is def<strong>in</strong>ed as<br />
“<strong>in</strong>dividuality <strong>in</strong> one‟s taste,” or “the way <strong>in</strong> which someth<strong>in</strong>g is said, done, expressed, or<br />
performed” (p. 817). One may have the ability to do someth<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d prefer to do it <strong>in</strong> a specific<br />
m<strong>an</strong>ner. These differences should be considered before results are used to <strong>in</strong>fluence bus<strong>in</strong>ess <strong>an</strong>d<br />
academic decisions. When compar<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>telligence with th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style, Tullet (1996) made a clear<br />
dist<strong>in</strong>ction, “knowledge of a person‟s <strong>in</strong>telligence or ability tells us noth<strong>in</strong>g about his or her<br />
th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style, nor vice versa.” In <strong>an</strong>other attempt to advise when differentiat<strong>in</strong>g style from type,<br />
Hellreigel <strong>an</strong>d Slocum (1975) suggested, “differences <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual styles should not be<br />
synonymous with differences <strong>in</strong> personality types” (p. 29). Furthermore, Puccio (1999) stressed<br />
this type of self-awareness by stat<strong>in</strong>g, “From <strong>an</strong> applied perspective, the goal is to help people<br />
become aware of their problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences so they c<strong>an</strong> better underst<strong>an</strong>d their strengths<br />
<strong>an</strong>d weaknesses when solv<strong>in</strong>g problems creatively. This knowledge may help people to more<br />
21
skillfully solve open-ended problems by recogniz<strong>in</strong>g their natural tendencies <strong>an</strong>d to use Creative<br />
<strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> strategies to strengthen less developed skills” (p. 172). Buff<strong>in</strong>gton, Jablokow, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
Mart<strong>in</strong> (2002) exam<strong>in</strong>ed team dynamics <strong>an</strong>d cognitive style. Their <strong>in</strong>vestigation strengthened the<br />
belief that apply<strong>in</strong>g cognitive style theory to better underst<strong>an</strong>d personal dynamics of <strong>in</strong>dividual<br />
when work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> teams is “appropriate <strong>an</strong>d useful” (p. 32). They concluded that convey<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong><br />
appreciation of different problem solv<strong>in</strong>g strategies led their study‟s particip<strong>an</strong>ts to “powerful<br />
<strong>in</strong>sights <strong>in</strong> their th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g” (p. 32).<br />
When compar<strong>in</strong>g problem solv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d fit with<strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>ization, Summers, Sweeney, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
Wolk (2000) claim, “match<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual‟s problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style to his or her functional role<br />
may help m<strong>in</strong>imize role stress <strong>an</strong>d its attend<strong>an</strong>t dysfunctional effects <strong>in</strong> public account<strong>in</strong>g” (p. 1).<br />
Similarly, Ch<strong>an</strong> (1996) studied employment fit <strong>an</strong>d the cognitive misfit, which “refers to the degree<br />
of mismatch between <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>dividual‟s cognitive style of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d the style dem<strong>an</strong>ds of<br />
the work context” (p. 194). Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Ch<strong>an</strong>, “the degree of cognitive misfit was positively<br />
associated with turnover probability (p. 203)”<br />
F<strong>in</strong>ally, utiliz<strong>in</strong>g this type of <strong>in</strong>formation c<strong>an</strong> also aid <strong>in</strong> identify<strong>in</strong>g obstacles to<br />
implement<strong>in</strong>g ch<strong>an</strong>ge. For example, f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g a large proportion of Kirton‟s adaptor style <strong>in</strong> their<br />
study of account<strong>in</strong>g educator‟s problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style, Wolk, Schmidt <strong>an</strong>d Sweeney (1997) claimed<br />
the level of ch<strong>an</strong>ge with<strong>in</strong> current account<strong>in</strong>g curriculums needed would be difficult to atta<strong>in</strong> as<br />
“the predom<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>ce of the adaptive style may constra<strong>in</strong> the agenda of ch<strong>an</strong>ge be<strong>in</strong>g called for<br />
with<strong>in</strong> the academic account<strong>in</strong>g community” (p. 479)<br />
Ga<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong> underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of various th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles <strong>an</strong>d problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences was a<br />
critical part of this study. As there is <strong>an</strong> abund<strong>an</strong>ce of research related to these topics <strong>an</strong>d f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g<br />
typologies or exam<strong>in</strong>ations that attempt to assess ones style are easily atta<strong>in</strong>able, one should be<br />
22
aware of the implications. It has been said that preferences are only one‟s preferred methods of<br />
execut<strong>in</strong>g a task it does not provide <strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong>to ability; which is one‟s capacity or capability to<br />
complete a task. This study exam<strong>in</strong>ed the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences of <strong>in</strong>dividuals with<strong>in</strong> one<br />
org<strong>an</strong>izational hierarchy <strong>an</strong>d assessed leadership preferences, not leadership abilities.<br />
Creativity <strong>an</strong>d Creative <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong><br />
This study explored how senior m<strong>an</strong>agers go about solv<strong>in</strong>g problems <strong>an</strong>d identified<br />
whether similarities exist <strong>in</strong> their problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style. The study suggested that if a similar style<br />
exists among leaders then <strong>in</strong>sight may be ga<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong>to underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g more about the way <strong>in</strong> which<br />
leaders solve problems. This next section provides <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>troduction <strong>in</strong>to Creativity <strong>an</strong>d the Creative<br />
<strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> process.<br />
<strong>Problem</strong> solv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d its dimensions is <strong>an</strong>other area of research that <strong>in</strong>trigues m<strong>an</strong>y<br />
researchers <strong>an</strong>d has existed for years. Bate (1984), Fee (2001), Shull <strong>an</strong>d Anthony (1978), Herbig<br />
<strong>an</strong>d Jacobs (1995) <strong>an</strong>d others have exam<strong>in</strong>ed m<strong>an</strong>y facets of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g. From def<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />
stages <strong>an</strong>d phases of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g (Treff<strong>in</strong>ger, Isaksen, Fireste<strong>in</strong>, & Dorval, 1994) to mapp<strong>in</strong>g<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agerial problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles (Hellriegel & Slocum, 1975) researchers have attempted to<br />
learn as much as they c<strong>an</strong> about this ability <strong>an</strong>d its various processes.<br />
Early research <strong>in</strong>to creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g was performed by Alex Osborn. Osborn was<br />
<strong>an</strong> advertis<strong>in</strong>g executive <strong>an</strong>d founder of the Creative Education Foundation. In his 1963 version of<br />
Applied Imag<strong>in</strong>ation Osborn discussed the process beh<strong>in</strong>d the mystery of creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
“The creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g process ideally comprises these procedures; (1) fact-f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g; (2)<br />
idea-f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g; <strong>an</strong>d (3) solution-f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g” (p. 86).<br />
23
Follow<strong>in</strong>g Osborn as President of the Creative Education Foundation was <strong>an</strong>other highly<br />
creative <strong>in</strong>dividual, Sidney Parnes. Parnes cont<strong>in</strong>ued <strong>in</strong>vestigation <strong>in</strong>to Creative <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong><br />
<strong>an</strong>d developed a five (or six) stage model of this process. Treff<strong>in</strong>ger, Isaksen, <strong>an</strong>d Fireste<strong>in</strong> (1982)<br />
<strong>an</strong>d Treff<strong>in</strong>ger, Isaksen, <strong>an</strong>d Dorval (1994) ref<strong>in</strong>ed Parnes‟ model <strong>an</strong>d accord<strong>in</strong>g to Davis (1999)<br />
“split six steps of the process <strong>in</strong>to three components” (p. 119). The components <strong>an</strong>d their<br />
respective phases are; “explor<strong>in</strong>g the challenge,” which <strong>in</strong>cludes identify<strong>in</strong>g a goal, wish, or<br />
challenge, gather<strong>in</strong>g data around it, <strong>an</strong>d f<strong>in</strong>ally clarify<strong>in</strong>g the problem. The next component is<br />
“generat<strong>in</strong>g ideas.” This is done by utiliz<strong>in</strong>g the only step <strong>in</strong> this phase of the process; employ<strong>in</strong>g<br />
generative thought to your challenge. The last component is “prepare for action.” This is when the<br />
problem solver selects <strong>an</strong>d strengthens his or her solutions <strong>an</strong>d formulates a pl<strong>an</strong> for action.<br />
Other models of creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g exist <strong>an</strong>d more recently, Puccio, Murdock, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
M<strong>an</strong>ce (2007) have exp<strong>an</strong>ded on earlier models to develop the Th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g Skills Model of creative<br />
problem solv<strong>in</strong>g. This current model <strong>in</strong>cludes three primary stages (clarification, tr<strong>an</strong>sformation,<br />
<strong>an</strong>d implementation) <strong>an</strong>d six process steps (explor<strong>in</strong>g the vision, formulat<strong>in</strong>g challenges, explor<strong>in</strong>g<br />
ideas, formulat<strong>in</strong>g solutions, explor<strong>in</strong>g accept<strong>an</strong>ce, <strong>an</strong>d formulat<strong>in</strong>g a pl<strong>an</strong>). Similar to other<br />
representations of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g processes, the Th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g Skills Model provides with<strong>in</strong> its six<br />
process steps opportunities for divergent <strong>an</strong>d convergent thought (two concrete rules for creative<br />
problem solv<strong>in</strong>g). One difference found <strong>in</strong> Puccio et. al. (2007) model among others is its very last<br />
executive phase, called “assess<strong>in</strong>g the situation” (p. 38). Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Puccio et. al. (2007)<br />
“assess<strong>in</strong>g the situation <strong>in</strong>volves the use of metacognitive thought” (p. 38). The unique f<strong>in</strong>al step <strong>in</strong><br />
the Th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g Skills Model expla<strong>in</strong>s how <strong>in</strong>dividuals must “monitor <strong>an</strong>d control his or her own<br />
cognitive processes (p.38)” to move through or ahead the CPS stages <strong>an</strong>d processes. Earlier<br />
research has identified similar stages <strong>an</strong>d processes to the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g process (Treff<strong>in</strong>ger,<br />
24
Isaksen, Fireste<strong>in</strong>, & Dorval, (1994), Treff<strong>in</strong>ger, Isaksen, <strong>an</strong>d Dorval 1994, Osborn (1963),<br />
however, the identification <strong>an</strong>d underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of <strong>in</strong>dividuals‟ metacognitive processes has not been<br />
found elsewhere <strong>in</strong> this literature review.<br />
Studies explor<strong>in</strong>g the effects of tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g have been performed as well<br />
(Wheeler 2001, Parnes, 1972) <strong>an</strong>d report <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g results. For example, <strong>in</strong> the 1972 Parnes<br />
Creative Studies Project, he states. “We now have conv<strong>in</strong>c<strong>in</strong>g data show<strong>in</strong>g that creativity-<br />
development programs work” (p. 157) <strong>an</strong>d Wheeler (2001) found that <strong>in</strong>dividuals, more<br />
specifically, ideators <strong>in</strong> his study may be able to better develop their decision mak<strong>in</strong>g processes by<br />
learn<strong>in</strong>g CPS tools.<br />
There are variations of creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g, each with dist<strong>in</strong>ct parts to the process <strong>an</strong>d<br />
it has also been found that <strong>in</strong>dividuals may be able to learn <strong>an</strong>d improve their own styles, thereby<br />
improv<strong>in</strong>g their decision mak<strong>in</strong>g abilities. If <strong>in</strong>dividuals <strong>in</strong> leadership positions c<strong>an</strong> become aware<br />
of their own styles <strong>an</strong>d improve upon them better bus<strong>in</strong>ess decisions may be made which may lead<br />
to more efficient, org<strong>an</strong>ized, compassionate, <strong>an</strong>d profitable firms. This study exam<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>an</strong><br />
<strong>in</strong>dividual‟s creative solv<strong>in</strong>g preference <strong>an</strong>d how FourSight helps reveal <strong>in</strong>teractions between their<br />
preference <strong>an</strong>d the Treff<strong>in</strong>ger, et. al. (1994) creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g model.<br />
FourSight<br />
This study <strong>in</strong>vestigated the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences of <strong>in</strong>dividual <strong>in</strong> leadership positions<br />
by utiliz<strong>in</strong>g a creativity style <strong>in</strong>ventory called FourSight, created by Dr. Gerard Puccio. FourSight<br />
was developed to assess people‟s preferences with<strong>in</strong> the CPS process <strong>an</strong>d has been used <strong>in</strong><br />
bus<strong>in</strong>ess, education, <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>dustry. “With more th<strong>an</strong> ten years of field-test<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d research, this<br />
25
simple, powerful tool measures one‟s preferences for different parts of breakthrough th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g or<br />
<strong>in</strong>novative th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g” (Puccio, 2002 p. 3). FourSight reveals what types of th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual is<br />
naturally drawn to <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong> what area one may be shortch<strong>an</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Puccio (2002), the<br />
<strong>in</strong>strument is designed to “help <strong>in</strong>dividuals <strong>an</strong>d teams better underst<strong>an</strong>d how they approach<br />
solv<strong>in</strong>g problems through creative th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g” (p. 1). As <strong>in</strong>dicated by FourSight, there are four faces<br />
of breakthrough th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g; the Clarifier, the Ideator, the Developer, the Implementer. Each of these<br />
style preferences will be described <strong>in</strong> further detail.<br />
Clarifier – these types like to explore challenge <strong>an</strong>d opportunity, exam<strong>in</strong>e<br />
details, w<strong>an</strong>t a clear underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of <strong>an</strong> issue, <strong>an</strong>d may suffer<br />
from “<strong>an</strong>alysis paralysis.”<br />
Ideator – these types like to look at the big picture, stretch their imag<strong>in</strong>ations,<br />
take <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>tuitive approach to <strong>in</strong>novation, <strong>an</strong>d may overlook details.<br />
Developer – Developers enjoy putt<strong>in</strong>g together workable solutions,<br />
like to compare compet<strong>in</strong>g solutions, enjoy pl<strong>an</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g steps to implement<br />
<strong>an</strong>d idea, <strong>an</strong>d may get stuck id try<strong>in</strong>g to develop the “perfect solution.”<br />
Implementer – Implementers like to see th<strong>in</strong>gs happen, enjoy see<strong>in</strong>g<br />
ideas come to fruition, they “just do it, <strong>an</strong>d may leap <strong>in</strong>to action<br />
too quickly. (6-7)<br />
It should be made clear that while people may be most comfortable work<strong>in</strong>g or learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />
us<strong>in</strong>g their preferred styles or <strong>in</strong> their preferred mode, it is not a sign or determ<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>t of someone‟s<br />
ability. Puccio (2002) found, “A high preference simply suggests that this preference is a part of a<br />
process where you feel most comfortable <strong>an</strong>d energized.” (p. 4).<br />
26
“Initial evidence shows FourSight to be both a reliable (consistency) <strong>an</strong>d valid<br />
(authenticity) measure. Factor <strong>an</strong>alysis of the items shows strong <strong>in</strong>ternal consistencies with<strong>in</strong> its<br />
four scales (Clarifier, Ideator, Developer, <strong>an</strong>d Implementer)” (M<strong>an</strong>n, 2003). Correlation studies<br />
with four other highly regarded psychological measures have yielded evidence that supports<br />
FourSight’s concurrent validity.<br />
FourSight Research<br />
S<strong>in</strong>ce its development <strong>in</strong> the late 1990‟s, research support<strong>in</strong>g the reliability <strong>an</strong>d validity of<br />
Puccio‟s FourSight has been <strong>in</strong>vestigated <strong>an</strong>d the <strong>in</strong>strument has been a part of several Master of<br />
Science theses. Research at the State University of New York-College at Buffalo has been<br />
conducted by Rife (2001), Wheeler (2001), <strong>an</strong>d M<strong>an</strong>n (2003).<br />
Rife (2001) extended the <strong>in</strong>vestigation of the Buffalo Creative Process Inventory‟s (BCPI,<br />
currently known as FourSight) validity <strong>an</strong>d “explored the personality composition of the four<br />
preferences measured by the BCPI” (p. 7). Try<strong>in</strong>g to unpack the makeup of a person‟s preferences<br />
<strong>an</strong>d ga<strong>in</strong> a deeper underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of the personality traits associated with Clarifier, Ideator,<br />
Developer, <strong>an</strong>d Implementer, Rife (2001) correlated the Buffalo Creative Process Inventory<br />
(former name for FourSight) with the Adjective Checklist. The study yielded 49 signific<strong>an</strong>t<br />
correlations between the two measures. Some of the most <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g correlations were among 5<br />
ACL dimensions. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Rife (2001), “it makes sense that the Creative Personality, Self<br />
Confidence, Succor<strong>an</strong>ce, Favorable, <strong>an</strong>d Achievement all relate to each of the four preferences. It<br />
implies that the more someone sees themselves as these four preferences, the more likely they are<br />
to report themselves as a Creative person, Self Confident, one who is not succor<strong>an</strong>t, who sees<br />
27
themselves <strong>in</strong> a favorable light, <strong>an</strong>d is achievement oriented.” (p. 42). Rife found these results are<br />
“excit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d beg<strong>in</strong> to show evidence for the validity of the BCPI” (p. 47).<br />
In 2001 Wheeler exam<strong>in</strong>ed the “relationship between the people‟s style <strong>an</strong>d the degree to<br />
which they enjoyed learn<strong>in</strong>g the various components, stages, <strong>an</strong>d tools of the CPS process” (p. 9).<br />
Although this study was conducted to <strong>in</strong>vestigate the impact of Creative <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />
through the <strong>an</strong>alysis of <strong>in</strong>dividual differences, FourSight was used to measure one‟s cognitive style<br />
preference as it was <strong>in</strong> this study. Results of Wheeler (2001) identified correlations between<br />
FourSight preferences <strong>an</strong>d phases of the CPS process <strong>an</strong>d tools utilized <strong>in</strong> CPS. For example,<br />
accord<strong>in</strong>g to Wheeler, “high ideators saw future value <strong>in</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g the CPS tool „Praise First<br />
(PPCO)/ALUo/LCOb‟. These high ideators may believe that by underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g how to use the CPS<br />
tool „Praise First PPCO)/ALUo/LCOb‟ they will not rush <strong>in</strong>to try<strong>in</strong>g so m<strong>an</strong>y ideas at once” (p.<br />
73). If <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual c<strong>an</strong> learn how to make better decisions by be<strong>in</strong>g tra<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> CPS <strong>an</strong>d by<br />
learn<strong>in</strong>g CPS tools <strong>an</strong>d if it is hypothesized that problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is a core component of leadership<br />
<strong>in</strong>dividuals <strong>in</strong> leadership positions may <strong>in</strong>crease their effectiveness by learn<strong>in</strong>g their own<br />
<strong>in</strong>dividual preference(s), the CPS process, <strong>an</strong>d CPS tools.<br />
F<strong>in</strong>ally, most similar to the current study, M<strong>an</strong>n (2003) adm<strong>in</strong>istered FourSight to a sample<br />
of educational adm<strong>in</strong>istrators, primary, <strong>an</strong>d secondary level teachers of all subjects. This study<br />
<strong>in</strong>vestigated the cognitive style preferences of adm<strong>in</strong>istrators <strong>an</strong>d teachers <strong>an</strong>d identified whether<br />
similarities or differences existed when compared across <strong>an</strong>d with<strong>in</strong> subject areas. M<strong>an</strong>n‟s results<br />
<strong>in</strong>dicated the overall highest score for the full sample group was Clarifier with over forty percent<br />
(40%) of the full sample population exhibit<strong>in</strong>g a Clarifier preference. In addition, the f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs<br />
<strong>in</strong>dicated that over eighty-one (81%) subject area groups were also identified as high Clarifiers. An<br />
observation one may make from M<strong>an</strong>n‟s study is that he <strong>in</strong>vestigated the FourSight preferences of<br />
28
leaders with<strong>in</strong> education; teachers are classroom leaders, <strong>an</strong>d adm<strong>in</strong>istrators are school leaders. In<br />
M<strong>an</strong>n‟s study, the Adm<strong>in</strong>istrator group was represented by ten <strong>in</strong>dividuals. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to his<br />
results, there was no s<strong>in</strong>gle preference among these educational leaders, however, 40% of the<br />
sample did report a Clarifier preference. Additionally, the me<strong>an</strong> score of 40 may signify a higher<br />
th<strong>an</strong> average clarifier preference for these five <strong>in</strong>dividuals. As shown <strong>in</strong> table 1, a review of the<br />
adm<strong>in</strong>istrator group to the other particip<strong>an</strong>t groups was also performed <strong>an</strong>d found several groups<br />
with overwhelm<strong>in</strong>gly large percentages also report<strong>in</strong>g a preference toward clarification.<br />
Group Name<br />
Clarifier Score<br />
( percentage of overall<br />
group)<br />
Art/Music 25%<br />
Bus<strong>in</strong>ess/Technology 38%<br />
English 31.6%<br />
Foreign L<strong>an</strong>guage 37.5%<br />
Health/Physical Education 85.7%<br />
Mathematics 61.1%<br />
Science 46.7%<br />
Social Studies 47.7%<br />
Special Education 58.8%<br />
Elementary Education 40%<br />
Furthermore, the me<strong>an</strong> score of 40.00 for M<strong>an</strong>n‟s adm<strong>in</strong>istrators is only the fourth lowest<br />
Clarifier me<strong>an</strong> with Health/Physical education, Art/Music, <strong>an</strong>d Mathematics report<strong>in</strong>g me<strong>an</strong><br />
Clarifier scores of 42.00, 40.81, <strong>an</strong>d 40.44 respectively.<br />
The current study is similar <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>tent as leadership preferences measured by FourSight are<br />
also explored. If M<strong>an</strong>n (2003) c<strong>an</strong> be used as a benchmark for leader problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences,<br />
the results of this study should show a correlation <strong>an</strong>d a majority of Clarifier preferences will be<br />
uncovered.<br />
Table 1: Clarifier Preference, particip<strong>an</strong>t group (M<strong>an</strong>n 2003)<br />
29
Summary<br />
In order to appreciate <strong>in</strong>sights ga<strong>in</strong>ed from this research, one must first underst<strong>an</strong>d th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g<br />
styles. With <strong>an</strong> underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles one should then evaluate results from studies<br />
where th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles have been measured, <strong>an</strong>d f<strong>in</strong>ally, the implications of style with<strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong><br />
org<strong>an</strong>izational context should be discussed. As this study is unique <strong>in</strong> that problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g styles<br />
of leaders with<strong>in</strong> one org<strong>an</strong>ization are <strong>in</strong>vestigated, this chapter provided a review of related<br />
literature <strong>an</strong>d <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>troduction to FourSight <strong>an</strong>d its support<strong>in</strong>g literature.<br />
30
Chapter Three<br />
Methodology<br />
Introduction<br />
The purpose of this section is to describe <strong>in</strong> detail how the study was conducted. Details<br />
about the acquisition of particip<strong>an</strong>ts, survey distribution, adm<strong>in</strong>istration, data collection, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
FourSight debrief<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation are described.<br />
Sample<br />
All particip<strong>an</strong>ts for this study were employed by a local operations unit of a global f<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>cial<br />
services firm. This fortune 500-comp<strong>an</strong>y employs over 30,000 people globally <strong>an</strong>d at the time of<br />
the study was a United States Securities <strong>an</strong>d Exch<strong>an</strong>ge Commission publicly traded comp<strong>an</strong>y on<br />
the New York Stock Exch<strong>an</strong>ge. The particip<strong>an</strong>ts‟ level with<strong>in</strong> the org<strong>an</strong>izational hierarchy varied.<br />
For example, subjects were represented from four levels of the org<strong>an</strong>ization‟s hierarchy; entry level<br />
employees, first <strong>an</strong>d second level m<strong>an</strong>agers, <strong>an</strong>d senior level executives. Table 2 below illustrates<br />
demographic <strong>in</strong>formation for the sample groups.<br />
Number of Gender Average<br />
Group<br />
Particip<strong>an</strong>ts Breakdown Age<br />
Senior M<strong>an</strong>agement 27 18 male : 9 female 41.6<br />
First/Second Level M<strong>an</strong>agement 30 9 male : 21 female 38<br />
Entry Level/Non M<strong>an</strong>agement 16 6 male : 10 female 37<br />
Table 2: Demographics, Sample Groups<br />
31
Procedures<br />
Before <strong>in</strong>itiat<strong>in</strong>g the study, this researcher secured permission from the Research<br />
Foundation of the attend<strong>in</strong>g college to conduct this type of research. Next, the researcher prepared<br />
a proposal to the local bus<strong>in</strong>ess unit of <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternational f<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>cial services firm. The proposal was<br />
submitted to the site director (appendix A). After the review <strong>an</strong>d accept<strong>an</strong>ce of the proposal, the<br />
site head forwarded the proposal to the next level of m<strong>an</strong>agement. After review <strong>an</strong>d accept<strong>an</strong>ce of<br />
the proposal by executive m<strong>an</strong>agement <strong>an</strong>d the hum<strong>an</strong> resources department, this researcher<br />
offered, through email <strong>an</strong>d verbal communication, <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>vitation to participate to all comp<strong>an</strong>y<br />
employees. Subsequently, the 100 research particip<strong>an</strong>ts from four employment levels with<strong>in</strong> the<br />
org<strong>an</strong>ization‟s hierarchy volunteered for the study. Then, via <strong>in</strong>teroffice mail, this researcher<br />
distributed a copy of the FourSight <strong>in</strong>strument to the particip<strong>an</strong>ts. The particip<strong>an</strong>ts from the first<br />
three levels <strong>an</strong>d a portion of the highest level with<strong>in</strong> the hierarchy were chosen from the local site.<br />
Additional senior level m<strong>an</strong>agement was chosen from a regional office located <strong>in</strong> the state of<br />
Delaware. Particip<strong>an</strong>ts were asked to complete the FourSight survey. Then all materials were<br />
returned to the researcher via <strong>in</strong>ter-office mail. There are three particip<strong>an</strong>t groups (figure 1) each<br />
with thirty members; one representative of executive m<strong>an</strong>agement (Director, Senior Vice<br />
President, Department M<strong>an</strong>ager), one representative of middle m<strong>an</strong>agement (Section M<strong>an</strong>ager,<br />
Assist<strong>an</strong>t Vice President), <strong>an</strong>d one representative entry-level employment (Workflow, Senior<br />
Specialist, computer operators/processors).<br />
32
30<br />
entry-level<br />
employees<br />
390 total employees<br />
Local site<br />
90<br />
Particip<strong>an</strong>ts<br />
30<br />
middle<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agers<br />
Figure 1<br />
After scor<strong>in</strong>g the FourSight questionnaire, the researcher scheduled a time to offer a thirty<br />
m<strong>in</strong>ute debrief (via conference calls or <strong>in</strong> person classroom sett<strong>in</strong>g) of the results to all particip<strong>an</strong>ts.<br />
Instrumentation<br />
35 employees (Alt. site)<br />
10 employees<br />
30<br />
executive<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agers<br />
A creativity style measure, known as FourSight (appendix B), was used <strong>in</strong> this study. As<br />
stated, FourSight was developed by Dr. Gerard Puccio. In the early 1990‟s Puccio beg<strong>an</strong> to<br />
<strong>in</strong>vestigate the correlation between <strong>in</strong>dividual behavior <strong>an</strong>d creative solv<strong>in</strong>g problem preference.<br />
The <strong>in</strong>strument has been widely used to asses one‟s creative th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style. FourSight measures<br />
<strong>in</strong>novative or breakthrough th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g. There are four th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles described <strong>in</strong> FourSight; (a)<br />
Clarifier, (b) Ideator, (c) Developer, <strong>an</strong>d (d) Implementer. Us<strong>in</strong>g Cronbach‟s alpha, this version of<br />
FourSight measured high <strong>in</strong>ternal consistency of the four scales, with each scale‟s alpha coefficient<br />
33
exceed<strong>in</strong>g .70. FourSight is a thirty-seven question battery with 9 items per scale. The first question is not scored. The <strong>in</strong>strument is a pen <strong>an</strong>d<br />
paper <strong>in</strong>strument <strong>an</strong>d is scored m<strong>an</strong>ually.<br />
FourSight been compared with four other highly reputed psychological measures; (a) the<br />
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), (b) the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Scale (KAI), (c)<br />
Basadur‟s Creative <strong>Problem</strong> <strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> Inventory (CPSI), <strong>an</strong>d (d) the Adjective Checklist (ACL).<br />
Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Puccio (2002), “FourSight shows signific<strong>an</strong>t correlation with four highly reputed<br />
psychological measures, giv<strong>in</strong>g evidence of its validity” (p. 36).<br />
Summary<br />
This chapter provided a description of the processes <strong>an</strong>d procedures required to complete<br />
this research study. All necessary college approvals, corporate proposals, <strong>an</strong>d sample <strong>in</strong>struments<br />
utilized are referred to <strong>an</strong>d discussed. Additionally, these documents are provided <strong>in</strong> the<br />
respective appendices.<br />
Chapter 4<br />
34
Presentation <strong>an</strong>d Analysis of Data<br />
Introduction<br />
This section presents the f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>an</strong>d <strong>an</strong>alyzes the data gathered from the study. The<br />
descriptive data <strong>an</strong>d signific<strong>an</strong>t differences are presented with general observations <strong>an</strong>d<br />
<strong>in</strong>terpretation of the f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs. The chapter concludes with <strong>an</strong> overall summary.<br />
Descriptive Statistics<br />
Table 3 presents the descriptive statistics for the four Foursight preferences among all<br />
groups, <strong>in</strong>dividual group <strong>an</strong>d total me<strong>an</strong> scores, group size, <strong>an</strong>d st<strong>an</strong>dard deviations. It is<br />
<strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g to note that for three of the four Foursight preferences (Clarifier, Ideator, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
Developer) me<strong>an</strong> scores followed the same order as the employment hierarchy with entry level<br />
employees scor<strong>in</strong>g the least highest <strong>an</strong>d middle m<strong>an</strong>agement <strong>an</strong>d executive m<strong>an</strong>agement scor<strong>in</strong>g<br />
the second <strong>an</strong>d first highest respectively. For the fourth preference (Implementer) it is <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g<br />
that the executive group me<strong>an</strong> score was lowest of all groups <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g hav<strong>in</strong>g a score lower th<strong>an</strong><br />
all groups‟ overall me<strong>an</strong> score. The <strong>an</strong>alysis <strong>in</strong> table 3 also identifies a signific<strong>an</strong>t difference<br />
among groups for the Ideator preference which is further illustrated <strong>in</strong> tables 9 <strong>an</strong>d 10.<br />
35
FourSight Preference<br />
Org<strong>an</strong>izational Hierarchy<br />
Clarifier<br />
Senior M<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
Mid M<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
Entry Level<br />
Total<br />
Ideator<br />
Senior M<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
Mid M<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
Entry Level<br />
Total<br />
Develeper<br />
Senior M<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
Mid M<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
Entry Level<br />
Total<br />
Implementer<br />
Senior M<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
Mid M<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
Entry Level<br />
Total<br />
N<br />
27<br />
30<br />
16<br />
73<br />
27<br />
30<br />
16<br />
73<br />
27<br />
30<br />
16<br />
73<br />
27<br />
30<br />
16<br />
73<br />
Me<strong>an</strong><br />
36.555<br />
34.500<br />
33.500<br />
35.041<br />
33.596<br />
30.166<br />
27.937<br />
30.945<br />
33.814<br />
33.400<br />
32.750<br />
33.411<br />
33.592<br />
35.066<br />
34.312<br />
34.356<br />
Std.<br />
Deviation<br />
4.492<br />
5.250<br />
5.573<br />
5.135<br />
5.603<br />
6.649<br />
5.904<br />
6.426<br />
4.376<br />
4.343<br />
3.991<br />
4.242<br />
3.522<br />
4.193<br />
4.527<br />
4.032<br />
Us<strong>in</strong>g Cronbach‟s Alpha as the measure for <strong>in</strong>ternal consistency of all of the Foursight<br />
skills, reliability <strong>an</strong>alysis was conducted <strong>an</strong>d tables 4 through 7 represent summaries for each<br />
FourSight preference. Unlike past research which has shown alpha coefficient above the<br />
m<strong>in</strong>imum, <strong>in</strong> this study, two the four scales measured above the desired .70 coefficient. The scales<br />
for Clarifier <strong>an</strong>d Ideator reported coefficients of .80 <strong>an</strong>d .84, respectively. The scales for Developer<br />
<strong>an</strong>d Implementer were .64 <strong>an</strong>d .66, respectively.<br />
Table 3: Descriptive Statistics for FourSight across All Levels<br />
36
FourSight<br />
Preference<br />
Clarifier<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
7<br />
8<br />
9<br />
Me<strong>an</strong> Std.<br />
4.027<br />
3.972<br />
4.166<br />
4.013<br />
3.527<br />
3.402<br />
3.986<br />
4.111<br />
3.916<br />
Deviation<br />
.9783<br />
.9782<br />
.888<br />
.863<br />
.903<br />
1.002<br />
.813<br />
.881<br />
.884<br />
N<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
Table 4: Cronbach Alpha Analysis for Clarifier<br />
Scale/Alpha = .80<br />
FourSight<br />
Preference<br />
Ideator<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
7<br />
8<br />
9<br />
Me<strong>an</strong> Std.<br />
3.625<br />
3.597<br />
3.708<br />
3.819<br />
2.986<br />
2.930<br />
3.638<br />
4.027<br />
3.750<br />
Deviation<br />
1.118<br />
1.121<br />
.970<br />
.893<br />
1.119<br />
1.356<br />
1.213<br />
1.006<br />
.817<br />
N<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
Table 5: Cronbach Alpha Analysis for Ideator<br />
Scale/Alpha = .84<br />
37
FourSight<br />
Preference<br />
Developer<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
7<br />
8<br />
9<br />
Me<strong>an</strong> Std.<br />
3.671<br />
3.726<br />
3.767<br />
4.013<br />
3.520<br />
3.438<br />
4.054<br />
3.767<br />
3.452<br />
Deviation<br />
As shown <strong>in</strong> Table 7 above, the scale for Implementer returned a coefficient of .66,<br />
considered to be less th<strong>an</strong> desired; however, as illustrated <strong>in</strong> table 8 below, if Question 37, the last<br />
item on the FourSight <strong>in</strong>ventory, were removed the coefficient for the Implementer preference<br />
.943<br />
.989<br />
1.020<br />
.857<br />
.899<br />
1.06<br />
.779<br />
.825<br />
.898<br />
N<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
Table 6: Cronbach Alpha Analysis for Developer<br />
Scale/Alpha = .64<br />
FourSight<br />
Preference<br />
Implementer<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
7<br />
8<br />
9<br />
Me<strong>an</strong> Std.<br />
3.9167<br />
3.6111<br />
4.3889<br />
3.9861<br />
3.8889<br />
3.7361<br />
4.0833<br />
4.2083<br />
2.5278<br />
Deviation<br />
.85168<br />
1.15741<br />
.74220<br />
.88003<br />
.89687<br />
.90372<br />
.78274<br />
.74941<br />
.83872<br />
N<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
72<br />
Table 7: Cronbach Alpha Analysis for Implementer<br />
Scale/Alpha = .66<br />
38
would ch<strong>an</strong>ge to .734 which is above the m<strong>in</strong>imum .70. This does not exist for <strong>an</strong>y other s<strong>in</strong>gle<br />
item <strong>an</strong>alyzed <strong>in</strong> this study <strong>an</strong>d does raise questions about Question 37 itself <strong>an</strong>d/or its placement<br />
as the last item <strong>in</strong> the FourSight measure.<br />
Item<br />
Number<br />
Scale<br />
Me<strong>an</strong> if<br />
Item<br />
Deleted<br />
One way <strong>an</strong>alyses of vari<strong>an</strong>ce were also run to test for signific<strong>an</strong>t differences on Foursight<br />
preferences for all groups <strong>an</strong>d c<strong>an</strong> be found <strong>in</strong> table 9 below. The me<strong>an</strong> score among the three<br />
groups (executive/senior m<strong>an</strong>agement n=27), middle m<strong>an</strong>agement (n=30), <strong>an</strong>d entry level<br />
employee/non m<strong>an</strong>agement (n=16) were tested to see if there were differences. There was one<br />
signific<strong>an</strong>t difference found among groups <strong>in</strong> the Ideator preference <strong>an</strong>d table 10 illustrates the Post<br />
Scale<br />
Vari<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
if Item<br />
Deleted<br />
Hoc assessment of which groups demonstrated differences.<br />
Corrected<br />
Item-<br />
Total<br />
Variation<br />
Cronbach‟s<br />
Alpha if<br />
Item<br />
Deleted<br />
37 31.8194 17.305 -.219 .734<br />
Table 8: Item-Total Statistics - Implementer<br />
39
Clarifier<br />
Table 10 represents the Post Hoc Assessments of differences by group <strong>an</strong>d as noted above<br />
this study found a signific<strong>an</strong>t difference among the groups surveyed with<strong>in</strong> the Ideator preference.<br />
The most signific<strong>an</strong>t difference, .013, was found between the senior m<strong>an</strong>agement group <strong>an</strong>d the<br />
entry level group. There was also a difference of .093 found between the senior m<strong>an</strong>agement group<br />
<strong>an</strong>d the middle m<strong>an</strong>agement group.<br />
Groups Sum of<br />
Between Groups<br />
With<strong>in</strong> Groups<br />
Total<br />
Ideator<br />
Between Groups<br />
With<strong>in</strong> Groups<br />
Total<br />
Developer<br />
Between Groups<br />
With<strong>in</strong> Groups<br />
Total<br />
Implementer<br />
Between Groups<br />
With<strong>in</strong> Groups<br />
Total<br />
Squares<br />
108.710<br />
1790.167<br />
1898.877<br />
352.158<br />
1284.274<br />
1295.671<br />
11.397<br />
1284.274<br />
1295.671<br />
30.917<br />
1139.823<br />
1170.740<br />
df Me<strong>an</strong><br />
2<br />
70<br />
7<br />
2<br />
70<br />
7<br />
2<br />
70<br />
7<br />
2<br />
70<br />
7<br />
Square<br />
54.355<br />
25.574<br />
176.079<br />
37.452<br />
5.699<br />
18.347<br />
15.459<br />
16.283<br />
F Sig<br />
2.125<br />
4,701<br />
.311<br />
.949<br />
.127<br />
.012<br />
.734<br />
.392<br />
Table 9: Analysis of Vari<strong>an</strong>ce (ANOVA) among all three groups<br />
40
(1) (J)<br />
Dependent Grp Grp<br />
Variable Code Code<br />
Clarifier Exec Mid<br />
Entry<br />
Clarifier Mid Exec<br />
Entry<br />
Clarifier Entry Exec<br />
Mid<br />
Ideator Exec Mid<br />
Entry<br />
Ideator Mid Exec<br />
Entry<br />
Ideator Entry Exec<br />
Mid<br />
Developer Exec Mid<br />
Entry<br />
Developer Mid Exec<br />
Entry<br />
Developer Entry Exec<br />
Mid<br />
Implementer Exec Mid<br />
Entry<br />
Implementer Mid Exec<br />
Entry<br />
Implementer Entry Exec<br />
Mid<br />
Me<strong>an</strong> Difference<br />
(l-J)<br />
2.05556<br />
3.05556<br />
-2.0556<br />
1.00000<br />
-3.05556<br />
1.000000<br />
3.42593<br />
5.65509<br />
-3.42593<br />
2.22917<br />
-5.65509<br />
-2.22917<br />
.41481<br />
1.06481<br />
-.41481<br />
.65000<br />
-1.06481<br />
-.65000<br />
-1.47407<br />
-.71991<br />
1.47407<br />
.75417<br />
.71991<br />
-.75417<br />
Std. Error<br />
1.34151<br />
1.59548<br />
1.34151<br />
1.56551<br />
1.59548<br />
1.56661<br />
1.62342<br />
1.93076<br />
1.62342<br />
1.89450<br />
1.93076<br />
1.89450<br />
1.13625<br />
1.35136<br />
1.13625<br />
1.32598<br />
1.35136<br />
1.32598<br />
1.07045<br />
1.27310<br />
1.07045<br />
1.24919<br />
1.27310<br />
1.24919<br />
Sig.<br />
.282<br />
.142<br />
.282<br />
.799<br />
.142<br />
.799<br />
.095<br />
.013<br />
.095<br />
.471<br />
.013<br />
.471<br />
.929<br />
.712<br />
.929<br />
.876<br />
.712<br />
.876<br />
.358<br />
.839<br />
.358<br />
..819<br />
.839<br />
.819<br />
Table 10: Post Hoc Assessment of Differences Among Groups<br />
Summary<br />
This chapter presented the results of the data obta<strong>in</strong>ed dur<strong>in</strong>g the study <strong>an</strong>d identified notable<br />
f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs. Signific<strong>an</strong>t differences were found among all three groups for one of the FourSight skills,<br />
Ideation, with the most signific<strong>an</strong>t difference exist<strong>in</strong>g between senior m<strong>an</strong>agement <strong>an</strong>d entry level<br />
employees. There was also a difference between senior m<strong>an</strong>agement <strong>an</strong>d middle m<strong>an</strong>agement <strong>an</strong>d<br />
although not as high as that between senior m<strong>an</strong>agement to entry level, the data does support the<br />
hypothesis that creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g skills are a trait held by leaders <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong> this case, for<br />
41
ideation, a marked difference toward that preference among those with<strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>izational<br />
hierarchy.<br />
42
Chapter 5<br />
Conclusions, Recommendations, <strong>an</strong>d Implications<br />
Introduction<br />
The purpose of this chapter is to present overall conclusions of this study as well as<br />
recommendations for future research. The guid<strong>in</strong>g question of this thesis as identified <strong>in</strong> Chapter 1<br />
is addressed. This chapter concludes with <strong>an</strong> overall summary.<br />
Conclusions<br />
The purpose of this study was to conduct further research <strong>in</strong>to the identification of <strong>in</strong>dividual<br />
preferences for aspects of the creative process among those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions. With this <strong>in</strong><br />
m<strong>in</strong>d, the results were excit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d showed support for this study <strong>an</strong>d others which <strong>in</strong>vestigate<br />
whether creativity <strong>an</strong>d creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g are required personality traits for successful<br />
leaders.<br />
Chapter 1.<br />
With the results <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d the follow<strong>in</strong>g section <strong>an</strong>swers the research question presented <strong>in</strong><br />
Is there a unique problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style that is prevalent among leaders?<br />
Yes, <strong>in</strong> this specific org<strong>an</strong>ization a preference toward ideation is prevalent among the<br />
leadership team. Ideators are <strong>in</strong>dividuals who like to generate broad ideas <strong>an</strong>d concepts, are most<br />
comfortable underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g the big picture <strong>an</strong>d stretch<strong>in</strong>g their imag<strong>in</strong>ation. They are flexible<br />
th<strong>in</strong>kers, see m<strong>an</strong>y possible solutions, <strong>an</strong>d are drawn to abstract <strong>an</strong>d global issues. Hav<strong>in</strong>g<br />
43
professional relationships with m<strong>an</strong>y of the survey particip<strong>an</strong>ts, these results are aligned with the<br />
author‟s personal experiences <strong>an</strong>d op<strong>in</strong>ions.<br />
The groups who participated <strong>in</strong> this study were current or former employees of Operational<br />
Units for a major F<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>cial Services firm <strong>an</strong>d encounter challenges such as <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g efficiency,<br />
reduc<strong>in</strong>g expenditures, meet<strong>in</strong>g federal <strong>an</strong>d corporate regulations <strong>an</strong>d report<strong>in</strong>g requirements, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g globally on a daily basis. The stress level is considered high among the teams <strong>an</strong>d leaders<br />
require creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g skills among m<strong>an</strong>y other traits, skills, <strong>an</strong>d abilities. As a former<br />
employee of the org<strong>an</strong>ization <strong>an</strong>d a middle m<strong>an</strong>agement study particip<strong>an</strong>t, the author has witnessed<br />
the problem solv<strong>in</strong>g behaviors of m<strong>an</strong>y of the study particip<strong>an</strong>ts <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong> addition to demonstrat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
high ideator scores on FourSight, the author‟s personal experiences of Bra<strong>in</strong>storm<strong>in</strong>g sessions <strong>an</strong>d<br />
strategy meet<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g employees from all levels of the employment hierarchy support the<br />
ma<strong>in</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of this study.<br />
With trillions of dollars tr<strong>an</strong>sacted <strong>an</strong>d processed daily by the groups who participated <strong>in</strong> this<br />
study the author agrees that employees at all levels of the org<strong>an</strong>ization require creative skills<br />
because creative solutions do provide new ways to solve old problems. The members of this senior<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agement group are tasked with generat<strong>in</strong>g new ideas <strong>an</strong>d they must have the ability to envision<br />
multiple solutions to challenges as the work environment requires flexibility. Intricate relationships<br />
between f<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>cial products, back office process<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>an</strong>d technology restra<strong>in</strong>ts are just a few of the<br />
challenges faced by this senior m<strong>an</strong>agement team. As found <strong>in</strong> the study, the senior m<strong>an</strong>agers of<br />
this org<strong>an</strong>ization have a preference towards ideation which <strong>in</strong> the author‟s op<strong>in</strong>ion assisted them <strong>in</strong><br />
provid<strong>in</strong>g new ideas for the critical challenges they faced. Provid<strong>in</strong>g multiple ideas to lower levels<br />
of m<strong>an</strong>agement who evidenced higher preferences <strong>in</strong> clarification <strong>an</strong>d development, though not<br />
44
statistically signific<strong>an</strong>tly so, also demonstrates <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g distribution of creative problem<br />
solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences among those <strong>in</strong> this org<strong>an</strong>ization.<br />
From a bus<strong>in</strong>ess perspective, money may be saved, products may be improved, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
operational processes may be enh<strong>an</strong>ced to function more seamless by f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g new <strong>an</strong>d creative<br />
solutions to exist<strong>in</strong>g problems. By identify<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>dividual preferences with<strong>in</strong> the creative process<br />
<strong>an</strong>d by underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g the nature of leadership <strong>an</strong>d the skills required for success org<strong>an</strong>izations may<br />
be better suited to locate appropriately qualified <strong>in</strong>dividuals to lead them.<br />
Recommendations<br />
This study identified one signific<strong>an</strong>t difference <strong>in</strong> creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles among<br />
those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions <strong>an</strong>d is aligned with other hypotheses <strong>in</strong>vestigat<strong>in</strong>g creative problem<br />
solv<strong>in</strong>g styles <strong>an</strong>d leadership (Buttner, et. al. 1999, Coulson & Strickl<strong>an</strong>d 1983, . Izgar, 2008,<br />
M<strong>an</strong>n 2003, Mosley, et. al. 1991, Mumford, et. al. 2000) <strong>in</strong> that problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences were<br />
identified, more specifically, one <strong>in</strong>dividual preference existed among the senior m<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
team. Additionally, similar to other research <strong>in</strong> the leadership field, (Heijltjes 2007, Hellriegel &<br />
Slocum 1975, Herbig & Jacobs 1996, Kosicek 2008, M<strong>an</strong>k<strong>in</strong>s & Steele 2006, Marshall 2008) this<br />
study recognized that problem solv<strong>in</strong>g is a key component of leadership <strong>an</strong>d c<strong>an</strong> be enh<strong>an</strong>ced.<br />
Future studies <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g senior m<strong>an</strong>agers <strong>in</strong> other org<strong>an</strong>izations may provide further <strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong>to<br />
the distribution of creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences among those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions.<br />
Similar f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs would supplement the theory that leadership does require creative skills <strong>an</strong>d<br />
abilities. Furthermore, studies <strong>in</strong>vestigat<strong>in</strong>g the collection, utilization, <strong>an</strong>d ma<strong>in</strong>ten<strong>an</strong>ce of this data<br />
may also be deemed appropriate. As discussed previously, if traits for successful leadership are<br />
45
def<strong>in</strong>ed, <strong>in</strong>dividuals have a valuable tool for self discovery <strong>an</strong>d personal development <strong>an</strong>d<br />
org<strong>an</strong>izations have a valuable tool for employment recruit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d professional development. More<br />
studies <strong>an</strong>alyz<strong>in</strong>g the creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences of leaders <strong>in</strong> the same org<strong>an</strong>ization<br />
throughout multiple locations would also provide additional data <strong>an</strong>d may possibly identify a trend<br />
throughout <strong>an</strong> entire org<strong>an</strong>ization not only a subset or regional location. Such future studies may<br />
wish to replace or modify the statement associated with question 37 on FourSight as this item<br />
showed weaker reliability.<br />
F<strong>in</strong>ally, longitud<strong>in</strong>al studies <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>dividuals throughout a career sp<strong>an</strong> would also<br />
provide <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g results. Questions such as; “Do <strong>in</strong>dividuals have one s<strong>in</strong>gle, consistent creative<br />
problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preference throughout their professional career or is there a shift as one progresses<br />
through <strong>an</strong> employment hierarchy?”, or “Do <strong>in</strong>dividuals demonstrate one s<strong>in</strong>gle, consistent<br />
creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preference throughout their professional career or is there a shift as one<br />
digresses through <strong>an</strong> employment hierarchy?” may be <strong>an</strong>swered. Such longitud<strong>in</strong>al studies would<br />
also be useful <strong>in</strong> determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g whether <strong>in</strong>dividuals are selected, <strong>in</strong> part, for leadership positions due<br />
to their Ideator preference or if after selection <strong>in</strong>dividuals naturally develop this preference <strong>in</strong><br />
response to the tasks associated with leadership positions.<br />
Implications<br />
The results of this study had both theoretical <strong>an</strong>d applied impact <strong>in</strong> terms of implications.<br />
From a theoretical side, it provided further <strong>in</strong>sight <strong>in</strong>to the preferences <strong>an</strong>d creative behavior found<br />
among those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions, thereby further<strong>in</strong>g the contention that leadership <strong>in</strong>volves<br />
creative th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g, especially the use of imag<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>an</strong>d ideation. From <strong>an</strong> applied perspective,<br />
46
studies attempt<strong>in</strong>g to ga<strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of the traits required for leadership open the door for a<br />
multitude of applications for the data.<br />
Professional org<strong>an</strong>izations may use the data to; <strong>in</strong>crease their overall productivity, ensure a<br />
better match for a person-environment fit, underst<strong>an</strong>d their employees better, offer specialized or<br />
concentrated professional development tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, <strong>an</strong>d for team formation, perform<strong>an</strong>ce, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
dynamics. Individuals may use the data to underst<strong>an</strong>d themselves better, f<strong>in</strong>d areas of<br />
improvement, <strong>an</strong>d learn to communicate <strong>an</strong>d work more productively with others.<br />
Summary<br />
This chapter provided the overall conclusions to the research as well as addressed the<br />
guid<strong>in</strong>g thesis question. Specifically, this chapter provided <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>terpretation of the results <strong>an</strong>d a<br />
description of recommendations for future research. Theoretical <strong>an</strong>d applied implications of the<br />
study concluded the chapter.<br />
47
References<br />
Balkis, M. & Isiker, G.B. (2005). The relationship between th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles <strong>an</strong>d personality types.<br />
Social Behavior <strong>an</strong>d Personality 33(3), 283-294.<br />
B<strong>an</strong>erjee, P. (2004). Mak<strong>in</strong>g better bus<strong>in</strong>ess decisions: underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g critical th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d problem<br />
solv<strong>in</strong>g skills. a book review. IIMB M<strong>an</strong>agement Review 16(2) 0.<br />
Boer,A.L., Steyn, T. (1999). Th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style preferences of underprepared first year students <strong>in</strong> the<br />
Natural Sciences. South Afric<strong>an</strong> Journal of Ethnology 22(3) 97-103.<br />
Briggs-Myers I. & Cook–Briggs K. (1998). Introduction to type. Palo Alto, CA: CPP, Inc.<br />
Buff<strong>in</strong>gton, K.W., Jablokow, K.W., & Mart<strong>in</strong>, K.A. (2002) Project team dynamics, <strong>an</strong>d cognitive<br />
style. Eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g M<strong>an</strong>agement Journal 14(3), 25-33.<br />
Burst<strong>in</strong>er, I. (2001). Evaluation of a m<strong>in</strong>i-workshop <strong>in</strong> “creative leadership” for educational<br />
adm<strong>in</strong>istrators. Education 93(1), 47-50.<br />
Buttner, E. H., Gryskiewicz, N., Hidore, S.C. (1999). The relationship between styles of<br />
creativity <strong>an</strong>d m<strong>an</strong>agerial skills assessment. British Journal of M<strong>an</strong>agement (10), 228-<br />
238.<br />
Cabral, G. & Joyce, M. H., III., (1991). M<strong>an</strong>agers <strong>an</strong>d psychological type <strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>dustrial sett<strong>in</strong>g:<br />
sex differences <strong>an</strong>d similarities, m<strong>an</strong>agerial level, <strong>an</strong>d age. Journal of Psychological<br />
Type, 21, 40- 46.<br />
48
Carr, M. (2006). How m<strong>an</strong>agers <strong>an</strong>d non-m<strong>an</strong>agers differ <strong>in</strong> their mbti personality type. People<br />
M<strong>an</strong>agement, 12(9), 48-48.<br />
Ch<strong>an</strong>, D. (1996). Cognitive misfit of problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g style at work: a facet of person-org<strong>an</strong>ization fit.<br />
Org<strong>an</strong>izational Behavior <strong>an</strong>d Hum<strong>an</strong> Decision Process, 68(3), 194-207.<br />
Coulson, L. & Strickl<strong>an</strong>d, A., (1983). The m<strong>in</strong>ds at the top: An <strong>an</strong>alysis of the th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style<br />
preferences of super<strong>in</strong>tendents of schools <strong>an</strong>d chief executive officers. Journal of<br />
Creative Behavior, 17(3), 163-174.<br />
Davis, G.A. (1999). Creativity is forever (fourth ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt<br />
Ev<strong>an</strong>s, A.L. & Ev<strong>an</strong>s, V. (2002). <strong>Leader</strong>ship workshop. Education 123(1), 18-30.<br />
Fox, J. M., & Fox, R.L. (2000). Explor<strong>in</strong>g the nature of creativity. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt<br />
G<strong>an</strong>ster, D.C. (2005). Executive job dem<strong>an</strong>ds: suggestions from a stress <strong>an</strong>d decision mak<strong>in</strong>g<br />
perspective. Academy of M<strong>an</strong>agement Review 30(3), 492-502.<br />
Gustafson, S. B. & Mumford, M.D. (1995). Personal style <strong>an</strong>d person-environment fit: a pattern<br />
approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 46(2) 163-88.<br />
Harris, G. (2003). I was born to be a ceo. BizEd March/April 2003, 54-55.<br />
Heijltjes, M. (2007). Learn<strong>in</strong>g to Lead--Responsibly. BizEd, 6(6), 32-37.<br />
Hellriegel, D. & Slocum, J.W. (1975). M<strong>an</strong>agerial problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g styles. Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g & Development<br />
Journal, 29(3), 29-36.<br />
49
Herbig, P. & Jacobs, L. (1996). Creative problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g styles <strong>in</strong> the USA <strong>an</strong>d Jap<strong>an</strong>.<br />
International Market<strong>in</strong>g Review, 13(2), 63-71.<br />
Hoy, F. & Hellreigel, D. (1982). The kilm<strong>an</strong>n <strong>an</strong>d herden model of org<strong>an</strong>izational effectiveness<br />
criteria for small bus<strong>in</strong>ess m<strong>an</strong>agers. Academy of M<strong>an</strong>agement Journal 25(2), 308-322.<br />
Izgar, H. (2008). Headteachers‟ leadership behavior <strong>an</strong>d problem solv<strong>in</strong>g skills: a comparative<br />
study. Social Behavior & Personality, 36(4), 535-548.<br />
Kirton, M.J. (1987). Kirton adaption-<strong>in</strong>novation <strong>in</strong>ventory m<strong>an</strong>ual (2 nd ed.) Hatfield, UK:<br />
Occupational Research Center.<br />
Kosicek, P.M. (2008). An essay on the teach<strong>in</strong>g of leadership to undergraduates <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />
schools. Education, Knowledge & Economy, 2(1), 67-73.<br />
Lavack, J. F. (1991). Cerebral hemisphericity, college major <strong>an</strong>d occupational choices. Journal<br />
of Creative Behavior, 25(3), 218-222.<br />
Maier, N.R.F., & Sashk<strong>in</strong>, M. (1971). Specific leadership behaviors that promote problem<br />
solv<strong>in</strong>g. Personnel Psychology 24, 35-44.<br />
M<strong>an</strong>k<strong>in</strong>s, M.C. & Steele, R. (2006). Stop mak<strong>in</strong>g pl<strong>an</strong>s <strong>an</strong>d start mak<strong>in</strong>g decision, Harvard<br />
Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Review, 84(1), 76-84.<br />
M<strong>an</strong>n, M.C. (2003). Identify<strong>in</strong>g the creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences of secondary educators<br />
<strong>an</strong>d adm<strong>in</strong>istrators. . Unpublished master‟s thesis, State University of New York<br />
College at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.<br />
50
Marshall, D. (2008). Creat<strong>in</strong>g new leaders, <strong>Leader</strong>ship Excellence 25(10), 10-12<br />
Mosley, D.C., O'Brien, F.P. , & Pietri, P.H.(1991). <strong>Problem</strong> solv<strong>in</strong>g styles determ<strong>in</strong>e m<strong>an</strong>ager's<br />
approach to mak<strong>in</strong>g decisions. Industrial M<strong>an</strong>agement, 33(5) 4-9.<br />
Mumford, M.D., O‟Connor, J., Clifton, T.C., Connelly, M.S., & Zaccaro, S.J. (1993).<br />
Background data constructs as predictors of leadership behavior. Hum<strong>an</strong> Perform<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
6(2), 151-195.<br />
Mumford, M.D., Zaccaro, S.J., Connely, M.S., Marks, M.A. & Gilbert, J.A. (2000). Assessment<br />
of leader problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g capabilities. <strong>Leader</strong>ship Quarterly, 11(1), 37-64.<br />
Osborn, A. (1963). Applied imag<strong>in</strong>ation. New York: Charles Scriber‟s Sons.<br />
Parnes, Sidney (1971). The creative studies project. As <strong>in</strong> Frontiers of Creativity research<br />
Isaksen 1987 156-187.<br />
Perry,W. G. (1970). Forms of <strong>in</strong>tellectual <strong>an</strong>d ethical development <strong>in</strong> the college years: A<br />
scheme. New York: Holt, R<strong>in</strong>ehart <strong>an</strong>d W<strong>in</strong>ston.<br />
Perry, W. G. (1981). Cognitive <strong>an</strong>d ethical growth: The mak<strong>in</strong>g of me<strong>an</strong><strong>in</strong>g. In A. Chicker<strong>in</strong>g<br />
(Ed.), The modern Americ<strong>an</strong> college. S<strong>an</strong> Fr<strong>an</strong>cisco: Jossey-Bass.<br />
Puccio, G. (2002). Your th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g profile. Ev<strong>an</strong>ston, IL: Th<strong>in</strong>c Communications.<br />
Puccio, G. (2002). FourSight tech m<strong>an</strong>ual. Ev<strong>an</strong>ston, IL: Th<strong>in</strong>c Communications.<br />
Puccio, G. (1999). Creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences: their identification <strong>an</strong>d implications.<br />
Creativity <strong>an</strong>d Innovation M<strong>an</strong>agement 8(3), 171-178.<br />
51
Puccio, G.J., Murdock. M.C., & M<strong>an</strong>ce, M. (2007). Creative <strong>Leader</strong>ship: Skills that Drive<br />
Ch<strong>an</strong>ge. Thous<strong>an</strong>d Oaks, CA: Sage Publish<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Rhodes, M. (1961). An <strong>an</strong>alysis of creativity. As <strong>in</strong> Frontiers of Creativity research Isaksen 1987<br />
216-222.<br />
Rife, S. L. (2001). Explor<strong>in</strong>g the personality composition of the four preferences measured by the<br />
Buffalo Creative Process Inventory. Unpublished master‟s thesis, State University of New<br />
York College at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.<br />
Roush, P.E. & Atwater, L. (1992). Us<strong>in</strong>g the mbti to underst<strong>an</strong>d tr<strong>an</strong>sformational leadership <strong>an</strong>d<br />
self-perception accuracy. Military Psychology 4(1), 17-34.<br />
Safi, A. & Burrell, D.N. (2007) Develop<strong>in</strong>g adv<strong>an</strong>ced decision mak<strong>in</strong>g skills <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternational<br />
leaders <strong>an</strong>d m<strong>an</strong>agers. Vikalpa (32(3), 1-8.<br />
Shull, F. & Anthony, W.P. (1978). Do black <strong>an</strong>d white supervisory problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles<br />
differ? Personnel Psychology, 31, 761-781.<br />
Simonton, D.K. (1988). Quality <strong>an</strong>d purpose, qu<strong>an</strong>tity <strong>an</strong>d ch<strong>an</strong>ce. Creativity Research Journal,1<br />
68-74.<br />
Summers, S.L., Sweeney, J.T., Wolk, C.M. (2000). <strong>Problem</strong>-solv<strong>in</strong>g style <strong>an</strong>d fit <strong>in</strong> consult<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>an</strong>d audit<strong>in</strong>g. Journal of Information Systems 14(1), 1-15.<br />
Sternberg, R.J. (1988). Mental self-government: a theory of <strong>in</strong>tellectual styles <strong>an</strong>d their<br />
development. Hum<strong>an</strong> Development, 31(4), 197-221.<br />
52
The americ<strong>an</strong> heritage dictionary (4 th ed.). (2001). New York: Dell.<br />
Torr<strong>an</strong>ce, E.P., Torr<strong>an</strong>ce, J. P. (1978). Develop<strong>in</strong>g creativity <strong>in</strong>structional materials accord<strong>in</strong>g to<br />
the Osborn-Parnes creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g model. Creative Child <strong>an</strong>d Adult Quarterly,<br />
3(2) 80-90.<br />
Tref<strong>in</strong>ger, D.J., Isaksen, S.G., & Firestien, R.L. (1982). H<strong>an</strong>dbook of creative learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Williamsville, NY: Center for Creative Learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Tullet, A.D. (1996). The th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g style of m<strong>an</strong>agers of multiple projects: implications for<br />
problem solv<strong>in</strong>g when m<strong>an</strong>ag<strong>in</strong>g ch<strong>an</strong>ge. International Journal of M<strong>an</strong>agement 14(5),<br />
281-287.<br />
Wheeler, R. A. (2001). Improv<strong>in</strong>g the underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />
through <strong>an</strong> exam<strong>in</strong>ation of <strong>in</strong>dividual differences. Unpublished master‟s thesis, State<br />
University of New York College at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.<br />
Wolk, C, Schmidt, T, & Sweeney, J. (1997). Account<strong>in</strong>g educators‟ problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style <strong>an</strong>d<br />
their pedagogical perceptions <strong>an</strong>d preferences. Journal of Account<strong>in</strong>g Education 15(4),<br />
469-483.<br />
Zh<strong>an</strong>g, L.F. (2002). Th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g styles <strong>an</strong>d cognitive development. Journal of GeneticPsychology<br />
163(2), 178-195.<br />
53
Concept Paper<br />
Thesis Title: The Relationship between FourSight Profiles <strong>an</strong>d Employee Placement <strong>in</strong> the<br />
Hierarchy of <strong>an</strong> Org<strong>an</strong>ization.<br />
Rationale <strong>an</strong>d Questions:<br />
In order to effect ch<strong>an</strong>ge <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>novation, a bus<strong>in</strong>ess must underst<strong>an</strong>d the personality types,<br />
traits, <strong>an</strong>d, <strong>in</strong> some cases, problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles of its m<strong>an</strong>agement <strong>an</strong>d staff. Bus<strong>in</strong>esses have<br />
utilized this type of personality style <strong>in</strong>formation for years <strong>an</strong>d for m<strong>an</strong>y different purposes. For<br />
example, with<strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>ization, a hum<strong>an</strong> resource department will employ the use of personality<br />
measures to assist <strong>in</strong> hir<strong>in</strong>g decisions; project teams use similar <strong>in</strong>struments to build groups,<br />
allow<strong>in</strong>g the ability to capitalize on <strong>in</strong>dividual talents or areas of expertise. In addition, senior level<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agement may use these measures to decide the leadership potential of <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual m<strong>an</strong>ager or<br />
to design a leadership model. If this personality style data is accurate, the adv<strong>an</strong>tages to the<br />
bus<strong>in</strong>ess are enormous. By adm<strong>in</strong>ister<strong>in</strong>g FourSight, a creativity style measure, this study will<br />
explore the distribution of problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences with<strong>in</strong> a comp<strong>an</strong>y‟s hierarchy. More<br />
specifically, the study will ask the question “What is the distribution of FourSight Profiles among<br />
employees <strong>in</strong> different levels of the org<strong>an</strong>ization‟s hierarchy?”<br />
A major additional question that will drive this thesis is:<br />
Will the creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences of employees, as measured by FourSight,<br />
vary accord<strong>in</strong>g to level with<strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>ization (e.g., entry level, mid-level m<strong>an</strong>agement,<br />
<strong>an</strong>d executives)? In particular, will a unique profile emerge among those <strong>in</strong> leadership<br />
positions?<br />
Statement of Signific<strong>an</strong>ce:<br />
Theme:<br />
<strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Problem</strong>-<strong>Solv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Style</strong> <strong>Preferences</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong><br />
Org<strong>an</strong>izational Hierarchy<br />
Initiative:<br />
Analyz<strong>in</strong>g the Distribution of FourSight Scores with<strong>in</strong> Employment<br />
Levels of <strong>an</strong> Org<strong>an</strong>ization<br />
54
Although a search for literature explicitly related to problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preference <strong>an</strong>d <strong>an</strong><br />
employee‟s location with<strong>in</strong> <strong>an</strong> org<strong>an</strong>izational hierarchy eluded this <strong>in</strong>vestigator, research that c<strong>an</strong><br />
be considered relative to this topic has been performed <strong>in</strong> areas of org<strong>an</strong>izational structure, group<br />
dynamics, leadership, org<strong>an</strong>izational psychology, <strong>an</strong>d other social sciences. More so, the role of<br />
measur<strong>in</strong>g personality type is not new to the bus<strong>in</strong>ess world <strong>an</strong>d much literature c<strong>an</strong> be found that<br />
exam<strong>in</strong>ed relationships between personality type <strong>an</strong>d a myriad of other variables. For example,<br />
Schott (1992) studied Abraham Maslow, hum<strong>an</strong>istic psychology, <strong>an</strong>d org<strong>an</strong>ization leadership,<br />
Miller <strong>an</strong>d Wells (2001) discussed personality type <strong>an</strong>d occupational environment, <strong>an</strong>d Eagly (1969) researched<br />
leadership style <strong>an</strong>d role differentiation.<br />
There are several reasons why the research question posed by this study makes a signific<strong>an</strong>t contribution to<br />
the field of creativity. First, as it would appear that no previous study has <strong>in</strong>vestigated this question, it fills a gap <strong>in</strong> the<br />
literature. Second, <strong>an</strong>d more import<strong>an</strong>tly, this study will add to the exist<strong>in</strong>g research performed by Mumford <strong>an</strong>d his<br />
colleagues (2000) <strong>in</strong> which they claim that for leaders to be successful they must use creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g to<br />
address complex org<strong>an</strong>izational problems. This study sets out to better underst<strong>an</strong>d the creative problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
preferences of employees by <strong>in</strong>vestigat<strong>in</strong>g whether a unique profile emerges among those <strong>in</strong> leadership positions. If a<br />
unique profile exists among leaders, then new <strong>in</strong>sights may be ga<strong>in</strong>ed relative to how leaders prefer to approach<br />
problems that require creative th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Description of the Method or Process:<br />
For the study, this researcher will secure permission from the research foundation of the<br />
college to conduct this type of research. Next, the researcher will prepare a formal proposal to the<br />
local bus<strong>in</strong>ess unit of <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternational f<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>cial services firm. The proposal will be submitted to the<br />
site head. After the review <strong>an</strong>d accept<strong>an</strong>ce of the proposal, the site head will forward the proposal<br />
to the next level of m<strong>an</strong>agement. After review <strong>an</strong>d accept<strong>an</strong>ce of the proposal by executive<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agement <strong>an</strong>d the hum<strong>an</strong> resources department, this researcher will offer, through email <strong>an</strong>d<br />
verbal communication, <strong>an</strong> <strong>in</strong>vitation to participate to all comp<strong>an</strong>y employees. Subsequently, the<br />
100 research particip<strong>an</strong>ts will be picked for the study. Then, via <strong>in</strong>teroffice mail, this researcher<br />
will distribute the hum<strong>an</strong> subjects form <strong>an</strong>d a copy of the FourSight <strong>in</strong>strument to the particip<strong>an</strong>ts.<br />
The particip<strong>an</strong>ts from the first three levels <strong>an</strong>d a portion of the highest level with<strong>in</strong> the hierarchy<br />
will be chosen from the local site. Additional senior level m<strong>an</strong>agement will be chosen from a<br />
regional office located <strong>in</strong> the state of Delaware. Particip<strong>an</strong>ts will be asked to complete the<br />
FourSight survey <strong>an</strong>d the hum<strong>an</strong> subjects form at the same time. Then all materials will be<br />
returned to the researcher via <strong>in</strong>ter-office mail. There will be four particip<strong>an</strong>t groups, each with<br />
55
twenty-five members; one representative of executive m<strong>an</strong>agement (Directors, SVP‟s, DM‟s), one<br />
representative of middle m<strong>an</strong>agement (Section M<strong>an</strong>agers, AVP‟s), one representative of lower<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agement (Workflows, Senior Specialists), <strong>an</strong>d one representative entry-level employment<br />
(computer operators/processors).<br />
Once the particip<strong>an</strong>ts have successfully completed the FourSight questionnaire, the researcher will<br />
collect (via <strong>in</strong>teroffice mail), asses, <strong>an</strong>d schedule a time to offer a thirty m<strong>in</strong>ute debrief (via<br />
conference calls or <strong>in</strong> person classroom sett<strong>in</strong>g) of the results to all particip<strong>an</strong>ts. F<strong>in</strong>ally, us<strong>in</strong>g one-<br />
way <strong>an</strong>alysis of vari<strong>an</strong>ce, the data will be tested for statistical differences among the three groups<br />
of employees.<br />
Personal Learn<strong>in</strong>g Goals:<br />
Learn <strong>an</strong>d become more familiar with FourSight.<br />
To underst<strong>an</strong>d the relationship (or not) between my research <strong>an</strong>d its results.<br />
To become familiar <strong>an</strong>d comfortable with survey adm<strong>in</strong>istration <strong>an</strong>d debrief<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
To learn <strong>an</strong>d utilize statistical formulae.<br />
To become <strong>an</strong> expert <strong>in</strong> the area of , problem solv<strong>in</strong>g styles, org<strong>an</strong>izational psychology, <strong>an</strong>d<br />
leadership research.<br />
Outcomes:<br />
Three executive summaries will be completed for the ICSC Web Site.<br />
One <strong>an</strong>notation of my thesis for Creativity Based Information Research database (CBIR).<br />
A completed thesis write-up will be presented.<br />
Additional <strong>in</strong>vestigation <strong>in</strong>to the validity of the FourSight measure as a profil<strong>in</strong>g ssessment will<br />
be presented.<br />
Potential submission of study to academic journal <strong>in</strong> field of creativity, <strong>in</strong>novation,<br />
m<strong>an</strong>agement, or bus<strong>in</strong>ess.<br />
Timel<strong>in</strong>e:<br />
October 2004<br />
- Beg<strong>in</strong> literature search<br />
- Review previous theses related to FourSight<br />
- Establish solid work/school bal<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
November 2004<br />
- Have concept paper approved<br />
- Cont<strong>in</strong>ue collect<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d review<strong>in</strong>g the literature surround<strong>in</strong>g thesis topic<br />
- Beg<strong>in</strong> proposal for Citigroup site head<br />
- Sign up for Spr<strong>in</strong>g classes<br />
- Ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> work/school bal<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
December 2004<br />
56
- Beg<strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g thesis Chapters I <strong>an</strong>d II (Introduction <strong>an</strong>d Literature Review)<br />
- Follow up on Bus<strong>in</strong>ess‟ approvals<br />
- Beg<strong>in</strong> to accumulate hum<strong>an</strong> subject forms<br />
- Ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> school work bal<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
J<strong>an</strong>uary 2005<br />
- Beg<strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g thesis Chapters I <strong>an</strong>d II (Introduction <strong>an</strong>d Literature Review)<br />
- Follow up on Bus<strong>in</strong>ess‟ approvals<br />
- Submit thesis packet to Graduate Office<br />
- Schedule test<strong>in</strong>g date<br />
- Submit Chapters I <strong>an</strong>d II of Thesis for approval/guid<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
- Ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> school work bal<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
February 2005<br />
- Beg<strong>in</strong> CRS 635<br />
- Review Chapters I <strong>an</strong>d II of thesis<br />
- Adm<strong>in</strong>ister FourSight<br />
- Debrief/review FourSight with Particip<strong>an</strong>ts<br />
- Beg<strong>in</strong> to <strong>an</strong>alyze data<br />
- Cont<strong>in</strong>ue writ<strong>in</strong>g/submit thesis (Chapter III)<br />
- Ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> school work bal<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
March 2005<br />
- Review Chapter III<br />
- Beg<strong>in</strong> Chapters IV <strong>an</strong>d V of thesis<br />
- Ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> school work bal<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
April 2005<br />
- Submit Chapter Four <strong>an</strong>d Five of thesis for approval/guid<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
- Complete thesis revisions, submit for approval<br />
- Ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> school work bal<strong>an</strong>ce<br />
May 2005<br />
- Submit f<strong>in</strong>al draft of thesis for approval<br />
- Attend Master‟s Graduation Ceremony<br />
- Have thesis bound<br />
- Celebrate<br />
Pr<strong>in</strong>cipal Investigators:<br />
Dr. Gerard Puccio, Faculty Thesis Advisor<br />
Heath H Frisch, Master‟s C<strong>an</strong>didate<br />
Related Literature:<br />
Abdel-Halim, A. A. (1983). Power equalization, participative decision-mak<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>dividual<br />
differences. Hum<strong>an</strong> Relations, 36(8), 683-705.<br />
57
Basudur, M., Graen, G. & Wakabayashi, M. (1990). Identify<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>dividual<br />
differences <strong>in</strong> creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g style. Journal of Creative Behavior, 24,<br />
111-131.<br />
Cr<strong>an</strong>ti, J. M., & Batem<strong>an</strong>, T. S. (2000). Charismatic leadership viewed from above: the impact of<br />
proactive personality. Journal of Org<strong>an</strong>izational Behavior, 21(1), 63-76.<br />
De Cremer, D. (2003). How self-conception may lead to <strong>in</strong>equality. Group & Org<strong>an</strong>ization<br />
M<strong>an</strong>agement, 28(2), 282-203.<br />
Eagly, A. H (1970). <strong>Leader</strong>ship style <strong>an</strong>d role differentiation as determ<strong>in</strong><strong>an</strong>ts of group<br />
effectiveness. Journal of Personality, 38(4) 509-535.<br />
Fleishm<strong>an</strong>, E.A., Hard<strong>in</strong>g, F.D., Jacobs, T.O., Mumford, M. D., & Zaccaro, S.J. (2000).<br />
<strong>Leader</strong>ship skills for a ch<strong>an</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g world: solv<strong>in</strong>g complex social problems. <strong>Leader</strong>ship<br />
Quarterly, 11(1), 11-26.<br />
Hogarth, R. M. (1993). Account<strong>in</strong>g for decisions <strong>an</strong>d decisions for account<strong>in</strong>g Account<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Org<strong>an</strong>izations & Society, 18(5), 407-425.<br />
Kirton, M. (1980). Adaptors <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>novators <strong>in</strong> org<strong>an</strong>izations. Hum<strong>an</strong> Relations, 33(4), 213-225.<br />
L<strong>an</strong>g, J. R., Dittrich, J. E., & White, S.E. (1978). M<strong>an</strong>agerial problem solv<strong>in</strong>g models: a review<br />
<strong>an</strong>d a proposal. Academy of M<strong>an</strong>agement Review, 3(4), 854-867.<br />
Leonard, N. H., Scholl, R. W., & Kowalski, K B. (1999). Information process<strong>in</strong>g style <strong>an</strong>d<br />
decision mak<strong>in</strong>g. Journal of Org<strong>an</strong>izational Behavior, 20(3), 407-421.<br />
M<strong>an</strong>n, M.C. (2003). Identify<strong>in</strong>g the creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g preferences of secondary<br />
educators <strong>an</strong>d adm<strong>in</strong>istrators. Unpublished master‟s thesis, State University of<br />
New York College at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.<br />
58
Miller, M. J., & Wells, D. (2001). Why are the three letter bar codes of a barber <strong>an</strong>d sheriff<br />
identical? underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>terpret<strong>in</strong>g occupational environments. Journal of Employment<br />
Counsel<strong>in</strong>g, 38(1), 10-14.<br />
Nauta, A., De Dreu., C., & V<strong>an</strong> der Vaart, T. (2002). Social value orientation, org<strong>an</strong>izational goal<br />
concerns <strong>an</strong>d <strong>in</strong>terdepartmental problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g behavior. Journal of Org<strong>an</strong>izational<br />
Behavior, 23(2), 199-134.<br />
Owen, J. M., & Lambert, F. C. (1998). Evaluation <strong>an</strong>d the <strong>in</strong>formation needs of org<strong>an</strong>izational leaders.<br />
Americ<strong>an</strong> Journal of Evaluation, 19(3), 355-366.<br />
Puccio, G. J. (2001). Buffalo Creative Process Inventory: Technical M<strong>an</strong>ual. Ev<strong>an</strong>ston,<br />
IL: Th<strong>in</strong>k Communication.<br />
Rahim, A. (1979). The m<strong>an</strong>agement of <strong>in</strong>traorg<strong>an</strong>izational conflicts: a laboratory study with<br />
org<strong>an</strong>ization design. M<strong>an</strong>agement International Review, 19(1), 97-107.<br />
Rieple, A. (2004). <strong>Underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g</strong> why your new design ideas get blocked. Design M<strong>an</strong>agement<br />
Journal, 15(1), 36-43.<br />
Rife, S. L. (2001). Explor<strong>in</strong>g the personality composition of the four preferences<br />
measured by the Buffalo Creative Process Inventory. Unpublished master‟s thesis,<br />
State University of New York College at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.<br />
Roberts, H. E., Foti, R. J. (1998). Evaluat<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>teraction between self-leadership <strong>an</strong>d work<br />
structure <strong>in</strong> predict<strong>in</strong>g job satisfaction. Journal of Bus<strong>in</strong>ess & Psychology, 12(3), 257-268.<br />
Sh<strong>an</strong>non, J., & Schreiber, B. (1999). Lead<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>an</strong>y position: <strong>an</strong> enneagram workshop<br />
prepar<strong>in</strong>g leaders for the 21st century. Serials Librari<strong>an</strong> 36(1), p5-14.<br />
59
Schott, R. L. (1992). Abraham maslow, hum<strong>an</strong>istic psychology, <strong>an</strong>d org<strong>an</strong>ization leadership: a jungi<strong>an</strong><br />
perspective. Journal of Hum<strong>an</strong>istic Psychology, 32(1), 106-121.<br />
Schur<strong>in</strong>g, R. W., Harbers, C., Kruiswijk, M., Rijnders, S., & Boer, H. (2003). The problem of<br />
us<strong>in</strong>g hierarchy for implement<strong>in</strong>g org<strong>an</strong>isational <strong>in</strong>novation. International Journal of<br />
Technology M<strong>an</strong>agement, 26(8), 903-918.<br />
Wheeler, R. A. (2001). Improv<strong>in</strong>g the underst<strong>an</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g of creative problem solv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g through <strong>an</strong> exam<strong>in</strong>ation of <strong>in</strong>dividual differences. Unpublished master‟s<br />
thesis, State University of New York College at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.<br />
Whitley, R. (2003). The <strong>in</strong>stitutional structur<strong>in</strong>g of org<strong>an</strong>izational capabilities: the role of authority<br />
shar<strong>in</strong>g <strong>an</strong>d org<strong>an</strong>izational careers. Org<strong>an</strong>ization Studies (Sage Publications Inc.), 24(5),<br />
667-695.<br />
60