See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/249671196

The Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory

Article  in  Review of Public Personnel Administration · April 1999

DOI: 10.1177/0734371X9901900204

CITATIONS READS

30 3,065

3 authors, including:

Michael Bobic
Alderson-Broaddus College
8 PUBLICATIONS   76 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

I am working on a new Theory X article, following up on ideas in my original article. I am also working on a book comparing President
Kennedy to President Bush in terms of foreign policy decision theory. View project

With the peoples consent View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Michael Bobic on 29 October 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Review of Public Personnel Adm1nistration
spring 1999 vol. xix - no. 2

Editorial Scaff
Seaior Editorial A'"'-Y Board
PIIbIiaber J- S. Bowmaa FIorid8 Scate Uniwntcy
LDouaWDobeon
use lnadrute olPublic Affirin
DouWICIiaper FloridaIncemadon8IUntv.
DmdH. Ro8nbIoom AmericanUnMmicy
Highliglw
EcIitor-la.cbW O. GIeaa SC8bIAr\tnaton.VA
NkhoIu P. Lovrich,Jr. 'I'I18IIJ. 'J'hoMp.oo SUNYIe Alban,
Wuhineron Srate Univeniry
EditorIal AdvI8ory Bo.rd
MaaaciDlEdftor
SteVen W. Hays
Univeniry of South Carolina
C8dyaBMa UntveniryoiPlcabulah
E_a.- UntvmiryofCenll1llFlodda 5 u.lna Performance
Measurementin Human
ResourceManagement
61 Profe8llional Notes
Potential Consequences of
N.JoeepIa
c.,. AriIonI~ UnIvenky
Editon Community.Oriented Policing for
CMhyC- Pon~Auchority A SlII'Vey<iU.S. Counl:ies
Richard C. Kearney Civil Liability: Is There A Dark Side
DeDak D8Iey NCSU MRaIeIan
E.tCarolina Univeniry AIIIIIoDeNW Rutam Uniwnitv Evan Berman. Jonathan West to Employee Empowerment?
Cbarlie B. T yet" Deaai8 DNe.ac UniftnicyofWl.anin and XiaoHu Wang John Worrall and RickyGutierrez
Universiry olSouth Carolina RobercEllioa Auburn Untwnity

Pro_ioaaI Notes Editor

JackRabin
t.I8k ~
Ge..ldG.bria
Univenicyof Connecdcuc
NonhemIllino8Un1wnicy 18 The Kirton Adaptation-
Innovation Inventory 71
Precursors to Human Resource
Planning in the Public Sector
C. BllueGnhala use acColumbia
Pc:rmsylv.niaState Universiry Validity Issues. Practical Questions Mario Martinez
}oWy E. Guy FIodda Scare Univenicy
Book Review Editor Michael &hic. Eric Davis
PIIIridI"""" Syncu.e Univenicy
Step~ Win J.I!dw8rdJCellouP UntvmiryofGeoqia and RobeTtCunningham
Boise State Univeniry CamlLiaerSanM-. TX
Publicatiooa
~M.
Dinoc:tor
Whit6ekl
~Manouo TOWIOIISraeeUniYenIty
JobaN.a-fim Uniwniryofx-
32 Continuity and Change in Public 77 Contributors
s.n-~ UniftnicyolArltar.. Personnel Administration
Univeniry of South Carolina
Feh A. Nipo Athena, OA Stephen Stehr and Ted Jcmes
Subecriptioaa
Freda AtkiNon
IJo,d Nipo
J-
GeorgiaSraee Univenicy
L Peny Indi8n8 Univenicy 79 How to Join SPALR
Univeniry of South Carolina
Gary Pokomy ElCcrrico,CA
Notma lUcc:ucd SUNY ac Ahmy 50 SupervUon' Perceptions of the
Performance of Cooperative
Gary RoI8t8 FairleiahDicldNoa Uniwni&y Education Employees Working
AbaSebeeia Calibn8SraeeUnivenity in Federal Agencies
J-ySWriu UntvmiryofPkabuJlh
James Douglm and Gene Brewer
ADIDIIIoSia.oe UnivenicyollDinoia
RoaaIcI D. s,t.Ia San.Joee Scare UnlYeniry
r..- Selia \.JnMnityofM8louri
JonMt- Weac UniwnlryolMiImI
HoycN. Wheeler USCacColumbia

The loumal of the Secnon on Pe""mnel AdminiStration and

lahor Rel.non. of the American Society (or PuNk AdmlniAtnttlon.

The Kirton Adaptation--Innovation
Inventory
Validity Issues, Practical Questions
MICHAEL BaBIC, EMMANUEl COllEGE
ERIC DAVIS, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, RIvERSIDE
ROBERT CUNNINGHAM, UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE, KNOXVILLE
The Kirton AdaplallOl1./nnowUon Irwtntory (KAI) is dcsipcd co "",as"", proptnsi" coin""""".........
pm" i" 10adapI, a pmonali" dimtnsian c/aimtd .ignificant.for wndm«mding and buiIdint organitalianal
,{fWMtvU, This ani& p",mu G !niL! of ""lidiry chtdu for u.. KAI. r<porn two wmmpiloNJ findings,
lhen It'"~ Rin""', hy~.is lha. d U4m compo.tJ of o~
rhan d ,,"'" balanad on rhis dimtnSion.
O rganizations, public and private, face
turbulent and uncertain environ-
ments. Downsizing, rightsizing, and con-
tracting out threaten the jobs of public sec-
tor managers, supervisors, and front line
workers. Restructuring, decentralization,
and empowerment are recommended for
meeting the challenges of fast-changing en-
vironments. However, adjusting blocks and
lines on an organization chart, or creating
task forces and cross-functional work
groups, will not automatically transform an
organization's behavior. Perhaps working
with people, and allowingchange to emerge
from the natural dispOsitionsof the group
members,can bringorganizationaleffective-
ness.
The Kirton Adaptation-Innovation In-
ventory (KAI) purports to measure a natu-
ral disposition, an individual's propensiry to
innovate. The 32-item measure was pub-
lished in Kirton (1976) and has been tested
and validated in several languages and cul-
tures (Tullett & Kirton, 1995; Tullett,
1997).' Given the importance of Innova-
tion to the public sector and the dearth of
1M RI'\'IIIX' ('I' rl 'I'l.Ie rERSONNEI AOMINISTRATION
~
adapI..., '" 0 in""""IO" is It.. offtClM
alternative research instruments to measure
the propensiry to innovate, the KAI merits
investigation. If the KAI is a valid measure
of Innovativeness, and the theory Issubstan-
tiated that groups diverse as to KAI scores
are particularly effective, then the KAI can
be an important management tool for hu-
man resources managers In composing the
makeup of their work force. This research
reports a variery of validiry checks for KAI,
and then tests the theory that tearns diverse
on the KAI perform more effectively than
teams domina red by either adaptors or In-
novators. These two hurdles constitute a
strenuous test for the KAl.
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION AND
RATIONALE FOR THE KAI
The KAI Is based theoretically upon requi-
site variery, a principle spanning the physi-
cal, natural, and social sciences (Ashby,
1956). Requisite variery assumes that dl-
versiry within a system enhances the likeli-
hood of system success in the face of exter-
nal challenge. Research substantiating the
requisite variery principle appears in the lit-
SrRIN<1IQ</9
~
erature on communication (Thompson,
1991), social relations (Sirgy, 1990), alco-
hol rehabilitation (Sterman, 1990), educa-
tion (Foden & Mason, 1986), leadership
(Fisher, 1985), and organizations (Follett,
1918/1998; Miller, 1990; Weick, 1987,
1991).
Follett (1918/1998) insists that the di-
versiry of neighborhoods strengthens both
the effectiveness of their organizations as
well as democracy. In organization theory,
Miller (1990) adopts requisite variery prin-
ciples In describing the Icarus Paradox,
where the organization's strength, which
generated the Initial success, eventually
leads to the organization's downfall. The
specialized organization filled with similar-
minded individualsremains effectiveonly so
long as its abilities, skills,and products con-
nect with demand in the environment.
Without requisite variery, the organization
lacks sensitiviry to environmental changes.
When the stakeholders demand different
services, an organization with focused, spe-
cializedskillsmaybe unable to meet the new
challenge. The organization having requi-
site variery more easily senses and adjusts
to the changing environment.
The KAI connects requisite variety
theory to the management of an
organization's human resources. Everyone
has a decision-making style. Decision-mak-
ing sryle Is stipulated as an integral aspect
of personaliry-stable over time, incident,
and culture and uncorrelated with cognitive
capaciry,cognitive techniques, or personal-
iry traits (Kirton, 1989,chap. 1;Clapp, 1993;
Murdock, Isaksen & Lauer, 1993).One's de-
clsion-making sryle ranges on a continuum
from innovative to adaptive. The extreme
innovator starts each issue on a fresh page
as a new opportunity; the extreme adaptor
depends heavily on precedent and past ex-
perience to craft an appropriate response to
KIRKTPN
the issue.
To the layperson, creativity and
Innovativeness are synonyms,both different
from adaptiveness. Kirton (1978) offers a
different perspective. Both innovators and
adaprors are creative. Adaptors are creative
within a narrow range, seeking minor im-
provements, initiating changes that lie near
current organizational practices, and push-
ing boundaries incrementally. A manager
with an adaptive sryle accepts established
routines as appropriate, makes marginal
changes within existing boundaries, and is
seen as conforming, safe, and dependable.
Innovators have a different mindset.
They allow creativity freer rein and accept
few givens. Innovators do things differently
rather than necessarily better. They may
even reconstruct the paradigmatic frame
within which the organization operates.
Fleenor and T.\ylor(1994) from the Center
for Creative Leadership, analyzing a data
base of 12,115 managers, report KAI scores
positivelycorrelated with the MBTI Creativ-
iry Index and the CPI Creativiry Scale. Simi-
larly, in a smaller study, Jacobson (1993)
found correlations between the KAIand the
MBTI intuitive and perception dimensions.
The manager with an innovative sryleregu-
larlyquestions established routines and may
be seen by adnptive manalotersas undisci-
plined and insensitive to others' consensu-
ally agreed ways (Kirton, 1976; 1989).
According to the theory, KAI facilitates
the construction of diverse teams. The ideal
team or organization includes both employ-
ees desiring substantial change (innovators)
and employees preferring minimal change
(adaptors). If dominated by either adaptors
or innovators, an organization risks dimin-
ished effectiveness (Kirton, 1978). The
adaptor-dominated organization may offer
a product or service which does not meet
the customer's neWneeds. The innovator-
AI1ArT'ON,lNNOV A T'ON C\INNINnHAM
FTAI.. ,q

controlled organization may produce goods
and services which are superior to alterna-
tives, but clients are not yet ready to accept
the new concepts. A cohesive dedslon-
making team Including both adaptors and
innovators is more likely sensitive to envi-
ronmental challenges.
KAI: TIiEORYANDOPERATIONAUZATION
Assuming that personality II composed of
abilities. traits, and styles, the KAI measures
cognitive style--()ne's preferred or charac-
teristic manner of processing information.
Conceptually, KAI has three dimensions:
I. Rule/Group Conformity (R)
2. Efficiency (E)
3. Sufficiency vs Proliferation of Origi-
nality (0) I
Rule/group conformiry (R) is the degree
[0 which one works within the accepted
structures or rejects critical elements of such
structures. Innovators may overlook or ig-
nore pressures to conform to consensual
views on what is needed and how to get it;
adaptors are more likely to abide by system
dictates (IZ items). Examples of conformity
items include "A person who likes the pro-
tection of precise instructions" (Q29), and
"A person who prefers colleagues who never
rock the boat" (Q32).
Efficiency (E) exemplifies Weber's no-
tion of the legal-rational bureaucracy. The
efficient manager emphasizes precision, re-
liability, and efficiency. Innovation is dis-
continuous to the existing system, thereby
to be rejected as hindering efficiency (7
items). Sample items for efficiency include
"A person who is thorough" (QI4), and "A
pers<'n who is consistent (QI7).
SuffICiency liS proliferation of originaliry
(0) taps the number and scope of innova-
tive ideas the subject generates. The inno-
vator regularly reinvents the wheel; the
adaptor offers fewer ideas and these Ideas
20 RfVIFW PF 1'\JlIlIC PERSONNELADMINISTRATION
..."
tend to lie within present practices and pro-
cedures (13 items). Representative Items
are "Aperson who has originalideas" (Q21),
and "A person who Is stimulating" (QI9).
Validation studies have supported Kirton',
factor structure (Bagozzi & Foxall, 1995;
Murdock et aI., 1993; Clapp, 1993; FoxaU
& Hackett, 1992).
Individuals respond to items by indicat-
ing their level of agreement on a 1-5 scale,
with scores in a theoretical range from 32
to 160. Empirical results show a mean score
of95; with 67% of the scores (one standard
deviation) lying betWeen 79 and 113 (KAI
Report Back Form 1985). In multi-factor
space, each of the 32 items reportedly loads
on the appropriate dimension 83% of the
time (Kirton, 1989, chapter 1).
TEST POPULATION
Our evidence to test KAI II drawn from
three respondent-groups: middle-level state
managers, international managers studying
in the United States, and university stu-
dents.
Middle-level Slate managers (N=2OJ).
From 1983 to 1990 Cunningham coordi-
nated an annual three-week management
development program spread over three
months for 25-28 middle-level state man-
agers. Participants filled in the KAI instru-
ment prior to orientation and again three
months later, on the next to last day of the
program. KAlscores weredebriefed after the
second test only, so the corrupting effects of
test-retest carry-over should be minimal. In
the fall of 1988, participants from the 1983
through 1987 management classes were
mailed the KAIand asked to fillit in. There-
fore, from this training program the 1983,
1984,and the 1988-1990classeswere tested
twice, and classes 1985-1987were tested
three times. Personal interviews with par-
ticipants occurred from 1984-1989, and a
,,-c,
SPRING 1999
1i
quasi-experiment was conducted in 1985.
lnumationalmanagers (N= 12Z).Since
1988 Cunningham has taught at training
programs held in the United States for in-
ternational managers. Participants in these
programs are sponsored by the U.S. govern-
ment or by foreign governments. Middle-
level public managersfrom around the world
completed the KAI and were debriefed.
StUdmu (N"262). From 1985 to 1988
various student classes filled In the KAI.
Some were beginning university students,
some were upper division undergraduates,
and some were graduate students.
This research project did not emerge
from a pre-conceived design. Initially,infor-
mation was collected so students and man-
agers could learn about themselves and
share their experiences with cohorts. The
respondents constitute accidental popula-
tions. The evidence presented here testing
the validityof the KAIconsists of fragments.
No single piece of evidence can or would be
convincing alone. The strength lies in the
consllteney. PerhapssurpriJingly,all the frag- .
ments point in the same direction. Triangu-
lation,bringing multiple data sets to bear on
a single theoretical problem, is applauded
In evaluation research as a method for as-
suring validity of the findings (Campbell,
1979, Filstead, 1979; Trend, 1979).
TESTING KAI
ValidityII defined as how well has been mea-
sured what was intended to be measured
(Guion, 1980) and as the accuracy of infer-
ences about test scores (Tenopyr, 1977). In-
ferences are based upon a theoretical/ truth
component-the subjective judgment that
the concept In question Isreasonably repre-
sented by the operational tests which mea-
sure it; and a pragmatic, utilitarian compo-
nent-the scoresderived from tests fall into
an Interpretable pattern based on empirical
KIRKT0N AOAPTION.INNOVA TION..
evidence (Messick 1988). Validity can be
categorized as construct, content, and cri-
terion validity. J
CONSTRUCTVALIDITY
The KAI concepts of originality, efficiency,
and rule conformity are theoretically Inde-
pendent of each other. Sufficiency of origi-
nality need not imply lesser or greater effi-
ciency or rule conformity. Nor should one's
high efficiency necessarily Imply lesser origi-
nality or lesser conformity.. The KAI is
operationalized by asking respondents to
indicate their ease or difficulty in present-
Ing themselves, consistently, over a long
period, in various situations (the 32-item
instrument; Kirton 1989, chap. 6). For the
three dimensions (subscales) plus the over-
all KAI to meet Kirton's criteria for construct
validity, the individual items should load
most heavily on the predicted subscale, in
the predicted direction, and the three
subscales must be positively, but modestly,
positively intercorrelated. Factor analysis of
the data describedaboveconfirmthese ex-
pectations.
The results of factor analyses include:
factors,which are estimations oflatent vari-
ables underlying a data set; factor loadings,
which are correlations between the original
variable and the underlying factor (Hair,
Anderson & Tatham, 1987, p. 249); and
measures of the variance explained by the
factors extracted from a given data set.
Factor loadings are considered signifi-
cant if they are greater than :t .30 (Hair,
Anderson & Tatham, 1987. p. 249), and a
variable is associated with that factor whose
"loading" isthe highest for that variable. For
example, QZ's Rules Conformity loading is
.35, its efficiencyloadingis .27, and its origi-
nality loading is .21.5 From this, we say that
Q210ads on the firstfactor,whileQ2 I (load-
ings .04, -04, .70, respectively) loads on the
ClINNINOHAM FT At. 21
 "

third factor, originality. 3. Altkirt does not dispute a content valid-

TABLE 1. Kirton Adaptation Inventory, Rotated Factor Matrix (N-587)
Table 1 presents the factor loadings and ity claim.
the amount of variance explained by those RULES
(R) EFFICIENCY(E) ORIOINALITY
(0)
facrors. All variables for a given factor load CRITERION VALIDITY
Q24 0 .71 -.05 .05
at greater than .30, and in every case, the CriterionI!aliditycan be established by show-
Q29 R .64 .17 .\2
next highest loading score is statistically sig- ing KAI scores appropriately relating to
Q32 R .60 .00 .10
nificantly smaller than the score for the fac- other measures, either as predictors or as
Q27 R .53 .22 .08
tor chosen as its primary loading dimension. measures of similar content. Here, KAI
Q30 R .50 .21 .28
Twenty-five of the thirty. two items scores will be checked for (a) consistency
QIO R .48 -.02 .25
(78%) load strongest on the predicted fac. with a content analysisof leadership stories
Q20 R .44 .14 .00
tor, with three factors accounting for 33% told by managers, (b) stability over time (to
Q8 R .42 .37 .03
of the variance. Such a result supports the test the assumption that KAIscores are per-
,'"nc"nli,'II, 1(11IhI"\'('.dimt'nNiolllll NtrllCtllre. Q28 E .41 .24 .15
Nonlllity mCIISllreswhich do not (hRnlle eM'
QIJ 0 .40 .11 .1/1
Since explained variance is a function of the ily), and (c) consistency when managers
Q7 R .39 .27 .15
degree to which the items are measuring the carry out a task within a group fairlyhomo-
Q2 R .35 .27 .21
same thing, accounting for a high propor- geneous with respect to KAI scores.
tion of variance would suggest item redun- Content analysisof leadershipstories. In
Q14 E <.05 .67 -.12
dancy. On the other hand, too little vari- the 32.item KAI, Kirton sets the agenda by
QI7 E <.08 .65 -.04
ance accounted for indicates the absence of defining the dimensions and constructing
Q25 E .30 .58 .06
a unique, clearly defined dimension. With the items. Respondents assess their com.
fort level with Kirton's items. The instruc. Q22 E .19 .54 -.16
each of the three factors accounting for a
Q4 E .09 .53 -.05
respecrable proportion of the variance, the tions read: "How easyor difficultdo youfind
Q33 R .18 .49 .31
three-factor solution is a reasonable inter. it to present yourself, consistently, over a
QI5 E .18 .47 .09
pretation. The subgroup personality mea. long period of time as "
. Q9 R .15 .47 .24
sures also correlate moderately with each In 1985 each middle manager was in.
Q6 R .08 .33 -.04
other and with the KAI overall score, indi. terviewed privately during the management
eating that subscales are tapping a common development programand asked to tell lead-
Q21 0 .04 -.04 .70
underlying phenomenon; see Table 2. ership stories about situations in which he
or she was involved. The interviews, which QI9 0 -.05 -.03 .70
QIl 0 .13 -.1\ .5/1
CONTENTVALIDITY lasted from 20 minutes to over an hour, were
Q23 0 .12 -.\2 .57
Concl'T1lI!alidity checks whether all signifi- audiotaped and transcribed. These stories
QI8 0 .26 <.07 .51
cant aspects of the domain are included in are assumed to represent typical ways that
Q26 0 .34 .17 .48
the measure. This is difficult to detennine, the manager presents self. Because the sto-
Q5 0 .01 .15 .48
for there are not clearly defined behaviors ries which managers tell are self.generated
Q12 0 .04 .35 .42
to match adaptive and innovative attitudes, and personal, the respondent is obviously
Q31 0 .10 .24 .42
except perhaps at the extremes. Dimensions describinga management stylewhich iscom-
Q3 0 .25 -.25 .39
of Kirton's conceptual meaning were fortable to him or her.The stories bridge the
operationalized by choice-pairs of phrases to cognitive stylelbehavior gap, for the stories
Facror Eigenvalue Cum Pct of Variance
create an alternative measure (Altkirt); see are self.reports of a manager's behavior.
1 5.66 17.7
Appendix. Respondents chose the one The manager's comfort level is re-
2 3.11 27.4
statement from a two.statement pair which flected by the customaty behavior present
3 1.85 H.2
hener describes himself or herself. With a in the story. The coder's challenge is to de-
Pearson's r of .65, KAI and Altkirt appear termine whether the manager's comfort
Nou. In theKAI.itemI I, 0.dummy..totementwhichi, not.cored;,coredItem,Are2throughJJ.
to he tapping the same dimension; see Table level lies in adapting or in innovating.

H RI\"IFW or rl JR!Ie rFRSnNNH. ""MINISTRAnON SPRING 19Q9 KIRKTON

AnAI'TION.INNOVAT'\N... ('\INNINO!1t\MFTAI.. ZJ
TABLE Z. Pearson's r among Subscale. (N-S87)
RULES
R i.~
0 .13
KAI .88
---...-
TABLE 3. Pearson's r: Altkirt with KAland Subscalel, Student Sample
RULES ORIGINAUTY
Alrkirt .62
N=R4
TABLE 4. KAI Mean: Pre- and Post-Training by Year, State Managen
1985 1986
N=24 N=23
rr".rraininl: 100.8 104.8
99.9 104.9
P",r-rraining
Kirton provides 14 characteristics of adap-
rors. and their corresponding innovator
characteristics (Kirton.1989.pp. 8-9). Re-
spondenrs' stories were read and coded the-
matically by Bobic and Davis separately.
Each theme dimension was allocated one
point. so each respondent's score ranged
from I to 14. The coders then discussed
and justified their assessments of each
respondent's score on each of the 14dimen-
sions" On the initial pass. 80 percent agree-
ment was achieved between the coders.
Respondents who received different scores
lay close to the midpoint. Consultation re-
solved those disputes.
Changeooertime. Kirton (1989, chap.
i) insists that KAI is a measure of personal-
ity.therefore stable over time and not easily
changed. Van der Molen (1989) and Clapp
(1993) offer supporting evidence. Oold-
.-1 courage empowerment, risk-taking, and in-
novation. This intensive residential pro-
ORIOINALm EmCIENCY gram took state managers away from their
work sltel Into a campus environment where
.49 .44
they worked with practitioners and academ-
Ics In an experiential program incorporat-
.77 .61
Ing both Individual and group projects. If
the program Increased propensity to Inno-
vate. participants should have gravitated
toward the Innovative pole of the KAI In
EFFICIENCY KAI the three-month Interval betWeenorienta-
tion and program conclusion. Enthusiastic
.50 .40 .65 evaluation of the program by participants
suggests that their KAI scores should have
moved toward the innovative end of the
spectrum; yet aggregate KAI scores did not
budge. see Table 4. The slight changes are
random.
1987 1988 1989 1990 This evidence supports the argument
N=23 N=27 N=25 N"'27
that training cannot easily change KAI
105.7 98.6 97.6 99.8 scores. Perhaps the messageof the training
108.2 96.7 96.2 101.6
program takes longer to soak in. In that
case, scores should rise in one to three years
after the management development experi-
smith (1989) reports that training programs ence. Some participants filled In KAI pro-
appear to have no impact on KAI scores. tocols one to three years after the program
KAIstability has important Implications for was concluded. The results are found In
organizations which Invest In training pro- Table 5. Ai8l'egate scores remain stable
grams to teach people to be innovative. across time, which supports the originalfind-
If training programs can teach innova- Ing that training programs do not change
tive behavior.then not only does KAItheory KAI scores.
err in assuming the adaptation-Innovation However, racial differences emerge.
dimension as an Integral aspect of personal- Table 6 contrasts the mean KAI score be-
Ity. but organizations are spending money fore and after training. Because of the .mall
wiselyas they train people to innovate, as- number of black respondents for whom in-
suming that their organization lacks formation from three time points is avail-
Innovativeness. However,ifKirton and oth- able, the data are pooled for all respondents
ers are correct on this issue. organizations from 1985 through 1987. Black managers
seeking to change their culture should con- before training are lessinnovative than their
sider recruitment, replacement, or building white peen. At the end of the training pro-
diverseteams rather than training to achieve gram, KAIscores for black managers remain
the needed balance of managerialstylesOver unchanged. However, after one to three
thewholecognitivestylerange. . years, innovation propensity among black
State manager training sought to en- respondents hu Increased to the point that
they are as innovative as their white col-
leagues, who remain unchanged.
This is a small data set (7 black man-
agers and 43 white managers) from which
to extract a firm conclusion. but the find-
Ings offer an Idea to explore. Perhaps mi-
norities have a narrower range of behav-
Iors acceptable to majorities. Successful
minority managers are sensitive to the pa-
rameters of group norms, and stay within
them. The training program encouraged
managers to go beyond the boundaries. The
reinforcement of superiors, peers. and in-
structors that innovative behavior 15accept-
able. even desirable. may have fallen on a
fertile field among minorities, who broke
barriers to achieve these management posi-
tions and who may have constrained their
natural Innovative inclinations in order not
to risk damaging their careers.
Work environment may Influenceone'.
Innovative or adaptive attitude. The Influ-
ence of work environment Is reported sig-
nificant In Holland. Bowskill & Bailey
(1991), who found a regression to the mean
.where new employees' KAI scores differed
from the mean of the organization, but no
change where new employees' KAI scores
did not differ from the mean.
We tested the influence of work envi-
ronment on KAI scores. The governor in
office fromJanuary 1979 until January 1987
qot only encouraged training to Improve
management, he also preached to cabinet
members and other top level officials the
philosophyof empowerment and devolution
of authority. Cabinet members were ex-
pected to work with their own line and staff
to create more effective state government.
The commissionermade the decisions in the
department; the governor's staff members
were subordinate. and stayed out of depart-
ment matters unless Invited In. Informal
conversations with middle managers during

14 Rf\'lfW Of M.'III.I(' PERSONNel AOMINISTRATION SPRING 1999

KIRKTON AOAmON.INNOVATION... CIINNINGHAM ET At. n

TABLE S. Kirton Scores: Pre-training, Post-training and Follow-up.
TEST AOMINISTEREO 1985
N=16
Pre.rraining 98.H
POM-!raining 99.56
I 10}-var follow-up 102.75
"Indu,te, onlv tho", ".10 manaRen who have ocarel for allthr.. observations.
_d___.
TABLE 6. Mean Kirton Scores and Standard Error Over Time by.Race. State
Managers Only
PRE
White 103.4
Standard Error 2.5
mack 98.9
Standard Error 4.7
the summer training programsindicated that
participants understood the governor's mes-
sa~e and appreciated the opportunities for
innovation offered by this managerial phi-
losophy.
The next governor adopted a contrary
managerial philosophy. Policy decisions
were made by the governor's personal sraff,
and cabinet members were subordinate to
staff on policy matters. Deviation from ex-
isting policy had to be cleared by commis-
sioners through the governor's staff. Com-
missioner and middle manager innovation
was not encouraged. The managerial envi-
ronment emphasized adaptation rather than
innovation. Several managers expressed
their discomfort at having decisionsimposed
upon them by the governor's staff.One cabi-
net member stated privately that he some-
times learned from the newspaper about
decisions affecting his department. This
management style differs sharply from the
previous governor.
Note from Table 4 that KAI pre-train-
It> RI'\'IFW t)F rlll\UC rERS0NNEt AOMINIS11lAllON
'j'
..<
i.
i~ be encouraged when the executive commu-
nicates by words and deeds that risk-taking
1986 1987
and innovation are encouraged.
N=18 N=16
The findings regarding the impacts of
103.28 106.56 race and work environment on KAI scores
105.11 108.31 were not predicted; they appeared as seren-
107.61 106.81 dipitous findings in the data analysis. The
speculations we offer that (a) a member of
minority identity group or (b) working in a
,IB<,
controlling environment constitute condi-
tions which depress one's propensity to in-
novate constitute reasonable hypotheses,
but demand further testing. These findings
POST FOLLOW-UP N may seem at odds with the overarchlng
theme of a stable, unchangin~ personality
105.3 105.8 43
factor which affects how each person re-
2.2 2.5
sponds to the work environment. However,
98.9 104.6 7
paradox rather than consistency is a reality
4.7 3.9
both in life and in the work place. None of
us responds identically to the same stimulus
ing scores from 1983-1987 (first governor) both at home and at work, nor on different
are at or above 100. Pre-training scores for days of the week. Quinn (t 988) argues that
1988-1990 (second governor) do not reach competent managers must be inconsistent,
100. The differences betWeenthe tWogov- must respond paradoxicallyto the situations
ernors are consistent over the data set, and they face. One has a basic orientation, yet
support a speculation that while training
deviates from that consistency in specific'
may have no effect on KAI score, the cul- situations. There is no isomorphism be-
ture of the workplace appears to have an
tWeen personality And response to Adeci-
impact. An innovative workplace culture sion situation.
fosters higher KAIscores; an adaptive work- Decisiongroups. Homogeneous groups
place culture encourages adaptation. Em- of adaptors and innovAtorsshould arrive at
phasizing the influence of the environment decisions which reflect the modal charac-
is compatible with the Deming argument terisdcs of their KAIscore. A group of adap-
(Bowman, 1994) that the workplace envi- tors should arrive at an adaptive decision; a
ronment and task structure are significant group of innovators should reach an Inno-
sources for organization effectiveness. The vative decision. If the KAI measures adap-
inference from this finding is that to effect tadon and innovation accurately, and if the
change, the organization executive should theory that homogeneous groups of adap-
restructure the environment or redesign the tors and irmovators will arrive at less effec-
job rather than flre employees. Sending tive decisions, then the following quasi-ex-
people to training programs may teach spe- perimental research task should support that
cmc work behaviors, but does not appear to hypothesis.
generate an innovative orientation. How- The 1985 management training class
ever, a suppressed innovative attitude can was split into three groups, and KAI score
srRINO 1m
KIRKTON APAI'TION.INNOVA'IION...
(in addition to gender and department dis-
tribution) was a major criterion in dividing
the participants.7 High KAIscorers and low
KAI scorers were assembled into homoge-
neous groups. A third group wascomposed
of scorers falling near, and on either side of,
the KAImean of98. The three groups were
charged with the same task: over the next
three months you are to develop a proposal
for addressing the disposal of nonhazardous
solid waste for the state. Speakers were
brought in to address the topic; participants
visited several solidwaste disposal sites, And
each group spent many hours In Indlvlduul
Rnd I(roup research. Because this report
would be presented In both oral and writ-
ten form to the state's Department of Health
and Environment, participants were com-
mitted to an outstanding product. The com-
missioner of the department would attend
the oral presentation.
The groups worked on their proposals
all summer. During the last week of train-
ing, each group in a "dress rehearsal" pre-
sented its recommendations to a panel of
four solid waste experts. The experts com-
mented on each of the three plans, and
evaluAted the plans 910nl(several dimensions
usinga 1-10scoringscheme. Innovativeness
WASmeAsuredby the dimension "departure
from standard practice." An adaptive score
approaches the "standard practice" pole; an
innovative score approaches the "sharp de-
parture" pole. The project teams scored as
predicted by the KAI theory. Aggregating
a mean among the scoresof the four experts,
the innovator team achieved a mean score
of 7, the adaptor team scored 3, and the
middle team scored 5. Again, the validity
of the KAI measure is confirmed. When
innovators get together, the decision willbe
innovative; when adaptors get together, the
decision will be adaptive. Also in line with
diversity theory, the experts evaluated the
CliNNINGUAM n AI.. 27
 TABLE 7. KAI Group Score and Innovative Group Behavior, State Managen
INNlW A'I\)RS
GROUP
Mean KAI score I2Z
*Departure from 7 5
OI:mJard practice
.Composj.e expen score (I =srandard practice. 10=sharp departure).
middle group as offering the best project
plan.
These three tests of criterion validity
support the KAI as a valid measure of deci-
sion-making style, corroborating previous
evidence for construct and content validity.
Scores remain stable over time, and Kirton's
hypothesis that balanced teams outperform
teams nf homogeneous adaptors or innova-
tOrsis confirmed.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Organizations face the paradoxical chal-
lenge of maintaining the satisfaction level
of their current stakeholder base while seek-
ing new opportunities and more effective
waysof developing, producing, and deliver-
ing the product or service.Becauseindividu-
als differ in their propensity to welcome or
seek change, the work group which incor-
porates and celebrates a wide spectrum of
employeeorientations to change willbe pre-
pared !>othto hold onto the best of the old
and to introduce the new. Byassessingindi-
vi,llIals "n Ihe a,IAptlltinn.innovlltion di.
mensi"", KAI can assist management in
building effective work teams. However,
one's KAI score may also be influenced by
one's work environment or minority social
status. Individuals take cues from manage-
ment and peers. KAI can be useful in en-
hancing innovative problem solutions, but
an executive's demonstrated behaviors re-
ltI RF\'IE\\' ("If rlJRue: PERSONNELADMINISTRATION
MllmLES ADAPTORS
GROUP GROUP
97 79
3
main a factor influe~cing a subordinate's
propensity to innovate.
SUMMARY
Based upon multiple data sets and multiple
methods, this research finds the KAI to be a
valid measure of the adaptation-innovation
dimension of managerial decision style. Fac-
tor analysis supports tri.dimenslonality for
the overall KAI, and confirms the Internal
structure of subscales.Triangulation byem-
ploying an alternative method of testing
adaptation-innovation (Altklrt), a content
analysis of manager stories, and expert
evaluation of three groups' project propos-
als argue that KAImeasures the innovation-
adaptation continuum.
KAI appears to be tapping a stable per-
sonality dimension. A significant training
experience did not significantly elevate (or
lower) innovation scores. While the data
indicate that one's KAIscore remains stable
over time, minority group status or the or-
ganization culture communicated by top
manaKement likely nudge. scores to come
in line with the executive's predisposition.
In each test, Kirton's theory Is con-
firmed. In none of the tests does the KAIor
Kirton's theory fail. Seeking organizational
effectiveness through work-group diversity
along the adaptation-innovation dimension
receivessupport and iscompatible with prior
research showing that organizational effec-
SPRING 1m
tiveness is produced by the requisite variety
principle (Miller, 1993; Watson, Kuman &
Michaelsen, 1993;Weick, 1979). The prac-
tical management strategy for organizational
effectiveness is to recruit or build diverse
decision teams.
If the adaptation.lnnovation dimension
Issignificantfor supplyingneeded variety for
an organization, and i( the theory of requi-
site variety applies to organizations, then
(other (acton being equal) organizations
which use managers' KAI scores for build.
ing diverse work teams willbe more success-
ful than organizations which ignore such
information about their employees when
building teams.
Notes
'More .han II0reoeRrch articinmakllllluoeo(the KAI
are reponed In the P8ycINFO 1996.lmdatabue.
I TIle II.. of Items comprill"8 each luboeale can be
found In Klnon (1976).
'Oulon (1980) and Mellick (1988) Illte that validity
II more a unitary than a lrinltlry concept. TIle catel/Ory
oeparatlon8 are. uaed here for orlfllnlzR.fonal PUrpmel.
. Conceptually, the orlllnRllty. efficiency and rule
con(ormlty luboeale. are orrholOnal (uncorrellted) In
multidimensional Ipace. and the overall KAlil linear In
two-dimensional space. In rwo.dlmen.lonallpace the Iteml
form a .1"8le me..ure; 10 delplte the orthotronalltruc.ure
of the three component (acton. .he"" .ub.scorel will have
modes. pooluve In.ercorrelatlon8. By dellnltlon, orthogonal
':,: facton are uncorrelated. Howeve.. when lpeciAc Item. are
.ummed to create lubocalel. the (ac.or loadl Rnd effectl
of non luboeale items are removed, .herebv Rllowlnll (or
the I'OIIIbility of either pool.lve or nelflltlve correl"lon.
alllOtll lubocalel. In thll Cloe. al expected, the lu,,"cole.
lhawed modest pooltlve IntercorreIA.ionl. Thll mean. thaI
the .uboeales are Independent. ~. related to the umbrellA
dimension of adap'ation.lnnovotlon.
, The dlffiirence berween the "'0 larBeIt loadlnlll I.
.09. (the smalln. difference In our do.a) and 18"""IlIcAnt
at ,,-.0202 (t- 2.304).
. In .h.l. own penonal KAI lenre, nohic InJ DRvl.
leore approximately one ..anJArJ d.vlRllon from .he mean
In oppotite dlrectlonl. Thll dlvenlry be!Ween the coden
reduce. the likelihood that a .Igniflcant theme II
overlooked. and the con venation. (literally vehemenl
argumenu) between the codell after their InlUal
Independent jud(ll1len18lncreRaed the likelihood o( a valid
Intetpfttation of themel from the srotie.. The different
penpectiVei of Bobk: and Davll Ind .hat Impacl on lhe
leorl"8 points up the Importlnc. of seeklllll dlverllty In
oelectlng code... Validity II enhRnced by a thorough
dlacuaion amotll coden with dUI'eri", perspective.. Scorillll
klRKTON ADAmoN.INNOV
done by coden wl.h .imil.r ocore. on the dlmen.lons .elled
mAYachieve reliability, vel .acriAce validity.
, Only .he pr"ll'am coordlnAton knew of thl. 1110111'
"'AIiAcation.
References
Alhby, w. R. (1956). In.mJ..crion10c,btmtric< New York:
John Wiley.
Balloul. R. &. Foxall, 0. (1995). Conltruc. validity and
lenerall.abillty o( the Klnon AdAptation.Innova.'on
Invenlnry. Ewro/Jtan}OIIma'of l'erslllld/ir,.9 (3), 185.
206.
Bowman.J. (1994). At IA".Analternotive to performance
apprAI..1: Total quality mAnallement. Pwblic
AdminiJrra.imI RevitUl, H (2). 129.116.
CAmpbell. DonAld. (1979). ~lIIeel o((reedom And .he CO""
Itudy. In T. Cook &. C. ReichArt (Edl.~, Quantirarille
and qua/jra.IIIe mtlhodJ in tIIal /{m rt!tarch (pp. 47.
69). Beverly Hili.. CA: SOlie.
Clapp. R. G. (1993). Stobtllty of cOllflltive .tyle In odul..
and 8Ome ImplicAtion., A longitudinal llUdy of the
Kirton Adapta.lon.lnnovation Inventory. P.",ho~lgical
Rtpan" 73 (}), 1235.1245.
Ftlltead. W. (1979). Quolitative methodl.ln T. Cook &.c.
ReichArt (Ed..), Quan.jratille and qwaUra.wt -thods in
tIIal imI rmarch (pp. 33.48). Beverlv HIIII, CA: SAge.
Fllher. A. (1985). Leadenhlp 01 medium: Treo'ing
enmplexl'y In II"'UP communication re.earch. S"","
GrowpB.havior, 16 (2), 167.196.
Fleenor. J. &.Taylor. S. (1994). Conmuct validity ofthree
lel(.report meo.ure, o( c.eativlty. Edwcarlonal and
P.,cho~'gical M.alwrtmenl, 54 (2),46<1.470.
Foden. L. &. MalOn, H. (1986). Who. price partlclpAtionl
EdwcarJanal and Child l'J,choIoO, 3 ()), 230.236.
Foxoll, O. &. HRckert, P. (1992). Th. (.ctor strucrure and
c"",rruc. vAlidity of.he Kirton Adoptatlon .Innovatlon
Inventory. PnsonaUryand Individ 1DifftrtnCtS,/3 (9).
967.975.
Follen. M. P. (1918/1998). The ntwsra... University Pork.
PA: PennlylvaniA S,... Unlv.,,11)' Pres..
G,ldsmlth. R. (1989). CreAtive style And pe""nality .heory.
'n M.Kirton(Ed.). Ada;tors and inn""".OTS(chap. 2).
London: Rou.ledge, .
Oulon, R. (1980). On trlnharlan doctrinel o( validity.
Pmfmiorlllll'J,choloo, I I. (3), 385.398.
Hair. J.. Anderton. R. E, &.Tatham, R. (1987). MwlriV<Jriare
dala anal,,;, (2nd ed.).
Pubilihen.
New York: MacmillAn
Holland. P.A.. Bowsklll, I., Bolley, A. (1991). Adap.on And
Innovarnn: Selection veroo. IndOlc.l"n. Ps,chological
R,ptlrU, 1\11(I), 12/1 1.1290.
Jacoh.on, C. (1<191). C"lInhlve 'Ivle. of creallvl.v:
Relollonl o( score. on .he Kirton Adap...lon .
Innovallon Inventory and the Myero.Brlglls type
Indicator among manaBers In the USA. P"choIoRical
R./IOfU, 72, IIJ 1.11 36.
KAI Repon Back Form. (1965).
Kirton. M. (1989). Ada".ors and Innavarors London:
Routledge.
Kirton. M. (1976). Hove adaptors And Innovators equAl
levell o( creatlvityl P':1"h%gical R."OTU, 42.695.698.
Kirton. M. (1976). Adap.onand Innova.or., A description
ATlON... CtJNNINOHAM ET Al. 19
 Trend, M.G. (1979). On the reconciliation of qualitative
anJ ",,'a""c. Journal..f AppheJ rs~,h"I"I<.f.6/. 6ZZ.6Z9.
~uhn. 1. (I<nO). TIle IIruc'ure of ",enufi, revo/u'ion! and qUAntitative analyses, In T. Cook & c. Reichart
Appendix
U'Kago: Unive"ity of ChICago Pre". (Eds.). Qu,mtilativeand qualillltivemelhod..in evaluation
Me""k. ~. ( I'mil). The once anJ futute issues of validity: rmareh (pp. 68-116).Beverly Hills, CA: Sa~e. ALTKIRT
A',e",ng the meanong and «.nsequences of Tulle\!, A, (1997). Co~nitive style: Not cuhure's
mea,,"ement. In H. Wainer & H. Braun (Eds.), Tell wnsequence. E"TfJpeanP"eholagist.1 0). Z58-Z67, Check the one from each of the following pairs which best describes you.
..,/"1,,, (1'1'. }}.45)' Hill,Jale. NJ: Lawrence Erlhaum
Tullert, A, & Kirton, M. (1995). Further evidence for the
A"""ares. independence of adaptive.innovative (A.I) cognitive A 0 1. Thinking characterized by precision, reliability, efficiency, prudence,
~1III<-r.n. (1'19(\). The IWTU' pMaJo,. New York Harper style (rom na'ional culture. PemmalilJ and Individual discipline
Bu'one". Differenas, 190),393.396.
~1",I,I.~. (l'l()t>\. ~"""" A.I theory: hidence ""aringon
Van deT Molen, P. (1989). Adaptalion.innovation and 0 2. Thinking characterized by lack of discipline. linking of unrelated ideas.
,I.,' "d,. 1< 1 :m,lt.."", ""ml~"i'ion issoes. IIri'i." d,,"'ges in sodlll ""octlll<: On ,he anAtomy o( unusual thought patterns
./",m",I..{ I'",'h"/,,,,':I.H7 (2), 241.254. ca'Astrophe. In M, Kinon (EJ.). AdaplOTS andinll//\l<JtOTS
~1""I",k. ~1. h..k','n. S. & Lauer. K. (1993). Creativiry (PI" chap. 7). LonJon: Ro,;tledge. B 0 1. Interested in finding problems to solve
rr.""'IIg .m,I,he ,t..",hty anJ inrernal consisrency of WatSon.W, Kuman. K, & Michaelsen, L. (1993). Cultural
diversi'y's impact on intetaction process anJ 0 2. Interested in solving problems
till' ~"ton AJartlOn.lnnova,ion Inventory.
P"oI",I"g,,',d Rel'°rlS. 12 (J). II ZJ. II 30. performance: Comparin~ homogeneous and diverse C 0 1. If rules don't fit. bend them a bit
011inll. R. (I'll'S). Bev"IIJ wtlO""/ maougemen!. San 'ask groups. Academ, of ManllgernenrJournal, 36 0).
h.u"",o lo"ey.B:....
590.602. 0 2. Prefer to work within established rules
~"I[\. I. (I'NC'). 'I;.ward a ,heory o( "",al relatio",: The
Weick, K. (1991),The vulnerahleSy.tem:An analy.i.of
"'g".,,,on analog lIelw"low/ Sdena, 350), 197.206, the Tenerife air disaster. In P.Frost, L.Moore, M, Loul., DOl. Solutions sought by tried and true methods
~'<lm.lII. C. (1990). Arc vou the product o( my e. Lundherg & I. MArtin. (Ed..). Reframing
organi.atumal w/lure (pp. 117.!}0). Newhury Park:
0 2. Use unproven ideas in seeking solutions
m"undeNanJong! Or the n.le o( ,orting mechanisms
,11\,1tI... "a,i< human program' on ,he ITeatment of Sage, E 0 1. Can maintain high accuracy for long periods of work
:ol<,.hol"m. In C. St,'rmall (EJ.). Neuro.lmguilli, Weick, K, (IIJII7). Organizational culture as a source of
l'r",~,"nll1l11gm ab'/v'/15111treatmenl (1'1'. 125.140). New high reliahility. Califomw MaMRemen'Review,19 (2), 0 2. Work best for short bursts of high intensity
II Z.I27-
Y"rk. Haworth.
Weick. K. (1979). The ,ocial ""ch%o of organizingNew
F 0 1. Bending the rules for one person is unfair to the rest
'\en. '1'\'1.M. (1'177). Content 'C' ""ITuet confusion. Personnel
York:Ranl!om House.
P,," ""/"1::" 3(1. 47.54. 0 2. Bendingthe rules if necessarymakesbureaucracyhuman
rhollll""II.T (1991). P".I,'cl'cs, communication anJ
nl'II "'" (or I II'allvIlV. Jo'm",lo}< :rf"'flW Be/uwior, 15 G 0 1. Impractical,unpredictable.change-oriented type
(11.4 \. 51.
0 2. Practical,predictable, take-care-of-businesstype
H 0 1. Command of specialized km}wledge
0 2. Command of general knowledge
0 1. When involved in a project. I forget that other people are involved and
probably should be consulted
0 2. When involved in a project, I am still considerate of others

View publication stats