No abstract

We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.-Benjamin Franklin, At the signing of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.This article reports the results of a study conducted to examine the ability of the Situational Outlook Questionnaire (SOQ TM ) to effectively discern climates that either encourage or discourage creativity and the ability to initiate change in a team setting. The purpose of the study is to examine the concurrent criterion-related validity of the SOQ. The article explores the characteristics in an organisational climate that promote teamwork and some of the tripwires one needs to be aware of in the formation and management of teams. Nine dimensions of the climate for creativity and change as measured by the Situational Outlook Questionnaire are put forward and defined in relation to teams. The methodology and results of the study are reported. The results show that when subjects (N = 154) complete the SOQ based on their recollection of a best-and worst-case team experience, the measure is able to consistently and significantly discriminate between the two types of experiences. Conclusions, implications, and areas for future research to further examine the validity of the SOQ are explored.

The foundations of a multidimensional measure designed to assess creativity and change are presented. The reliability and construct validity of the Situational Outlook Questionnaire were tested using a sample of 1,111 subjects. Cronbach alpha and exploratory factor analysis supported reliability and construct validity. The study identified areas where the Situational Outlook Questionnaire can be improved and areas for further study with the questionnaire.

VIEW: An Assessment of Problem Solving Style (Selby, Treffinger, & Isaksen, 2002) is a new instrument for assessing problem‐solving style, for use with individuals from ages 12 through adult. It measures three dimensions of style relating to creative problem solving and change management. In this article, we discuss the construction of the instrument, the initial evidence supporting the instrument's reliability and validity, and a very brief overview of the instrument's foundations. Our reliability data involve both stability and internal consistency. We report evidence for the criterion‐related validity, based on correlational studies with relevant measures of learning style, cognitive style, and psychological type. We also conducted principal components factor analyses that support our three‐factor structure. Researchers and practitioners studying and applying Creative Problem Solving and change management methods can use VIEW in several ways. Finally, we identify several research directions that will contribute to the refinement and development of the instrument as well as to a better understanding of the “problem‐solving style” construct.

No abstract

In his 1986 analytic review of the first ten years of research on adaption-innovation theory, Mudd commented on the importance of continued research on the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory. Suggestions pertinent to the present study involved an examination of the stability of the instrument as well as the test-retest reliability of the full scale and subscales. A Lindquist Type III analysis of variance was used to examine the influence of creativity training on the stability of the Kirton full scale scores. The scores did not change after training. There was, however, a significant effect for gender by pre- and posttest interactions for the full scale scores. Men's full scale scores were higher than women's, and only men exhibited an increase. The women's pre- and posttest scores appeared more stable. Internal reliability coefficients and test-retest reliability coefficients for both the full scale scores and the subscale scores were very adequate, but the men's scores did increase.

This study investigated the relationship between two measures used to assist change and transformation efforts, the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory which assesses style or manner of cognition and problem-solving, not level or capability, and the Leadership Practices Inventory which measures the extent to which leaders exhibit certain leadership behaviors associated with accomplishing extraordinary results. These two measures of level and style should be conceptually distinct and show no or only modest correlation. Analysis yielded statistically significant and meaningful relationships between scores on the Kirton inventory and two scales of the Leadership Practices Inventory. Implications and challenges for research and practice were outlined.