No title

EDITORIAL

125

Editorial Knowledge management and innovation

T

he management of knowledge has become a matter of increasing practical interest to managers, professionals, and inevitably to organisational consultants. The rather obvious case might run as follows. Organisations are increasingly competing in an information rich and information complex environment. As markets become global, so does the strategic task of managing information. Fortunately this need for knowledge management can be handled through increasingly sophisticated information technology systems. Terms such as the learning organisation are in increasing currency. There has been less attention paid to the links between creativity, innovation, and knowledge acquisition. A refreshing exception is the pioneering work of the Group ESCP at the Paris School of Management which includes annual symposia on links between cognition and creativity in organisational settings and links to organisational learning. A more comprehensive account of this work is planned for a future edition of Creativity and Innovation Management. This edition also concerns itself with these important issues. In some senses of course all organisations learn, with the post-hoc distinction that some organisations learn more effectively than others, as evidenced by the manner of their prospering or their decline. In that same broad way we may say that all organisations are faced with innovation choices that they are more, or less, successful in meeting. So maybe the innovative organisation and the learning organisation are terms that are loosely used to indicate success or excellence. Only more careful examination of our theories and of what happens in practice may enable us to make progress towards deeper understanding.

Contents This issue contains various practical and theoretical ideas about the relationships be# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997. 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

tween knowledge, creativity, and innovation. Pierre Abetti introduces us to the secrets of how innovations in Toshiba began life as underground projects. Regular readers will recall an earlier article that suggested many innovations spring up because of such illicit `bootlegging' (`The manager as pirate: An inspection of the gentle art of bootlegging' by Peter Augsdorfer, CAIM, Vol 3, No 2). One reason that information in organisation remains hidden is the manner in which the official system only accepts the reality of those ideas that have already acquired a budget number! Fortunately, the enthusiast and product-champion is temperamentally capable of working in devious ways to sustain the idea ± often if not always in the best interests of the organisation. Teresa Covin and Bonnie Stivers have taken the direct route to assessing the management focus of North American firms. Their work suggests that support for innovation is closely connected with a focus on knowledge management. While the direction of causality can not be established, it is tempting to speculate that there is a co-correlation here, firms interested in, and active in one are likely to be interested and active in the other. Kjell Gronaug and Willie Haukedal show a worthwhile finding. Transfer of knowledge is not simply a matter of going out there and getting it. The processes whereby knowledge is incorporated into change and innovation are intensive and in the authors' term `cumbersome'. It is well to remember that the territories of science or knowledge, and technology (applications) are rather difficult to connect up in a simple fashion. Peter Wilson provides the perspective of the creative problem-solving movement. This tradition has always been optimistic that innovation gaps can be closed through deliberate and structured efforts at creative problem-solving methods. They support Simplex, a variant of the Parnes-Osborn model, that has been pioneered by the Canadian-based researcher and consultant Min Basadur. The last two contrasting articles in this issue concentrate on the intellectual components of discovery. Raymond Carr has

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

126

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

summarised a labour of love over many years into the nature of genius. This work, although beginning as a traditional historiographic piece actually proposes a new theory of cognitive style that has some face-validity on neurological grounds. Reg Talbot, working in that related area of cognitive style sheds new light on currently fashionable ideas of cognitive styles of innovators and adaptors after the pioneering work of Michael Kirton.

Book of the quarter The nature of knowledge acquisition and innovation is made more complex by the changing nature of the empirical world. Just when some progress might have been made

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

into understanding innovation in stable marketplaces, the market places change to turbulent ones. Teams now operate in what is becoming called virtual reality. The book of the quarter describes the infra-structural innovations that are accelerating these changes, namely the World Wide Web. The rapid diffusion of the Web still accords with the epidemic theories of diffusion of ideas through pioneers, innovators, and so on. But the context of innovation is a long way from the simplistic linear models of the past. Perhaps the cautionary message has to be that each innovation is a learning and knowledge acquisition effort. The general rules to be extracted from past experience will be of some guidance, but never a complete template for action.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

JAPAN'S UNDERGROUND INNOVATIONS

127

Underground Innovation in Japan: the Development of Toshiba's Word Processor and Laptop Computer Pier A. Abetti Introduction: the folklore of ``underground'' and ``skunkworks'' innovation

B

usiness folklore credits many successful radical innovations to corporate entrepreneurs (Block and MacMillan 1993) or ``intrapreneurs'' (Pinchot 1985) who, as fearless knights, fight their way through the maze of corporate bureaucracy, indifference or even hostility, to emerge as winners in the marketplace. However, this scenario actually happens quite rarely, maybe one time in thirty (Kiechel 1988). Even more infrequent are cases where a successful innovation is initially nipped in the bud by company management, with severe penalties to the obstinate entrepreneur. For instance, Lou Lehr, chief executive officer (CEO) of 3M, related each year to a meeting of his most creative employees the story of a laboratory engineer who disobeyed orders and refused to quit working on his pet project. He was fired, but persuaded the guards to let him continue to come to work, and successfully developed his innovative product. ``The stubborn employee ultimately retired as the vice president of this very successful operation (Lehr 1979).'' In contrast to these exceptional cases, the world of business abounds with frustrated innovators who, as good soldiers, stopped their unauthorized work as ordered, and returned to their routine assignments. The company may have thus lost opportunities for launching a profitable new business and squelched, perhaps forever, the creative intent of gifted employees. In practice, a creative entrepreneur, who truly believes in his/her innovation and refuses to submit to the orders of manage# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997. 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

ment, is faced with three difficult and risky choices.

Three difficult choices

(1) Leave the company and start his/her own new venture, the well-known ``spinoff phenomenon'' (Roberts 1991; Segal 1988). While a few of these ventures have achieved spectacular successes such as Apple (Burgelman and Maidique 1988) and INTEL (Nanda and Bartlett 1994), the majority fail or achieve only marginal profitability (Timmons 1994). (2) Wrest control from the organization by force and set up a separate ``little kingdom'' as Steve Jobs did for Apple's Macintosh personal computer (PC) (Moritz 1984; Nonaka and Kenney 1991). (3) Go ``underground'' (Aram 1973) until the innovation is too firmly developed to be in danger of being uprooted by hostile organizational forces (Kao 1989) and then emerge gradually, counting on the indifference or ``benign neglect'' of headquarters. ``Underground innovation'' is often equated with ``skunkworks'' (Peters and Waterman 1982; Burgelman 1983). However, most skunkworks are not forbidden by, or hidden from management. In some cases, they are actually encouraged by top executives who are frustrated with company bureaucracy and with the slow response of the formal organization to major challenges. The very successful development of the IBM PC took place in a giant skunkworks in Florida, far away from headquarters in White Plains, NY. This skunkworks was set up by orders of the CEO, Tom Ackers. The lead entrepreneur, Philip Estridge, reported directly to him (Chopsky and Leonsis 1988). Tom West, the project leader of Data General's new machine, ran a true ``underground skunkwork'' in the oppressive climate of a factory basement,

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

128

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

without air conditioning and with locked doors for security reasons, but first sought and received approval of the vice president and then used this legitimization to spur his team into action (Kidder 1981).

`Under the table' projects

Volume 6

Number 3

``Under the table'' innovation in Japan In this paper, we will discuss the third alternative above, namely ``underground innovation'', specifically in Japan, based on the author's 30-year experience of working with Toshiba Corporation. With typical Japanese understatement, this approach is designated as ``under the table''. From a first cursory look, this approach to innovation might appear quite improbable in Japan, a country where Confucian ethics dictate obedience to one's superiors, and social mores entail disapproval of original or deviant behavior. On the other hand, the other two alternatives are not possible in Japan. In fact, overt refusal to accept management orders and revolution in the ranks, would entail loss of face by management, immediate dismissal and inability to obtain other employment in the country. Similarly, the creation of a new venture through spinoff is very difficult in Japan, because the entrepreneur would be branded as disloyal by management and fellow employees, and would have great difficulties in obtaining scarce startup venture capital (Yasutatsu 1994). To conclude, in Japan the third alternative, going ``under the table'' is the only possible one in practice, albeit quite risky. Thus, we will analyze underground innovation through parallel in-depth case studies of two major ``under the table'' innovations in Toshiba Corporation: the first Japanese language word processor (WP) and the first fully IBM-compatible laptop PC. These innovations have enabled Toshiba to achieve worldwide leadership in the portable PC business, where the company presently enjoys 27 percent market share in Europe and United States (Koga 1996). In Japan, the Toshiba WP also enjoyed the highest market share and profits in 1993 among 14 competitors (Abetti 1997b). The two cases are quite similar in that the new products were conceived by creative internal entrepreneurs who visualized the potential market need well ahead of the strategic planners of Toshiba and its competitors. Both developments were carried out by dedicated passionate engineers, working on their own time, without company support,

September 1997

indeed against the distrust of headquarters. As mentioned above, both developments finally achieved enduring success. However, the two cases also present significant differences: the Japanese language WP was not expressly forbidden by management, while the laptop PC project was vetoed twice by headquarters. After the projects emerged ``above the table'', the laptop benefitted from the benign neglect of headquarters, while the WP was endorsed by management. In the latter case, management's assistance was more of a hindrance than of help, created havoc in the orderly implementation of the project, and finally forced the internal entrepreneur to seek, as a ``beggar'', alternate sponsorship from another company business. Finally, as mentioned above, both projects were reincorporated in the mainstream (Burgelman 1988) operations of Toshiba and the corporate innovators were repeatedly promoted to attain top executive positions. All three are presently (1997) Members of the Board of Directors. The history of both innovations follows, with emphasis on critical events and entrepreneurial actions and reactions, starting chronologically with the WP.

The birth and growth of the Japanese language word processor Analysis of the Japanese language in relation to the word processor The author has studied seventeen languages during his lifetime, both indo-european (romance, germanic, slavic, etc) and non-indoeuropean (basque, finnish, turkish, chinese and japanese) and can state that written Japanese is the most difficult to read and especially to write correctly and fluently. In brief, Japanese is presently written by utilizing three different sets of characters, letters and marks, namely: (1) Chinese characters (kanji) numbering several thousand. In spite of the attempt to limit official documents and newspapers to 2000‹ ``standard kanji'' about 5000 are used for daily communication and up to 7000 are available in advanced WPs. (2) The traditional Japanese syllabic alphabet (hiragana and katakana) with 2648 = 96 symbols. (3) Western symbols including letters and numerals for a total of 36, and more than 50 marks, such as punctuation, diacritics, etc. While most Western languages are pronounced as they are written and written as

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

JAPAN'S UNDERGROUND INNOVATIONS

they are pronounced (with some exceptions) there is no evident correlation between the shape of a Chinese character and (1) its meaning or (2) its pronunciation. In fact, almost all kanji have at least two different pronunciations and some characters may correspond to ten or more different sounds. What is worse, Japanese abounds with omonyms, words of different meaning that sound alike. Such omonyms are relatively infrequent in English for example: you (personal pronoun), ewe (a sheep), and yew (a tree).1 Consequently, when transcribing the spoken language, either from dictation or as recorded in syllabic script (kana), the writer must select the correct kanji based on personal previous knowledge of the subject discussed, or request clarifications from the speaker, if available. In addition, given the very large number of kanji, Japanese was normally written by hand. So-called Japanese ``typewriters'' consisted of several trays with thousands of characters, selected by a skilled operator utilizing only one hand and a pointer, a slow and expensive process. Consequently, these typewriters were utilized only for official documents, such as patent applications. Thus in 1970, practically all correspondence and documents were handwritten, since all computers available in Japan utilized either the English language or katakana as input and output. It was feared that this lack of efficient Japanese typewriters and word processors would severely limit the development of office automation in Japan in comparison with the West.

Gestation and concept development of the Japanese language word processor In 1971 Dr. Ken-Ichi Mori, the inventor of the Japanese word processor, was leader of the optical character recognition team at the Toshiba Research Laboratory in Kawasaki. He had developed zip-code readers for the postal service that had prescribed that all such codes should be written in arabic numerals. However, all mail was addressed by hand in kanji or by computer in katakana. While the former was delivered correctly, ten percent of the latter was either undeliverable or delivered to the wrong party. This created a big problem for all computer manufacturers, since the post office threatened to charge double the regular postal rate for all mail addressed in katakana. Dr. Mori felt this pressure and conceived the idea of a Japanese word processor consisting of katakana input (already available) a kana-to-kanji translator (not available) and a kanji output (such a printer had already been developed by Toshiba for newspapers).

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

129

The idea of kana-to-kanji translation was original and difficult to implement in practice. IBM had given up their Russian to English translation project after repeated attempts and skeptical ``experts'' at Toshiba headquarters stated that there was no solution in sight for kana-to-kanji translation. Such a project might take 10 years with a high risk of failure. Dr. Mori was more optimistic. He conceived a ``user friendly'' translator targeted to the average Japanese, as a Western typewriter, rather than to specialists, such as skilled operators of Japanese typewriters. Dr. Mori and two associates, Mr. Kawada (who had studied computer linguistics) and Mr. Awama, arrived at the following functional specifications: (1) the input capability in Japanese should be faster than if written by hand in block letters, (2) the machine should be portable and priced, as a Western high-speed typewriter (100,000 yen = $1000)2, and (3) the machine should have access to outside memory as a personal file, based on frequency counts of the user's kanji, for creating the output. The translation principle was simple but the burden on storage (dictionary, grammatical and syntactical rules) was enormous. However, Dr. Mori was aware of two empirical laws of Silicon Valley: (1) Moore's law (named after Gordon Moore, a founder of INTEL) stated that the speed of computers and memories would quadruple every 3 or 4 years, and the size of memory would increase proportionally (Clark 1995), (2) Grosch's law (named after Herbert Grosch, an astronomer who had worked at IBM's Watson laboratory) stated that the cost C of computing is inversely proportional to the square root of speed S (Grosch 1953). 1 C ˆ p S Therefore computing costs would decrease by half every 3 or 4 years. In effect, Mori had conceived a word processor based on a fiveyear look ahead of both market needs and the evolution of technology. We will see later that the same approach was conceived independently by Mizoguchi for the laptop computer.

``Under the table'' birth of the word processor Armed with his product concept and belief in the progress of technology, Mori requested authorization to start his kana-to-kanji translation project with his two associates. Management ordered them to continue working

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

130

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

full-time on the assigned optical pattern recognition project, but added ``you can work on this project on your own time only and you may recruit other researchers willing to work on their own time.'' Mori was able to recruit a fourth associate, and all worked on the WP project every day after 5 pm and often on weekends. Later, management allowed this self-motivated and self-organized team to use 10 to 15 percent of their time and budget for this ``unofficial'' project. In 1977 they demonstrated the first prototype of the kana-to-kanji translator. The machine was the size of an office desk, very heavy (220kg), expensive (the cost was predicted to be 5 million yen = $50,000 for factory-produced units), slow (1 to 2 minutes per character) but worked correctly. However, Mori and his research team lacked both the core competencies and the funds to evolve their prototype into a mass-marketable product.

The painful growth of the word processor

A fortuitous encounter

Volume 6

Number 3

Tetsuya Mizoguchi, the future inventor of the laptop PC, was the ``creative brain'' of the Toshiba's computer development group. In October 1977 he was Senior Manager of large computer design in the Ome factory, but knew that Toshiba, burdened with heavy losses, would probably exit the mainframe business soon. Therefore Mizoguchi was looking for new opportunities and had started developing the first Japanese PC. Mizoguchi was intrigued to hear a report from one of his young engineers who had seen the kana-to-kanji translation system at the R&D Center, and set up an appointment to see Dr. Mori whom he had never met. Mizoguchi arrived at Kawasaki station, bought a newspaper and gave it to Mori. Mori inputted the text in kana and the same text came out with correct kanji. Mizoguchi exclaimed ``Gee, it works!'', but also noted that the hardware was too heavy and thus not suited for developing the new business he had envisioned. This fortuitous encounter between the scientist-inventor who wanted a low-costdesktop WP and the engineer-inventor who wanted to develop a new computer business was the spark that started the process that made possible office automation in Japan. In fact, all 14 Japanese manufacturers of WPs presently use Dr. Mori's patents. Mizoguchi realized that there was obvious synergy between WPs and PCs and had already developed many of the key components: a kanji printer and a monitor to display them, LSI chips, PCB cards with four such chips,

September 1997

and a hard disk with 10 MB (megabytes) capacity. Mizoguchi obtained immediate approval from his boss, the chief engineer of the Ome plant, to start a new project for WP development. He set up a joint team of 10 engineers (7 from his group, 3 transferred from Mori's team) to complete the hardware and further develop the software. Dr. Mori and 5 or 6 members of his original team continued to work at the R&D laboratory. Thus, the ``unofficial'' project in the Kawasaki laboratory had now become an ``official'' project in the Ome plant. While this legitimization allowed adequate funds and personnel, it created many problems for the two internal entrepreneurs because of management's second-guessing and interference. First, the General Manager (GM) wanted to utilize the 100,000 skilled operators of the old fashioned Japanese typewriter and requested a one-hand pointer for selecting 2300 kanji. Mori and Mizoguchi fought back: ``Our target is not the one-handed 100,000 skilled operators, it is all Japanese who can use two hands !'' As a compromise, the GM authorized only one trial machine. In July 1978, a race was held between the WP, operated by a female office clerk, and conventional hand writing. Times were comparable, but the WP was more accurate and the quality of the printed output was much higher. Actually, this demonstration was ``doctored'' by the two entrepreneurs in that the available vocabulary was only suitable for factory documentation, a wellkept secret! The GM was highly impressed, assigned extra personnel, and asked that commercial models be ready for demonstration at the Japan Data Trade Show in October 1978. Japan's first WP, the JW-10, became immediately famous. Due to the many requests from prospective customers, who paid 6.3 million yen ($63,000), there were 20 to 30 b-test sites on the customers' premises in January 1979. The first lot of 300 machines was shipped in 18 months, and the price of improved models was reduced first to 4.9 million yen ($49,000) and then to 2.6 million yen ($26,000). Thanks to cost reductions and mass production, profits remained very high. Mori left the R&D laboratory in 1981 and became Manager-Product Planning of the Computer Division in Tokyo. He developed plans for three models called ABC: A ± portable and simple, B ± desktop and more sophisticated, C ± more advanced desktop with publishing software. Mori and Mizoguchi decided to develop first the massmarket portable A model, in line with Mori's

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

JAPAN'S UNDERGROUND INNOVATIONS

original concept. Mizoguchi was working hard on the A model, when Mori was promoted and called back to the R&D laboratory. Shortly thereafter, the GM of the Computer Division informed Mori that he had ordered Mizoguchi to shift from the A model to the C model. The reason was that the C model was priced at 2 million yen ($20,000) and the A model at only 100,000 yen ($1,000), and the GM believed that a salesman could sell either machine with the same effort. This management decision caused Mizoguchi to lose one year and severed the connection between Mori and Mizoguchi. However, Mori, a true internal entrepreneur, did not give up his vision of the A model for the mass market, and sought another sponsor in the Consumer Division in Nagoya. Although he was considered a ``beggar'', he persuaded them to adopt the A model which was launched successfully as the PW-10 within one year, at the end of 1984. The GM of the Computer Division was surprised and ordered Mizoguchi to shift from the C model back to the A model. Mori started working again with Mizoguchi, and they together developed the first of the successful RUPO-10 series. So now Toshiba was mass-marketing two successful models of word processor, the PW-10 built in Nagoya and the RUPO-10 built in Ome. The machines were similar, but not compatible and naturally the users were unhappy. After one year Mori was able to merge the two groups and the Nagoya team moved to Ome, where the WP share of Toshiba reached 80% in the second half of 1985 (Abetti 1997b).

The birth and growth of the laptop computer Gestation and concept development As an adolescent, Mizoguchi built radios from kits. In 1977 he was fascinated by the simple computer kits sold by hobby shops on the Ginza, but quickly recognized their drawbacks. He realized, just as Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs, the founders of Apple (Burgelman and Maidique 1988), that the market wanted ready-to-use machines. As we have seen, in 1977 he had started a project to develop the first Japanese PC, the T-400. Seven prototypes were built in 1978 and received high praise at various trade shows. However, Toshiba headquarters denied his request to commercialize the product in Japan and only authorized original equipment manufacturer (OEM) sales in the United States that were unsuccessful (Abetti, Sumita and Kimura 1995).

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

131

One and a half years later, NEC introduced its first PC in Japan which was an immediate success. In response, Toshiba developed the Pasopia 7, launched it in 1981 for the mass market, and failed miserably because of incompatibility with both IBM and NEC, the two de facto standards in Japan. Here again Mizoguchi, a determined internal entrepreneur, did not give up after two failures. He was backed by his boss, Masaichi Koga, who in 1983 had become General Manager of the Computer Business Division in Ome. Through repeated failures, Koga, Mizoguchi and their strategic planner, Dr. Shigenori Matsushita had learned that they needed a ``brighter blue'' product, that is, a product fully compatible with, but better than IBM (Abetti 1997a). To achieve this goal, Mizoguchi developed his ``back to the future'' market research and design process, a fiveyear look ahead similar to Mori's original concept of the WP, but more formalized. With five teams of engineers and sales persons, Mizoguchi visited major customers and dealers in the United States and through intuitive market research ascertained that the more progressive users and early adopters wanted smaller, lighter, truly portable PCs, but insisted on full compatibility with IBM and its clones. Mizoguchi developed the specifications for the laptop computer in terms of size, weight, battery capacity, display and a new 3.5 inch disk, which were ``cast in concrete'', and prepared a plan to develop the hardware and software, make or buy the required components, and have a prototype ready within 18 months ± a highly ambitious and difficult goal. However, Tokyo headquarters, remembering the failure of Toshiba's mainframe business and of two attempts to enter the PC business, vetoed the project by refusing to assign funds. GM Koga then offered to selffinance the project from savings in his division, but headquarters vetoed the project again. They stated that Toshiba had a shortage of engineers, and therefore any engineers assigned to disapproved projects would be reassigned elsewhere.

Two vetoes from headquarters

``Under the table'' birth of the laptop PC Faced with these two vetoes, Koga and Mizoguchi went ``under the table'' by shifting funds and ten engineers, led by Ginzo Yamazaki, from projects related to military specification devices. Working underground, in a true ``pressure cooker'' atmosphere, under Mizoguchi's watchful eyes that did not allow any deviations from the original

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

132

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

specifications, the prototype was ready in 24 months ± a major technical and human achievement. The following episode illustrates Mizoguchi's style of entrepreneurial leadership. On a Friday afternoon, the exhausted engineers told Mizoguchi that they were unable to find space in the crammed box for an additional component. Mizoguchi ripped off the cover, exposed the components and poured a glass of water into the box, thereby ruining all the circuits. He then turned the box upside down, and a few drops came out. Mizoguchi then addressed his shocked engineers ``See, there is some space left! Work smarter!'' In April 1985 the laptop was ready and under the table project had become an ``unofficial'' project, reluctantly accepted by headquarters. However, they, as previously, only authorized OEM sales and, when these were unsuccessful, wanted to kill the project. Mizoguchi fought back, stating: ``Downsizing will be the next trend in the market. . . We should try to sell, no matter how small the volume might be. That would give us the pioneering position in the era of downsizing.''

The rapid growth of the laptop PC

A visitor from Europe

Atsutoshi Nishida, Senior Vice President of Toshiba Europe, was responsible for all computer related marketing in Europe. In 1985 he wished to expand his product line, limited to printers and peripherals. On one of his regular visits to the Ome plant, he was shown a prototype of the laptop. Nishida immediately saw the market potential of the new product and stated: ``Make me seven prototypes that I can show around Europe and I will commit to sell 10,000 the first year.'' The reaction of Koga and Mizoguchi, who knew and trusted Nishida, was immediately positive. ``If Nishida says he can sell 10,000, he will sell them. Let's go ahead!'' Nishida, too, was a true internal entrepreneur driven by his vision of the business. He clearly visualized the opportunities but lacked the required resources (Timmons 1994). In fact, Nishida planned to distribute the laptop under the Toshiba name, but lacked brand image, a chain of dealers, and even the application software, because the laptop used, for reasons of size, a 3.5 inch disk drive rather than the standard 5 inch drive.

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

Nishida creatively developed an entrepreneurial solution: OPR (other people's resources) and sought the best available in Europe. After five visits, he persuaded the two leading software houses in Europe, Lotus and Ashton-Tate to transfer their programs to the smaller disk. He then persuaded the IBM dealers in each country to allocate scarce shelf space to his machine, with the simple message: ``Desktop from IBM and laptop from Toshiba! These are complementary products . . . and now you have the opportunity of selling two computers to the same customer!'' Nishida was able to sell the promised 10,000 units in 14 months, starting from scratch ± a remarkable market and human achievement! The next logical step was to attack the U.S. market, where the laptop had already received major awards at computer shows. However, Toshiba headquarters were still mistrustful and refused the necessary funds. Nishida, although responsible for Europe only, again visualized the opportunity and offered part of his unexpected high profits to test the U.S. market with 3000 units. He recalls: ``I believe that this was in the best interest of Toshiba and that our presence in the world's largest market, the United States, would enable us to conquer the entire world and re-enter the Japanese market.'' The laptop PC line achieved market leadership both in Europe and in the United States, with 38% and 21% market share, respectively, among at least 20 competitors (Abetti, Sumita and Kimura 1985).

Reincorporation of the PC business into mainstream operations As we have seen, the attitude of Tokyo headquarters towards the laptop PC changed gradually from hostility to mistrust and then to benign neglect. The PC business was still considered a maverick, and the entrepreneurs in the Ome factory, a bunch of ``cowboys''.3 However top executives of other Toshiba businesses heard unexpected praises of the laptop from their customers, who demanded a Japanese version, and were finally convinced that this time the computer business would succeed and would fit well in Toshiba's new strategic thrust. In fact, Toshiba wanted to gradually shift from the traditional electric power business to electronics, computers and communications. It was decided to upgrade the Computer Division

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

JAPAN'S UNDERGROUND INNOVATIONS

to the Information Processing and Control Group to be located at Tokyo headquarters. The entrepreneurs had to become entrepreneurial managers, and find their way into the corporate bureaucracy in order to further grow their businesses. To facilitate this transition, Kunika Mizushima, a Senior VP who had grown up in the electric power business, was appointed Group Executive and Koga was promoted to Deputy VP. Mori, Mizoguchi and Nishida also received promotions. Mizushima's first task was to teach Koga how to navigate into the maze of headquarters and obtain the necessary resources. A companywide committee to promote the laptop was established and an extra-budget fund for new business development was allocated for launching the Japanese version of the laptop PC. This product was successfully introduced in October 1986. In 1989, 26% of all PC sales in Japan were laptops and Toshiba reached 46% market share. In 1996, Toshiba enjoyed 27% share of portable PCs in the United States and Europe, 21% worldwide (Koga 1996).

A model of the process of underground technological innovation Description of the model The process of technological innovation, in new ventures and established companies, has been studied extensively (e.g., Twiss 1985; Martin 1994) and several theoretical and practical models have been advanced. Here we will adapt Abetti's model (1984; 1985) to the specific case of underground innovation in large established companies and apply it to the two cases presented above. Figure 1 graphically displays the various stages, activities, milestones, and critical events for two parallel streams. At the left side is the conventional process, carried out with management's approval and support; at the right side is the underground process based on entrepreneurial initiatives. The decision points show the possible alternatives for the actions by entrepreneurs or managers and the corresponding reactions by the other party. In both cases the process starts with concept development by the entrepreneurs followed by an R&D proposal to management. If management approves, the R&D project is started, the entrepreneur receives management support and utilizes the assigned resources during the incubation stage, to prove feasibility and develop a prototype. If management does not approve the R&D

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

133

proposal, the entrepreneur will either give up his/her idea and go back to assigned routine work, or not give up. In the latter case, the entrepreneur normally has two alternatives: (1) leave the company and spinoff a new venture, or (2) stay with the company and go underground. (We have seen that the second alternative is the only possible one in Japan.) If the internal entrepreneur elects to go underground, he/she is faced, just as an external entrepreneur, with the problem of securing adequate resources. These resources may be obtained from unofficial sponsors (Mizoguchi from Koga) from associates (Mori), or from diversion from other projects thanks to slack internal controls (Mizoguchi, Mori at a later stage). Despite the limited resources, the entrepreneurial team, working long hours in a skunkworks setting, succeeds in proving feasibility and building a prototype. For the conventional process, the business plan, with forecast of investments, sales, profit and loss is prepared and submitted to headquarters for approval of the decision to commercialize. If not approved, the project is aborted. If approved, the project is transferred to operations, and production and marketing facilities are readied during the transition and implementation stage. In the underground process, the entrepreneurs wait for a precipitating event that will cause the project to emerge above ground. For the WP, this event was the visit of Mizoguchi to the R&D laboratory, and his proposal to the GM of the Computer Division to drastically reduce size and weight and commercialize the WP. Having received management approval, the project was legitimized, reincorporated into the mainstream operations and followed the conventional process, albeit with some problems due to management secondguessing and vacillations. For the laptop PC, the precipitating event was Nishida's visit to the Ome factory, resulting in his decision to commercialize in Europe and Koga's acceptance of his marketing plan. However, Tokyo headquarters continued to be skeptical, did not allocate funds and at best showed benign neglect. Consequently, Koga, Mizoguchi and Nishida continued to develop the internal venture with their own resources, to be ready for production in Ome and marketing in Europe. The next decision point for both streams is the market test. If the new product fails, in the conventional process the project is aborted or restarted by going back to the drawing board. In the underground process, the failed project is killed and the entrepreneurs are reprimanded. On the other hand, if the market test is successful, headquarters embraces the

Becoming entrepreneurial managers

Precipitating events

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

134

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Figure 1. The process of technological innovation: above-ground (left side) and underground (right side)

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

JAPAN'S UNDERGROUND INNOVATIONS

project with belated enthusiasm, and reincorporates it into the mainstream operations, thereby legitimizing the new business venture for good. The conventional process now takes over, the diffusion period starts, the business grows and becomes a successful new corporate business. Needless to say, the entrepreneurs are repeatedly promoted and acclaimed by top management.

Application of the model Tables 1 and 2 present two applications of this model, for the WP and for the laptop PC. Detailed descriptions are given of the stages,

135

milestones or precipitating events, key events, entrepreneurial actions and management reactions. Note that, according to the model, the various stages are separated by decision points (milestones or precipitating events). Also, in the case of the WP, due to management interference, Mori had to go underground a second time in order to seek a new sponsor in the Consumer Division and restart the process. Therefore Table 1 shows two Incubation, Transition, Implementation and Diffusion stages. The two competing products, built in Ome and Nagoya were merged into the RUPO series and all engineering personnel concentrated in the Ome

Table 1. Stages, milestones, events, entrepreneurial actions, and management reactions of Toshiba's word processor (WP) Stage

Milestone or precipitating event

Concept Development R&D Proposal.

First Incubation

Emergence ``above ground.''

First Transition and Implementation First market test.

First Diffusion

Mori returns to R&D laboratory, management decides to shift from A to C model.

Date

Key events

Entrepreneurial actions

1971±72

Mori conceives the Japanese language WP.

Mori hires machine translation expert.

1973

Mori conceives wordfrequency-count approach.

Mori proposes kana-to-kanji translation project.

Project not approved, but Mori authorized to work on his own time.

1974±76

Mori develops personal file approach and first prototype.

Mori recruits 3 volunteers, persuades management to allocate 10±15% of budget.

Skepticism and benign neglect.

1977

Mizoguchi visits R&D laboratory, meets Mori.

Mizoguchi proposes to move project to Ome factory, drastically reduces size and weight.

Project approved, but with kanji input.

1978

Mori and Mizoguchi disagree and fight back.

Mori and Mizoguchi ``doctor'' demonstration with kana input.

Decision to demonstrate JW-10 at trade show.

1979

Successful demonstration, first orders.

Selection of 30 b-test sites, price 6.3 million yen.

Allocation of resources to Mizoguchi. Mori appointed Head of Product Planning.

1980±82

Development of JW-10-2 and JW-5 models. price reduced to 4.9 and 2.6 million yen.

Mori develops plans for three models (ABC), starting with simplest A model.

Approval, resources allocated for A model.

Mori decides to go underground again, seeks new sponsor.

Connection between Mizoguchi and Mori is cut.

1983

Management reactions

Second Incubation, Transition and Implementation

1983±84

Development and launch of PW-10 model by Consumer Division in Nagoya.

Mori persuades Consumer Division to adopt A model, renamed PW-10.

Mizoguchi loses one year in shifting from A to C.

Second Diffusion

1985±92

Development of RUPO-10 by Mizoguchi and Mori.

Mori persuades Consumer Division to move their WP team to Ome, jointly develop RuPO series.

New Office Automation Division responsible for WPs, new computer Division for PCs, both built in Ome plant.

Merger of WPs and PCs in one new Group under Mori.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

1993

Mori appointed Group Executive-Information Systems Group, later Member of the Board.

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

136

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Table 2. Stages, milestones, events, entrepreneurial actions, and management reactions of Toshiba's laptop personal computer (PC) Stage

Milestone or precipitating event

Concept Development R&D Proposal.

Incubation

Date

Key events

Entrepreneurial actions

1983

Mizoguchi visits United States with 5 teams, conceives laptop PC.

Mizoguchi develops ``back to the future'' design approach.

1983

Mizoguchi develops specs of IBM fully-compatible laptop.

Mizoguchi with GM Koga's blessing, diverts ten engineers and funds to laptop project.

1984

First prototype is developed.

Koga keeps project small, maintains profitability.

Nishida visits Ome factory, promises to sell 10,000 in one year.

Decision to build prototypes for Nishida for demonstration in Europe.

1985

Development of production model and facilities.

Nishida visits software houses and IBM dealers in Europe, persuades them to adopt laptop.

1985

Success at computer show. Sale of 10,000 units in 14 months.

Development of advanced models.

Skepticism and denial of funds for U.S. market launch.

1986±87

Spectacular sales growth first in Europe, then in United States.

Diversion of earnings in Europe to attack U.S. market.

First benign neglect, then surprise and decision to market in Japan.

1988

Successful market launch in Japan.

Development of Japanese version.

Creation of new Information and Control Group with Mizushima as Group VP, Koga as Deputy VP. Allocation of extrabudget funds.

1989±96

Continued success worldwide.

Development ``under the table'' of Notebook, then Subnotebook, Palmtop, etc. ``above the table''.

Repeated promotions of Koga and Mizoguchi, now Members of the Board.

Emergence ``above ground.'' Transition and Implementation

Market test.

First Diffusion

Reincorporation of venture into mainstream business.

Second Diffusion

plant. However, it was only 8 years later that the WP and PC businesses were reunited in the new Information Systems Group. In summary, it appears that this new model of the underground process of technological innovation is congruent with the conventional model, and is useful to describe and analyze the two cases presented in this study.

Conclusion: Critical success factors in underground innovation Extensive studies and analyses have been made of the critical success factors for technological innovations (e.g., Marquis 1969; Rothwell et al. 1974; Morone 1993) R&D projects (e.g., Souder 1987) new industrial products (e.g., Maidique and Zirger 1985; Cooper 1993) independent entrepreneurial ventures (e.g., Timmons 1994) corporate

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

Management reactions

Attempts for OEM sales are authorized, but unsuccessful.

ventures (von Hippel 1977; Block and MacMillan 1993) and intrapreneurship (Pinchot 1995), but relatively little attention has been given to the success factors for underground innovation. Therefore, we will concentrate on the specific factors that contributed to the outstanding successes of the Toshiba WP and laptop PC. The business potential P of an independent venture, that is, the possibility of achieving a long-lasting stream of profits, is expressed by the simple formula (Timmons 1985, p. 141). PˆOER where O is the quality and durability of the opportunity, E the quality and relevant experience of the entrepreneur(s), R the application of adequate resources. From the author's experience, the same formula is also valid for internal ventures, whether above ground or underground.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

JAPAN'S UNDERGROUND INNOVATIONS

The opportunity The opportunity depends upon a creative combination of large pent-up market demand with radically innovative technology to satisfy the market needs. It is the role of the entrepreneurs to visualize the opportunity, persuade others to share their vision and to allocate the required resources, develop the technology, be first to market and continuously improve the performance/price ratio of the product to keep ahead of competition. In the case of underground innovation the quality of the opportunity, that is, the size and growth rate of the potential market must be very high, and competition weak or absent. The reason is that the underground entrepreneurs have only limited time and resources to implement their innovation and emerge above ground with a successful product. If the incubation stage is too long, the entrepreneurs will lose steam or management will discover and kill the project. This also means that the technology should be developed or acquired in a relatively short time, with limited expense. For the word processor, as we have seen, Japan was way behind the West in processing documents and office automation. Computer manufacturers and users, newspaper publishers and the postal service clamoured for computerized word processing, but Western technology was incapable of meeting these pent-up demands. Mori developed a unique technical approach, the kana-to-kanji translator based on frequency counts that could be implemented into portable inexpensive WPs, thanks to the rapid progress of semiconductor and memory technology. For the laptop PC, Mizoguchi visualized through intuitive market research, the need for portability and downsizing of desktop PCs coupled with full compatibility with IBM, in order to utilize all available software. Mizoguchi was able to attack this large potential market through his ``back to the future'' design approach, to develop in-house or acquire the specified components, and keep two years ahead of competition, first with the laptop and then with the notebook and subnotebooks. In summary, in both cases the market opportunity was very attractive, and the technology could be developed rapidly to fully satisfy the pent-up demand.

The entrepreneurs There is no question that both Mori and Mizoguchi were both outstanding entrepreneurs in terms of creativity, visualization of the market needs, ability to convince others to share their vision, recruit unpaid associates,

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

137

willingness to take calculated risks, drive their teams hard and manage difficult projects with limited resources. In addition, Mori and Mizoguchi were also able intrapreneurs, and were able to fight the corporate bureaucracy without creating too many enemies. Mori persuaded the laboratory management to let him work on his project, first on his own time, then to let him recruit three other volunteers, and finally to allocate 10 to 15% of the budget for this project. After the fortuitous meeting with Mizoguchi, Mori agreed to transfer this project to Ome. When confronted by the decision of the GM of the Computer Division to abandon the A model, Mori again went underground, found another sponsor in the Consumer Division, developed the A model there, and finally persuaded top management to merge the two competing products. Mizoguchi enlisted GM Koga as sponsor and protector from interference by headquarters. They kept the project relatively small in order to avoid detection, and maintained profitability of the computer business. They immediately believed Nishida's promise to sell 10,000 units in Europe during the first year, and gave him all the required support. Later, with Nishida's help, they attacked the U.S. markets, in spite of the scepticism of headquarters. In summary, the entrepreneurs-intrapreneurs could fight the system, go around it and utilize it in order to realize their vision and achieve specific product and market goals.

Entrepreneurs visualize opportunities

The resources An independent entrepreneur needs to leverage other people's money and resources. While the above ground corporate entrepreneur theoretically has all the company's resources available, the underground entrepreneurs must find these resources, persuade others to share them, or even steal them outright. Fortunately, both Mori and Mizoguchi were two young engineers highly respected by their peers and superiors because of their previous achievements, Mori in optical character recognition, and Mizoguchi in mainframe and personal computers. Thus there was no question of their technical credibility, but rather the problem was how to find the required personnel, equipment, funds and overall technical support. These resources were gradually assembled by persuasion and diversion, thanks to their personal social networks, the support of their sponsors, and the slack controls of the organization, that allowed for a certain amount of redundancy.

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

138

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

In conclusion, we can state that the process of underground technological innovation is similar to the conventional above ground process. However, the risk is much higher and therefore the critical factors (opportunity, entrepreneurs and resources) must all be potentially available at high level in order to ensure reincorporation of the venture into mainstream operations for enduring success.

Acknowledgement This study would not have been possible without the permission generously granted in 1991 and 1993 by Mr. Masaichi Koga, now Senior Executive Vice-President, Dr. Ken-Ichi Mori, now Senior Vice-President and Mr. Tetsuya Mizoguchi, now Vice-President of Toshiba Corporation. All are now Members of the Board of Directors. The author conducted twenty half-day interviews, in English and Japanese, with these three executives and additional 12 engineering and marketing persons. Follow-up interviews were held in December 1996. This study was supported by two research grants from the International University of Japan, where the author was Visiting Professor in Fall 1991 and Fall 1993.

Notes 1. For instance, the Japanese sound ``HASHI'' has four different meanings, corresponding to four different kanjis: (1) bridge, (2) chopsticks, (3) end, and (4) beak. 2. For convenience, the exchange rate of 100 yen (Y) = 1 U.S. dollar ($) is used throughout the paper. 3. Koga, Mizoguchi, Matsushita and Yamazaki had been trained in 1967±69 in the General Electric (USA) computer plant in Phoenix, Arizona where the author was in charge of all GE-Toshiba relationships.

References Abetti, P.A. (1984). `Technology: A Challenge to Planners'. Planning Review, July, pp. 24±27, 45. Abetti, P.A. (1985). `Milestones for Managing Technological Innovation'. Planning Review, March, pp. 18±22, 45±46. Abetti, P.A., Sumita, U. and Kimura, Y. (1995). `Toshiba Information Systems: from mainframes to laptops and notebook computers'. International Journal of Technology Management, Special Publication on Emerging Technological Frontiers in International Competition, pp. 139±160. Abetti, P.A. (1997a). `The Birth and Growth of Toshiba's Laptop and Notebook Computers'. Journal of Business Venturing, in press.

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

Abetti, P.A. (1997b) `The Birth and Growth of the Japanese Language Word Processor'. International Journal of Technology Management, in press. Aram, J.D. (November 1973). Innovation via the R&D underground. Research Management, pp. 24±26. Block, Z. and MacMillan, I.C. (1993). Corporate Venturing. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Burgelman, R.A. (December 1983). `Corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management: insights from a process study'. Management Science 29 (12), pp. 1349±1364. Burgelman, R.A. and Maidique, M.A. (1988). Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation. Homewood, IL: Irwin, pp. 257±279 and 288±320. Chopsky, J. and Leonsis, T. (1988). Blue Magic: The People, Power and Politics Behind the IBM Personal Computer. New York: Facts on file. Clark, D. (1995). `All the Chips: A Big Bet Made Intel What it is Today'. Wall Street Journal, June 9±10, pp. 1 and 5. Cooper, R.G. (1993). Winning at New Products. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, second edition. Grosch, H.R.J. (1953). `High Speed Arithmetic: The Digital Computer as a Research Tool'. Journal of the Optical Society of America, pp. 306±310. Kao, J.J. (1989). Entrepreneurship, Creativity and Organization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kidder, T. (1981). The Soul of a New Machine. Boston: Atlantic, Little Brown. Kiechel, W. III (1988). `The politics of innovation'. Fortune: 131±132. Koga, M. (1996). Personal communication to P.A. Abetti, Tokyo, December 5, 1996. Lehr, L.W. (November 1979). `Stimulating technological innovation ± The role of top management'. Research Management, 22, pp. 23±25. Maidique, M.A. and Zirger, B.J. (1985). `The New Product Learning Cycle'. Research Policy, pp. 299±313. Marquis, D.G. (1969). `The Anatomy of Successful Innovations'. Innovation, pp. 28±37. Martin, M.J.C. (1994). Managing Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Technology-Based Firms. New York: Wiley. Moritz, M. (1984). The Little Kingdom. New York: Morrow. Morone, J. (1993). Winning in High-Tech Markets: The role of general management. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Nanda, A. and Bartlett, C.A. (1994). Intel Corporation ± Leveraging Capabilities for Strategic Renewal. Harvard Business School: case 9-394-141. Nonaka, I. and Kenney, M. (1991). `Toward a new theory of innovation management: a case study comparing Canon, Inc. and Apple Computer, Inc.' Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 8, pp. 67±83. Peters, T. and Waterman, R. (1982). In Search of Excellence. New York: Harper and Row. Pinchot, G. III (1985). Intrapreneuring. New York: Harper and Row.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

JAPAN'S UNDERGROUND INNOVATIONS

Rothwell, R. et al. (1974). `Sappho Updated-Project Sappho Phase II'. Research Policy, pp. 258±291. Roberts, E.B. (1991). Entrepreneurs in High-Technology. New York: Oxford University Press. Segal, N.S. (1988). `The Cambridge Phenomenon' in Smilor, R.W. et al. (ed.) Creating the Technopolis. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. Souder, W.E. (1987). Managing New Product Innovations. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Timmons, J.A. (1985). New Venture Creation, second edition. Homewood, IL: Irwin. Timmons, J.A. (1994). New Venture Creation, fourth edition. Homewood, IL: Irwin. Twiss, B. (1985). Managing Technological Innovation, third edition. London: Pitman.

139

von Hippel, E. (1977). `Successful and Failing Internal Corporate Ventures: An Empirical Analysis'. Industrial Marketing Management, pp. 163±174. Yasutatsu, K. (1994). Venture Business & Capital Saisei no Michi. Tokyo: Dokuyan (in Japanese).

Pier Abetti is Professor, Management of Technology and Entrepreneurship, Lally School of Management and Technology, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, USA.

Appendix

Figure A1. The first model of the Toshiba Word Processor, 1979. Weight 220 kg, price 6,300,000 yen

Figure A2. A recent model of the Toshiba Rupo Word Processor, 1993. Weight 3 kg, price 200,000 yen

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

140

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Knowledge Management Focus in US and Canadian Firms Teresa Joyce Covin and Bonnie P. Stivers Experts predict that as we approach the year 2000, employee brainpower and other knowledge resources are rapidly becoming the most important factors driving business profitability. The challenge for organizations over the next decade will be to understand the role of knowledge resources in creating value for firms. This article provides three perspectives to understand the notion of knowledge management. The first section provides an overview of trends and issues that highlight the emergence of the knowledge era. The second section of the article recaps the results of a survey of Fortune 500 and Post 300 firms that the authors conducted to learn about knowledge management practices. The last section of the article provides guidelines for getting started in knowledge management.

Introduction

A Trends in knowledge management

Volume 6

Number 3

ccording to Drucker (1992), Stewart (1994, 1995) and others, we are currently experiencing a shift from an industrial economy, based on physical and financial capital, to an economy based on knowledge. Maintaining a competitive advantage in a knowledge economy will require the full use of employee brainpower. Strategists James Quinn, Thomas Doorley, and Penny Paquette argue that maintainable competitive advantage will derive increasingly from ``outstanding depth in selected human skills, logistics capacities, knowledge bases, or other service strengths that competitors cannot reproduce'' (1990, p. 60). If one assumes that these experts are correct and competitive advantages are being crafted primarily from knowledge, it is important for managers to understand this new business terrain and to design their business practices accordingly. This article provides three perspectives to understand the notion of knowledge management. The first section provides an overview of trends and issues that highlight the emergence of the knowledge era. The second section of the article recaps the results of a survey of Fortune 500 and Post 300 firms that the authors conducted to learn about knowledge management practices. The last section of the article provides

September 1997

guidelines for getting started in knowledge management.

Knowledge management ± trends and issues Although knowledge resources have always contributed greatly to organizational success, there are a number of converging trends and factors that mark the emergence of ``Knowledge Management'' as a management practice (Manasco, 1996). Some of these factors are: 1. Downsizing and Restructuring ± many of the people and networks that organizations have relied upon to invent, discover, and transfer knowledge have been lost. 2. Massive Investments in Information Technology ± IT investments provide access within and outside the corporation instantly and provide a means to create and capture knowledge. 3. Customer Contact ± Employees at all levels are in direct contact with customers and companies need a way to capture what these employees are learning. 4. Globalization ± Employees are scattered around the world, yet geographic, time and language constraints prevent real-time access to each other. # Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997. 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

5. Knowledge Work and Collaboration ± Although some knowledge workers work independently, collaborative work is often necessary for complex projects. The tools for effective collaborative knowledge work are not yet known or disseminated. 6. The Need for Increased Speed and Reduced Cycle Time ± Firms no longer have the time to reinvent solutions. In most companies, the management of knowledge resources is still unchartered territory. To operate effectively in the knowledge economy, firms must either acquire or develop critical knowledge resources, implement business practices to ensure the retention and growth of these assets, and capture performance measures that provide a sense of the firm's future capabilities. Although firms have been quite successful in acquiring, developing and measuring tangible resources, many are just beginning to treat intangible resources, such as knowledge, as critical organizational assets. The fact that more than 50 percent of Fortune 500 companies use skill-based pay for at least some employees is indicative that companies believe there is a linkage between employee knowledge and competitive position (Caudron, 1993). The existence of skillbased pay, as well as extensive employee training and retention programs, may be the most common indications that a company recognizes the importance of employee knowledge. In addition to knowledgesupportive human resource policies, companies with a knowledge management focus often have sophisticated information systems to capture and disseminate new knowledge, procedures in place to measure and track knowledge assets and, perhaps most importantly, an organizational culture which values knowledge as a strategic resource (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Several authors have suggested particular organizational characteristics that are likely to be associated with a focus on knowledge management. For example, companies pursuing strategies of innovation should have knowledge management practices in place due to the potential to be severely damaged by turnover because of reliance on individual expertise and unrecorded knowledge (Jackson, Schuler & Rivero, 1989). Firms operating in technologically sophisticated environments are likely to find that a focus on knowledge management is essential for survival. Hodgetts, Luthans, and Lee note that ``most of the creative, innovative and effective approaches of world-class organizations are possible because of advances in

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

141

such technologies as CAD/CAM, telecommunications networks, expert systems, . . . executive information systems, to name a few'' (1994:124). The same authors caution organizations not to ignore the human side of technology by stating that ``the most important thing is not the technology itself, but how creative people use the technology to serve the customer more effectively.'' Propensity toward a knowledge management focus may also be related to a perception that intangible resources, in general, will become a more important source of competitive advantage. As organizations strive to meet external standards for quality (e.g. Baldridge Award criteria, ISO 9000) most find that reliance on tangible resources alone (e.g., equipment, materials, manufacturing processes) is insufficient to meet standards (Ciampa, 1992). Johnson and Kaplan (1987) have argued that the value of intangible assets, such as the knowledge of production processes, employee talent, customer loyalty and product awareness, reliable suppliers, and efficient distribution networks, may be a more valid indicator of a company's longterm competitive position than the sum of the values of its tangible assets.

People using technology

Survey of current practice We surveyed top executives in Fortune 500 and Post 300 firms to learn more about current practices in the area of knowledge management. Specifically, the study explores the relationship between knowledge management focus and: (1) organizational support for innovation, (2) industry technology focus, (3) competitive pressure for conformance to external standards, (3) firm size and financial performance, and (4) the perceived future importance of other key intangible resources including intellectual property, stated company mission, information systems, and know-how. These relationships were examined in both U.S. and Canadian firms. A questionnaire was designed specifically for this study. In section one, study participants were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with statements pertaining to their firms' business practices and competitive environments.1 These items were developed based on a literature review of practices associated with strong organizational emphasis on knowledge resources. Items pertaining to knowledge management focus, support for innovation, industry technology focus, and competitive pressure for conformance to

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

142

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Innovation support the strongest predictor

external standards were contained in this section of the questionnaire. In a second section of the questionnaire, study participants were asked to indicate the extent to which 17 different intangible resources are expected to contribute to the overall success of their firms in the year 2000.2 When possible, questionnaire items and scales validated by prior research were utilized. Previous research by Hall (1992, 1993) was critical in the development of measures pertaining to intangible resources. However, because of limited research in the area of knowledge management, the research team developed several of the measures relating to knowledge management-related business practices and competitive conditions. Information regarding organizational size and financial performance was obtained independently from two data bases: Compact Disclosure and CANCORP Canadian Financials. Average yearly sales, assets, and net income for each company were calculated over the years 1990±1994. One-hundred and three of the Fortune 500 firms and 151 of the Post 300 firms responded to the questionnaire for firm response rates of 23.5 percent and 55.7 percent, respectively.3 Multiple responses were obtained from a total of 15 U.S. firms and 39 Canadian firms as an additional means of assessing the reliability of responses. The breakdown of the respondents included 70 chairmen of the board, 85 chief executive officers, and 98 chief financial officers. Based on 1993 Compact Disclosure and CANCORP Canadian Financials data, the average number of individuals employed by responding U.S. firms was 25,409 and the average number of employees in responding Canadian firms was 9,764. Firms were from a variety of industries with over 70 primary SIC codes represented in the U.S. sample and over 80 represented in the Canadian sample.

Analysis Multi-item scales were developed representing the business practice and competitive condition items contained in section one of the questionnaire and the intangible resource items contained in section two of the questionnaire (for more details on the development of the multi-item scales, please see the Appendix). These multi-item scales serve as the research variables for this study and are shown in Tables 1 and 2. The business practice and competitive condition scales are: knowledge management focus, support for innovation, technology focus, and external

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

standards. Four intangible resource scales focus on: intellectual property, stated mission, information systems, and know-how. Stepwise multiple regression and discriminant analysis were used to examine the relationships among the research variables. More detailed information on the statistical methods used in this research is contained in the Appendix.

Can knowledge management focus be predicted? One research question was whether or not a knowledge management focus can be predicted. Step-wise multiple regression was used, with knowledge management focus as the dependent variable, to determine which of the research variables (the business practice and competitive condition scales and the intangible resource scales, as well as average assets, sales and net income) predict whether or not companies have implemented practices consistent with an emphasis on knowledge management. Results indicate that support for innovation is the strongest predictor of a knowledge management focus for both U.S. and Canadian firms. For U.S. firms, external standards are also shown to impact the extent to which firms implement policies and practices consistent with an emphasis on knowledge management. The perception that a company's stated mission (including statements of strategic goals, corporate values, and corporate ethics) will become more important in the future, is shown to predict a knowledge management focus in Canadian firms. We then used discriminant analysis to identify the research variables which distinguish between low and high knowledge management focus firms. That is, we were interested in identifying those variables which would best allow us to categorize firms as having either a low or high knowledge management focus. Firms were placed in ``low'' and ``high'' groups according to their mean scores on the knowledge management focus scale. The mean score for U.S. firms was 3.67 and the mean score for Canadian firms was 3.52. Our analysis indicates that support for innovation is the only variable which discriminates between high and low knowledge management focus in U.S. firms. For Canadian firms, support for innovation and a perception of the future importance of intellectual property, stated mission, and know-how are shown to distinguish high and low knowledge management focus firms.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

143

Table 1. Business practice and competitive condition scales Knowledge Management Focus . Pay is linked to specific knowledge and skills required for organizational success. . Mechanisms are in place to ensure that intellectual assets are retained. . Knowledge is viewed as the company's most critical resource. . Information system allows the company to capture and share collective knowledge. . Intellectual capital is an integral focus of the performance measurement system. . Human resources are viewed as the key element in the strategic plan. . Company does everything possible to retain high performers. . Company rewards people for acquiring new knowledge, skills, and abilities. . Company has effective procedures in place to identify high performers. Support for Innovation . Performance measurement system is designed to foster innovation. . Assistance in developing new ideas is widely available. . Adequate resources devoted to innovation. . Adequate time to pursue new ideas. Technology Focus . Heavy investments in R&D are characteristic of the industry. . Wide-spread employment of new or advanced process or product technologies is characteristic of industry. External Standards . Compliance with the Baldridge award criteria is essential for competitive advantage in industry. . ISO certification is essential for competitive advantage in industry.

Table 2. Intangible resource scales Intellectual Property

Stated Mission

Information Systems

Know-How

. Contracts and Licenses . Intellectual Property

. Statements of Strategic

. Data Bases . Information Systems

. Employee Know-How . Supplier Know-How

Rights

. Research/Technology

Centers

. Trade Secrets

Goals . Statements of Corporate Values . Statements of Corporate Ethics

Support for innovation and knowledge management focus The results of our Fortune 500/Post 300 survey provide clear, empirical evidence that there is a strong link between support for innovation and strong knowledge man-

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

. Distributor Know-How

agement practices. Certainly the process of knowledge management and creation is dynamic. The conceptual link between knowledge creation and innovation is described by Nonaka and Takeuchi: ``. . . knowledge creation fuels innovation. In other words, the process by which new

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

144

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

knowledge is created within the organization ± in the form of new products, services, or systems ± becomes the cornerstone of innovative activities'' (1995:235). Our results suggest that firms that depend on innovation for success are finding that the management of knowledge resources is critical for their continued success. The stronger the need for innovation within the firm, the stronger the need for excellent knowledge management practices. Therefore, for firms to be successful, they must find new ways of doing business and new ways of managing human resources and technology. This process creates an environment in which innovation is fostered and competitive advantage is sharpened.

Getting started with knowledge management Based on our survey, as well as other current research, it is evident that knowledge resources will become increasingly important for all companies. The results of this study indicate that companies providing more support for innovation are also more likely to have more of a knowledge management focus. But a knowledge management focus doesn't ``just happen.'' Building a knowledge management infrastructure requires a concerted effort by people throughout the organization to: (1) identify knowledge resources necessary for success; (2) create a workplace environment supportive of innovation; (3) put in place mechanisms to ensure that knowledge resources are retained and grown by the organization; (4) build information systems to aid in tracking and building the organization's collective knowledge; and (5) educate organizational stakeholders about the importance of knowledge resources.

Four factors supporting innovation

Identifying knowledge resources First, companies must identify the knowledge assets necessary for success in their industry and develop specific plans for acquiring, retaining, building and leveraging those assets on a continuous basis. If a company does not have its fundamentals in place, all the corporate learning, information technology, or knowledge data bases are just costly diversions. Strategies for managing knowledge will likely vary greatly across industry. Companies operating in innovation-intense industries may find that human resource

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

policies designed to reward and retain employees might be the focal point of the knowledge management strategy. Firms operating in technologically sophisticated environments are likely to find that a focus on developing and mastering new technologies is essential for survival. For these firms, investments in new technology and creating conditions supportive of innovation might be the focal point of the knowledge management strategy. Companies can assess the adequacy of their knowledge resources by focusing on five basic questions: 1. What knowledge resources are critical for success in the industry? 2. What knowledge resources does the company currently have? 3. What knowledge resources does the company need that they don't have? 4. What knowledge resources is the company investing in that they don't need ? 5. How can the company acquire the knowledge resources needed?

Providing support for innovation In our research we focused on four factors supportive of innovation: a performance measurement system designed to foster innovation, assistance in developing new ideas, adequate resources devoted to innovation, and adequate time to pursue new ideas. Previous research has suggested several other factors associated with innovation. Schuler and Jackson (1987) hypothesize that companies with innovation-oriented strategies should have human resource policies which include: (1) group-oriented, long-term appraisal systems; (2) generalized skill development and broad career paths; (3) compensation approaches accentuating internal equity; and (4) flexible compensation systems including employee stock ownership. Lau and Shami (1992) suggest that managers can foster innovation through such practices as: (1) communicating confidence in individuals; (2) providing constructive feedback; (3) reducing concern over failure; (4) encouraging project involvement based on interest ± rather than jobs, departments, or divisions; (5) encouraging questioning and open confrontation of conflicts. Less organizational hierarchy, fewer rules, and an absence of barriers to free exchange of information appear to be conducive to innovation, as well as important to the effective management of knowledge resources (Stewart, 1991).

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

Retaining and building knowledge resources Retaining and building knowledge resources requires that, at a minimum, companies know: (1) what knowledge is currently available, who has it, and how to get it; (2) if and how knowledge is being transferred within the organization; (3) if and how outside knowledge is systematically being acquired; and (4) if and how the organization is creating new knowledge. For most companies, the central issue is not creating or acquiring organizational knowledge. Instead, it is figuring out how to more effectively capture and share the knowledge that already exists within the organization but which is locked within a department, division, or even in the minds of employees. Chevron, for example, saved over 20 million dollars a year by comparing information on the operation of gas compressors in fields in California, the Rockies, and offshore Louisiana and adopting practices already being used in their best managed fields (O'Dell, 1996). Hoffman La Roche struggled with massive duplication of effort and significant inefficiencies in designing clinical trials prior to the development of a knowledge map (Seemann, 1996). The map consists of questions, examples, and contradictory opinions and was created by asking people where they got the information they needed. Companies face several common challenges in retaining and building knowledge resources: 1. A knowledge infrastructure is only part of the solution. A sophisticated knowledge infrastructure is of no use unless it helps people to achieve corporate goals. Hoffmann-La Roche experienced more difficulties getting people to use and contribute to their expert system than in developing it (Seemann, 1996). The consulting industry is also grappling with this issue. A recent survey of consulting firms by Consultants News (Reimus, 1996) showed that about 75 percent of firms surveyed reported that they had a process in place for capturing best practices, sharing information from one project to another, and documenting innovative ways of solving client problems. However, the actual mechanisms and processes in place for doing this were largely informal. Over one-third of the executives surveyed identified as their number one challenge devising new ways to convince their consultants to willingly and consistently share more information, knowledge, and insights with one another. 2. The knowledge must be directly related to a business process. Knowledge management is

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

145

not simply about collecting and stockpiling data. Many knowledge bases contain useless information which will never be used by employees because it does not help them in their jobs. Broad-based employee participation in determining what knowledge is essential is critical in determining what types of information should be collected and shared. Knowledge management must also be viewed as the responsibility of every employee and not as a process owned by a particular functional area (e.g., Information Systems, Quality, Human Resources). 3. The most valuable knowledge may be furthest down the supply chain. The knowledge needed by employees on a daily basis may not be contained within the walls of the organization. In fact, much crucial information will likely be in the heads of customers, suppliers, and other organizational stakeholders. Mechanisms to ensure that these intellectual assets are retained by the organization to the extent possible are also imperative. Knowledge about customer preferences, problems, successful and unsuccessful products and processes, guidelines for dealing with suppliers, and why particular decisions have been made in the past, will be lost as individuals leave the organization if explicit attempts are not made to capture this information in some way. As Carroll (1984) notes, when people leave without mechanisms for transferring personal experience among decision makers, the lessons of history are lost, knowledge disappears, and the institution's memory is reduced. The challenge for organizations will be in transforming individual learning into organizational learning ± the ability to retain learning and transfer ideas to new individuals (Ulrich, Jick & Von Glinow, 1994).

Building information systems Organizations will need information systems that will aid them in tracking and building their collective knowledge. Such systems are virtually nonexistent in most organizations, leaving a critical gap in the information managers need to make many key business decisions. At a minimum, companies will need some basic way to measure and value both human and structural intellectual assets, and to know whether the company's knowledge base is getting stronger or weaker. Knowledge resources are difficult to measure and track even with the most sophisticated information systems. Without sufficient information systems, however, even small organizations will find it impossible to capture and share the organization's

Tracking collective knowledge

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

146

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

collective knowledge. Organizations must understand the benefits and limitations of information systems in the knowledge management process. Although comprehensive information systems are critical tools for knowledge management, they should not drive the process. Manville and Foote (1996) suggest that technology will continue to yield disappointing results until information system managers and business executives realize that information technology must provide a way to form communities, not simply provide communications. Even with the most impressive information technology, people will not willingly share knowledge with their co-workers if their workplace culture does not support it. Buckman Laboratories International, a multinational chemical firm operating in some 90 countries has relied heavily on information systems in its knowledge management efforts. Based on his experience in developing these systems, Roger H. Buckman, the company's Vice Chairman provides the following guidelines for designing an ideal system: 1. Minimize the number of transmissions of knowledge between individuals to achieve the least distortion of that knowledge. 2. Give everyone access. 3. Allow each person to contribute. 4. Make the system available from any location 24 hours a day. 5. Make the system easy to use and searchable on every word. 6. Allow users to contribute in their native language and provide translation capabilities. 7. Design a system that is automatically updated as questions are asked and answers are given. (Buckman, 1996:17±18).

Educating stakeholders Our survey results show that many companies understand the increasingly important role of knowledge resources in gaining and maintaining competitive advantage. However, it is clear that some common organizational practices are inconsistent with the principles of knowledge management. From a knowledge management perspective, for example, decisions to downsize or cut training and R&D budgets represent a real and major loss to the firm's asset base. As with any attempt to introduce organizational change, top management support, commitment, and consistent action is crucial to the success of knowledge management efforts.

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

Employees throughout the organization must understand that their knowledge, skills, and abilities and their willingness to share these with co-workers are the most important factors driving business success. Knowledge is one of the few assets that grows most ± also usually exponentially ± when shared (Argote, 1993). However, much knowledge is tacit, and employees will likely need assistance and coaching in identifying knowledge they have. Nonaka and Takeuchi give as illustration a master craftsman who has developed a wealth of expertise ``at his fingertips'' after years of experience, but is unable to articulate the scientific or technical principles behind what he knows (1995:8). Educational efforts focused on knowledge management technologies will also be necessary if all employees are to contribute and benefit. Other organizational stakeholders will need to become more proficient in evaluating a business when knowledge is its chief resource. Perhaps the mind set of a venture capitalist will be helpful. Most venture capitalists eschew investments in bricks and mortar and make their money by: (1) investing in the special skills and intellect which only highly motivated, knowledgeable people can provide, and then (2) leveraging this intellect in the marketplace (Quinn, 1992, pp. 48±63).

Conclusions As Dorothy Leonard-Barton notes ``firms are repositories and wellsprings of knowledge . . . managing these strategic knowledge assets determines the company's ability to survive, to adapt, to compete (1995, p.xi). The knowledge management movement is pervasive. Whether defined in terms of knowledge resources, know-how, learning, intelligence, intellectual capital, or insight or wisdom, the conclusion is the same: manage it better or perish (Rogers, 1996). This study examined relationships among key knowledge management variables in U.S. and Canadian firms. Although support for innovation was identified as the strongest predictor of a knowledge management focus, several other variables were found to be associated with firms' propensity to adopt policies and practices consistent with a strong emphasis on knowledge management. These variables include technology focus and external standards for both U.S. and Canadian firms, in addition to perceptions of the future importance of intellectual property, stated mission, and

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

know-how for Canadian firms. Organizational size and financial performance were not significantly related to a knowledge management focus in either U.S. or Canadian firms. Scale scores suggest that both U.S. and Canadian firms recognize the importance of knowledge as an organizational resource. It seems reasonable to expect that those companies focused on innovation or competing in environments requiring sophisticated technologies and/or compliance with external standards may lead the way in developing effective knowledge management systems. The Canadian firms, more so than the U.S. firms in this sample, appear to recognize the relationship between knowledge and other critical intangible assets. This may be the result of a long-term effort by the Canadian government to identify the new types of performance measures necessary in a knowledge-based economy (McClean, 1995). Although approaches to the management of intangible assets will vary greatly across industries and national boundaries, all organizations will face an increasingly knowledgeintensive environment. There is no universal template for knowledge management. Strategies for managing knowledge must be based on the specific needs of the company and developed only after a careful examination of a firm's competitive environment and an inventory of the firm's portfolio of knowledge resources. Results of our survey show that many Fortune 500 and Post 300 companies already have in place business practices which are consistent with a focus on knowledge management. Organizations with knowledge-friendly systems and processes in place will likely serve as role models for firms struggling with rapidly changing business demands. This study has provided only a broad-based overview of some current issues in knowledge management. Further research examining exactly how companies are successfully managing knowledge and other key intangible assets should prove especially beneficial at this time.

Notes 1. 5-point Likert scale, where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. 2. 10-point Likert scale where 1 = no contribution and 10 = critical contribution. 3. After three mailings, seven of the Fortune 500 questionnaires and 11 of the Post 300 questionnaires were returned as nondeliverable.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

147

Fifty-four of the Fortune 500 questionnaires and 18 of the Post 300 questionnaires were returned with letters indicating that the company had a policy prohibiting participation in mail surveys.

References Argote, L. (1993). Group and organizational learning curves: Individual, system and environmental components. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 31±51. Buckman, R. H. (1996). Buckman Laboratories International. Knowledge Report: A Report from the Knowledge Imperative Symposium. Arthur Andersen Worldwide, pp. 25±26. Carroll, G. R. (1984). Organizational ecology. Annual Review of Sociology, 10, 71±93. Caudron, Sheri (1993). Master the compensation maze. Personnel Journal, 72, 64F. Ciampa, Dan (1992). Total Quality: A User's Guide for Implementation. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley Publishing Company. Drucker, Peter F. (1992). Managing for the Future. New York: Truman Talley Books/Dutton. Hall, R. (1992). The strategic analysis of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 135±144. Hall, R. (1993). A framework linking intangible resources and capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 607±618. Hodgetts, Richard M., Fred Luthans, and Sang, M. Lee (1994). From total quality to learning to world class. The Learning Organization in Action, pp. 111±124. New York: American Management Association. Jackson, Susan E., Randall S. Schuler, and J. Carlos Rivero (1989). Organizational characteristics as predictors of personnel practices. Personnel Psychology, v42(4), 727±786. Johnson, H. T. and Robert S. Kaplan (1987). Relevance Lost. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Lau, J. B. and A. B. Shani (1992). Behavior in Organizations: An Experiential Approach. Homewood, IL: Irwin. Manasco, B. (1996). Leading firms develop knowledge strategies. Knowledge Inc. V1 (6), 1±5. Manville, B. and N. Foote (1996). Harvest your workers' knowledge. PlugIn, July 7, pp. 1±3. McClean, Robert (1995). Performance Measures in the New Economy. A Report Commissioned by the Premier's Council with Support of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. Leonard-Barton, Dorothy (1995). Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Nonaka, Ikujiro and Hirotaka Takeuchi (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. Oxford: Oxford University Press. O'Dell, Carla (1996). Turning knowledge into value. Knowledge Management and Best Practices Conference, San Diego, October 1996.

Knowledge management practice

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

148

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Quinn, James Brian. (1992). The intelligent enterprise a new paradigm. Academy of Management Executive, v6(4): 48±63. Quinn, James B., Thomas L. Doorley, and Penny Paquette (1990). Beyond products: Servicesbased strategy. Harvard Business Review, 90(2), 60. Reimus, B. (1996). Knowledge sharing within management consulting firms. Consultants News, Kennedy Publications, Fitzwilliam New Hampshire. Rogers, D. (1996). Knowledge management gains momentum in Industry. Research-Technology Management, 39(3), 5±7. Schuler, Randall and Susan Jackson (1987). Linking competitive strategies with human resource management practices. Academy of Management Executive, 1(3), 207±219. Stewart, Thomas A. (1991). Brainpower. Fortune (June 3): 44±60. Stewart, Thomas A. (1994). Your company's most valuable asset: Intellectual Capital. Fortune (October 3): 68±74.

Stewart, Thomas A. (1995). Trying to grasp the intangible. Fortune (October 2): 157±161. Seeman, P. (1996). Hoffman-La Roche. Knowledge Report: A Report from the Knowledge Imperative Symposium. Arthur Andersen Worldwide, pp. 25±26. Ulrich, D., T. Jick, and M. Von Glinow (1994). High impact learning: Building and diffusing learning capability. The Learning Organization in Action. New York: American Management Association, pp. 68±82.

Teresa Joyce Covin is Departmental Chair and Associate Professor in the Department of Management and Entrepreneureship and Bonnie Stivers is Professor of Accounting, Department of Accounting at the Coles College of Business, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, Georgia, USA.

Appendix I. Development of multi-item scales Multi-item scales generally provide more valid and reliable measures than do single-item scales. In order to develop multi-item scales, the business practice and competitive condition items contained in section one of the questionnaire and the items pertaining to intangible resources in section two of the questionnaire were independently factor analyzed using principal component factoring and a varimax rotation. Multi-item scales were developed representing each of the resulting factors. Four of the business practice and competitive conditions factors and four of the intangible resource factors yielded the reliable scales (alphas greater than .6) used in this research.

II. Step-wise regression results 1. U.S. Sample Dependent Variable:Knowledge Management Focus Predictor:

BSE

(B)

Beta

T

Sig (T)

Support for Innovation External Standards

.472 .129

.069 .048

.619 .246

6.80 2.71

.000 .009

F = 26.03 (69)

Volume 6

Number 3

Sig F = .000

September 1997

R Square = .430

Multiple R = .656

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

149

2. Canadian Sample Dependent Variable:Knowledge Management Focus Predictor:

BSE

(B)

Beta

T

Sig (T)

Support for Innovation Stated Mission

.604 .057

.067 .022

.709 .199

9.06 2.55

.000 .013

F = 48.12 (71)

Sig F = .000

R Square = .575

Multiple R = .758

III. Discriminant analysis results 1. U.S. Sample Univariate F-Tests

Wilks' Lambda

F

Sig.

.821 .955 .965 .998 .999 .975 .999 .983 .972 .972 .988

15.24 3.27 2.53 .12 .06 1.75 .06 1.19 1.97 1.99 .80

.000 .074 .116 .731 .809 .189 .813 .280 .164 .163 .374

Support for Innovation Technology Focus External Standards Intellectual Property Stated Mission Information Systems Know-How Number of Employees Average Asset Value (4 year) Average Sales (4 year) Average Net Income (4 year)

Actual Group

Number of Cases

Predicted Group Membership Group 1

Group 2

Group 1 Low Knowledge Focus

33

24 (72.7%)

9 (27.3%)

Group 2 High Knowledge Focus

39

9 (23.1%)

30 (76.9%)

Percent of Group Cases Correctly Classified: 75% Discriminant function for U.S. firms is significant at the p5.05 level.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

150

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

2. Canadian Sample Univariate F-Tests

Wilks' Lambda

F

Sig.

.683 .975 .948 .911 .937 .967 .938 .984 .985 .999 .999

33.30 1.80 3.94 7.04 4.86 2.47 4.74 1.19 1.09 .06 .04

.000 .183 .051 .009 .030 .121 .033 .278 .301 .799 .833

Support for Innovation Technology Focus External Standards Intellectual Property Stated Mission Information Systems Know-How Number of Employees Average Asset Value (4 year) Average Sales (4 year) Average Net Income (4 year)

Actual Group

Number of Cases

Predicted Group Membership Group 1

Group 2

Group 1 Low Knowledge Focus

29

24 (82.8%)

5 (17.5%)

Group 2 High Knowledge Focus

45

11 (24.4%)

34 (75.6%)

Percent of Group Cases Correctly Classified: 78.38% Discriminant function for Canadian firms is significant at the p5.001 level.

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

RESEARCH DATA TO KNOWLEDGE USE

151

The Cumbersome Route from Research Data to Knowledge Use Kjell Grùnhaug and Willy Haukedal Why do some firms within an industry make use of commissioned research while others don't? To answer this important, but far from understood research question a guiding perspective borrowing from the ``two-community-metaphor'', cognitive psychology, and studies on knowledge use was developed. A quasi-experiment was conducted among two groups each one consisting of four firms from the hotel industry. Semi-structured, longitudinal personal interviews were conducted with top manager and assistant managers in each firm. The findings showed that utilization of research data may be cumbersome, requiring considerable cognitive efforts and elaboration to become useful knowledge applicable for practical purposes. It was also demonstrated that knowledge utilization involves innovative activities, including the construction of new routes of actions. During this process the initial research data were transformed, diffused and elaborated among organization members. It was also observed that when substantial ``language'' barriers exist between research providers and users, competent personal assistance in interpretation and further elaboration of the research data may facilitate knowledge use. Theoretical and managerial implications are highlighted.

Introduction

I

t is a firmly held belief that the ability to acquire and exploit new knowledge is crucial for (most) organizations to survive and prosper. This is believed to be particularly true for business organizations embedded in everchanging environments as new knowledge is continuously needed to foresee threats, discover and exploit opportunities, and improve actions to enhance performance. The emphasis on knowledge acquisition and utilization is reflected in several of the business disciplines under a variety of labels. For example, in organization science organizational learning is an important topic attracting the interest of researchers and practitioners at an escalating rate. (See Levitt & March 1988; Levienthal & March 1993 for excellent overviews.) In the discipline of corporate (business) strategy, Porter (1990) has emphasized the need for continuous ``upgrading'', which mainly relates to the acquisition and exploitation of knowledge and skills. To be in the forefront and stay competitive, business firms must learn continuously about markets (Day 1994). Updated ± and superior knowledge may

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997. 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

allow business firms to serve their most important constituency, their customers, in a better way, and thus they can gain and sustain competitive advantage (cf. Day & Wensley 1988). Organizations may acquire new knowledge in a variety of ways. For example, through observation of and reflections on own trials and errors, i.e. through their own experiences they may gain useful insights. Firms may also get valuable insights by observing competitors and their actions. Through successful imitations and elaborations of observed activities firms may thus enhance their stock of knowledge. Firms may also acquire new knowledge from research activities. Because firms may not possess the needed competencies, time constraints, or research activities may require uneconomically specific investments, they (firms) may choose to contract external research providers instead of conducting research themselves. As research can be conceived as production of knowledge, high quality research conducted by competent research providers, e.g. research universities and advanced research institutions, should be considered important by business firms. This should in particular

Research as production of knowledge

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

152

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

be the case for applied research, i.e. research conducted to solve specific problems believed to be of prime importance to the potential users. However, this seems not to be the case. For example, research findings show that commissioned research frequently is neglected or misused (cf. Caplan et al. 1975, Knorr 1977). Neglect and misuse of contracted research may partly be explained by lack of competence, as knowledge is needed to benefit from contracted research. Rogers (1990) observed, however, that benefits from cooperating with research universities varied substantially among high-technology firms, approximately equal in size, resources and competence. This observation initiated our research problem, i.e.: Why do some firms within the same industry, apparently equal in economic resources, size and competence benefit from contracted research, whilst others do not?

Research institutes and users differ

Volume 6

Number 3

This simple, but important question has been raised before, but a definite answer has not yet been offered. Our rather general question also triggers a series of more specific questions, such as: ``What is knowledge?'' and ``What is useful knowledge?'' Insights into such questions are important. For example, such insights may result in identification of barriers to knowledge use making it possible to overcome or lower such barriers, improve communication between providers and users of research, and more relevant research and adequate research utilization. The paper proceeds as follows: First we focus on providers and potential users of research. In doing so we make use of the so-called ``two-communities metaphor'' (or theory) as our point of departure, assuming that researchers and users hold different perspectives and values (cf. Caplan et al. 1975). In addition we address factors found to influence research utilization in prior research. This section also discusses the notions of ``knowledge'' and ``knowledge use''. In doing so we borrow from cognitive psychology and relate our discussion to past studies on knowledge production and knowledge use as well. Next, we report the research methodology underlying the empirical part of our study. As will be discussed later, a quasi-experiment with two groups each consisting of four firms from the hotel industry was conducted. Semistructured longitudinal interviews with the top managers and assistant managers were conducted to trace knowledge utilization. Following this, the research findings are reported, and subsequently discussed. At last

September 1997

managerial and theoretical implications are highlighted.

Knowledge and knowledge use This section reports the theoretical underpinning of the present study. As noted at the outset, present insights regarding knowledge use are modest. However, insights exist that may prove helpful in structuring and guiding, (but not dictating) our investigation. Here we employ ideas from the ``two-community metaphor'', insights from cognitive psychology, and research findings regarding knowledge production and utilization as point of departure for our investigation. In the discussion to follow we in particular address the question of actionable knowledge, as useful knowledge often ± and particularly in business ± is associated with actions and improvements.

The two-community metaphor The key idea underlying the two-community metaphor is that research providers, (e.g. research institutes) and research users, (e.g. business organizations) are different in several respects. They hold different values, make use of different concepts, and their knowledge and thinking differ. One of the earliest contributions to this metaphor (or theory) was reported by Caplan et al. (1975). Their study conducted among federal government officials demonstrated that low utilization of social science information could be explained by the two-community explanation, or as stated by the authors: ``More specifically, (the study) suggests that social scientists and policy makers operate in different world with different and often conflicting values, different reward systems, and different languages. Our data suggests that mutual mistrust is an important factor in the separation of the producer and user communities'' (Caplan et al. 1975, p. 50) The idea of the two-community metaphor has also been examined in business settings. In a study reported by Deshpande & Zaltman (1984) conducted among providers and users of market research, it was found that the two groups (providers and users of market research) varied considerably in their evaluations of factors influencing the usefulness of such research. Dysfunctional distrust among the two groups, as reported for the governmental officials and the social scientists was, however, not found to be prevalent in this study.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

RESEARCH DATA TO KNOWLEDGE USE

Research has also demonstrated that motivation is important for research utilization. However, managers and others, e.g. consultants may have considerable motivation to make new ideas seem their own, which naturally can shadow for adequate tracing of utilization and impacts of commissioned research (see Beyer 1997 for a recent discussion).

Knowledge Clarification of the concept of knowledge is important for an understanding of knowledge use. The findings reported by researchers may constitute new knowledge for them (the researchers). For users, the research findings are data. To become information ± or knowledge ± data must be interpreted, i.e. sense-making of the research data is crucial. Even if the research findings are understood, they need not necessarily represent (new) knowledge. They first become (new) knowledge when they result in difference in memory (Brucks 1985, p. 2). This last point is of importance to understand knowledge use and improvements. People hold knowledge structures. When interpreted, stimuli (data) tend to be categorized into existing knowledge structures or schemes (c.f. Rosch 1979). Existing knowledge structures influence what is captured, and whether and how data are understood. Such knowledge structures ± or mental models can also be seen as the actors' reality constructions (cf. Berger & Luckman 1969). Experienced managers hold elaborate knowledge structures about their domain. Their knowledge structure may definitely differ from those of the research providers, as training and experiences may be very different. Elaborate knowledge structures ease the absorption of new information. This in particular holds true when the new data are congruent with existing knowledge structures. From this follows that people may absorb new information quickly, but also that the new information may not necessarily mean change in memory and behavior (c.f. Argyris 1991), as established knowledge structures tend to be rather rigid (Sanford 1985). New data (information) may, however, be very deviant, and thus difficult to interpret and integrate, and thus neglected as frequently observed. However, new and conflicting data may capture attention, initiate reflection and speculation, and modify known insights.

Useful knowledge The term ``useful knowledge'' is an ambiguous one. A distinction can be made

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

153

between instrumental, conceptual and symbolic use of knowledge (Pelz 1978). Instrumental use means applying research results in specific, direct ways. Conceptual use is the use of research results for general enlightenment, while symbolic use is the use of research findings to legitimate actions and points of view. In business, useful knowledge is often thought of as instrumental use; i.e. knowledge that gives direction ± or recommendation for actions. Such research is often termed actionable research (cf. Andreasen 1985). To be directly actionable, ways of actions should be ± given research outcomes ± specified prior to conducting the research. The following example, demonstrates this: ``Given research findings so and so, we should implement action so''. Thus actionable research can be considered as prespecified biconditionals, i.e. given research outcome, roi than action, aj . However, research findings do not necessarily give directions for actions. For example, a research finding showing that customers evaluate the service offerings from a firm lower than those of its competitors, does not immediately indicate how to improve service quality and thus enhance customers satisfaction. Rather it (the research finding) can be considered as some diagnosis, which may be integrated into existing knowledge structures or mental model ± of what drives customers' satisfaction. From there on the research user may construct and subsequently implement (hopefully) adequate actions. From this it follows that knowledge is needed to interpret and make use of knowledge (data), and that making actionable use of new knowledge (data) may also require innovative activities (cf. Grùnhaug & Haukedal 1995). Our discussion so far is summarized in Figure 1. Figure 1 is our tentative perspective, and is to be read as follows: New research data may be overlooked due to lack of attention. They (research findings) may be neglected because they are not understood. The findings may be understood, but not integrated into existing knowledge structures, and ± if integrated ± they may not imply any change, and thus no new knowledge is created nor is learning taking place. Even when integrated and representing new knowledge, construction of a route of actions may be deterred. And finally, even if a route of action is constructed, it may not be implemented, e.g. due to lack of available resources or resistance from organizational members. The above perspective may seem overly individualistic. Individuals are, however, the building blocks of any organization. In an organization some degree of collective

Research findings neglected

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

154

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

1. New data exposure

; 2. Answers/Attention

?

Neglected

?

Not understood. Neglected Misunderstood

?

Not integrated. Integrated, but make no difference in memory

?

No new action is constructed

?

Action not implemented

; 3. Interpretation/Sense-making

; 4. Encoding/Integration

; 5. Construction of Routes for Action

; 6. Implementation of Action Figure 1. From research data to actions sense-making is needed, which can be hard to achieve, as can be the agreement of constructed route of actions. Commitment and allocation of resources are also needed to implement actions. (See Day 1994, for elaboration of this argument.) Thus, an organizational perspective does not change, but rather complicates the perspective presented above (cf. Figure 1). Since our prime purpose is to enhance understanding of knowledge use and non -(mis-) use, we chose to start with this rather simple, guiding perspective, and later, after presentation and discussion of research findings we will modify our perspective accordingly.

Research methodology This section reports the research methodology employed in this study1. As stated at the outset the prime purpose is to enhance our understanding of why some firms make use of commissioned research while some don't. As utilization of such research may vary across industries, and within industries with factors such as resources (size), educational level, competence etc., the study was restricted to include firms from one industry only. As will be discussed below, the utmost was done to eliminate (control for) factors such as variations in economic resources, educational level and (research) competence.

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

We first report the actual research setting, than the research design of the study, followed by descriptions of the data collection and how the data were categorized and analyzed.

Research setting The present study is conducted among firms from the hotel service, probably one of the least research intensive industries as measured in relative R&D spendings. However, in this industry outside consultants and researchers are often contracted to conduct market research, analyses for improvements and so on. The industry is highly competitive, characterized by high rates of bankruptcies and low profitability (cf. Porter 1980). In order to survive and prosper firms must continuously update and improve. The hotel industry is often thought of as a lowtechnology industry. This, however, has been objected. In referring to firms within the industry that systematically perform better than others (as observed in most industries), it has been claimed that this is (partially) due to the better performing firms' superiority in knowledge difficult to imitate, as reflected in the perspective of knowledge as ``dynamic capabilities'' (cf. Teece et al. 1990). The firm's knowledge base may yield sustainable competitive advantage when new information is continuously integrated and exploited.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

RESEARCH DATA TO KNOWLEDGE USE

Research design A quasi-experiment was found appropriate for the present research purpose. Here two groups each one consisting of four firms were included. As randomization was not possible (as it seldom is in such ``real life'' research) considerations were made to control for such factors as economic resources, level of education and competence in research. The firms included were all small or medium sized. They were very similar with respect to educational level of their employees, which for most firms in this industry was found to be low. Neither were observed any systematic differences in past economic performance between the firms in the two groups. The two groups consisted of (1) four firms belonging to the same chain of hotels and (2) four hotels from the same geographical area, a small municipality making heavy investments in ± and also being very dependent on the tourism industry. The two groups are termed G(roup) 1 and G(roup) 2 respectively. All hotels in this study participated in an improvement project, which included research on customers' (guests') satisfaction and attitudes. The structure of the research design can be explained as follows: (1) At the outset data on guests' satisfaction and attitudes were collected by selfadministered questionnaires. The purpose of this data collection was diagnostic, i.e. to characterize the actual situation, and thus serve as a point of departure for further improvements. No systematic differences in guest satisfaction and attitude scores were found among the two groups of firms. (2) Reports from the conducted research were submitted to the firm. The research findings were also presented individually to the participants. Here the reports and presentations can be conceived as the experimental stimuli. The research findings were mainly presented as means and standard deviations on a great variety of scale items capturing customers' satisfaction with different aspects of the hotel product for all hotels included, and the scores on these scales for the subject's own hotel. (3) Several months later semi-structured interviews were conducted with managing directors and assistant managers in the participating hotels. The purpose of this post test was to tap into potential knowledge acquisition and use due to the conducted research. The present study can thus be conceived as a two group quasi-experiment without randomization.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

155

By making the two groups as equal as possible, such factors as economic resources and competence were controlled for. This strategy, to reduce/eliminate variations in factors outside the treatments or independent variable(s) under scrutiny is frequently used in quasiexperimental research designs (cf. Cook & Campbell 1979).

Data collection The ``pretest data'' were gathered by self administered questionnaires. Most of the questions were structured. For example, the consumer (guest) study included multiple statements related to perceived satisfaction with several aspects of the hotel stayed at and its service. Example: ``Please evaluate the hotel where you last stayed over. How good or bad do you consider the hotel to be with regarding to the aspects (characteristics) listed below? Please circle the number that best expresses your opinion'': Extremely dissatisfied (±5) . . . extremely satisfied (+5) Examples of statements are: ``How well were you received when checking in'' ``Politeness of employees'' ``The food served'' The post test included semi-structured interviews with the four managing directors and three assistant managers in the first group and four managers and eight assistants in the second groups, giving a total of 19 lengthy semi-structured interviews. Prior to the interviews an interview guide aiming at capturing knowledge acquisitions and knowledge use due to the research had been prepared. Most interviews lasted approximately two hours. The interviews were tape-recorded and subsequently transcribed. When tape-recording was not possible, detailed notes were taken. ``Think loud''-protocols to tap the subjects understanding and use of the written research reports were also on the research agenda. The subjects were given the following instruction after being given one of the research reports previously submitted and presented (the guest satisfaction survey). ``Read the report as you normally would have done. Think loud as you are reading''. This part of the study mostly failed, because the subjects were rarely able to make any sense of the reported data.

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

156

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Data analysis The transcribed interviews and notes were thoroughly examined. In order to capture knowledge acquisition, attitudes towards, and the potential use of the research, categorizes were established to capture these constructs (cf. Strauss & Corbin 1990). To capture knowledge we constructed categories related to the presented research, (standard deviation; quality; consumer (guest) satisfaction; and so on). Attitudes towards the research were captured through negative and positive statements related to the conducted research. Knowledge use was captured by establishing categories for the subjects responses to whether and how the research had been utilized, e.g. for responses to and activities initiated by the research.

Findings Below we report the findings, organized in the following way: First we report findings regarding understanding of the reported data, followed by attitudes towards the research reports and utilization of the research data.

Knowledge (Understanding of the report.) Almost none of the respondents could make sense of and explain the research findings. A typical example is: ``Both I and my colleagues have difficulties in understanding all the numbers. . . .'' The lack of understanding is demonstrated in the quotes below (S = subject, I = interviewer). I.

``Here standard deviations are reported. Do they (the standard deviations) tell you anything?'' S: ``Standard deviations? . . . I believe, since they are high, they have to be included . . . To understand this. I hadn't heard about it 'till I attended . . .'' (the subject held an undergraduate degree in business administration, and has had a course in statistics!). I: ``Here we have hotel number 7-seven. Please think aloud when you're reading the numbers related to that hotel''. S: ``Well, it is a long time ago. Standard deviation? It must be something relative to level (i.e. the scores for the actual hotel). No, I've to admit that it is difficult (impossible) to provide any meaningful description/explanation''. S: ``When we talked about .05 level of significance, I asked why this is not 0.4

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

(i.e. the difference between the mean score and the hotel's score). You really have to be into statistics''. These responses are prototypical for both groups, indicating that ex post it was very difficult (impossible) to make sense of the reported research data.

Attitudes/perceived usefulness S (group 1): ``There is no doubt that the project (including the research reports) was very useful.'' S (group 2) ``Well, the reports tell us a lot . . .'' (but so far the reports have not been studied, or used).

Knowledge use S (group 1): ``We talked very much about the numbers'' (helped by an outside consultant). I: ``And so what?'' S (group 1): ``We listed a set of projects of what to do . . . Without help it would have been impossible for us to do so (see next section for explanation) . . . By doing so, we got structure, and then started prioritizing. We have in no way done everything yet. But the way it was done, we could start tackling the most pressing problems. . . . Well, some of the tasks also required changes of routines, and investments as well. When it comes to activities/changes requiring investments, we have approached the board of directors. The answers have both been `yes' and `no'.'' S (group 1): ``This has resulted in a positive process. We have addressed specific problems. For example, people responsible for serving meals have agreed with the receptionists to take care of the physical fitness on facilities ± even though it is not their responsibility!'' S (group 1): ``We got a real surprise when we discovered that what we believed to be good, the guests predicted as mediocre. We know that the parking facilities were bad, but that bad was almost impossible to imagine!'' I: ``Have your employees read the reports?'' S (group 1): ``They mainly know the summary. We have tried to explain it, draw the picture, showing our strengths and weaknesses''. For group 2 it was impossible to trace anything related to use of the reported data. Example: S (group 2): ``I remember the report presentation. We also talked about it, but it is a long time ago''.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

RESEARCH DATA TO KNOWLEDGE USE

S (group 2): ``We have the reports, but it is difficult to find time''. An additional important and interesting observation was a prevalent tendency to recourse to present activities and solutions, seemingly imprisoned by established routines and practices in group 2. Table 1 summarizes our findings. Inspection of Table 1 reveals some surprising and apparently counter intuitive findings. First, neither subjects in group 1 nor group 2 had acquired any understanding of the research findings as captured in the post test. On the other hand, positive attitudes, and active knowledge use, also resulting in a variety of activities were registered in group 1, while no such effects could be traced in group 2. How can these puzzles be explained, i.e. 1) active knowledge use without apparently understanding the research, and 2) substantial knowledge use and changes in group 1, but no use nor changes in group 2?

Discussion This section discusses the reported findings. We first address the second question raised above, i.e. why the dramatic differences between group 1 and group 2.

The role of attention, motivation and commitment An important point, concealed until now, relates to reasons for and motivation to

157

participate in the research project. For group 1 a decision had been made at the top management level to enter a total quality program, in which the research activities describe above (see the research methodology section), were considered important diagnostic tools. The hotels in this group had all allocated money and personnel for active participation, which as such indicates involvement in and commitment to the project. These hotels were also assisted by consultants in their interpretations of the research data, and how they (the research data) could be used, taking form of seminars, individual guidance, and written materials clarifying the research reports. The use of qualified help in interpreting the data as such make sense, because personal communication allows for clarifications and adjustment to the receivers a priori knowledge (c.f. Daft & Lengel 1984). The initiative to enter the research program for group 2 was made by a public marketing office, responsible for promotion of tourism and hotels in the actual region. The only commitment for hotels belonging to this group was to pay for the research reports. Thus our observations clearly demonstrate that attention, commitment ± and support ± are important for knowledge acquisition and use, as reflected in the extant literature on teaching and learning (see Sandoval 1995 for recent and excellent overview); studies of learning organizations (cf. Garvin 1993; Senge 1990; Levitt & March 1988); and Bandura's theory and studies of ``mastery modelling'' (for an overview, see Wood & Bandura 1989).

Table 1. Knowledge acquisition, attitudes and knowledge use Group 1

Group 2

1.

Knowledge acquisition (directly from research) Recall/understanding

None

None

2.

a) Attitude b) Perceived usefulness

Positive Useful

Neutral Don't know

3.

Knowledge use a) Addressed problems b) Prioritizing of task to be solved

Yes Yes

No No

4.

Activities: a) Creation of solutions b) Involvement of employees c) Change of routines d) Investments

Yes Yes Yes Yes

No No No No

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

158

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

From research data to actionable knowledge

Interpreting and using data

Create attention and commitment Volume 6

Number 3

The second question, i.e. why positive attitudes and substantial knowledge use, and changes ± in spite of almost no understanding of the research data? Several explanations are possible. An intuitive explanation relates to the support in interpreting and making use of the report data. Here we elaborate a more comprehensive explanation. We do this step-by-step, and explain the underlying mechanisms. (1) As noted above when the research reports were submitted, the research findings were explained to and discussed with the participants in groups. Through explanations and discussions they started making sense to the subjects. Through such interactions and discussions the research findings could be captured through the subjects' knowledge structures. Even though the theoretical concepts (e.g. standard deviation) were not absorbed or integrated, the intended meaning underlying the reported results were probably integrated into and also enhanced the subjects' knowledge. (2) It is definitely possible that during the process of explanation and discussions of the research data the subjects held some (intuitive) understanding of the researchers' concepts. This understanding was, however, not elaborated to the extent that it became an integral part of the subjects' knowledge, but the intended meaning did. Thus apparently a separation between the reported data and explained (perceived) meaning has taken place. A similar finding has been reported in communication research, showing that the association between source and message dissolves with passage of time. (3) The reported findings (see Table 1) also show that when comprehended, the research data initiated considerable cognitive efforts to address problems and create possible routes of action (see Figure 1). This is important, as use of knowledge often implies some aspects of creativity and innovation. This has for long been recognized in the diffusion of innovation literature termed as ``reinnovation''. Many innovations require novel innovative activities to be adopted (see Rogers 1995, pp. 174±180 for detailed discussion), but mostly overlooked in the literature on knowledge use. This as such is surprising, as research data are ± and should be conceived as ± ``innovations''. (4) The reported findings also demonstrate, besides cognitive elaboration, social ef-

September 1997

fects as more people in the individual hotels of group 1 became involved. Thus ideas initiated and solutions created were diffused and elaborated among organization members. (5) It is also observed that effects and commitment may escalate over time, resulting in change of routines, investments and other behavioral effects. Similar observations have been recognized in communication literature, termed the sleeper effect (the persuasive impact of a message may increase rather than decrease over time). Based on the findings and also discussion, our tentative perspective now can be modified. Figure 2 shows as before (cf. Figure 1) the various steps from exposure to new research data to realized utilization (see mid column). Not shown here is that there might be feedback loops between the various stages. For example, working with the research data (step 4, 5) may result in reinterpretations (step 3), or experiences when implementary actions (step 6) or trying to find new solution (step 5) may initiate the request for new research data. Also shown in Figure 2 are inhibitors at the various stages for effective use of research data (right hand column), as well as facilitators that may enhance adequate utilization of contracted research.

Implications From the above discussion it follows that factors such as attention, motivation, commitment are important factors to explain utilization of research data. The use of qualified assistance in interpreting and elaborating the research data is apparently of importance for its utilization. This is in particular true when the language gap between the researcher providers and research users is substantial as in the present case. We have also demonstrated that knowledge use may imply more than information (knowledge) absorption, as changes in thinking are required. This point has been explicated by Argyris (1991) in his fascinating article Teaching Smart People How to Learn, contending that in order to create change, the actors' (implicit) theories-in-use, has been changed, as was observed here among participants in group 1. An additional important point is that knowledge use may involve innovative creation of new knowledge. The reported findings have managerial implications as well. If knowledge use is wanted, efforts should be exerted to create attention and commitment. Involvement of

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

RESEARCH DATA TO KNOWLEDGE USE

Facilitators Commitment Top-management involvement

159

Steps +

?

Inhibitators

1. Research data exposure

;

2. Awareness/Attention

±

Lack of commitment Neglected

±

Not understood/ Misunderstanding

±

Not integrated and forgotten/ No difference in knowledge

±

No new solutions created

±

Action (Constructed Solution) Not Implemented

?

; Qualified Assistance

+

?

3. Interpretation/ Sense-making

?

; High-priority Task-related work

+

?

4. Encoding/ Integration

?

; Set aside time + ? and resources. Focus Qualified Assistance

5. Construction of Routes of Actions

Top-management involvement/ Allocate Resources

6. Implementation of Actions

+

?

?

; ?

Figure 2. Facilitators and barriers in making use of research data top management will often be required to get the needed resources of time and money. Top management involvement is also important to put pressure on people when needed as knowledge utilization often implies change and extra efforts. More efficient use of commissioned research may as well be enhanced by close cooperation between research providers and research users as suggested by Andreasen (1985); Deshpande and Zaltman (1984); and Watson (1994). Close cooperation between research providers and research users allows for clarification of research objectives for both parties (!), enhanced understanding of the thinking of the other party, and the research context, research possibilities and constraints, and improved understanding and further elaboration of research data.

Note 1. This research is a part of a large-scale research program at Foundation for Research in Economics and Business Administration at the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration focusing on such aspects as assessment of quality, and customers' satisfaction in the tourism industry headed by professor Sigurd V. Troye.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

References Andreasen, A.R. (1985), ``Backward Market Research'', Harvard Business Review, Vol 63 (May± June), 176±182. Argyris, C. (1991), ``Teaching Smart People How to Learn'', Harvard Business Review, Vol 69 (May±June), 99±109. Beyer, J. (1997), ``Research Utilization. Bridging a Cultural Gap between Communities'', Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol 6, No 1, 17±22. Berger, P.L. and Luckman, T. (1967), The Social Construction of Reality, Garden City, New York, Doubleday. Brucks, M. (1985), ``The Effects on Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior'', Journal of Consumer Behavior, Vol 12 (June), 1±16. Caplan, N., Morrison, A. and Stanbaugh, R.J. (1975), The Use of Social Knowledge in Public Policy Decisions at the National Level, Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research. Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T. (1979), QuasiExperimentation. Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings, Chicago, Rand McNally. Daft, R.L. and Lengel, R.H. (1984), ``Information Richness: A New Approach to Managerial Behavior and Organizational Design'', Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Vol 6, 191±233. Day, G.S. (1994), ``Continuous Learning About Markets'', California Management Review, (Summer), 9±31.

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

160

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Day, G.S. and Wensley, R. (1988), ``Assessing Advantage: A Framework for Diagnosing Competitive Superiority'', Journal of Marketing, Vol 52 (April), 1±20. Deshpande, R. and Zaltman, G. (1984), ``A Comparison of Factors Affecting Researcher and Manager Perceptions of Market Research Use'', Journal of Marketing Research, Vol XXI (February), 32±38. Garvin, D.A. (1993), ``Building a Learning Organization'', Harvard Business Review, Vol 71 (July± August), 78±91. Grùnhaug, K. and Haukedal, W. (1995), ``Experts and Novices in Innovative Unstructured Tasks: The Case of Strategy Formulation'', Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol 4, No 1 (March), 4±13. Knorr, K.D. (1977), ``Policymakers' Use of Social Science Knowledge ± Symbolic or Instrumental?'', in C.H. Weiss (ed.), Using Research in Policy Making, Lexington, MA: Lexington-Heath. Levienthal, D.A. and March, J.G. (1993), ``The Myopia of Learning'', Strategic Management Journal, Vol 14, 95±112. Levitt, B. and March, J.G. (1988), ``Organizational Learning'', Annual Review of Sociology, Vol 14, 319±340. Pelz, D.C. (1978), ``Some Expanded Perspectives on Use of Social Science in Public Policy'', in M. Yinger and S.J. Cutler (eds.), Major Social Issues. A Multidisciplinary View, New York, Free Press, 346±357. Porter, M.E. (1990), The Competitiveness of Nations, New York, Free Press. Reve, T., Lensberg, T. and Grùnhaug, K. (1992), Et konkurransedyktig Norge, Oslo, Tano. Rogers, E.M. (1990), ``The Role of the Research University in the Spin-off of High-Technology Companies'', in K. Grùnhaug and G. Kaufmann (eds), Innovations: A Cross-Disciplinary Perspec-

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

tive, Oslo/Oxford, Scandinavian University Press/Oxford University Press, 443±455. Rogers, E.M. (1995), Diffusion of Innovations, New York, Free Press (Fourth ed.). Rosch, E. (1978), ``Principles of Categorization'', in E. Rosch and B.b. Lloyds (eds.), Cognition and Categorization, Hillsdale, New Jersey, Erlbaum, 27±48. Sandoval, J. (1995), ``Teaching in Subject Matter Areas: Science'', in L.W. Porter and M.R. Rosenzweig (eds.), Annual Review of Psychology, Vol 46, 355±374. Sanford, A.J. (1985), The Mind of Man: Models of Human Understanding, Brighton, The Harvester Press. Senge, P.M. (1990), The Fifth Discipline, New York, Doubleday. Strauss, A. and Gorbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research, Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1990), University of California Berkeley, Working Paper EAP-38. Watson, W.S. (1994), ``The New Market Research Responsibility: Emerging Needs from the Hotel Industry Perspective'', World's-Eye View of Hospitality Trends, Vol 8, No 2, 3±5. Wood, R. and Bandura, A. (1989), ``Social Cognitive Theory of Organizational Management'', Academy of Management Review, Vol 14, No 3, 361±384.

Kjell Grùnhaug is Professor in Business Administration at the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, Bergen-Sandviken, Norway. Willy Haukedal is Professor in Organisational Science at the Institute of Psychological Science, University of Bergen, Norway.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING

161

Simplex Creative Problem Solving Peter Wilson Einstein is reputed to have said that if he had one hour to save the world he would spend fifty-five minutes defining the problem and five minutes finding the solution. This is the opposite approach to the staff in most public and private offices, factories and construction sites. Simplex creative problem solving process is a system developed by Min Basadur at McMaster University, Ontario that does allow time to spend finding the real problem. It then finds a solution and programmes the implementation.

The development of the process

D

r. Min Basadur is a professor of Organisational Behaviour at the Michael G. De Groote School of Business at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario. He developed Simplex as an eight step process during his twenty years experience of working in manufacturing companies in North America. Simplex was developed to ensure their research and development teams were producing the ``right'' products. He found creative problem solving was a process for innovation for a wide range of corporate problems. He is now an international consultant to many major north American companies. He has used the process to solve problems that include: . . . . . .

strategic planning new product innovation total quality management productivity improvement employee involvement customer involvement

The Simplex wheel Segments of a wheel graphically depict Simplex as an eight step process. The wheel, as shown in figure 1, consists of the following segments: . the first three segments for finding prob-

lems

. the next two segments for finding sol-

utions

. the last three segments for implementing

solutions

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997. 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Figure 1. Showing the three basic stages of Simplex creative problem solving

The wheel depicts a continuous process from problem to action and shows how a solution to one problem often leads to another problem that needs a resolution.

Diverging and converging For each step shown as a segment of a circle the team develops ideas by brainstorming. This is referred to as ``diverging'' and is graphically illustrated by the symbol ''5``. During the diverging there is no judgement of

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

162

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Ill defined problems

the ideas. Any judgement or discussion will reduce the flow of ideas from the participants. The aim is to have as many ideas as time allows. The ideas should be wild as well as the obvious and mundane. As a result of some ideas leading to further ideas, the best ideas come in the last two thirds of the list of ideas. The divergence of ideas is a simple process but Basadur, Graen and Scandura (1986) found it does require practice for consistently good results. Before moving to the next segment just one of the ideas is selected from the many listed. This is referred to as ``converging''. This time judgement is used and converging is graphically illustrated by the symbol ''4``. These two separate steps are very easy to read about but initially difficult to achieve without trying to merge them and discuss the merits during the initial non-judgmental stage.

The first step of the process is problem finding. This is to list the problems that are being encountered and require a solution. These are ill defined problems referred to as ``Fuzzy situations''. Participants list the problems and then they select one of the problems to process. Min Basadur gives a prompter on his Simplex creative problem solver sheet that includes 19 suggestions under the three headings of personal, organisational ± sensing the present, and organisational ± anticipating the future. The second step is fact finding. The facilitator asks questions from a list of prompter questions, but the requirement is for all known facts to be listed. Sometimes the facts that are listed are those that are unknown. The facilitator will normally start this session by asking the participants what they know or think they know about this fuzzy situation. Other questions include: . What do you not know about this fuzzy

The process The process is shown in figure 2 and consists of the eight steps as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

problem finding fact finding problem definition idea finding evaluate and select plan acceptance action

Figure 2. The Simplex creative problem solving process

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

situation but you would like to know?

. Why is this a problem to you? . What have you already thought of or tried?

The aim of this section is to list a wide range of facts. It is difficult to make a decision without knowing the facts! From the range of facts the important items are selected and agreed and the most important item selected. This item is then the basis of a problem statement. The third step is problem definition. This is such an important part of the process participants diverge and converge twice in this step. A series of simple statements is written that incorporate the important facts into problem statements starting with ``How might we . . .'' or ``how might I . . .'' These have to be written in simple unambiguous sentences. All the participants must agree on the meaning and importance of the statements. The initial fuzzy situation is written as a problem statement and then is refined in the light of the information gathering. The group list up to ten problem statements. The group then converge to agree on one problem statement to be considered in more detail in the second part of this step. The second part of problem definition is the mapping process producing a problem definition map. This part of the process is the most powerful step and unique to Simplex. It asks two questions of the problem statement. The questions are: . Why? . What's stopping?

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING

163

The answers to the ``why?'' questions go up the page and show a broader problem statement. The answers to the ``what's stopping?'' go down the page and show a narrower problem statement. The whole process is referred to as ``mapping''. Figure 3 shows a simplified diagram of the process of forming a problem definition map. Ask ``Why . . . ?'' to broaden the problem ~

Broader problem statement ~

Broad problem statement ~

!

Ask ``What's stopping . . . ?'' to narrow the problem

Narrower problem statement

Figure 3. Placing of problem statements in a problem definition map From the initial problem statement a series of related problem statements are developed using the two questions. The higher the prob-

WHY

~

lem is on the page the higher the problem is in an organisation and so the problem is wider. The higher the problem also brings it closer to the aims and objectives of the organisation. The lower the problem the more simple the question and this may lead to the solution being at a practical level in the organisation. This process is the most analytical of the stages and requires careful consideration of each statement for clarity and clear relationships with other statements. The answers to the ``why'' and ``what's stopping'' questions must be simple clear unambiguous statements. Figure 4 shows the example of a simple problem definition map asking ``How might I get rid of the mice in my house''. It also shows how the top line is frequently ``How might I . . .'' (HMI) find happiness and bliss! Once having obtained answers to the questions the map the facilitator broadens the map by asking ``why else . . . ?'' and ``what else is stopping us . . . ?'' After the group places each statement they then check the position to ensure the reverse direction is also true. When the statements are true in both directions and arrow is drawn up the page to confirm its relationship. An illustration of a map with more than one column is shown in figure 5. When mapping strategic planning problems Min Basadur (1995) shows how the results may form the basis of a strategic action plan. The rows consistent of challenges, not solutions, of mission statements, goals, objectives, strategy and tactics. An example of a strategic map is shown in figure 6.

HMI find happiness and bliss? ~

HMI Improve the stability and love of our family? ~

HMI ensure the health and safety of my family against mice? ~

HMI rid my house of mice? ~

HMI catch more mice? ~

!

HOW

HMI build a better mousetrap?

Figure 4. Simple problem definition map ``How Might I rid my house of mice? # Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

164

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Broader problem statement ~

Broader problem statement ~

Ask ``Why else . . .. ?'' to broaden the problem ~

~

! Ask ``What else is stopping . . . ?'' to narrow the problem

~

Beginning problem statement

Narrower problem statement

Narrower problem statement

Figure 5. Placing of problem statements asking ``Why else . . .'' and ``What else is stopping . . .''

Finding the right brief for a bar of soap Dr Min Basadur illustrates the need to find the right problem by his experience of the development of a bar of soap. When he was working in Proctor and Gamble as a production engineer he found products being developed that were solving the wrong problems. ``In one case the R & D department spent six months developing a new green striped soap that was not required by the marketing department. The team had been trying to solve the problem `How might we make a green striped bar that consumers would prefer to Colgate's Irish Spring'. I spent a morning with the R & D group, and during that time they redefined the problem as `how might we better connote refreshment in appearance, shape and colour in a soap bar?' This led to a major new product line of a swirled blue and white bar called `Coast'. This soap was an immediate success and has been produced for many years.'' It shows the importance of defining the problem. Once the participants have reached the end of the mapping process they converge on one problem statement to take to the next step of idea finding. The fourth step is idea finding. The group develops ideas by diverging. The facilitator encourages the listing ideas by thinking of wild ideas, related ideas, blitzing, transforming ideas by reversing, twisting and other methods of developing an existing list. Parnes found in his research that extending effort provides significantly more good ideas in a given time period. Basadur and Thompson

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

also showed in that it is worth while for an individual or group to use extended effort when generating ideas on real world managerial and technical problems. Significantly more people will find their most preferred idea in the latter two thirds of their idea list than in the first third. From the list the team selects a short list to half a dozen or so. In the fifth step the group evaluate and select the ideas. In this step the divergence and convergence are for the selection of the evaluation criteria for selecting the idea to be the solution for implementation. The sixth step is the planning of the implementation. Once again the participants diverge and converge, but this time it is for the selection of the stages of the implementation. The participants list the stages in sequence. Each stage includes the information of What, How, Who, When and Where. This information is presented as a table that has to be completed by the group so there is a commitment by the group to carry out the work. In many cases part of the planning will include the next stage of selling the proposals. The final steps of seven and eight are Gaining acceptance, the selling of the idea, and Action. In step seven the participants use the convergence and divergence process to list: . . . . .

the problems that the solution will solve the benefits of the solution their proofs the objections to the solution how they may be overcome.

The process is completed when the solutions are implemented. Action consists of carrying

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING

165

HMW contribute to and promote a healthy community

MISSION

~

HMW improve the emotional well being of all individuals? ~

~

~

HMW assist in the prevention of mental health problems

HMW reduce the cost of supporting the mentally ill ~

HMW plan and collaborate in the provision of mental health facilities

~

HMW increase public awareness of mental health issues

GOALS

HMW improve the quality of life of the customers of our services ~

HMW promote a shared community responsibility for improved emotional well-being

OBJECTIVES

~

HMW provide support which mental illness

helps control

HMW better understand the clients

STRATEGY needs of our

~

HMW create a process to understand the needs of clients

TACTICS

~

HMW talk to our clients to find out what problems they are having

Figure 6. Part of a strategic map for a mental health association # Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

166

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

out the items listed in steps six and seven. Often people do not implement good ideas. To complete the process implementation has to be carried out and the actions accomplished. Once the group implements the selected ideas these solutions lead to other problems and fuzzy situations. The process continues with other new fuzzy problems and starting at step one. A current example of the solution of one problem leading to another fuzzy situation is the solution to transporting people and goods around the country in the motor car. The development of the motor car has solved many problems but has led to road congestion, deaths and global warming. The problem solving process needs to start again at step one.

ideas increased, and they produced more original solutions to problems. Basadur (1989) developed a simple test to find the participants working preference in the Simplex circle. The four creative problem solving profiles are: . . . .

Generator Conceptualiser Optimiser Implementer

Facilitation An education system and a work environment which train people to stifle creativity and imagination makes the divergence of ideas initially difficult. The Simplex process does increase the ability to develop ideas. The facilitator and the coach lead the process of the creative problem solving. The participants provide the content, knowledge and ideas. As the participants gain more knowledge of the process so the ideas flow more easily. The facilitator ensures all participants are: . . . .

participating involved in the development of ideas involved in decision making accepting ownership of the results

The facilitator ensures enforcement of the very strict but simple rules. This produces results that are successful for the client and a team consensus. Research by Basadur and Thompson shows that those teams producing the greater number of ideas also produce the best ideas.

The participants

The wrong way round the wheel Volume 6

Number 3

Busy managers are people of action who like quick results. In day to day situations this is often appropriate. However, when the problem or task is not well defined or changes become necessary, these qualities can be a distinct disadvantage. The first solution will probably not be the best, cheapest or quickest. In Simplex terms they jump from an illdefined problem, a fuzzy situation, to a solution. They go the wrong way round the Simplex wheel. Runco and Basadur showed that after training the managers' original

September 1997

Figure 7. Creative problem solving profiles Basadur, Graen and Wakabayashi found that knowing one's own style helped understanding one's own creativity as well as that of others. He also found it was necessary for groups to be most effective needed have participants with interests and strengths in the four quadrants. Using Simplex creative problem solving process participants from various disciplines work together to ensure the solutions are: . well considered . acceptable to the team . the team has a consensus of opinion

The solutions may not be immediate, but they are appropriate to the problem. At each step an advisory team assists the problem owner by adding content or knowledge to the process. The facilitator and coach take the team through the Simplex wheel and ensure that segments are not omitted or muddled. The independent facilitator ensures the process is followed, enthusiasm is maintained and a successful conclusion is achieved.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING

167

Organisations using Simplex

References

Organisations using Simplex come from a wide range of industry and commerce. The Simplex process is being used by many companies in North America including the Ford Motor Company, Nabisco, Frito-Lay and IBM. In the UK it is being used by charity organisations, software designers, and newly privatised public sector organisations, small companies and large international companies. Simplex is an aid to resolving problems and to forming a consensus in multi-disciplinary teams. Basadur (1993) found that creativity is an important tool which organisations can use to increase their effectiveness, competitiveness and long term survival. Organisational creativity provides adaptability and contributes to efficiency. Both are necessary for organisational effectiveness leading to economic benefits. Creativity leads to a continuous supply of new improved products and methods for the organisation. It leads to more motivated, committed and job satisfied people. These lead to higher efficiency and lower costs. Teamwork results in better problem solving. Senior managers do need a commitment to plan, create and implement an approach to creativity in order to obtain institutional long term creative organisations. G.K. Chesterton said ``It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is they can't see the problem.'' Simplex ensures they can see the problem. Using the Simplex creative problem solving process is a little like learning to drive. It looks very simple until you try to do it, but the effort is well worthwhile.

Basadur, M. (1993) Impacts and Outcomes of Creativity in Organisational Settings. McMaster University. Basadur, M. Simplex Creative Problem Solver Sheet. Basadur, M. (1995) The Power of Innovation. Pitman Publishing. Basadur, M. and Thompson, R. (1996) `Usefulness of The Ideation Principle of Extended Effort in Real World Professional and Managerial Creative Problem Solving.' McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario. Basadur, M., Graen, G.B. and Scandura, T.A. (1985) `Training Effects on Attitudes Towards Divergent Thinking Among Manufacturing Engineers.' McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario. Basadur, M., Graen, G.B. and Wakabayashi, M. (1990) `Identifying Individual Differences in Creative Problem Solving Style.' McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario. Parnes, S. (1961) `Effects of Extended Effort in Creative Problem Solving.' Journal of Educational Psychology. Runco, M.A. and Basadur, M. (1983) `Assessing Ideation and Evaluative Skills and Creative Styles and Attitudes.' McMaster University.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

Dr Peter Wilson is an architect-engineer working as a business consultant with Phoenix 2000 Limited, 95 Fetter Lane, London EC4A 1EP. He is a facilitator for the Simplex creative problem solving process.

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

168

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Education and Genius Raymond T. Carr We can hardly hope to define genius with precision when we start investigating its nature. If, alternatively, we defined it broadly as a (limited) capacity for independent thinking and invention, perhaps we should all qualify as geniuses. Instead we can study biographically the lives of those whose works have long been acclaimed, acknowledging provisionally that there could be more than one kind of genius but seeking common factors nevertheless. This article is a digest of such a study (originally one hundred times longer) and is particularly angled towards educational factors.

N

Genius is non conformist

Volume 6

Number 3

owadays formal qualifications gained by examination, indicative of educational attainment, are sometimes treated as a measure of mental capacity, which they are in a limited sense. Their possession betokens however a willingness to conform, to commit to memory ideas and information, to adopt mental attitudes some of which may ere long be obsolete. The genius who initiates a revolution in human thought or behaviour cannot be wholly conformist, may lack formal education, is often educated by private tutor, and tends to be independent rather than docile under mass instruction. Even in the arts, those whose works are admired exceptionally (and who perhaps initiate trends) are often markedly individual and privately (flexibly) instructed. The following renowned commanders, strong-willed yet mentally flexible, severe disciplinarians eager to reward, audacious opportunists, all inspired devotion in their men. Consider their education. Alexander (358±323 BC) educated by tutors including Aristotle (pupil of Plato pupil of Socrates) when sixteen defeated Thracians during Philip's absence1. Genghis-Khan (1162±1227) of the Mongolian nomads was taught `like a colt' and brought up by his mother, a chief's penurious widow2. Horatio Nelson (1758±1805), noted for daring at grammar school, joined the Royal Navy when twelve years old3. Napoleon (1769±1821) after a Royal School for nobility was admitted (a dreamer) to L'Ecole Militaire when fifteen and commissioned at sixteen4. Interestingly, he slept on grave problems and declared: ``The quality of a

September 1997

mental creation is proportional to its creator's universality'' 5.

Arts Love, perhaps amounting to reverie, inspired these writers. Dante (1265±1321), educated apparently to secondary level, influenced by many writers through the Florentine circle and private study, described himself as ``the scribe of love'' in Purgatoria, canto 24: ``I when he breathes take up my pen and as he dictates write''. Shakespeare (1564±1616), probably educated at Stratford Grammar School, draws on many sources, classical, historical, Italian and contemporary. ``But love, first learned in a lady's eyes . . . gives to every power a double power''. ``Small have continual plodders ever won, save base authority from others' books'', declares Berowne in Love's Labours Lost. Goethe (1749±1832), tutored by his father, dabbled in five languages, art and music6. Attending Leipzig University (1765±68) he enjoyed social life, came down unwell without a degree but, recovering, became a licentiate in jurisprudence at Strasburg (1770-71). Here he also attended lectures on anatomy, medicine, midwifery and chemistry. A privy councillor inspired to verse by many women7, he contributed to Darwin's Origin of Species. Tolstoy (1828±1910) privately tutored, `neither willing nor able' but extraordinarily imaginative, at Kazan University (1844) aimed to be a diplomat, but lacking application turned to law (1845±47), without qualifying. For a book to be good, he said, the writer must love its central theme: he had # Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997. 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

EDUCATION AND GENIUS

loved the nation in War and Peace, the concept of a family in Anna Karenina 8,9. Among Renaissance artists Leonardo and Michelangelo together embrace many forms of creativity (painting, sculpture, architecture, engineering, poetry)10; whereas Rembrandt in the seventeenth century is essentially a painter and portraitist whose unequalled ability to suggest a sitter's thoughts seems to derive from the habit of self-portraiture: self portraits number more than ninety over the years. Leonardo (1452±1519), illegitimate son of a notary and a peasant, entered his father's home when his mother married. Literate in Italian, but weak in Latin, detached, imaginative, he writes from right to left and reverses the letters, read with the aid of a mirror. He worked in Verrocchio's studio from about eighteen to twenty-five 11 . Michelangelo (1475±1564), suckled by the wife of a quarryworker when his mother died, ``absorbed stone cutting with nurse's milk''. Brought home aged ten, when his father remarried, he was sent illiterate to school, four years behind other boys12. An apprentice painter and sculptor from thirteen, innovative, assertive enough to dismay his master Ghirlandaio, he was invited into the Medici Palace (by Lorenzo, Il Magnifico) among resident intellectuals and family tutors. Two future popes were young companions. Rembrandt (1606±69) attended Latin school (aged seven to fourteen), matriculated at Leiden University, but withdrew to paint. He was apprenticed to van Swanenburgh at fourteen, Lastman at sixteen, and practised independently at nineteen13. Among musicians J.S. Bach (1685±1750) was taught instruments at home, attended a local school until fifteen and proceeded to Luneburg as a chorister. A brilliant organist at eighteen, energetic, devout, stubbornly emotional, he improvised on known music or transcribed, then composed, synthesised styles, absorbed Italian influences and ranged widely14. Mozart (1756±1791), a prodigy, privately tutored by his graduate father, sensitive, responsive, wrote a concerto at four, minuets at five, sonatas and symphonies at seven or eight, rehearsed and directed his own opera Mitradate in Italy at fourteen15. Beethoven (1770±1827) was at school until eleven; averse to rote he could not multiply. He discovered the classics and met influential people at HeÂleÁne von Breuning's home (whose children he taught the piano) 16. A brilliant pianist at twenty he studied composition under Haydn at the elector's expense. Deafness, destroying a pianist's career, promoted composition. This proud, forgetful, day-dreamer of beautiful thoughts 17 (and of

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

169

unpredictable temper) found early that modulations leading to remote tonalities can move a listener who relates them to the main key 18. Wagner (1813±83) screamed as a child, fancying that furniture was alive. He loved the theatre, not school. Perfunctory in home drawing lessons, he wrote a tragedy. Family moves (Leipzig, Dresden, Prague, Leipzig) disrupted formal education. This instrumentalist read a textbook, studied scores, briefly attended the Thomasschule and then (as musical student) went to Leipzig University 19. At twenty-one he could compose operas of either German or Italian stamp. He wrote his own libretti, responded to women with enthusiasm and with musical composition 20.

Disrupted education

Science and engineering invention Absent-minded dreaming and forgetfulness are characteristic of genius (not exclusively of scientific genius) as if imaginative, lateral, recombinative thinking proceed habitually. According to Stukeley 21 Newton, when meditating, led his horse five miles home instead of remounting at the top of Spittlegate Hill, Grantham. He sat on his bed all day lost in thought, half-dressed and unsure whether he had eaten meals. Newton relates dreams, fantasy, imagination to invention 21. Darwin, whilst day-dreaming, once walked off Shrewsbury fortifications, falling eight feet 22. His memory Darwin describes as ``extensive yet hazy . . . I have never been able to remember for more than a few days a single date or line of poetry''. He framed hypotheses however on every subject, deducing consequences subsequently verified or refuted. In a queue to pay taxes, Edison drifted into a fanciful world of multiplex telegraphy, forgetting the taxes and even his own name when interrogated suddenly 23. He claimed however to have entertained 3,000 hypotheses concerning electric lights (two verified), and he filled a 200-page notebook with thoughts and sketches in a week: his notebooks number 3400. Gauss at twenty, his love of maths ``impassioned'', found that ideas came too fast to be noted, let alone pursued: gifted persons had little need of lectures, set out on personal quests, he said 24. Einstein, given to daydreaming (``I will a little think'') 25, felt he had a talent for visualising, grasping things broadly. He was however surprisingly forgetful and endured ``punishment rather than gabble by rote''. Imagining, visualising, hypothesising forwards seems to be at odds with backwards recalling, and this is unsurprising since they

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

170

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Trusting intuition

Volume 6

Number 3

imply the breaking up of memories into smaller elements of thought (almost the reverse of memory which holds them together) and recombining elements in new, and possibly quite novel, syntheses. Creative mental energy is dynamic, and probably demanding of the brain's nutritional supply in comparison with static recall. ``There are such a huge number of actions and forms that memory cannot preserve them and consequently you should keep the sketches'' says Leonardo, who could gaze for hours at his Last Supper without adding to it. In his notes architectural ideas intrude into studies for paintings and mingle with botany, just as thoughts on Leibniz, theological arguments and business accounts meet on the same page in Newton's papers at the Royal Mint, suggesting that genius rejects comparted thinking and dances immediate attendance on the subconscious. Mozart wrote of K385: ``my new Haffner symphony has amazed me for I had forgotten every single note of it''. Adam Smith was very absent-minded, and Cicero tells us that Simonides offered to teach the art of memory to the great Themistocles of Athens, who replied: ``rather teach me to forget''. Great scientists are usually graduates, but not invariably so. Galileo (1564±1642), hitherto privately tutored, entered a monastery at eleven and Pisa University at seventeen. Nicknamed the Wrangler, he argued, came down without a degree, found a private tutor, revered Archimedes ± how inferior were other minds 26 ! He taught maths at Pisa, embroiled in arguments, and secured a chair at Padua when twenty-eight. Newton (1642±1727), a yeoman's posthumous son, after elementary instruction attended King's School, Grantham when twelve. Bottom in form until kicked, he assaulted the kicker and then beat him in class 21. He made models, clocks, kites, drew pictures, kept illustrated notebooks. Set to manage his mother's estate at fourteen, instead he studied alone anatomy, astronomy, botany, maths and philosophy. At seventeen he returned to school and at eighteen entered Trinity College, Cambridge. Shunning games, solitary, pious, obstinate, he gained a B.A. (1665) though `put to second posing' or `lost his greats' reputedly. In 1669 Professor Barrow relinquished his chair to Newton compared with whom, he said, `I am but a child'. Newton's Annus Mirabilis (1666) was the prelude to huge advances in maths, optics and mechanics, celestial and terrestrial. Gauss (1777±1855) untaught corrected his father's arithmetic when three; at school he excelled in languages, was exonerated from maths (so gifted). In College Carolinum from fifteen he

September 1997

read the masters, Newton (``topmost''), Euler, Lagrange, before proceeding to GoÈttingen in 1795 24. Faraday (1791±1867) attended a common day school 27. Errand boy at thirteen, apprentice bookbinder at fourteen, he read what he bound and attended evening lectures given by Humphry Davy, who recruited Faraday for the Royal Institution and took him to Europe (1813±15). Introduced to famous scientists, exhilarated, Faraday lived for science, childlike, devout, devoid of material ambition. Einstein (1879±1955) was a lonely, introspective child at a Catholic school from 1884. In secondary education (1889±95) once asked to leave (a rebel), he advanced in maths. Gaining a physics degree at Zurich (1896±1900), he read privately while a friend attended the lectures and lent Einstein his notes. A patent examiner (1902± 09), he contributed greatly to physics as an amateur before gaining a chair. ``I want to know how God created this world . . . his thoughts; the rest is detail'', he said 25. Revolutionary advances in science have been made by thinkers prepared to trust intuition provisionally and test by experiment subsequently. Sometimes religious faith seems to bolster their trust and spur them to conscientious endeavour, though faith may be shaken later, as was Darwin's. Newton, a Unitarian, wrote in his Principia: ``This Being governs all . . . we adore him as his servants''. ``We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient . . . for Nature is pleased with simplicity, and affects not the pomp of superfluous causes''. From intense work in mathematics, mechanics and physics, he relaxed by turning to chemistry, theology and chronology. Newton suffered a nervous breakdown at forty-nine. Faraday, member of a strict religious sect, which held that it was sinful to save money, believed in the unity and symmetry of nature. Since electricity generated magnetism, magnetism should generate electricity. Rejecting lucrative consultancy to concentrate on fundamental research, he discovered induction and invented in principle that transformer, dynamo and motor. He demonstrated that simple laws govern electrolysis and that static electricity has the same properties as battery-generated and magnet-generated electricity. He too had a severe breakdown at forty-nine. ClerkMaxwell (1831±79), devout, `dafty' at school, once sent home as ineducable, but awarded a fellowship at Trinity College, Cambridge, gave mathematical expressions to his own and Professor Faraday's results with twenty equations in terms of twenty variables. Einstein sometimes sought aesthetic satis-

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

EDUCATION AND GENIUS

faction and coherent simplicity when logic failed. Einstein's refinement of Newton's mechanics (which had explained the elliptical orbits of the Moon and planets) predicted a slight forward rotation of Mercury's orbit of 43 seconds of arc per century. The measured forward rotation was 1.56 degrees or 5600 seconds of arc, mostly attributed to the influence of other planets but of which 40 or 50 seconds had been unexplained. Einstein was beside himself with ecstasy for days (1916). Life scientists also utilise hypotheses. Louis Pasteur crystallised salts of tartaric acid and examined them microscopically 28. The crystal facets were asymmetric, some towards the left, others towards the right, and he separated them manually, producing two acids the crystals of which rotated polarised light in opposite directions. A mixture of the two was optically neutral. Certain moulds grew in neutral solutions, destroying one component whilst sparing the other so that optical activity increased with delay. Many natural organic substances rotated light, whereas the same substances produced synthetically did not. Pasteur made an inspired guess: optically active asymmetric compounds are produced by living micro-organisms utilising one component, not the other, in their nutrition. He proceeded to prove that microbes existed ± hitherto debatable. A cerebral haemorrhage bereft him of speech and paralysed his left limbs in 1868 but, a good Catholic actuated by noble motives, partly recovering he resumed research on silkworm disease against advice and afterwards investigated rabies, sleeping above his mad menagerie. The `father of physiology' William Harvey (1578±1657), son of Folkestone's mayor, went to King's School, Canterbury when ten years old (Folkestone had no school), and to Gonville and Caius, Cambridge five years later 29. For his B.A. he read logic, rhetoric, classics, but after 1597 he took premedical and science subjects. He qualified in medicine after two years (1600±02) at Padua's preeminent university. Subsequently, while practising and dissecting in London, he studied the hearts of fishes, frogs, pigeons, dogs, calves and deer. He showed that the heart-pump circulates blood round the body ± reasoning, as might an engineer, quantitatively. Charles Darwin (1809±1882) after day school boarded at Shrewsbury (1818±25) 22. A childlike dreamer fascinated by insects and birds, he then studied geology, zoology and medicine at Edinburgh, but fled from an operating theatre. Aiming for Holy Orders, he took a B.A. at Cambridge without attempting honours, studied rocks

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

171

with Professor Sedgwick, and joined H.M.S. Beagle as naturalist (unpaid) in 1831. Pasteur (1822±95) was at Arbois junior school from 1831, won prizes in Arbois College and painted grave portraits 28. At the Royal College of Besancon he qualified in lettres (1840), taught maths and took a degree in science (1842) before entering Ecole NoÁrmale (1843) to improve his chemistry and physics and gain a doctorate in crystallography (1847). Renowned among inventors, George Stephenson 30 and Thomas Edison 23 lacked formal education. Stephenson (1781±1848), quick-witted, full of fun, picked dirt out of coal at twelve, was a pit-brakesman at twenty. He dismantled engines and clocks, practised reading and writing after work, studied his son's homework, arithmetic, drawing, mechanics. At Killingworth he developed, almost concurrently, locomotives, permanent way, underground haulage by stationary engines and the Geordie safety lamp, before proceeding to public railway construction. Edison (1847±1931), granted 1200 patents eventually, was at school for three months (1855), a latecomer, bottom-of-the-class, repulsed by rote learning. Told his mind was addled, he ran home; his mother (former teacher) introduced Shakespeare, Gibbon, Hume and a book of simple experiments. He constructed a telegraph line, sold vegetables and newspapers, printed his own local news, read ``the whole library'' in Detroit. Smiling, mischievous, partially deaf, he emulated Faraday. ``I always keep six or eight things going at once'' he said. When stumped in one project he turned to another, and switching evoked an answer to the first problem. His telephone transmitter, perforating pen, stencil pens, Remington typewriter improvements, phonograph and gramophone patents all came about 1877, the year in which he began investigating electric lamps. He dabbled in electric traction while giving birth to the electric generating industry, about 1880. Henry Ford 31 (1863±1947) friendly, mischievous (nailed your shoes to the floor), left school when fifteen. ``Thinking is the work of digging to the foundations'', he said, and ``Wisdom lies in the ability to read the signs of the future''. Napoleon had claimed: ``I always live two years in the future''. Wilbur and Orville Wright, pioneers of aviation, were not awarded diplomas at high school 32. Marconi's father was Italian, his mother Irish. Born at Bologna in 1874, baptised Roman Catholic, brought up Protestant, he shuttled between England and Italy. A gadget maker, he failed to matriculate but was

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

172

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

allowed to consult the library and experiment in the laboratory at the University of Bologna. He set up the first wireless company in 1897. Fearing to be forestalled, he worked into the night and neglected to come downstairs for meals; his mother carried meals up and left them outside his door. His audiences were astonished that Guglielmo Marconi from Italy should speak English so perfectly, so quietly and with such English reserve 33.

The brain and memory Stimulation by electrode at certain positions in the cortex causes a conscious person to recall forgotten childhood events. Thoughts and sensory experiences seem to be occasioned by the passage of electric signals along neurons and across the clefts (or gaps) between neurons at the synapses (junctions) bridged electrically by chemical neurotransmitters which, released from a presynaptic neuron, cross the cleft and bind with receptors in a post-synaptic neuron. There are excitatory synapses and (fewer) inhibitory synapses 34. Each neuron (nerve cell) has innumerable junctions with other neurons. Transmission of an electric signal from one neuron across the cleft and along the next neuron requires an adequate electric stimulus: the algebraic sum of almost simultaneous excitatory and inhibitory potentials must attain a threshold potential of about 5 or 10 millivolts in the post-synaptic neuron, in order to transmit the signal farther. In this need to attain a minimum voltage lies an obstacle to creation and invention, when forceful instruction has dominated minds exposed to it. For long-term memory depends on intensifying excitatory response, at those synapses utilised in the training process, by strengthening the connections therein. Growth of synaptic contacts may occur and an increase in the number of glutamate receptors very probably does occur in synapses repeatedly fired (as in learning by rote) 35,36. Calcium ions have a role in the release of neurotransmitters and in longterm `potentiation' by high-frequency electrical stimulation 37. That learning by repetition provides built-in pathways of enhanced excitatory response in the tangled networks of the brain, favouring subsequent transmission through these same neural pathways, suggests very strongly that the excitation of new sequences of nerve cells, and the corresponding conscious experiences of new ideas and chains of association, will be resisted. We know that our training and learning greatly influence the course taken by our

Memorising grudgingly

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

actions and thoughts, often usefully for routine purposes, but revelations and inventions are uncommon. Furthermore concentration, in `trained' networks, of molecules that facilitate transmission across synapses may imply deficiency of these molecules in adjacent synapses that (untrained) have not been utilised repeatedly. Goethe observed that horned animals lack a full set of upper teeth. In Origin of Species Darwin concurred 38: cows yielding much milk do not readily fatten, and cabbages yielding abundant foliage do not copiously supply oil-bearing seeds. That perfect remembering should be incompatible with works of genius (requiring recombinations of fragmentary and therefore fragmentable memories) is credible on common-sense grounds (to excel in one respect is to fall short in another). There is also biographic evidence of which some examples have been adduced above. Our ability to assimilate and circulate chemicals required by our neurons is limited. Geoffry and Goethe propounded (almost together) a law of compensation: ``in order to spend on one side, nature must economise on the other side''. Nourishment flowing excessively to one organ or part is unlikely to flow abundantly to another part, notes Darwin. If you see in a creature special superiority, envied perhaps, then ask at once, where does it suffer deficiency? writes Goethe. This adds weight to (indeed it may have prompted) my suggestion that the concentration of molecules favourable to transmission of the `spike' in neural circuits `potentiated' by repetitive excitation (as in learning by rote) probably diminishes below normal the concentration of those molecules in nearby circuits seldom activated, increasing the imbalance depicted on the left of my diagram. Thus yet more reliable conventional (vertical diagrammatically) memories may be gained at still greater cost to lateral, imaginative thinking and insights (flexibility). Perhaps we should memorise grudgingly, as geniuses often do, to free imagination. Creativity utilises fragmentable, rather than robust, memories.

Educational psychology Penguin Books' Creativity edited by P.E. Vernon (1970) surveys the evidence provided by many psychologists. E.P. Torrance had found (1962) that to identify as gifted in I.Q. (conformability) tests, requiring one approved answer per question, was to eliminate

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

EDUCATION AND GENIUS

about 70% of those gifted in open-ended creativity tests, requiring manifold answers. C.W. Taylor and R.L. Ellison (1964) predicted scientific talent with a biographical inventory better than with tests. D.W. MacKinnon (1962), studying American architects, found that outstandingly creative architects had averaged about B grade as students: they were flexible but unwilling to accept anything on authority. MacKinnon and also J.W. Getzels and P.W. Jackson (1963) reported that teachers disliked high-creatives; they preferred the more docile high I.Q.s. E.J. Brown (1962) reported results of MacKinnon and F. Barron who found that research scientists as students had averaged between B and C grades. These findings are compatible with the suggestions contained in the preceding paragraphs.

Private tuition A private tutor or mentor, unhampered by regulations and able to focus on one pupil or few, can teach flexibly, especially if free from the spectre of examinations and qualifications, adjusting to a pupil's interests and aptitudes, drawing forth latent talent. Such a tutor need not demand precise (rigid) memorising, which may well set the pupil's mind in the tutor's mental ruts, detrimental to the pupil's individual thinking. Vaguer ideas, toyed with noncommittally, lend themselves to variation and recombinative syntheses. When indoctrination precedes private thinking it often dominates minds exposed to it, pre-empting the role of truth-seeking flexibility. Gauss laid the foundation of mathematical advances before he went up to GoÈttingen and Einstein reputedly discussed at sixteen ideas that led to relativity after graduating. Charles Darwin's boyhood passion for beetles and birds preceded his university days, as did the different theory of evolution propounded by Erasmus Darwin, a grandfather of Charles. Civilised long before Europe, China for two millennia selected mandarins by examination ± making for stability rather than progress, in that influential positions were awarded to those who conformed to venerable standards.

Dreams Mysteriously we seem to possess a faculty for throwing our thoughts into a desired channel, as if we chose where electrical activity should

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

173

predominate in the brain, although we cannot always command at will the retrieval of memories therein. There are however occasions when memories and even new ideas or insights occur unexpectedly and unsought. In sleeping dreams elements of conscious experience and learning recombine crazily, rather as they recombine reasonably in creative or imaginative thinking, perhaps while inhibitory controls prevent the passage of signals along habitual neural routes. Certainly inhibition of motor centres occurs in the rapid-eye-movement phase of sleep, for dreamers only twitch their limbs when running or struggling. The locus ceruleus may be the source of inhibition: its fine axons ramify through the mid-brain, forebrain and cerebellum 39. Gauss discovered a construction for a polygon with seventeen sides: ``during a vacation . . . before I got out of bed, I managed to see the required relationship with such clarity . . .''. Mozart's composition flowed best when he was alone or sleepless at night, an indescribable delight. Wagner, exhausted after a long walk in Italy (1853), dozed on a couch. He seemed to be in water whose incessant roar sounded like broken chords in E flat major; the water rose above his head. Waking in terror he wrote the prelude to Das Rheingold. As Richard Strauss, running into difficulty, would sleep and expect to have the answer next morning, so Einstein wakened one day with a fresh insight into the perplexities of special relativity. Goethe's ``Wandrers Nachtlied'' (17890) was composed spontaneously (hardly deliberating) in a trance-like state. His ``Um Mitternacht'' drifted into Goethe's thoughts unheralded (complete) on a moonlight night in his seventieth year. These examples may indeed illustrate inhibition in action, but I propose that personal habits of analysis and synthesis promote genius. Reverie, so characteristic of genius, seems to imply imaginative (recombinative) thinking, which improves responsiveness along lateral cross-connections between the (relatively isolated) neural routes `potentiated' by repetitive training. Lateral responsiveness allows electric excitation to diverge from the neural routes laid down by educators, more readily if the genius resisted learning by rote (by mimicry), and it constructs a network of responsive neurons, as illustrated simply in my diagram. Forgetfulness and invention seem to be two aspects of one phenomenon: the breaking out of mental ruts. Habitual reverie may lead to a structured mental organisation appropriate to the individual's purposes, or to information systems

Reverie and genius

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

174

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

of superior utility in that they guide the user who knows not what he seeks. Truth, Newton declares, ``is offspring of unbroken silence and meditation''. Chance, says Pasteur, favours the mind that is prepared. But Newton did not impress his mother's servants and Darwin, his gardener complained, could stand by a flower for ten minutes: if only he had something to do! A bus conductor in Princeton asked Einstein whether his arithmetic was bad. Dreamers are not admired by everyone. Asked about laboratory rules Edison expostulated: ``There ain't no rules around here! We're tryin' to accomplish somep'n''.

Conclusions If my diagram is substantially correct, we can only optimise conventional memorising at the cost of lateral memory, interdisciplinary thinking and flexibility. We may be overrating the value of examination-grading, as now practised. Perhaps we should, like many geniuses, memorise grudgingly (especially conventional details and names, for names serve to distinguish, not to join creatively). Creativity utilises fragmentable, rather than robust, memories. My diagram contrasts two extreme neural conditions. Perhaps all of us are in an intermediate

condition, but geniuses, I suggest, lie well over towards the right diagram. Often people succeed remarkably whose formal education is very limited.

Notes 1. Alexander the Great, J.G. Lloyd, 1981. 2. Conqueror of the World, R. Grousset, translated by Sinor & MacKellar, 1967. 3. Nelson, Carola Oman, 1947. 4. Napoleon, D. Chandler, 1973. 5. The Mind of Napoleon, J.C. Herold, 1961. 6. The Life and Works of Goethe, G.H. Lewis, reprint, 1959. 7. Goethe, D. Luke, 1964. 8. Childhood, Boyhood, Youth, L.N. Tolstoy, translated by R. Edmonds, 1964. 9. Tolstoy, H. Troyat, 1965, translated by N. Amphoux. 10. Lives of the Artists, G. Vasari, 1568, translated G. Bull, 1965. 11. The World of Leonardo, R. Wallace. 12. The World of Michelangelo, R. Coughlan, 1971. 13. The World of Rembrandt, R. Wallace, 1975, in Time-Life Library of Art. 14. Bach, E. & S. Grew, 1947. 15. Mozart, H. Raynor, 1978. 16. Beethoven, E. Ludwig, 1948. 17. Beethoven, G.R. Marek, 1969. 18. The Outline of Music, Malcolm Sargent and M. Cooper, 1962.

Diagrammatic

Vertical lines represent paths through successive synapses which, after forceful instruction, repeated use, have improved excitatory response. Memories are retentive partly because lateral paths, little used, are less likely to transmit the signals. Training and habit has set the mind in ruts. Electric excitation in the path from 2 to 2 continues along this path reliably but routinely. Deviations are regarded as errors. The brain can be a scrapyard for approved but trivial or transient information, e.g. names or news.

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

Repeated tentative, imaginative, recombinational thinking (utilized in planning ahead, analysis and hypothetical probing) has improved transmission across lateral connections. Trains of thought set by education can be interrupted: what starts in path 1 may emerge along path 4. Fixed memories are less reliable but new insights and ideas can occur. The brain is a cross-linking tool: data is stored in notebooks or computer memories. Traits include withdrawn, perhaps absent-minded, dreaminess (reverie) oriented towards the universal and eternal.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

EDUCATION AND GENIUS

19. Wagner, R.L. Jacobs, 1935. 20. Tristan and Isolde, H. Redlich, 1948. 21. Memoirs of Sir Isaac Newton's Life, W. Stukeley, 1752. See A Portrait of Isaac Newton, F.E. Manuel, 1980, pages 42, 73. Isaac Newton, L.T. More, 1934. 22. From Darwin's Autobiography, see The Voyage of Charles Darwin, C. Railing, 1979 Edition, p. 18. 23. Thomas Alva Edison, M. Josephson, 1961. Edison, R.W. Clark, 1977. 24. Gauss, Ian Stewart, 1977. Carl Friedrich Gauss, Tord Hall, translated Froderberg, 1970. 25. Einstein, B. Hoffman, 1977, p. 231. Einstein, R.W. Clark, 1973. 26. Galileo, C.A. Ronan, 1974. 27. British scientists of 19th Century, J.G. Crowther, 1940. Michael Faraday of The Royal Institution, R. King, 1973. 28. Pasteur and Modern Science, R. Dubos, 1961. The Microbe Man, E. Doorly, 1938, 1978. 29. The Life of William Harvey, Sir Geoffrey Keynes, 1966. 30. Lives of the Engineers, S. Smiles, 1862. 31. My Philosophy of Industry, H. Ford, 1924. H. Ford, Chartered Mechanical Engineer, January 1967, R.T. Carr. 32. The Wright Brothers, F.C. Kelly, 1944. 33. Marconi, W.P. Jolly, 1972. 34. The Astonishing Hypothesis, Francis Crick, 1994, Chapter 8. 35. Molecular mechanisms of memory, Marie Gibbs, New Scientist, 25th January 1979, p. 261. 36. A Review in Nature, Vol. 322, 1986, p. 419, covers fifty investigations. 37. Neuroscience, J. Beatty, 1995, Chapter 14. 38. Mentor Edition, p. 142, 1958. 39. New Scientist, Floyd Bloom, 10th June 1976, p. 593.

References Beatty, J. (1995) Neuroscience, W.C. Brown Communications, Dubuque, IA52001, U.S.A. Bloom, F. (1976) Brains Multipurpose Centre, New Scientist, 10th June, p. 593. Born, Max (1971) The Born-Einstein letters, Macmillan, London or Basingstoke. Brown, I. (1951) Shakespeare, Reprint Society from Wm. Collins Sons. Carr, R.T. (1967) Henry Ford, Chartered Mech. Eng., January, p. 16, Inst. Mech. Eng., London SW1. Cary, H.F. (trans. 1916) Vision of Dante Alighieri, Oxford Univ. Press. Chancellor, J. (1973) Charles Darwin, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London SW4 7TA. Clark, R.W. (1977) Edison, Macdonald & Jane's, Shepherdess Walk, London N1 7LW. Clark, R.W. (1973) Einstein. Coughlan, R. (1971) World of Michelangelo, TimeLife International, Nederland, B.V. Crankshaw, E. (1974) Tolstoy, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, St. John's Hill, London SW1.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

175

Crowther, J.G. (1940) British Scientists 19th Century, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middlesex. Crick, F. (1994) The Astonishing Hypothesis, Simon & Schuster, Kendal St., London W2 2AQ. Darwin, C. (1859) Origin of Species, Mentor Books (1958 edit.), Madison Avenue, New York 22. Doorly, E. (1978) The Microbe Man, Heinemann Educational, Charles St., London W1X 8AH. Dubos, R. (1961) Pasteur and Modern Science, Heinemann Educational, Charles St., London W1X 8AH. Gibbs, M. (1979) Molecular Mechanisms of Memory, New Scientist, 25 January, p. 261. Goelet, Castelucci, Schacher, Kandel (1986) Nature, Vol. 322, p. 419, Reviews fifty articles. Grew, E. and S. (1947) Bach. Grousset, R. (1944) Conqueror of the World, Oliver & Boyd, Welbeck St., London W1. Hall, Tord (1970 trans.) Carl Friedrich Gauss, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A. Herold, J.C. (1961) Mind of Napoleon, Columbia University Press, New York & London. Hoffman, B. (1975) Einstein, Granada Publishing, Frogmore, St. Albans, Herts. AL2 2NF. Jacobs, R.L. (1935) Wagner. Jolly, W.P. (1972) Marconi, Constable. Josephson, M. (1961) Thomas Alva Edison. Kelly, F.C. (1944) The Wright Brothers. Keynes, Sir Geoffrey (1966) Life of William Harvey. King, R. (1973) Michael Faraday, Royal Institution, London. Lewis, G.H. (1959 reprint) Life and Works of Goethe, Everyman's Library. Lloyd, J.G. (1981) Alexander the Great, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge CP2 1RP. Luke, D. (1964) Goethe: Selected Verse, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middlesex. Manuel, F.E. (1980) Isaac Newton, Fred. Muller Ltd., London NW2 6LE. Marek, G.R. (1969) Beethoven, Em Kimber & Co. More, L.T. (1934) Isaac Newton. Naish, G.P.B. (1968) Nelson, Pitkin Pictorials, Wyfold Rd., London SW6. Newton, Isaac (1686) Principia (Motte's transl. revised Cajori), Univ. California, Berkeley & Los Angeles. Oman, Carola (1947) Nelson. Railing, C. (1979) Charles Darwin, B.B.C. London. Raynor, H. (1978) Mozart, Macmillan, London & Basingstoke. Redlich, J. (1948) Tristan and Isolde, Boosey & Hawkes, London. Ronan, C. (1974) Galileo, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London SW4 7TA. Sargent, M. and Cooper, M. (1962) The Outline of Music. Smiles, S. (1862) Lives of the Engineers. Tolstoy, L.N. (transl. Edmonds 1964) Childhood, Boyhood, Youth, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middlesex. Troyat, H. (1965, transl. Amphoux 1970) Tolstoy, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middlesex. Vasari, G. (1568, transl. G. Bull 1965) Lives of the Artists, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middlesex. Wallace, R. (1968) The World of Leonardo, Time-Life International, Nederland B.V.

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

176

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Wallace, R. (1975) The World of Rembrandt, TimeLife International, Nederland B.V. For quick references consult Encyclopaedia Britannica, Dictionary of National Biography, etc. Raymond Taylor Carr is a former engineer and author and editor of engineering training texts.

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

Editor's note. This article represents a substantial project carried out by Raymond Carr over a period of many years. It has proved difficult to provide full details of all references. If readers can indicate where such information can be found, the author and editors would be pleased to hear from them.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

INNOVATION STYLE REVISITED

177

Taking Style On Board (or how to get used to the idea of creative adaptors and uncreative innovators)

R.J. Talbot The purpose of this paper is to explore the potential impact of Kirton's Adaption-Innovation Theory on our thinking about creativity, and consequently on the practices of researchers and trainers in this field. That people differ in their degree or level of creativity has long been established. Kirton's work asserts that people also differ in the manner in which they express their creativity ± their style, and the KAI (the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory) measures a person's preferred style. In the literature, Style and Level of creativity are argued (and mostly shown) to be independent. It follows from this that Adaptors and Innovators are creative (and uncreative) in different ways. It is suggested that much of the work in the creativity field has focused on the Innovative style of creativity. This paper describes research identifying differences in how Adaptors and Innovators view their creative products, looks at some possible implications for training, explores differences in preferred organisational climate between Adaptors and Innovators, and suggests a style-neutral definition of creativity.

Style of creativity

M

ichael Kirton (1989 and elsewhere) suggests that not only do people exhibit different degrees or levels of creativity, but that they express their creativity in different ways ± they have different styles of creativity. On the one hand are what he calls Adaptors, whose preference is to work within the system to improve things. Adaptors are conforming, efficient and like to deal with ideas a few at a time. On the other hand are Innovators who ignore or challenge the system and come up with more radical proposals for change. They are non-conforming, inefficient, and like to proliferate ideas. Kirton (1989) also argues, and provides supporting evidence that style of creativity is unrelated either to mental capacity (IQ) ± there's no reason to suppose (and no evidence to suggest) that Adaptors are any more intelligent than Innovators ± or to capacity for creativity ± it is possible that where relationships between style and level measures have been found (e.g. Isaksen & Puccio, 1988), that the measures used have been impure measures of level and/or style. In a recent review of the style/level debate, Mudd, using the work of Goldsmith & Matherly (1987) and Goldsmith (1987), concludes that those level

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997. 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

measures showing relationships with the KAI `are relatively more a style than a level measure' (Mudd, 1996). We shall return to this issue later. For the moment we shall proceed on the assumption that style and level of creativity are independent. As I suggested in a review of Kirton's 1989 book (Kirton, 1989)

Different styles of creativity

``There are interesting consequences of separating level from style. If they are independent, we should be able to distinguish (crudely) four general types of people: Creative Innovators, Creative Adaptors, Uncreative Innovators and Uncreative Adaptors.'' (Talbot, 1990) I believe that the majority of interest in the creativity field has been devoted to Creative Innovators (often in implicit contrast to Uncreative Adaptors). This has meant the neglect of both Creative Adaptors and Uncreative Innovators. It leads to the commonly held belief (not least by themselves) that Adaptors are not creative, and that Innovators are always creative. To remedy this situation I believe we should make some changes to our understanding of creativity. We need, among other things, an increased understanding of the differing personalities and motivations of

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

178

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Adaptors and Innovators, further understanding of the differing creative processes of Adaptors and Innovators (and how their differing preferences might be better catered for in creative problem solving training), a recognition of the differing nature of the creative products of Adaptors and Innovators, and definitions and measures of organisational climates supportive of both Adaptors and Innovators. Finally, we will have to come up with a definition of creativity that caters for both Adaptors and Innovators. In the last few years, research, particularly in Buffalo and Manchester, has begun to throw some light on these facets of creativity.

Creative products The Adaptor's motive is towards doing things better, whereas the Innovator's is towards doing things differently. Adaptors and Innovators choose different types of problems to work on, and look in different places for solutions. Their products are a function of their style. Puccio (1990) and Puccio, Treffinger and Talbot (1995) showed that individuals who reported a more Adaptive orientation, were more likely to describe their creative products as those that: ``fulfilled their intended purposes or functions (Adequate), followed accepted and understood rules associated with the job (Logical), showed a high degree of craftsmanship (Well-Crafted), and had clear practical applications.'' Meanwhile, the innovative style . . . ``was more closely associated with products that were new or unusual (Original), caught the attention of others (Attractive), helped others to view their work in new and different ways (Transformational), responded to the responsibilities of the job (Appropriate), and clearly communicated their purposes and advantages (Expressive).''

Balancing training programmes Volume 6

Number 3

In other words, Adaptors place more emphasis on the usefulness and Innovators more on the novelty of their creative products. The measure used (the Survey of Creative and Innovative Performance, or SCIP, based on the work of Besemer and Treffinger (1981) and Besemer and O'Quin (1987)) is relatively style neutral. Adaptors and Innovators can both have high scores, but emphasise different characteristics of creative products. It is instructive to ask whether creativity training programmes, strategies and techniques are similarly balanced.

September 1997

Creative problem solving training: techniques The contemporary Creative Problem Solving (CPS) approach (e.g. Isaksen, Dorval, & Treffinger (1994)) offers a CPS strategy and a broad array of creativity techniques, and provides metacognitive skills that can be applied and that support personal and group effectiveness. There is explicit treatment of both styles by these authors. A whole chapter is devoted to `Personal Orientation to CPS' including a substantial treatment of Kirton's work. Following this, the strengths and weaknesses of each style are related to each phase of the CPS process (`Understanding the Problem', `Generating Ideas' and `Planning for Action'). In addition, some divergent techniques are classified as being more likely to lead to Adaptive or Innovative outcomes (following Gryskiewicz (1980)). By learning the whole variety of convergent and divergent techniques, a person acquires skills which augment their natural strengths, and which can be applied when the situation demands. They also learn to respect the strengths of people with a different style from their own. This seems an eminently satisfactory way of incorporating style considerations into CPS training. Of course, some features of CPS are differently congenial to Adaptors and Innovators. Injunctions to separate Divergence and Convergence, to challenge assumptions, etc., are likely to sit less well with Adaptors than with Innovators. Adaptors may be reluctant to diverge too far from the current reality, compared with Innovators. On the other hand, the thoroughness and orderliness of the whole creative problem solving strategy as presented by Isaksen, Dorval, & Treffinger (1994) is likely to appeal more to Adaptors than to Innovators. Rickards & Puccio (1992) provide evidence for the idea that Innovators prefer divergence, and Adaptors prefer convergence. There might well be some truth in this, in that Adaptors might not like to stray too far from the straight and narrow. It is possible, though, that Adaptors don't like some divergent techniques because the techniques are mostly more appropriate to the Innovative style. They're haphazard, undisciplined, nonsequential etc., and not thorough, systematic and painstaking. Perhaps it's not that Adaptors don't like diverging ± they acknowledge the need to seek alternatives ± it's that they don't like diverging in an Innovative way. A systematic, step-by-step exploration of the problem space would be much more attractive to Adaptors (`Have we covered everything?'). Similarly, Innovators might prefer

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

INNOVATION STYLE REVISITED

divergence because most of the available convergent techniques favour the Adaptive style. Innovators (if my own experience is anything to go by) find procedures involving, say, ranking and weighting of alternatives both tedious to do and unconvincing in outcome. (I'd rather toss a coin and see if I'm disappointed with the outcome.) It is, of course, possible to converge Innovatively ± presumably that's what `Illumination' is (or `Isolating Hits' (Isaksen, Dorval, & Treffinger (1994))). One diverges and incubates and resists convergence until the moment of insight occurs, or until you get an idea that feels right. It ought to be possible to do a reasonably well-controlled test of these speculations. The basic research design would be to include in several training courses at least one Adaptively Divergent technique, one Innovatively Divergent technique, one Adaptively Convergent technique and one Innovatively Convergent technique. Relating preferences for these techniques to Style, would unconfound the two variables (Style and Divergence/Convergence). Moger (1997) is currently investigating these issues by examining the preferences of Adaptors and Innovators for techniques (both divergent and convergent) with varying degrees of structure. What's really interesting about this line of thinking is the problem of finding as many Adaptively divergent techniques as there are Innovatively divergent ones. Does this suggest a bias towards Innovative creativity in the past? Maybe we have to find ways of presenting the techniques so that they can be used equally easily by Adaptors and Innovators. For example, in brainstorming, listening to and building on others' ideas (Hitch-hiking), is probably more amenable to Adaptors than is an injunction to fantasise (Free-wheeling). In other words we could identify and make explicit the style-relevant parts of current techniques, thus making it clear that both styles have a contribution to make, and where that contribution lies. Maybe we need to invent a few more techniques where there are seen to be gaps.

Creative problem solving training: increasing the level of creativity Another interesting implication for CPS trainers of Style/Level independence is that Adaptors and Innovators may be uncreative in different ways, and for different reasons. Isaksen & Dorval (1993) have produced a fascinating description of personal characteristics ascribed to creative and uncreative

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

179

people taking the style/level distinction into account (see Figure 1). They describe LowCreative Adaptors as ``submissive, dogmatic, dull, rigid, risk avoidant and compliant''. Low-Creative Innovators, on the other hand, are ``Reluctant to commit to any particular course of action, impractical, self-centred, abrasive, undependable and capricious risk-takers.'' (p. 308) In organisational contexts, these sorts of personal characteristics might translate to Uncreative Adaptors being too attached to the current way of doing things, too subservient to the powerful, too nit-picky/ absorbed in the detail, etc. Uncreative Innovators, on the other hand, might be too far removed from the reality of other organisation members, too wedded to their own ideas, too unconcerned with gaining acceptance, more interested in exploring alternatives than implementing solutions, or lack confidence in their ability to promote their ideas, lack certain types of power needed to influence the course of events, or possibly just lack a champion for their ideas. Adaptors and Innovators might thus require differing training from each other to help increase their level of creativity. Perhaps trainers need to go beyond CPS to help in this way. An understanding of people in organisations would seem to be a good first step (Talbot (1993)).

Creative climate and style: preferred climate It is also worth asking whether our thinking and assumptions about the desirable characteristics of creative climates, and in particular questionnaire measures of creative climate, especially those developed before Kirton's work became available, are balanced with respect to style. That is, is the climate described in the items of the questionnaire equally appropriate to Adaptors and Innovators? (if such a climate exists.) It seems not unreasonable to suggest that an Adaptor (such as some types of engineer (Lordan, Talbot & Thompson (1994))) would prefer a supporting climate that would be described rather differently from that preferred by the Innovator. Ekvall himself (Ekvall (1995)), suggests that some organisational characteristics, and some climate dimensions are differentially favourable to the two styles. An organisational characteristic he calls `order and plainness',

Perceptions of creative climate

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

180

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Figure 1. Results of Sorting some creativity characteristics using the Level-Style distinction which is to do with such things as unambiguous roles, requirements, instructions, responsibilities, schedules and plans, is: ``favourable to incremental innovation, small step improvements of the existing products and processes, but when it comes to radical innovation even this in many aspects favourable and necessary structure dimension might be hampering. Ekvall (1995) p. 18. On goal clarity, he says: ``unclear goals were contributing to the climate that made radical innovation possible'' Ekvall (1995) p. 19. `Order and plainness' were positively related to some CCQ dimensions (Challenge/ Motivation, Idea Support and Trust/Openness), and negatively with Conflicts. On climate dimensions he says: ``Risk-taking, Dynamism, Freedom and Debates seem to be the climate dimensions that make the crucial difference between

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

the creative climate that supports radical innovation and the creative climate that allows only incremental improvements. There is need for more of these climate aspects when big leaps are aimed at than when small step down development is the innovation strategy.'' Ekvall (1995) p. 19 These findings strongly suggest that Adaptors and Innovators need different climates for their creativity to flourish. For Ekvall, both sorts of climate can be described in terms of his climate dimensions, different sub-sets being differently important. Recent research (Talbot (1995)) suggests, however, that the Climate for Innovation Questionnaire (CIQ IVa), which was developed by Isaksen and colleagues from Ekvall's original instrument, the CCQ, describes a climate that might favour the Innovative style. Members of a Health Authority in England were asked what sort of climate they would prefer (in addition to the climate they observed ± the usual administration). With the exception of Conflicts, Innovators produced higher dimen-

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

INNOVATION STYLE REVISITED

sion scores than Adaptors on preferred climate, suggesting that the CIQ dimensions contained more of the climate characteristics desired by Innovators than by Adaptors. (In partial support of Ekvall, the largest differences were on Risk-taking and Debates.) Also Grivas (1996) reports that Adaptors and Innovators in an R&D organisation want some climate characteristics to be similar, and others to be different. The needs they have in common are classified by Grivas under Communication (both want clear open communication, debates, supportive interactions and clear communication from management) and Experiment (to explore new ideas, more resources to develop ideas and more quiet time for research). They differ when it comes to Community Interaction, Relationship to Management and Approaches to Obstacles. Under `Community Interaction', Adaptors want a sense of involvement and engagement in a well functioning community. Innovators, on the other hand desire a community which respects the autonomy of others, and thus of themselves, and provides recognition of their competence. On `Relationship to Management' Adaptors and Innovators have rather different needs as far as management is concerned. On the whole, Adaptors value management's personal involvement, whereas Innovators do not. Adaptors want Management to provide a sense of safety, in which they can take risks, and the help and approval of management for spending time on ideas. Too little support or too much control, seen as affecting their freedom is not liked by Adaptors. Over-involvement of management is also seen as indicative of a lack of trust on management's part. (They appear to want management to behave in much the same way as is prescribed by Hersey & Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory (Hersey & Blanchard (1981)). Innovators welcome management involvement only insofar as management provides the resources the Innovator needs. They tend to see management as a source of conflict, and mention the need for improved management communication and structure. Grivas also reports rather different approaches to improving the climate, especially when it comes to dealing with `obstacles to creativity'. Adaptors want to improve that which they find inhibiting ± improve current operating procedures, change others' attitudes towards being more supportive of risktaking and of new ideas; Innovators want to get rid of the source(s) of inhibition (the not unexpectedly more radical approach to problems); remove tasks that stand in the way

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

181

of ``real work'', remove the people causing the conflict and so on. The CIQ does seem to provide us with a valid and reliable measure of the climate suitable for the Innovative style, but how well does it cater for Adaptors? It might be worth speculating on how it could be modified or augmented to provide a measure of the climate suitable for the Adaptive style as well. As far as I've been able to ascertain there are no such measures available as yet, though other climate/environment instruments do contain items and subscales that might relate more to Adaptor than to Innovator preferences. For example, Amabile's Work Environment Inventory (WEI) (now KEYS) includes `Supervisory Encouragement', Amabile (1995) found no correlation between KAI style scores and any of her work environment scales. It remains to be seen whether people's preferred work environment would also be uncorrelated with style. Grivas' work is suggestive, here. Perhaps we could add some items ± concerning, for example, `Community' and `Management Involvement' on which Adaptors would score higher than Innovators for Preferred Climate. The questionnaire might contain a set of items that are `style neutral', a set important to Adaptors and a set important to Innovators, all relating to the current dimensions (or would they need modification?). Figure 2 shows a tentative arrangement of climate characteristics pertinent to style.

Definition of creativity Earlier I quoted Mudd concerning his assertion that some measures of level of creativity are in fact measures of style. An alternative interpretation is possible, and this has to do with how we choose to define creativity. Perhaps the measures are measures of level, but they're only measuring level of innovative creativity. What is needed are measures of level of adaptive creativity, as well (or maybe level measures that are style-neutral). What do creative Adaptors and creative Innovators have in common? Essentially they seek to create change, within the current system for Adaptors, of the system for Innovators. Both are dissatisfied with the status quo, and are motivated to change it. (See Figure 1 for further common characteristics.) To take Kirton's style distinction into account we might define creativity in organisations as follows:

Defining creativity

``Making a change that sticks (for a while).''

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

182

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Figure 2. Tentative results of Sorting some creative climate characteristics using the Level-Style distinction This way of looking at creativity has a number of features and implications:

``Making'' The use of this word is meant to emphasise the active nature of creativity. I am not talking just about imagining how things might be ± though that is an essential part of the process ± but also about the applying of new ideas to generate change.

``a Change'' ``Change'' is given a central place in these considerations. Change, in line with the Adaptor-Innovator distinction, can be looked at as varying from ``Incremental''

to ``radical''.

Synonyms include ``Evolutionary''

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

to ``Revolutionary''

``Improving things'' to ``Changing things'' ``Better'' to ``Different'' Changes at the left hand end, make the current system better in some way, in small steps, whereas the further to the right we go, the more we are likely to change how something is done, or even change what is done. Radical changes have many more implications for the people doing the changing and for others with interests in the situation being changed. Creativity involves (deliberate attempts at) change. Implied is a dissatisfaction with the way things are, or a vision of what they may (or even should) become.

``that Sticks'' This term is meant to draw attention to the value dimension of creativity. A change sticks because somebody wants it to. Minimally this is the change generator. Usually, there are others with interests in the situation, and their response to the proposed change coupled

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

INNOVATION STYLE REVISITED

with their degree of influence will determine whether and for how long the change sticks.

``for a while'' This is meant to draw attention to the temporal nature of creativity. Nothing lasts forever. Change begets change (Today's solutions are the sources of tomorrow's problems (Talbot, 1982).) People's interests change; new people, with their own projects, come on the scene and want to leave their mark, do things their way etc. In an organisational context, changes are made in Products or Services (what the organisation produces for its customers), or Human Resources (e.g. the capabilities, wellbeing etc. of its people), or Administrative Procedures (e.g. pay systems etc.), or Technology (e.g. production procedures). (This classification of ``products'' is borrowed and adapted from Daft (1989).) It is apparent that changes to any of these `products' can be adaptive or innovative, brought about by Adaptors, Innovators or more likely by a team containing a range of styles. Adaptors and Innovators typically have somewhat pejorative views of each other (Kirton (1987)). Awareness of the style concept, coupled with a respect for the different strengths and weaknesses of each style, can help considerably in generating a collaborative problem-solving strategy in organisations. To summarise: If style and level are independent (and the conceptual arguments are convincing, though the empirical evidence is more equivocal), then I think those of us interested in creativity must embrace the implications more comprehensively than hitherto. In particular we need to take a more style-balanced approach to creativity training, to our assessment of creativity-conducive climates, and to our identification of what are to be deemed as creative products, and perhaps most importantly, to how we define creativity. Failure to do so will mean the continuing neglect of the creativity of Adaptors (who constitute half the population), and the lack of understanding of why the Innovative style does not inevitably lead to creativity.

References Amabile, T.M. (1995). Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity: Promises and Pitfalls. In Proceedings of an International Conference on

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

183

Organizational Climates for Creativity and Change: Research and Applications (pp. 22±38). Buffalo, NY: Center for Studies in Creativity. Besemer, S.P., & O'Quin, K. (1987). Creative Product Analysis: Testing a Model by Developing a Judging Instrument. In S.G. Isaksen (Ed.), Frontiers of Creativity Research: Beyond the Basics (pp. 341±379). Buffalo, NY: Bearly. Besemer, S.P., & Treffinger, D.J. (1981). Analysis of Creative Products: Review and Synthesis. Journal of Creative Behaviour, 15, 158±178. Daft, R.L. (1989). Organization Theory and Design. New York: West Publishing. Ekvall, G. (1995). Assessing the climate for creativity and change. In Anonymous, Proceedings of Conference on Organizational Climate for Creativity and Change: Research and Applications (pp. 8±20). Buffalo, NY: Center for Studies in Creativity. Goldsmith, R.E. (1987). Creative level and creative style. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 317±323. Goldsmith, R.E., & Matherly, T.A. (1987). Adaption-innovation and creativity: A replication and extension. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 79±82. Grivas, C. (1996). Master's Thesis. Creative Style and Climate. Center for Studies in Creativity, Buffalo State College. Gryskiewicz, S.S. (1980). Targeted innovation: A situational approach. In S.S. Gryskiewicz (Ed.), Creativity Week 3 (pp. 77±103). Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K.H. (1981). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Isaksen, S.G., & Dorval, K.B. (1993). Toward an Improved Understanding of Creativity within People: The Level-Style Distinction. In S.G. Isaksen, M.C. Murdock, R.L. Firestein, & D.J. Treffinger (Eds.), Understanding and Recognizing Creativity: The Emergence of a Discipline (pp. 299±330). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Isaksen, S.G., Dorval, K.B., & Treffinger, D.J. (1994). Creative Approaches to Problem Solving. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt. Isaksen, S.G., & Puccio, G.J. (1988). AdaptionInnovation and the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: the Style-Level Issue Revisited. Psychological Reports, 63, 659±670. Kirton, M.J. (1987). Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory Manual. Hatfield: Occupational Foundation for Educational Research. Kirton, M.J. (1989). Adaptors and Innovators: styles of creativity and problem solving. London: Routledge. Lordan, M., Talbot, R.J., & Thompson, G. (1994). Training to Enhance and Vary Creativity Style. In J. Bedard (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1994 International Creativity and Innovation Networking Conference (pp. 166±173). Quebec. Moger, S. (1997). Master's Dissertation. Style Preference and Creative Problem Solving Training. University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology: Manchester, UK. Mudd, S. (1996). Kirton's A-I theory: evidence bearing on the style/level and factor composition. British Journal of Psychology, 87, 241±254.

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

184

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Puccio, G.J. (1990). Doctoral Thesis. Personenvironment Fit: Using Kirton's AdaptorInnovator Theory to Determine the Effect of Stylistic Fit upon Stress, Job Satisfaction and Creative Performance. University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology: Manchester, UK; Unpublished. Puccio, G.J., Treffinger, D.J., & Talbot, R.J. (1995). An Exploratory Examination of the Relationship between Creativity Style and Creative Performance. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 157±172. Rickards, T., & Puccio, G.J. (1992). Problem Finding, Idea Finding and Implementation: an Exploratory Model for Investigating Smallgroup Problem-solving. In P. Barrar & C.L. Cooper (Eds.), Managing Organisations in 1992: Strategic Responses (pp. 247±263). London: Routledge. Talbot, R.J. (1982). Problems and Change. In B.N. Evans, J.A. Powell, & R.J. Talbot (Eds.), Changing Design (pp. 99±108). Chichester: John Wiley.

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

Talbot, R.J. (1990). Adaptors and Innovators, Editor, M.J. Kirton: Book Review. The Occupational Psychologist, 10. Talbot, R.J. (1993). Creativity and the Organisational Context: implications for training. In S.G. Isaksen, M.C. Murdock, R.L. Firestein, & D.J. Treffinger (Eds.), Nurturing and Developing Creativity: the Emergence of a Discipline (pp. 177±214). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Talbot, R.J. (1996). Adaptors, Innovators and Climate for Creativity. Colloquium given at the Center for Studies in Creativity, Buffalo, 18th April, 1996. (un pub)

R.J. Talbot is Lecturer in Organisational Psychology, Manchester School of Management, UMIST.

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

188

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

Book Reviews Virtual teams: reaching across space, time and organizations with technology, J. Lipnack & J. Stamps, 1997, ISBN 0471165530, hback, 262pp, J. Wiley, NY, £22.50

A

virtual team is `a group of people who interact through interdependent tasks guided by a common purpose . . . [working] across space, time, and organizational boundaries with links strengthened by webs of communication technologies (pp. 6±7). The recognition of virtual teams is a consequence of the new technologies of communication that helps overcome the fundamental communication characteristic of communication in traditional teams, its rapid decline over distance. As is well-established, face to face communication and therefore quality of collaboration drops is substantially less for people who are located more than two floors or more than about twenty meters apart. That statistic however has become increasingly meaningless as the once-fixed work location ± say a personal space with desk and chair ± is replaced by flexible work areas, shared rather than personal spaces. The deskless but hot-wired executive is on the increase. Communications have also changed through new media permitting rapid links across the world. This is happening so as to facilitate wide-ranging collaborative ventures that transcend organizational boundaries ± for example along supply chains and joint ventures internationally. The authors of Virtual Teams provide a lucid and intelligent formulation of traditional and virtual teams. They show how a group of about five individuals already is reaching the limits of comfortable interpersonal communication changes of all members. This means that if the task needs of a project calls for larger numbers of interacting people (as is often the case) then the result is unlikely to be a fully interacting team, but perhaps becomes made up of clusters of teams within the larger entity. Within this analysis, they challenge an assumption on the beneficial nature of in-team cohesion. They suggest that in a networked organization, such teams may be

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

weak at collaborating with other team-like components within the network. This theme of new modes of collaboration continues in chapters on people and values. There seems to be a standard argument arising in response to the simplistic economic one of individual competition. This relies on a few new ideas from game theory in which individual self-seeking strategies turn out less successful than collaborative ones combined with clear signals that non-co-operative modes will be swiftly followed by nonco-operative responses. I find these arguments rather fragile, too easy to be defused by other inferences from theoretical modelling, and unlikely to make a dent in the prevailing individualistic paradigm. The most unconvincing material for me was that in the chapter on how to start and run a virtual team. Here the authors lost their usual sure-footedness. Their general advice was not so much obviously wrong as too close to rather obvious prescriptions about planning carefully and continuing rationally. If this is for the less experienced reader (most of us) I would have liked more about the uncertainties surrounding a very new kind of experience. This is advice on dealing with the unpredictable ± it is advice that draws on creative problem-solving theory and practice, and perhaps even more critically on learning and knowledge management theory. Even this criticism, however, should not be taken as more than a gap left in what is otherwise a well-presented account of an important topic. Within the chapter, the suggestions on media management, and establishing a team directory, seemed worth noting. Overall the book is well written, thoughtful, and offers much to the increasing number of people likely to become involved in virtual teams. Tudor Rickards # Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997. 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

BOOK REVIEWS

189

Clegg, S.R., Hardy, C., and Nord, W.R., Eds., (1996) Handbook of Organization Studies, Sage, ISBN 0-7619-5132-6, 730pp, hb, general index, £65 Handbook of Organization Studies is an ambitious, and largely successful project in capturing key issues in the contemporary study of organisation. In its scale and quality the result brings to mind Handbook of Industrial and Organisational Psychology edited by Dunnette, and published over 20 years ago. Quality control has been achieved through shrewd initial selection of authors, and also by means of a formidable editorial board.

Overall contents and design Part one provides frameworks for analysis; part two current issues; and part three reflections on research theory and practice. I make no pretence of having read each chapter thoroughly, nor do I expect to do so. Rather, I have dipped into the pages to find the latest synoptic views of authors, many of whom have established themselves within their chosen chapter topics. Thus, for instance, Calas and Smircich provide a review of feminist approaches to organisation studies; Bryman deals with leadership; Weick and co-author Frances Westley with organisational learning; Gibson Burrell with paradigmatic analyses, and Lex Donaldson with a further vigorous defence of `Normal' science of contingency theory. Wherever I have dipped I have found a uniformly high standard of contribution in terms of scholarship and analysis. Within weeks of receiving the book for review I found myself hooked, and somewhat dependent on it as my reference book of choice into these and other topics. The material is of particular value in preparing the ground for empirical research investigations. I have little doubt that many other researchers will use the book for similar purposes.

A personal document? Traditionally the editors are expected to provide some integration to the material they have assembled. In this case the task is exceptionally difficult. The editors are suitably aware of the challenge, and their

preface and concluding chapter are in somewhat muted vein. The plurality of views within the field is acknowledged, with a nod towards the meta-theoretical treatment of incommensurate paradigms: `it would appear that diversity is here to stay, and we hope to continue that trend in a handbook that celebrates rather than denies variation, diversity and difference' (p. 3). I felt the editors are being more defensive than arrogant in claiming that the Handbook `. . . ultimately is our view of the terrain'. The reasoning is that no wider claims can be made beyond the sense of a set of personal views. I prefer to see the contributions as highly representative of the field and its current preoccupations. Few editors would have been authoritative and at the same time up to the challenge. In this they were of necessity guided by a powerful editorial board that ensured that the topics were those that ± a priori might be largely expected to figure in such a book. In short, the book will create its own legitimacy. The editors are perhaps least convincing in their apology for abandoning plans to `involve fully voices from outside our geographic and linguistic mainstream' (xxvii). The pleas on grounds of pragmatism seem to overlook the possibilities of a different kind of editorial board, for example with different set of responsibilities. Nor do I like the reasoning for excluding other voices and other cultures because of the risk of marginalising or patronising them. How does exclusion avoid marginalisation? Nevertheless, within its self-set boundaries, the editors, contributors, and all concerned, are to be congratulated on a substantial contribution to scholarship in the field of organisation studies. Even in today's financially tight times, this book deserves serious consideration for acquisition by libraries and serious researchers into the nature of organisation. I see it as a good investment for several years into the future. Tudor Rickards

`Innovation and change in organizations', King, N., & Anderson, N., 1997, Routledge, London, ISBN: 0-415-12881-1, hback, £25.00, 206pp In a case example in the book, a publisher commissions some consultants to `generate

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

ideas on how to improve selection methods'. As a result, the publishers received a number

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

190

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

of suggestions including a means of recruiting more creative commissioning editors. It is tempting to speculate whether the publication of this book would have been assisted or hindered by an editor recruited after such a course of action. This little exercise in reflexivity introduces one of the unresolved issues about creativity and innovation. As the authors themselves ask, does creativity reside with the producer or consumer? The answer that goes beyond the obvious is `probably both'. Nor should we confuse form and content. Should a book about innovation be innovative? Not necessarily. There is still room for a carefully assembled text intruding students and practitioners to an overview of current thinking on innovation from a specific viewpoint. Here the viewpoint is behavioural, also one to be welcomed as a counterpoint to the more common economic perspective. The book examines innovation from individual, team and organisational levels of analysis. The material is widely researched and well-grounded. The individual level material is particularly strong on the historical classics of creativity; the group and organisational level material perhaps a little too close to more general precepts of team dynamics and organisational behaviours rather than innovative teams and organisations. One less positive aspect of the book was a lack of attention to a majority of influential European contributors to research into creativity and innovation over the last few decades. The European Association for

Creativity and Innovation, based in Holland, and various other networking groups have played a valued role in disseminating this information. It is a pity that few of the activities and publications from these networks seem to have been discovered by the authors. Even computerised literature searches will not substitute for membership in such networks as a means of locating information. For whatever reason, the book makes no mention of the work of Bessant at Brighton; Jones, Talbot, and Rickards at Manchester; Henry at The Open University; nor of continental influences such as Buijs (creativity in design); Ekvall (creative climate, a topic covered in the book); Kaufman (cognitive studies). These workers are mostly in the psychological tradition which the book follows. These omissions would not have mattered if the book had stuck to the expository mode, and offered a few key readings for follow-up work. It is less acceptable if the authors offer a comprehensive-looking bibliography that turns out to be neither focused nor comprehensive. Nevertheless this little volume makes a readable addition to the shelves of trainers and practitioners who would like to beef up their work with more theoretical information about the psychological principles of innovation. A second edition, with wider coverage of European practitioners, could be welcomed as an introductory business course reader. Tudor Rickards

Gibson Burrell, Pandemonium: Towards a Retro-Organization Theory (London: Sage, 1997, 244pp. £13.95) ISBN 0 8039 7777 8 However many reviews will be written about Pandemonium, on one thing they will all agree: this is a very unusual book. The book starts off with a critique (and reply) of the book yet to be written (a nice reversal of the idea used a.o. by Lem, Borges and Rabelais of reviewing books yet to be written). The first chapter provides a ``rough guide to Pandemonium'' and is the most ``traditional'' chapter of the whole book. Burrell explains: ``I do want it to look and feel different from normal books ± particularly that kind of stultifying text which is labelled as the `set book' for an academic course. . . . This book is meant to escape from the normal conventions of textual presentation which pass for common sense within Western social

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

science (p. 1).'' ``The text is designed to be disruptive, randomizing and reliant upon the reader's creativity (p. 2).'' This creates quite a few problems for the reviewer. Usually the reviewer tries to distil some essence out of the book reviewed, comments on the ideas proposed, and evaluates the contribution of the book. The meaning to be derived from Pandemonium, however, is very much a personal thing (to a certain extent this is the case for other books as well, but I have yet to encounter an organization theory book where this is so blatantly obvious ± and encouraged). Connections and stories are made visible within as to opposed from the book itself. Vision creativity and form creativity nicely support one another. After the

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

BOOK REVIEWS

first chapter we have a juxtaposition of contramoving text (roughly the first half of the page contains text flowing front to back, at the back of the book the reader reaches a turning point, and then the text at the bottom of the page flows back to the page where we entered Pandemonium). The customary bibliography can be found in the middle of the book in a section called ``Municipal Library''. The best analogy to describe my impressions of reading this book is the music of a band called Giant Sand (only 1 in 1000 readers ± assuming 1000 people will actually read this ± will understand what I mean by that, but never mind). Harmonies and discord continuously intermingle. Lyrics at times become almost surreal, the weirdest instruments appear in certain songs, and its full of (non-obvious) funny moments (such as the singer's six month old daughter providing ``backing vocals'' on one of the songs). I am well aware I have not really discussed the content of the book at all so far. I am very reluctant to do so because whatever meaning I derived from the book is definitely not the one you will derive from it, of that Burrell has made sure. Well, I suppose I can manage just the one sentence. It is a highly personalised,

191

sometimes funny, sometimes disturbing, often insightful discussion of a lot of issues that tend to be ignored in the traditional organization theory/organization studies literature (such as death, pain, disease, and sex). Enough said: discover the book for yourselves! One final question: is this a book worth reading? A lot of people will take exception to some themes, and opinions on the book will probably be split. Some will praise its originality and insightful ideas, others may dismiss it as a futile exercise, ``the inchoate ramblings of a disturbed mind'' (to quote the imaginary review). Quite frankly, I simply enjoyed reading this book (to that extent I will take the side of the ``praisers''). A logical and linear analysis would do an injustice to the spirit of the book. I can tell you, however, I will surely read Pandemonium again at some future date because I'm convinced I missed so much. That should tell you enough. Now go away and buy the book (or try to get a free reviewer's copy). Christian De Cock School of Management Royal Holloway

Aczel, A.D. (1996) Fermat's last theorem, Unlocking the secret of an ancient mathematical problem, ISBN 1-56858-077-0, 147pp, hb, light indexing, NY: Four walls eight windows press This little book tells of the tale which came to public light in an announcement in a mathematical conference that the most famous unproved mathematical puzzle of all time had been cracked. The claimant, Andrew Wiles, a Princeton-based British mathematician, gained popular fame, only for his success to be snatched away in peer review, and then restored as he found the final refutation to the refutation. Fermat, one of mathematics' greatest figures studied as a release from his governmental duties. It was his habit to work through the ancient mathematical texts available to him, jotting further ideas in their margins. Some of his marginalia were challenges that took many years for subsequent mathematicians to proof ± mostly they were proved right. One resisted all proofs, although Fermat claimed he has a wonderful proof too extensive to be written down in the marginal spaces. The simple-looking equation is in essence a claim of non-existence of a sum of any two whole numbers raised to a power beyond two (i.e. numbers cubed, are to the power three, the simplest example). Fermat

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997

states that such a sum can not be represented as any other whole number raised to that same power. (Note for non-mathematicians: there may be some practical applications for knowing the existence of the proof ± in code making, for example. These applications are not to the point. Pure mathematics seeks truth not utility!) In some ways the account follows ones of breakthroughs by earlier generations of mathematicians, some whose work plays a part in this book. Gauss, for example, and Poincare, both wrestled with the unknown, sometimes achieving the famous moment of insight `in a flash' but after monumental struggles. So did Wiles. The book builds up to the announcement, and its sequence of events. It covers briefly, but remarkably clearly, the fundamental kinds of mathematical breakthroughs that preceded this one. Then, as in all good detective stories, there is a sting in the tail. Wiles had made one assumption that could not be defended. In near despair he retreated and regrouped. On the point of admitting shameful defeat he made one final effort at understanding where

Volume 6 Number 3

September 1997

192

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

he went wrong. With extra bits of the jigsaw from colleagues he suddenly hit the jackpot. `Eureka'. His discovery led to how he could now get it right. This book is for enthusiasts of mathematics, and the history of discovery processes. However, it is written for a lay-audience and can

Volume 6

Number 3

September 1997

be enjoyed by those with limited levels of mathematical sophistication. I found it far more accessible than Hawkins' Brief History of Time, for example. A recommended read, for pleasure and intellectual profit. Tudor Rickards

# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997