IMPROVING SCHOOL BOARD RELATIONS THROUGH THINKING STYLES Scott Childress, Ed.D. New Mexico Association of School Boards

1. IMPROVING SCHOOL BOARD RELATIONS THROUGH THINKING STYLES Scott Childress, Ed.D. New Mexico Association of School Boards LEADERS RETREAT CLOUDCROFT, NEW MEXICO JULY 17, 2009

2. This session will introduce participants to a key explanation on how School Boards can work together. Thinking styles are the way individuals solve problems. Everyone uses creativity in problem solving, but how they use their preferred thinking style can be a source of conflict. The Alamogordo Board of Education will demonstrate how this can be used in conjunction with Five Stages of Board Development.

3. Outline Introductions Five Stages of School Board Development Results of Alamogordo Board Teamwork Survey Adaptor or Innovator Results of Alamogordo KAI Questionnaire Kirton Adaptation-Innovation Theory Coping Skills

4. SPECIAL THANKS TO THESE ALAMOGORDO BOARD MEMBERS Board PresidentDr. Allan Rickman Board Vice President Sue Medina Board Member Mike Jones Board SecretaryRhonda Cross Board MemberDavid Ceballes • Board MemberColonel Michael Stapleton Superintendent of Schools Michael Harris

5. Five Stages of School Board Development FORMING STORMING NORMING PERFORMING ADJOURNING

6. Analysis of Results of Teamwork Survey This information is essential so we can get to the Performing Stage as quickly as possible.

7. Kirton Adaptation-Innovation Inventory PEOPLE DO NOT SOLVE PROBLEMS THE SAME WAY Adaptor - Innovator What is your approach to Problem Solving? WHAT IS YOUR THINKING STYLE?

8. Concerned with resolving problems rather than finding them Could be said to discover problems and discover avenues for solution Seeks solutions to problems in tried and understood ways Queries problems' basic assumptions; manipulates problems Reduces problems by improvement & greater efficiency, with maximum of continuity and stability Is catalyst to settled groups, irreverent of their consensual views; seen as abrasive, creating dissonance ADAPTOR OR INNOVATOR

9. Is catalyst to settled groups, irreverent of their consensual views; seen as abrasive, creating dissonance • When collaborating: supplies stability, order and continuity to the partnership. • When collaborating: supplies the task orientations, the break with the past and accepted theory. • Provides a safe base for riskier operations. • Sensitive to people, maintains group cohesion and cooperation. • Insensitive to people, often threatens group cohesion and cooperation. ADAPTOR OR INNOVATOR

10. WHAT EXACTLY IS IT WE ARE DOING? Psychometrics is the field of study concerned with the theory and technique of measurement of knowledge, abilities, attitudes, cognition (THINKING) and personalitytraits.

11. What human trait is genetically determined? Is readily apparent in young children? Can be reliably measured in teenagers? Does not changewith age or experience? Can be validated with a reliable instrument? Scores can be normalized on a bell curve? Problem-Solving /Thinking Style

12. Kirton Adaptation-Innovation Theory Team collaboration and the reduction of conflictfigures largely in everyone’s life. For you to have an efficient Board team you need everyone to spend the greatest effort on the problems at hand (PROBLEM A) , rather than spending a great amount of time & effort (ENERGY)on problems raised in collaborating!(PROBLEM B). KAI will help you to achieve this, by exposing, and not allowing a disparaging, derogatory, or belittling effect while understanding and working with differences in thinking style in a group setting (‘cognitive gap’). 

13. Kirton Adaptation-Innovation Theory Management of Change:  We are problem-solvers and we do not resist change.  We may resist a specific change, but this has more to do with a lack of information or a lack of shared understanding of the problem.  "Resistance to change" can often be explained by the pain of having to let go of an old structure, field, domain or paradigm while still unsure about the validity of the new one.  Where people do openly resist a changeit is usually because they perceive it as someone else's change, not their change and that someone else is usually of a different creative or problem-solving style.  Using the KAI, Superintendents and Board Members can learn how to work successfully with different-thinking colleagues during times of planned or unplanned change. Management of Diversity:  Board training and individual development in personal awareness is very successful in working with diversity of thinking styles. 

14. Kirton Adaptation-Innovation Theory • Group Cohesion and Effectiveness:  KAI has been used extensively as a tool to increase group cohesion and effectiveness through an increased ability to work appropriately with ranges of individuals who think inside and outside the paradigm (or "inside and outside the box").  You need both on your Board. • Leadership:  KAI is effective in building and enhancing individual leadership skills.  Leadership is based on talents and strengths and KAI stresses that one of the primary tasks of good leadership is to create an environment in which everybody can work in a way which builds on their preferred decision-making style.  Stress in an individual usually comes about because this principle is not respected or even understood.

15. Kirton Adaptation-Innovation Theory • Problem Solving and Team Building:  top management teams, R & D groups, Marketing departments and Project Management groups have been made more effective using skills developed through the KAI. Users: Dupont, Nestles, American Crane, Proctor and Gamble. Worldwide and in 4 languages. Only certified users may administer and interpret the KAI.

16. Developed by Dr. Michael J. Kirton (kaicentre.com) The resistance to change does not depend on abilities, knowledge and intelligence of individuals involved; however it is related to the creative styles of individuals and differences in thinking styles. KAI is extremely useful in compressing the time it takes for individuals and teams to shift perspective. KAI defines and measures your and your fellow board members characteristic and preferred style of decision making and problem solving. Kirton Adaptation-Innovation Theory

17. KAI Theory and Application • KAI instrument measures preferred thinking style and plots them on a continuum from adaptive to innovative. • Distribution of scores in large populations form a normal bell curve.

18. Kirton Adaptation-Innovation Questionnaire How easy or difficult do you find it to present yourself, consistently, over a long period as: Very Very Hard Hard Easy Easy A PERSON WHO IS PATIENT.-------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * This Continues for 32 Questions and a Total Score is Calculated

19. Kirton Adaption-Innovation Continuum AGENT OF STABILITY AGENT OF CHANGE Agents of Chan 2% 14% 34% 34% 14% 2% 146 132 59 77 113 45 95 More Innovative See the definition as part of the problem Doing things differently More Adaptive Accept and work within the problem definition Doing things better

20. KAI Theory and Application • Thinking styles are concerned with form and not content (structure rather than substance). • Thinking styles deals with how we perceive, think, solve problems, make decisions, learn, and relate to others. • KAI does not measure level of creativity or ability, rather how you operationally pursue thinking during problem solving. • Everyone solves problems creatively.

21. KAI Scales • Observed scores range from 45-146 with mean at 95. • High Adaptors are 45-77. • Mid-Range - “Bridgers” are 78-113. • High Innovators are 114-146.

22. KAI Style of Problem Solving • A-I reflects different approaches to problem solving: • BETTER VS DIFFERENT • A-I’s have problems getting along at the extreme ranges. • The mean may vary but range is usually stable.

23. KAI Theory and Application • Adaptors prefer more structured problem-solving methods and are most comfortable when everyone is in agreement about the process and the solution. • Adaptors are also more likely to try to solve a problem by working within the current system as opposed to developing a completely new one.

24. KAI Theory and Application • Innovators are at ease with a less structured approach and don’t view a lack of consensus as an obstacle. • Innovators change the question or redefine the problem. • Innovators tend to look beyond the status quo for solutions.

25. KAI Theory and Application • Are “innovators” (new or different idea, method or device) more creative? NO!! • Neither style is more creative or better at problem-solving or decision-making. • Depending on the situation or problem, one style is better fitted. • A team composed of both adaptors and innovators is the most effective as long you understand how to work together and respect each other’s differences.

26. Levels of Performance Rolf Smith

27. KAI Theory and Application • Style differences of 20 points or more on the KAI scale lead to communication difficulty and distrust issues. • The more adaptive person on the teams will try to solve the problem meticulously, aided by many details. Also the more adaptive person will want to apply tried and tested solutions. • The more innovativeperson will prefer to redefine the problem and look at the big picture. The innovative person will also try to solve the problem by looking at it from unsuspected angles.

28. KAI Theory and Application • It is not uncommon for Board Members to mistake differences in thinking style (continuum spread) for differences in capacity, abilityor personality. • Such misunderstandings can lead to interpersonal conflict that seriously damages the Board’s collaborativeability. • Board members who can’t, won’t or don’twork together rarely develop effective solutions.

29. High Adaptor Problem Orientation • Characterized by precision, reliability, conformity, methodical, prudence. • Seeks solutions to problems in tried and understood ways. • Reduces problems by improvement, efficiency, stability, and group cohesion. • Challenges rules rarely and cautiously. • Produces a few, manageable sound ideas for prompt implementation.

30. High Innovator Problem Orientation • Thinks tangentially (indirectly related), approaches tasks from unsuspected angles. • Questions problem’s basic assumptions. • Catalyst in settled groups, irreverent of consensual views; seen as abrasive. • Challenges rules, past practices, group comfort with established procedures. • Produces many ideas, some risky or unsound.

31. Adaptor Characteristics • Does Things Better • Seen As Disciplined • Accepts Problem Definition • Makes “Goals” of “Means of the Process” • (Math problem) • Precise, Reliable, Dependable

32. Innovator Characteristics • Does Things Differently • Seen As Undisciplined • Challenges Problem Definition • Questions or Disregards “Means” • Unique, Visionary, Ingenious

33. Contributions to Problem Solving • I’s collaboration gives: • Shifting and breaking with accepted theory • Dynamics to bring about radical change • New viewpoints to settled groups & tasks • Questioning assumptions and established practices • A’s collaboration gives: • Stability, order and continuity • Maintain group cohesion & cooperation • Add sensitivity to people • Provide safe base for riskier operations

34. Dealing with Opposites High I’s see High A’s as: • Dogmatic • Compliant • Stuck in a “rut” • Timid • Conforming High A’s see High I’s as: • Abrasive • Unsound • Impractical • Self-centered • Insensitive • Creating confusion

35. KAI – MAKING IT WORK • COPING BEHAVIOR: • Behavior outside one’s preferred style by the MINIMUM amount of effort for the LEAST amount of time • COGNITIVE GAP: • distance between your own style and the behavior needed in a particular situation; • distance between your own style and others’ style • A GAP of 10 points and you’ll notice a difference • A GAP of 20pointsrequires coping behavior

36. Coping Skills COPING BEHAVIOR • This (‘with effort, I can’) is a learned technique available from acceptance and understanding; it occurs when behavior needs to be in a style not matching one’s preferred style. • Is available when insight or foresight indicates that it is needed. The driving force behind its execution is motive.

37. Coping Coping Skills Skills Coping Skills Coping Behavior • A behavior that is outside one’s preferred style. • It is measured by distance from preferred style and by how long is it has to be maintained. • Coping behavior is learned; it is a deliberate response to a particular problem-solving processthat is determined that it will not be solved unless coping is evoked. • Both Adaptors and Innovators must cope.

38. Coping Skills • Is this a fact? • Can it be changed? Do I have control over it? What thought results from this fact is in my mind? • Is this a thought? • If so, is it a helpful or unhelpful one to me? Can I change it? • Is this a feeling? • If so, what thought did it come from? Is this a pleasant or unpleasant feeling? Do I want to change it?

39. Coping Behavior Good coping is active problem solving that has: OPTIMISM or an expectation that positive change is possible PRACTICALITY about the kinds of solutions that are feasible FLEXIBILITY in approach to any problem RESOURCEFULNESS in finding support or additional information that helps With good coping, you do not feel helpless or hopeless.

40. Coping Behavior • Good leaders ask for minimum coping behavior most of the time. • Good leaders get offered maximum coping behavior in a crisis. • A good leader should know enough about his or her own people to create an environment in which they can work to their strengths.

41. Group A: KAI 74-93 DISADVANTAGES: None ADVANTAGES: More efficient Better Optimizer More predictable More credible Better managers of resources and time and money More supportive and accepting More stable Better at synthesis Possible less frustrated in fulfillment of long term life goals

42. Group B: KAI 94-99 DISADVANTAGES: Lack of imagination, innovation Stagnation Less long-term viability Cannot function in unstructured situation ADVANTAGES: Structure Stability Predictability Security Continuity Consistency Dependability Trust Probability of Success

43. Group C: KAI 100-105 DISADVANTAGES: None ADVANTAGES: Dependable Integrated Well-rounded Versatile Sensitive Adaptive Highly employable Individualistic

44. Group D: KAI 106-116 DISADVANTAGES: None ADVANTAGES: Positive thinkers Versatile – see both points of view Self satisfied Laissez-faire Set goals for adaptors and innovators Calculated risk taker

45. Group E: KAI 117-125 DISADVANTAGES: Does not fit it Determine own agenda which may not be relevant to the organization’s agenda Difficult to communicate with people at both ends Extra energy required to fit Only person in office with a messy desk with practical applications Low tolerance of adaptors ADVANTAGES: Can adapt to both ends Can manipulate an adaptive structure Can be perceived as a tem member and slip in innovations Can bridge between people at both ends High probability of innovative ideas

46. Group F: KAI 126-137 DISADVANTAGES: Hard to get positive recognition in big organizations Hard to get along with people Get stuff stolen by bosses Will work day and night on problem If “controller” above us, he makes life miserable Too many of us do nothing Not interested in small tasks Stops once end is seen Hates to translate thoughts into words ADVANTAGES: Easy to get noticed in big organizations Easy to get along with people Can amuse self Will work day and night on a problem Necessary for big changes Starts many projects Optimistic Impatient Life is not boring

47. Group G: KAI 138-146 DISADVANTAGES: Too flexible Too much variety Bored too easily Taking on too much Contempt for bureaucracy Impatient Over critical Emotional Hasty ADVANTAGES: Fun and adventurous Change Openness Sense of humor Sarcasm-punsters Laugh at themselves Wrongness OK High Energy Love nature Perseverance Emotional Intuitive

48. Scott Childress, Ed.D. Scott@ChildressFarm.com www.ChildressFarm.com (254) 725-6866 3 Credit Hours (CEC) – Team Building