UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The two faces of championship: an examination of the behavioral and individual-differences characteristics… Woolley, Ross M. 1995

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1995-983698.pdf [ 10.67MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0088861.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0088861-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0088861-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0088861-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0088861-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0088861-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0088861-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0088861-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0088861.ris

Full Text

THE TWO FACES OF CHAMPIONSHIP: AN EXAMINATION OF THEBEHAVIORAL AND INDWIDUAL-DllFbRENCES CHARACTERISTICS OFTHE CHAMPIONbyROSS M. WOOLLEYB.A. University of British Columbia, 1985M.A. University of British Columbia, 1990A THESIS SUBMiTTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTSFOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHYinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIESDepartment of PsychologyWe accept this thesis as conformingto the required standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIAMarch 1995© Ross Murray Woolley, 1995In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives, It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.(Signature)_________________________________Department of________________________The University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate_____DE.6 (2)88)11ABSTRACTThe purpose of the present research was to examine the behavioral and individual-differences characteristics of a key figure in the innovation process—the champion. Thechampion, also known as corporate entrepreneur (Kanter, 1982), and intrapreneur(Pinchot, 1985) is an individual who emerges informally in an organization to introduceand promote innovation. These individuals have been described as forceful, driven,energetic, and visionary and have been found to be critical players in the success oforganizational innovation.The majority of research on the champion has not, however, been conducted witha focus on this key figure. Rather, the emphasis of much of the previous research hastypically been on the process of innovation, with the champion acknowledged anddiscussed, but not featured or described in detail. Given the importance of the championin promoting innovation, it would be desirable to conduct research in which this figurewas the focus of attention. The three studies carried out as part of this research projectwere designed with this purpose in mind. Methods of individual-differences assessmentwere applied to the study of the champion.The present research began with a study of the champion’s behavior. Techniquesfrom the act frequency approach (Buss & Craik, 1980) were used to develop acomprehensive behavioral profile of the champion in order to establish a structural modelof championship. Acts describing championship were generated by panels of middle- andsenior-level managers and these items were factor analyzed separately in two samples,involving over 600 managers from seven Western Canadian organizations. Ultimately,10 first- and two second-order factors were identified and named by subject matterexperts. Evidence was found for a heroic and a dark side to championship at the secondorder factor level.111In Study 2, the focus turned to predictor measurement. Supervisory ratings ofchampionship on the criterion dimensions identified in Study 1 were obtained for 174middle- and senior-level managers. These same managers had been participants in athree-day Assessment Center in which they were administered: (a) cognitive ability tests,(b) personality inventories, (c) management simulations, and (d) a structured interview.Correlations computed between the Assessment Center measures, on the one hand, andthe criterion dimensions on the other, led to the conclusion that the dark side ofchampionship could be predicted, but that, unfortunately, the heroic side could not. Onthe basis of the Assessment Center scale correlations with the dark side, the championwas found to be: dominant, assertive, exhibitionistic, aggressive, independent,competitive, driven, impulsive, impatient, and likely to break rules and take risks.The results of Study 3 led to the development of a low-fidelity simulation, basedon the behavioral consistency model (Wernimont & Campbell, 1968). This simulation,called the Management Practices Simulation (MPS), was administered to the AssessmentCenter participants involved in Study 2 and scores on the MPS were correlated withscores on the criterion dimensions from Study 1. Two higher-order MPS scales werefound to correlate significantly with the two second-order criterion factor scales identifiedin Study 1. Moreover, the criterion-related validity of these scales surpassed thatachieved with any component of the Assessment Center.The results of Studies 1, 2, and 3 indicate that championship is a multidimensional construct that, at a higher-order level, can be described with reference to twoorthogonal dimensions, labeled the dark and heroic side. Individuals can be orderedalong a continuum on these dimensions and this scaling reflects meaningful differences inbehavior. Psychological tests can be used to predict ratings of championship, at leastthose associated with the dark side. Finally, application of the behavioral consistencymodel to the development of a low-fidelity simulation, led to the creation of a newinstrument—the Management Practices Simulation—whose scales correlatedsignificantly and at a slightly higher-level with the criterion than any of the AssessmentCenter battery scales.ivVTABLE OF CONTENTSABSTRACT.iiLIST OF TABLES xixLIST OF FIGURES xxiiiACKNOWLEDGMENT xxivINTRODUCTION 1Overview 1Objectives of The Present Research 5LITERATURE REWEW 7I. An Historical Sketch of the Study of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 7Entrepreneurship 8Corporate Entrepreneurship 8Innovation 9Summary 10II. Evidence For the Role of the Champion in Innovation Success 10Overview 10Descriptive Studies 11Empirical Studies 12ifi. Toward a Definition and Understanding of the Champion Role 15Overview 15The Champion Role Defined 17Elements of the Definition 17Champions, Innovators, Entrepreneurs, Corporate Entrepreneurs,and Intrapreneurs 22A Two-Dimensional Conceptualization of the Champion Role 23Summary 25IV. Champions of Innovation: Their Individual-Differences Characteristics 26viOverview.26Personality!Motivational Traits 28Interpersonal Effectiveness 28Components of Interpersonal Effectiveness 30Interpersonal Influence 30Interpersonal Awareness 31Summary 31Determined Achievement Orientation 32Openness! Willingness to Change 33From Personality to Ability 34Cognitive Ability 34Innovative Idea Generator 35Analytical Evaluative Ability 35Effective Communication Skills 36Summary 36RATIONALE AND HYPOTHESES 38Section I: Evaluation of Research on the Role of the Champion andDevelopment of Hypotheses Related to Criterion Measurement 38Limitations of Past Research 38Hypotheses 39Hypothesis 1 39Hypothesis 2 40Section II: Implications of Research on the Individual-DifferencesCharacteristics of the Champion and Development of HypothesesRelated to Predictor Measurement 40Limitations of Past Research 40Hypotheses 42viiPersonality/Motivational Characteristics 42Interpersonal effectiveness 42Determined achievement orientation 42Openness/willingness to change 43Cognitive Abilities 43Innovativeness 43Analytical evaluative ability 43Effective communication skills 44Summary 44STUDY 1: THE STRUCTURE OF CHAMPIONSHIP AND THEDEVELOPMENT OF CHAMPION CRITERION SCALES 46Overview and Rationale for Methods 46Hypotheses 49Hypothesis 1 49Hypothesis 2 49Hypothesis 3 50Hypothesis 4 50Phase I: The Generation of Champion Acts 50Method 50Participants 50Developmental Steps 51Stepi 51Step2 53Step3 53Results 53Phase II: The Scaling of the Acts for Social Desirability 54Overview 54vi”Method.54Participants 54Design of the Questionnaire 55Calculation of Item Social Desirability 55Results 55Phase ifi: Sample 1 Factor Analysis With Self-Report Data 55Overview 55Method 56Participants and Data Collection 56Data Analysis 57Structural analysis 58Scale development 58Results 59The Component Solution 59The Development of Preliminary Championship Scales 61Social desirability and the balancing of champion and non-champion items 62Scale reliability 64Phase IV: Sample 2 Factor Analysis With Supervisory Report Data and theApplication of Meredith’s (1964) Method One Procedure in the Derivation of aCommon Factor Pattern 65Overview 65Method 65Participants 65The Rating Form 66Distribution of The Rating Form 68Data Analysis 68ixFirst-order factor structure 69First-order factor congruence 70Scale development 70Second-order factor structure 72Results 72First-Order Factor Congruence 72The First-Order Championship Factor Scales 75Scale social desirability 75Scale internal consistency reliability 77Second-Order Factors of Championship 77Second-order factor congruence 81Summary 81Phase V: Conceptualization of the Factor Structure of Championship 83Overview 83Method 84Participants 84Data Analysis 86Factor labels 86Prototypicality of the factors 86Criterion measurement of championship 86Overall management performance (OMP) 87Results 87Labels for the First-Order Factor Scales of Championship 87Persistent Dominance (PD) 88Impatient Expediency (IE) 92Rebellious Drive (RD) 93Self Promotion (SP) 94xConfrontive Candor (CC) . 95Influence and Political Savvy (IPS) 95Driven Commitment (DC) 96Immediate Responsiveness (IR) 97Collaboration and Support (CS) 97Visibility and Growth Seeking (VGS) 98Labels for The Two Second-Order Factor Scales ofChampionship 99Forceful Drive and Expediency (FDE) 100Influence and Visible Drive (IVD) 100Prototypicality of the First- and Second-Order Factor Scales 102Correlates of the Dimensions of Championship 105The 3-item and 5-item self-report measures ofchampionship 105The championship factor scales and overall managementperformance (OMP) 107Discussion 108Overview 108A Two-Factor Conceptualization of Championship 112Agency and communion 112A Closer look at Forceful Drive and Expediency 116The dark side of leadership 116Narcissism and Forceful Drive and Expediency 119Psychopathy and Forceful Drive and Expediency 121Summary 123A closer look at Influence and Visible Drive 123xiThe relationship between transformational leadershipand IVD 125Summary 127The Prototypicality of The First- and Second-OrderFactor Scales 127Correlates of Championship 129The 5-item supervisory-report criterion measureof championship and the factor scales 129OMP and the factor scales 130Summary 132STUDY 2: AN EXAMINATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCESCHARACTERISTICS OF THE CHAMPION 133Overview 133Hypotheses 135Method 135Participants and Setting 135The Assessment Center Measures 135Cognitive Ability (Intellectual Measures) 135Personality Inventories and Measures of Temperament 141Management Simulations: In-Basket Exercises 142The Telephone Supervisor In-Basket Exercise (TS) 142The Consolidated Fund In-Basket Test 142Management Simulations: Role-plays 142The Employee Performance Role-play 143Industrial Relations Role-play 143The Marketing Role-play 143The New Manager Role-play 144xiiSummary Role-play Dimension Scores.144Structured Interview 144Biographical Information Form 145Criterion Measurement 145Data Analysis 145Correlational Analyses Involving the AC Measures and theChampionship Criteria 145Contrasted Groups Analyses Involving the AC Battery Scalesand the Championship Criteria 146Analysis of the biographical information forms 148Inter-rater agreement 149Category frequency counts 150A Case Study Analysis of Championship 151Results 152The Criterion Rating Scales 152Correlational Analyses: Predictor-Criterion Correlations 154Cognitive Ability 154Measures of Personality and Temperament 156California Psychological Inventory (CPI) 156The 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (1 6PF) 159The Personality Research Form (PRF) 161Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory (ROCI-il) 163Jenkins Activity Survey 165Management Simulations: In-Basket Exercises 166The Consolidated Fund In-Basket Test 166The Telephone Supervisor In-Basket Exercise (TSIB) 166Management Simulations: The Role Plays 166xliiThe Structured Interview.169Summary 171Correlational Analyses: Criterion Correlations of Optimal LinearCombinations of AC Battery Scales 172Regression Analyses Involving The CPI Scales 173Regression Analyses Involving The 16PF Scales 173Regression Analyses Involving The PRF Scales 173Regression Analyses Involving The JAS Scales 177Regression Analyses Involving The Role play Scales 177Regression Analyses Involving The Interview Scales 177Regression Analyses Involving The CPI, 16PF, PRF, andJAS Scales 181Stepwise results for FDE 181Stepwise results for IVD 183Summary 183A Contrasted Groups Analysis 183A Discriminant Analysis For FDE 184Conceptualization of the discriminant function 184Classification based on the discriminant function 188A Championship Profile Based on the Biodata Form 19QInter-rater agreement 190Category proportion comparisons 190Question 6. What is your own approach to supervision, i.e.,your management style? 192Question 12. How do your leisure and social activities relateto your career? 195xivQuestion 13. What are your most outstanding personalqualities9 196Question 14b. What are your shortcomings; your areas fordevelopment? 196Summary 197The Two Cases 197The case of Mr. A: high FDE 197The case of Mr. W: low FDE 201Summary 203Discussion 204Overview 204Correlational Findings 205Cognitive ability 209Personality 210Management simulations 211Structured interview 213Regression Analyses 214Contrasted Groups Analysis 216The Case Studies 218Overall Summary 218STUDY 3: DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF A LOW-FIDELITYSIMULATION 220An Overview of The Behavioral Consistency Model 220Work Samples and Simulations 221Low-Fidelity Simulations 225An Overview of the Development of the Management PracticesSimulation (MPS) 226xvMethod.229Participants and Setting 229Development of the Management Practices Simulation 230Scripting of the scenarios 230Generating the initial pool of response options 231Fitting the response options to the scenarios 231Drafting of instructions 232Pilot testing the simulation 232Rating of the MPS response options for social desirability.... 233Distribution of the MPS to the assessment centerparticipants 233The Criterion Measure 234Data Analysis 234Scale Development 234Examination of Primary and Secondary Scale Construct Validity.. 235Results 236Psychometric Properties of the Primary and Secondary MPS Scales 236Social Desirability 238Internal Consistency Reliability 239MPS Scale-Criterion Correlations 239Incremental Validity of the MPS Scales 241Construct Validity of the MPS 244Substantive Considerations 245Structural Considerations 246Inter-item structure 246Structural Fidelity 247External Considerations 250xviA multitrait-multimethod examination of championship 250Cross-correlations between the MPS scales and scales fromthe AC battery 255The MPS primary scales .. 261The MPS measure of Forceful Drive and Expediency 263The MPS measure of Influence and Visible Drive 265Summary and Discussion 269Overview 269The Meaning of High Scores on the Management PracticesSimulation 270The Predictive Usefulness of the Management PracticesSimulation 272Low-Fidelity Simulations as Measures of Multi-DimensionalConstructs 275Application of the Management Practices Simulation 276SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 279Study 1 279Replication of the Factor Structure of Championship 281Validation of the Criterion Dimensions 282Championship and Psychopathy 283Study 2 284Individual-Differences Characteristics and The Two Faces ofChampionship 286Study 3 287The Criterion-Related Validity of the Management PracticesSimulation 288Construct Validity of the Management Practices Simulation 289xviiInnovations in Low-Fidelity Simulation Design 290An Overall Summary and Synthesis of the Three Studies 291Implications for Application and Theory 293REFERENCES 297APPENDICES 314Appendix A Booklets Used In First Two Panels To GenerateThe Behavioral Incidents or Acts 314Appendix B Booklets Used In The Third Panel To GenerateThe Behavioral Incidents or Acts 320Appendix C List of Edited Non-Redundant Behavioral Incidents,Organized Into Four Groups: (a) Champion Undesirable,(b) Champion, (c) Non-Champion, and(d) Non-Champion Desirable 326Appendix D Booklets Used To Obtain Social Desirability Ratings 339Appendix E Booklets Used To Obtain Self-Report Data For the FirstFactor Analysis 355Appendix F Company and Participant Feedback Reports 370Appendix G Scale Composition at the Conclusion of Phase ifi 390Appendix H BCTe1 Company Feedback Report 401Appendix I Booklet Used to Obtain Supervisory-Report Data For theSecond Factor Analysis 413Appendix J The Twelve Dimensions and Their Items Used to MeasureOverall Management Performance (OMP) 423Appendix K Scale Composition at the Conclusion of Phase IV 426Appendix L The Rating Booklet Used to Obtain the Factor Labels andPrototypicality Ratings from the Subject Matter Experts 432xviiiAppendix M The 5-item and 4-item Criterion Measures ofChampionship 448Appendix N The Scoring Form for the Biographical Information Form 449Appendix 0 Sample Feedback Report for the Management PracticesSimulation 454Appendix P Form B of the Management Practices Simulation Used toObtain the Item Social Desirability Means 462Appendix Q The Management Practices Simulation 474Appendix R Item Content of the Primary and Secondary Scales of theManagement Practices Simulation 487Appendix S Cross-Correlations Between the Assessment Center BatteryScales and The Primary and Secondary Scales From theManagement Practices Simulation 493xixLIST OF TABLESTable 1 Champion, Corporate Entrepreneur, and Intrapreneur Definitions 18Table 2 Dimensions of Championship 24Table 3 Logically-Derived Trait Dimensions of the Champion 27Table 4 Psychometric Properties of the Preliminary Championship Scales at theConclusion of Phase III 63Table 5 Congruence Coefficients Among The Three Pattern Matrices ForThe Eleven First-Order Factor Scales 74Table 6 Psychometric Properties of the Final First-Order Factor Scales 76Table 7 Primary Common-Factor Pattern Matrices for the Aggregatedand Separate Samples and the Related Primary-Factor CorrelationMatrices for the Second-Order Factors (Decimal Points Omitted) 80Table 8 Congruence Coefficients Among the Three Pattern MatricesFor the Two Second-Order Factor Scales 82Table 9 The Subject Matter Experts 85Table 10 A Listing and Description of the First-Order Factor Scales 89Table 11 Meredith’s Common Factor Pattern and a Synthesis of theLabels Generated By the Raters 101Table 12 Mean Prototypicality Ratings For the Factor Scales, Listed inDescending Order 103Table 13 Bivariate Correlations Between the 3-item and 5-item Championship Criteria (3CC and 5CC), the Overall ManagementPerformance (OMP) and the Championship Factor Scales 106Table 14 A Summary of Hypotheses on the Individual-DifferencesCharacteristics of the Champion 136Table 15 Measures Used in the Assessment Center (AC) Battery 138xxTable 16 Descriptive Statistics for the Championship Criterion Scales 153Table 17 Correlations Between the Scales From the Cognitive AbilityTests and the 13 Championship Criteria (Decimal Points areOmitted) and Scale Descriptive Statistics 155Table 18 Correlations Between the CPI Scales and the 13 ChampionshipCriteria (Decimal Points are Omitted) and Scale Descriptive Statistics.... 157Table 19 Correlations Between the 16PF Scales and the 13 ChampionshipCriteria (Decimal Points are Omitted) and Scale Descriptive Statistics.... 160Table 20 Correlations Between the PRF Scales and the 13 Championship Criteria(Decimal Points are Omitted) and Scale Descriptive Statistics 162Table 21 Correlations Between the Rahim Organizational ConflictInventory (ROCI-Il) and the Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS)Scales and the 13 Championship Criteria (Decimal Points areOmitted) and Scale Descriptive Statistics 164Table 22 Correlations Between Scales From The Two In-Basket Exercisesand the 13 Championship Criteria (Decimal Points areOmitted) and Scale Descriptive Statistics 167Table 23 Correlations Between the Role-play Scales and the 13Championship Criteria (Decimal Points are Omitted) andScale Descriptive Statistics 168Table 24 Correlations Between the Interview Scales and the 13Championship Criteria (Decimal Points are Omitted) andScale Descriptive Statistics 170Table 25 Multiple Regression Analyses Involving the CPI: OptimalVariable Sets 174Table 26 Multiple Regression Analyses Involving the 16PF: OptimalVariable Sets 175xxiTable 27 Multiple Regression Analyses Involving the PRF: OptimalVariable Sets 176Table 28 Multiple Regression Analyses Involving the JAS: OptimalVariable Sets 178Table 29 Multiple Regression Analyses Involving the Role-play: OptimalVariable Sets 179Table 30 Multiple Regression Analyses Involving the Interview: OptimalVariable Sets 180Table 31 Multiple Regression Analyses Involving the CPI, 1 6PF, PRF,and JAS Scales: Optimal Variable Sets 182Table 32 Results of the Discriminant Analysis For FDE 185Table 33 Classification Results From the Discriminant Analysis of FDE 189Table 34 Results of The Inter-Rater Agreement Analysis Based on Flanders’ it 191Table 35 Results From the Analysis of the Biodata Form 193Table 36 Psychometric Properties of the Primary and Secondary MPS Scale 237Table 37 Multiple Regression Analyses Involving the CPI, 16PF, PRF,and MPS Secondary Scales: Incremental Validity 242Table 38 Two-Factor Exploratory and Oblique Procrustes Solutionsfor The MPS 249Table 39 A MultiTrait-Multimethod Matrix For The MPS PrimaryScales and The First-order Factor Criterion Scales 252Table 40 A MultiTrait-Multimethod Matrix Analysis of The MPSSecondary Scales and The Second-order FactorCriterion Scales 254Table 41 A Comparison of Correlates For the MPS Primary Scales andthe First-Order Criterion Factor Scales 256xxiiTable 42 A Comparison of Correlates For the MPS Secondary Scalesand the Second-Order Criterion Factor Scales 259xxiiiLIST OF FIGURESFigure 1 Management Simulations in the Larger Context of Work Samples 222xxivACKNOWLEDGMENTSA number of people were of assistance in the execution of this research project.Many of these people are mentioned throughout the document. A special thanks goes outto the several hundred managers from the following companies who gave of theirvaluable time: B.C. Hydro, B.C. Telephone, B.C. Transit, the Insurance Corporation ofB.C., Manitoba Telephone System, the Ministry of Transportation and Highways, and theUniversity of B.C.I wish to single out the managers of BC Tel for their repeated support at variousstages during data collection. In particular, I am indebted to Don Champion, Ken Crump,Pauline Elliott, and Joan Grant for agreeing to support this project. I am particularlygrateful for the unending and unfailing championship of Ms. Pauline Elliott, BCTe1Human Resource Development Coordinator, whose support and skill cleared roadblocksand smoothed passage for data collection.The assistance of the following members of the Industrial/OrganizationalPsychology laboratory at the University of British Columbia was gratefully appreciated:Kim Barchard, Allison McLeod, Derek Sam, and Linda Scratchley. Many thanks to Kimwho contributed, enthusiastically, many hours of her time and expertise to addresschallenges encountered in Study 1.Finally, my thanks go out to my thesis committee members—Drs. Peter Frost,Ralph Hakstian, and Jerry Wiggins—for their guidance and erudition. In particular, Iwish to single out Ralph, my academic advisor, and thank him for his repeated and longstanding support of my research interests.INTRODUCTIONThe purpose of the present research, outlined in three studies, is to further ourunderstanding of a central figure in the innovation process—the champion. Althoughchampions have been found to be critical players in the success of organizationalinnovation (e.g., Rothwell, Freeman, Horlsey, Jervis, Robertson, & Townsend, 1974),their characteristics have not been carefully studied. Past research on thechampion hasbeen primarily anecdotal and descriptive (e.g., Delbecq & Mills, 1985;Schon, 1963),based on researchers’ general impressions of the champion’s personalitytraits and, to alesser extent, abilities. As well, the reports have been generally “glowing” with littlemention of undesirable traits related to championship. With one recentexception(Howell & Higgins, 1990a), the characteristics of the champion have not been studiedusing well-established, reliable and valid methods of individual-differences assessment.The present research builds on and tests the validity of the descriptive conclusionsforwarded by organizational researchers over the past several years. Astructural modelof championship is developed in which champion behavior is featured. Next, theindividual-differences characteristics of the champion are examined usingwell-established assessment instruments. Finally, the present research goes astep further bydeveloping a simulation designed to measure behaviors specifically related to the role ofthe champion. Notwithstanding its contribution to theory-building onchampionship, thisresearch is of relevance to organizations wishing to develop methods of identifying,selecting, placing, and developing champions, initiatives that couldresult in substantialutility for organizations seeking to improve their competitiveness through the promotionof innovation (Schuler, 1986).OverviewThe topics of corporate entrepreneurship and innovation have enjoyedever-increasing attention in the management literature. Rogers (1983) noted that over 3,000articles on innovation had been published at that time. The recent surge in interest, noted2by Frost and Egri (1991), likely mçans that this number has increased substantially.Popular business writers like Kanter (1989) and Pinchot (1985) have joined the fray aswell, predicting that innovation and entrepreneurship are the new competitive strategiesof the 1990’s and beyond.Why has the topic of innovation—at the core of corporate entrepreneurship (e.g.,Burgelman, 1984)—enjoyed such popularity in the organizational behavior literature?Briefly, it is because innovation has been linked to a whole host of positive organizationaloutcomes, like productivity, growth, and survival (e.g., Morgan, 1988; Nayak &Ketteringham, 1986; Peters & Waterman, 1982; Pettigrew, 1985; Zaitman, Duncan, andHolbek, 1973). Although some have noted a pro-innovation bias’ in innovation research(e.g., Frost & Egri, 1991; Rogers, 1983), the majority of studies have pointed to thedesirability of innovation in fostering organizational productivity.Given its importance, organizational researchers have attempted to developmodels of organizational innovation. Toward this objective, many have investigated therole of organizational variables (e.g., formalization and specialization) in theimplementation and adoption of innovation. The disappointing consensus opinion hasbeen that findings are unstable across studies (Damanpour, 1987; Downs & Mohr, 1976).The field has coped with this instability by proposing sub theories of innovations Thusthe following distinctions have been made: (a) administrative vs. technical innovation(Ettlie, Bridges, & O’Keefe, 1984), (b) radical vs. incremental innovation (Nord &Tucker, 1987), and (c) stage of adoption (Zmud, 1982).In a recent meta-analysis, Damanpour (1991) challenged the validity of these subtheories. His findings revealed the consistent importance of, among other things, highinternal and external communication (exchange of ideas), team and interdepartmentalexchange, decentralization of decision making, and the presence of a managerial staff1 Rogers (1983) defined a pro-innovation bias as follows: “...the implication of most diffusion researchthat an innovation should be diffused and adopted by all members of a social system... (p. 92).3supportive of change. In their review, Frost and Egri (1991) made similar observations,stressing the importance of enhanced communication within organic structures in thecontext of an organizational culture that supports innovation and risk taking.The role of key individuals in the innovation process has also been studied (e.g.,Smith, McKeon, Hoy, Boysen, Shechter, & Roberts, 1984), although less frequently. Inone of the most exhaustive and extensive comparative studies of innovation success andfailure (Project SAPPHO2),Achilladelis, Jervis, and Robertson (1971) and Rothwell et al.(1974) reported that key individuals (i.e., sponsors, champions) were central toinnovation success. Freeman (1982) noted that key individuals and accuratecommunication were more important for success than organizational structure or processvariables. More than any other key individual, the champion has emerged as a centralfigure in the innovation process (Schon, 1963; Galbraith, 1982). His/her presence hasbeen linked to innovation success in a number of studies (e.g., Burgelman, 1983; Ettlie etal., 1984).The champion, also referred to as corporate entrepreneur (Kanter, 1982; Kierulff,1979) and intrapreneur (Pinchot, 1985) is the individual who emerges informally in anorganization to introduce and promote an innovation (Schon, 1963). Schon, the first toidentify the role of the champion in innovation success, noted that such individuals areneeded to overcome the indifference and resistance that technological change provokes.He remarked that “...the new idea either finds a champion or dies” (p. 84).Although the role of the champion in the innovation process has been identifiedand acknowledged, her/his characteristics—basic traits and skills—have been described,primarily, on the basis of researcher’s general impressions, with one recent exception(Howell & Higgins, 1990a). What we currently know about the individual-differencescharacteristics of the champion is based, primarily, on descriptive reports of their2 SAPPHO stands for Scientific Activity Predictor from Patterns with Heuristic Origins.Knight (1985) used all three terms interchangeably.4personality from either personal or second-hand observation. Although such qualitativeand descriptive accounts provide great depth and richness of information, it is difficult toknow, from such research, whether champions possess certain traits more than othermanagers. The methods and tools of psychological assessment have rarely been used inthe study of this role. It seems likely that their use would aid greatly in the identificationof champions and the description of their behavior and characteristics.When we consider the importance of innovation for today’s organizations and theestablished importance of the champion for innovation success, research aimed atdeveloping a better understanding of: (a) the role of the champion, and (b) the individual-differences characteristics of individuals demonstrating championship, would haveobvious relevance and importance. The development of assessment procedures toidentify and predict individuals likely to emerge as champions would have particularimportance and application in the areas of personnel selection, placement, and,potentially, training.The potential for such an application has been noted in the past (Gaibraith, 1982;Howell & Higgins, 1990b; Schuler, 1986), but work in pursuit of these objectives has notbeen reported, at least in the research literature. Gaibraith noted, prematurely it seems,that the attributes of successful champions were known. He stated that “...the ability ofthe innovating organization to generate new business ideas can be increased bysystematically developing and selecting those people who are better at innovating thanothers.” (p. 21). Howell and Higgins (1990b) remarked that “...individuals who havechampion potential can be identified through validated personality and leadershipmeasures or by observing behavior in interviews or assessment centers. Managementcould use the results of such assessment to select individuals with the requisite qualitiesfor undertaking innovation.” (p. 54).5Objectives of The Present ResearchThe individual was the unit of analysis in the present research. Althoughorganizational-level variables may be significantly related to aspects of innovation, thefocus here was a psychological one. The role of the champion was featured. The purposeof this study was to develop assessment procedures to: (a) reliably identify individualswho behave as champions in the work setting, and (b) identify individual-differencescharacteristics predictive of champion behavior. These two purposes correspond tocriterion and predictor measurement, respectively.As a first step in developing a prediction system, a careful criterion analysis wasperformed. In past research on the champion, researchers have glossed over the issue ofchampion identification. Little information has been supplied on how these individualsbehave; that is, how they act when they are carrying out their role as a champion. Pastoperational definitions have assumed a dichotomy: individuals have been classified aseither champions or non-champions; no recognition of a middle ground—the notion of acontinuum—has been considered. In the present research, dimensions of championshipwere identified and scaled as continuous variables.Before adequate prediction of championship can be accomplished, more carefulattention must be focused on the behavioral description of championship. It is time to“junk the criterion” (Dunnette, 1963) in research on the characteristics of the championand instead explore the possibility that this role is likely multi-dimensional.In summary, the main purposes of the present research were to:1. Develop a comprehensive behavioral profile of the champion to be usedto:(a) establish a structural model of championship, and(b) serve as criteria in the identification and validation of predictormeasures.62. Develop a comprehensive psychological profile of the champion in orderto:(a) test the validity of previous descriptive profiles of the cham