Individual Ambidexterity through the Lens of Cognitive Style
Keywords:
cognitive style, ambidexterity, cognitive diversity, idea style, information processingAbstract
Drawing on Piaget’s (1964, 1971) developmental theory, this study conceptualises linear and nonlinear reasoning as described in the formal operational stage as independent yet additive forms of thinking. This offers a nuanced understanding of the additive variant of cognitive style and clarifies the coexistence of linear and nonlinear concepts, along with the definition of ambidexterity and the position of any bias, linear or nonlinear. At the individual level, ambidexterity enables the balancing of incremental improvements with disruptive novelty. Also, when reflected into group, organisational, and cultural levels, the benefits of cognitive diversity become available. Such perspectives enhance an organisation’s capacity for creativity and adaptability in complex environments.To assess ambidexterity at the individual level, including any potential bias, measures of linearity and nonlinearity were derived from self- assessed evaluations of idea style outcomes in a sample of 153 participants. Results show that 83 individuals demonstrated ambidexterity, with no significant difference between their linear and nonlinear scores (RCI, p > .05). In contrast, 67 individuals exhibited a linear bias, scoring significantly higher on the linear than the nonlinear measures, while only 3 showed a nonlinear bias.A comparison of the sample means at the group level for linearity and nonlinearity revealed a significant difference (p < .001, t=12.5), indicating an overall bias towards linear reasoning. Additionally, the level of scoring for nonlinear reasoning was evaluated, 42% (64) of individuals scored at the medium or higher levels, pointing towards a normal distribution. Adding support to earlier findings that fewer than 50% of adults regularly show nonlinear reasoning (Huitt & Hummel, 2003; Kuhn et al., 1977).
References
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 950-967.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.66.5.950
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128
Berlin, I. (1953). The hedgehog and the fox: An essay on Tolstoy’s view of history. Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
Berlow, E., Canon, S., DeBiswas, K., Gurman, D., Jacoby, S., Simmons, L., Walshe, A., Williams, R., & Runco, M. (2021). Creative diversity: Patterns in the creative habits of ~10,000 people. arXiv.
Bratianu, C., & Vasilache, S. (2009). Evaluating linear-nonlinear thinking style for knowledge management education. Management & Marketing, 4(3), 3-18.
Burkert, M., & Grossrieder, S. (2025). Individual ambidexterity and management controls: A systematic literature review. Management Review Quarterly.
Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Berntson, G. G. (1997). Beyond bipolar conceptualizations and measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1(1), 3-25.
Caniëls, M. C. J., & van Assen, M. F. (2019). How motivational orientations are related to ambidexterity. Kybernetes, 48(10), 2177-2189. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-10-2018-0584)
Chang, Y., Chapman, G., Hughes, P., & Chang, C. (2024). Individual ambidexterity, relational context and academic entrepreneurship performance: Too much of a good thing?. British Journal of Management, 35(2), 750-774.
Clapp, R. G. (1991). The fate of ideas that aim to stimulate change in a large organisation. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Council for National Academic Awards.
Clapp, R. G. (1993). Stability of cognitive style in adults and some implications: A longitudinal study of the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory. Psychological Reports, 73, 1235-1245.
Clapp, R. G., & de Ciantis, S. M. (1989). Adaption-Innovation in large organizations: Does cognitive style characterize actual behaviour of employees at work? An exploratory study. Psychological Reports, 65(2), 503-513.
Clapp, R. G., & Ruckthum, V. (2024). A qualitative view of problem-solving in the context of large organisations. ABAC ODI Journal Vision. Action. Outcome., 12(1), 150-172.
Clements, L., Redding, E., Lefebvre Sell, N., & May, J. (2018). Expertise in evaluating choreographic creativity: An online variation of the consensual assessment technique. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1448. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01448
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO-PI professional manual. Psychological Assessment Centre.
Foxall, G. R. (2014). Cognitive requirements of competing neuro-behavioural decision systems: Some implications of temporal horizon for managerial behaviour in organizations. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 370. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00370
Gelade, G. A. (2002). Creative style, personality, and artistic endeavour. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 129(3), 213-234.
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. The Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159573
Gilson, L. L., & Madjar, N. (2010). Radical and incremental creativity: Antecedents and processes. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 21-28.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017863
Goldsmith, R. E., & Matherly, T. A. (1986). The Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory, Faking and Social Desirability. A Replication and Extension. Psychological Reports, 58, 269-270.
Good, D., & Michel, E. J. (2013). Individual ambidexterity: exploring and exploiting in dynamic contexts. The Journal of Psychology, 147(5), 435-453.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2012.710663
Herman, N. (1992). The Creative Brain. Herrmann International.
Hogan, J., Murdock, K., Hamill, M., Lanzara, A., & Winner, E. (2018). Looking at the process: Examining creative and artistic thinking in fashion designers on a reality television show. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2008. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02008
Huitt, W., & Hummel, J. (2003). Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. Educational Psychology Interactive, 3(2), 1-5.
Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59(1), 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.59.1.12
Kirton, M. J. (1961). Management initiative. Acton Society Trust.
Kirton, M. J. (1976). Adaptors and innovators: A description and measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61(5), 622-629. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.61.5.622
Kirton, M. J. (2011). Adaption-Innovation in the context of diversity and change. Routledge.
Kirton, M. J., & McCarthy, R. M. (1988). Cognitive climate and organizations. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61(2), 175-184.
Kuhn, D., Langer, J., Kohlberg, L., & Haan, N. S. (1977). The development of formal operations in logical and moral judgment. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 95, 97-188.
Litwin, G. H., & Stringer, R. A., Jr. (1968). Motivation and organisational climate. Harvard Business School.
Liu, Y., & Sun, Z. (2025). How openness to experience drives R&D staff’s innovative behavior: a nonlinear mediation and moderation perspective on flow experience and emotional intelligence. Front Psychol.
Malik, M. A., Choi, J. N., & Butt, A. N. (2019). Distinct effects of intrinsic motivation and extrinsic rewards on radical and incremental creativity: The moderating role of goal orientations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(9), 1013-1026.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2634940
Meynhardt, T., Hermann, C., & Anderer, S. (2017). Making sense of a most popular metaphor in management: Towards a HedgeFox scale for cognitive styles. Administrative Sciences, 7(3), 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci7030033
Michael, M. G. (2018). Problem solving, decision making, and Kirton adaption-innovation theory in high-performance organizations [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Walden University
Miron-Spektor, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. (2011). The effect of conformist and attentive-to-detail members on team innovation: reconciling the innovation paradox. The Academy of Management Journal, 54(4), 740-760.
Morecroft, D. W. (2015). Strategic modelling and business dynamics: A feedback systems approach. Wiley.
Nijstad, B. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., Rietzschel, E. F., & Baas, M. (2010). The dual pathway to creativity model: Creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence. European Review of Social Psychology, 21(1), 34-77.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10463281003765323
O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. (2016). Lead and disrupt, how to solve the innovator's dilemma. Stanford, CA. Stanford Business Books.
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: past, present and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 324-338.
Piaget, J. (1964). Cognitive Development in Children: Development and Learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2, 176-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660020306
Piaget, J. (1971). The theory of stages in cognitive development. McGraw-Hill.
Rao-Nicholson, R., Khan, Z., Akhtar, P., & Tarba, S. (2020). HR practices and organisational ambidexterity in the cross-border M&As of emerging‐market multinationals. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(2), 232-253. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1216882
Reiter-Palmon, R., Illies, J. J., & Kobe-Cross, L. M. (2009). Conscientiousness is not always a good predictor of performance: The case of creativity. The International Journal of Creativity & Problem Solving, 19(2), 27-45.
Richmond, B. (2003). Systems thinking: Critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond. System Dynamics Review, 9(2), 113-133. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.4260090203
Robbins, T. W., & Cools, R. (2014). Cognitive deficits in Parkinson's disease: A cognitive neuroscience perspective. Movement Disorders, 29(5), 597-607.
Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A. (2002). The Big Five personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 789-801.
Salton, G. J. (1996). Organizational engineering: A new method of creating high-performance human structures. Professional Communications Press.
Stacey, R. D. (1995). The science of complexity: An alternative perspective for strategic change processes. Strategic Management Journal, 16(6), 477-495.
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. Harper and Brothers.
Tetlock, P. E. (2005). Expert political judgment: How good is it? How can we know?. Princeton University Press.
Tetlock, P. E. (2017). Expert political judgment. Princeton University Press.
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137-1148. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069429
Van der Molen, P. P. (1994). Adaption-Innovation and changes in social structure: On the anatomy of catastrophe. In M. J. Kirton (Ed.), Adaptors and innovators: Styles of creativity and problem-solving (pp. 206-218). International Thomson Press.
Von Wittich, D., & Antonakis, J. (2011). The KAI cognitive style inventory: Was it personality all along?. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(7), 1044-1049.
Yilmaz, S. (2020). The ambidextrous personality and situation: A trait interaction approach ambidexterity, radical and incremental creativity [Master’s thesis], Erasmus University.
