Fundamentals of Management, 8th ed

492

Appendix: Interpretations of Skills Self-Assessment Instruments

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).

Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

---

CHAPTER 6: DELEGATION APTITUDE SURVEY

Bureaucratic System 1

0–9

10–19

20–29

30–39

Mixed Systems 2 and 3

40–49

50–59

60–69

70–79

Organic System 4

80–89

90–100

The higher the score, the more organic and participative the organization. The lower the

score, the more mechanistic and bureaucratically managed the organization.

Scores in the 0–39 range suggest that the organization is relatively bureaucratic and

mechanistic. Scores above 80 suggest that the organization is relatively organic and par-

ticipative. Scores in the 40–79 range suggest a mixed design. Students should compare

the type of organization identified with the type of environment in which it is most likely

to be successful as described in the book.

CHAPTER 7: INNOVATION AND LEARNING STYLES

According to Kolb, Accommodators learn and work by doing, Divergers learn and work

through imagination, Convergers learn and work by problem solving, and Assimilators

learn and work using inductive reasoning. Each of these types, then, has a specific role

to play in innovation.

Accommodators would be best at innovation tasks such as designing and building pro-

totypes or testing product features and functions. They would excel as product cham-

pions because they are energetic and enthusiastic.

Divergers would be best at brainstorming and generating new products. They would excel as

inventors, whether of an entirely new product or of an improvement to an existing product.

Convergers would be best at testing products through experimentation or at developing

additional features or enhancements to existing products. They would excel as technical

advisors to the innovation process.

Assimilators would be best at thought experiments. They would excel at observing users

and then generalizing from the specific observations to more general principles or ideas.

They would excel as champions because they enjoy organizing people and information

toward a practical outcome.

For more information about Kolb’s styles and their implications for learning and work,

look online. One interesting site is www.businessballs.com/kolblearningstyles.htm.