University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The perception of innovation in the delivery of services for Hawaiian students

(USC Thesis Other)

The perception of innovation in the delivery of services for Hawaiian students

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
THE PERCEPTION OF INNOVATION IN THE DELIVERY OF
SERVICES FOR HAWAIIAN STUDENTS

by

Jamee Māhealani Miller

_____________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2012

Copyright 2012 Jamee Māhealani Miller

ii
DEDICATION
“The greatness of a man is not in how much wealth he acquires, but in his
integrity and his ability to affect those around him positively”- Bob Marley. I
dedicate this work to my son ‘Ekolu. Son, you are a pillar of hope, strength and
righteousness. You have shown courage in the darkest of hours and your integrity is
matchless. You continue to inspire and amaze those around you. E Kulia I Ka
Nu’u! I am proud to be your mother. I love you always!

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the past, present and the future:
The Hawaiian proverb, Mohala i ka wai ka maka o ka pua translates “flowers
thrive where there is water, as thriving people are found where living conditions are
good,” this is the description of my environment. I am very fortunate that God chose
me to be the firstborn of James Allen Vasconcellos, Jr. and Roena Kau’ilani
Vasconcellos. Till this day, my parents continue to provide a beautiful life for
myself, my siblings and our families. They planted in us honesty, hard work,
integrity, respect, esteem, accountability and ‘ohana as foundational values to live by.
My siblings and I are thriving! Thanks Mom and Dad, you have been exemplary
parents and I hope to be as great a makua and kupuna as you both. To my siblings,
Jill and Jimbo Vasconcellos and your families- mahalo nui for all you’ve done for
me over the years. Your support has helped sustain me in good times and bad.
To my husband Kalei, thank you for your love, sacrifice and understanding.
You have always believed in me and supported me through all my crazy ideas. You
help me be better each day. There is no greater love than the love I have for you!
To my daughter Brytni Faith Kaleionaia, I know you think I am smart, but
my daughter- you are far wiser, more intelligent and more beautiful than I could ever
be. Continue to pursue your dreams, believe me one day it will pay off and when it
does- the struggles will feel miniscule to the achievements. We will then have two
doctors in the family! Thank you for being patient and understanding when I
couldn’t babysit or be there because I had to study. To my son-in-law Andrew, you
iv
know one day your daughters will choose to be Trojans over Warriors. It’s okay,
you got some time to get used to the idea and save up. Thank you for understanding
that education is very important to our family. Your support is appreciated.
To Alana Aluli, I couldn’t love you more even if you had my blood running
through your veins. Tears envelope my eyes as I think of all the support, love and
constant encouragement you’ve shown ‘Ekolu and all of us. You are such an
amazing young woman and we are very, very fortunate to have you in our lives.
May you continue to aspire toward finishing your degree and not be shaken by the
distance, rigor or life’s curve balls. Actually, I know you will finish- look what
you’ve done thus far and who your family is. Inspiring!
To my two manu titis, my grand daughters- Aubree Love Kau’ilani and
Hailee Grace Kamea’ahonui- God’s perfect timing has blessed us beyond measure
with your births. I am always ecstatic that you both love to read and learn, you are
the future. You will never realize how important you were to the completion of this
dissertation, one day Tuti will share the mo’olelo with you.
To the Queen Lili’uokalani ‘Ohana, the following quote by Confucius sums it
all up- “Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life.”
Mahalo nui loa for believing in me and supporting me through this dissertation. I
never take my work for granted. I am honored, humbled and at the same time
especially proud to be a servant of our beloved Queen. Queen Lili’uokalani’s motto
continues to inspire and fill me with hope for the lāhui, “E ‘Onipa’a Kakou I ka ‘Imi
v
Na’auao,” be steadfast in the seeking of knowledge. Our Queen was a woman
before her time, her vision is the epitome of innovation.
To the University of Southern California’s Hawai’i Cohort Program, thank
you for making the reality of studying at a premier institution here in Hawai’i, my
home. Thank you to all the professors that I had the privilege to learn from. To the
back of the class crew, thanks for the support and friendship. I want to thank my
dissertation committee, Dr. Dominic Brewer and Dr. Larry Picus from the University
of Southern California. My thanks for the editing, prodding and patience as I slowly
plowed through this dissertation. Your expertise and guidance became the safety net
as it came down to the wire. Mahalo piha ia Dr. Keawe’aimoku Kaholokula, Chair
and Director of the Native Hawaiian Health Department at the John A. Burns School
of Medicine, University of Hawai’i, my outside committee member. You exemplify
the kuleana we have to the lāhui. Thank you for your time and mana’o during this
journey. Now it’s my turn to give back.
Finally, I want to acknowledge those that came before me as I am always
enthralled and inspired by history. The following proverb speaks to our past or
genealogy, our present and our future or potential as a lāhui, Ua lehulehu a
manomano ka 'ikena a ka Hawai'i or Great and numerous is the knowledge of the
Hawaiian people. May this dissertation be a reminder that we come from greatness
and this greatness is in our generation’s reach, one doctoral degree at a time. Eo!

vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Tables x

List of Figures xi

Abstract xii

Chapter One: Introduction 1
Statement of the Problem 7
Purpose of the Study 8
Research Questions 9
Importance of the Study 11
Limitations, Delimitations and Assumptions 12
Definitions 14
Organization of the Study 15

Chapter Two: Literature Review 16
Introduction 16
Review of Literature 16
Disruptive Innovation 17
vii
Types of Innovation 19
Framework 21
Ho’okumu A’e: Innovation 23
Antecedents 27
Environmental Antecedents in Innovation 28
Organizational Antecedents in Innovation 31
Leadership Antecedents in Innovation 35
Summary of Chapter 39

Chapter Three: Methodology 40
Introduction 40
Research Questions 40
Research Design 41
Sample and Population 43
Instrumentation 43
Data Collection Protocol 44
Data Analysis 44
Summary of Chapter 51

Chapter Four: Results 52
Research Questions 52
Participants 53
viii
Order of Analysis 56
Research Question One 58
Part One 58
Part Two 61
Part Three 64
Research Question Two 66
Part One 66
Part Two 70
Part Three 72
Summary of Findings 76
Summary of Chapter 79

Chapter Five: Discussion, Conclusion, Recommendations 80
Overview of the Problem 80
Findings of the Study 82
Implications for Practice 86
Recommendation for Future Study 88
Conclusion of the Study 89

References 90

Appendices
ix
Appendix A 95
Appendix B 102
Appendix C 103

x
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Education Well-being of Native Hawaiian Students 3
Compared to Other Groups

Table 1.2: Events and Status of Native Hawaiians in Hawai’i 5

Table 3.1: A Matrix of Linkage between Research Questions, 44
Survey and Focus Group Questionnaires

Table 3.2: Survey Questions 48

Table 4.1: Population and Sample 53, 72

Table 4.2: Cronbach’s Alpha Results on the Survey 58

Table 4.3: Frequency of the Hawaiian Cultural Practices 64
Perceived as Innovative

Table 4. 4: Cronbach’s Alpha for Category Hawaiian Culture 65

Table 4.5: Internal Antecedents Associated 67
with Innovative Organizations

Table 4.6: Frequencies: Perceived Individual Attributes 69
for Innovation

Table 4.7: Cronbach’s Alpha Individual Attributes 69
of Members and Innovators

Table 4.8: Frequencies: Perceived Leadership Roles 71
and Attributes for Innovation

Table 4.9: Selection Percentages of Leadership Roles 72
and Attributes

Table 4.10: Frequencies: Perceived Organizational Attributes 73

Table 4.11: Cronbach’s Alpha results on 75
Organizational Climate Determinants

xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Ho’okumu A’e 24
Figure 2: Organizational Chart for Queen Lili’uokalani Trust 31
Figure 3: Age Frequency 54
Figure 4: Years of Employment 56
Figure 5: Ho’okumu A’e 84

xii
ABSTRACT
Native Hawaiians come from a tradition of success and resilience. Sumida
and Meyer (2006) report that Native Hawaiians were among the most literate people
in the world in the 1840’s where they had the highest literacy rate west of the
Rockies. By 1893, nearly 100 Hawaiian newspapers were in print and circulation in
the Hawaiian Islands (Sumida & Meyer, 2006). Prior to western contact, the islands
maintained a highly sophisticated society by sustaining 500,000+ people through the
very concise agricultural and hydroponic systems (Kame’eleihiwa, 1989). Native
Hawaiians were experts in sailing, agriculture, fishing, clothing manufacturing, and
medicine (Kame’eleihiwa, 1989). A society once depicting innovation, ingenuity
and intelligence. Less than two hundred years later, this is no longer the case.
The intent of this study is to investigate whether the Queen Lili’uokalani
Children’s Center (QLCC) is perceived as being an innovative organization or not.
This study posed emphasis for a disruptive innovative change in the delivery of
educational services for Native Hawaiians. Whereby, educational methodologies,
learning processes and collaborative efforts which stimulate and engage Native
Hawaiian students are innovative and implemented in an effort to help these students
reach their fullest potential. The Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center was chosen
to be studied for their innovative collaborative work with Native Hawaiian students
and their families. It was hypothesized that QLCC is an innovative organization.
This study inquires whether the establishment of QLCC’s Incentive Motivation
program is perceived as an organizational innovation. This study also queries
xiii
whether the use of Hawaiian cultural practices and values within the delivery of
services are considered to be innovative. This study furthermore investigates
whether QLCC possesses three key internal antecedents of an innovative
organization. The results of this study add to the limited literature on innovation in
education for Native Hawaiians.
This study was able to demonstrate that a traditional, hierarchal organization
such as QLCC does possess internal antecedents of innovation. Furthermore, the
data showed that QLCC staff have positive attitudes towards innovation, are willing
to try new things and are receptive to changes that enhance the lives of Hawaiian
children and their families. The results also provide evidence to corroborate this
study’s framework on Ho’okumu A’e, Hawaiian worldview. Hawaiian perspectives
or worldview emphasizes the importance of learning from the past. Where learning
from the past is the ability to create value through new uses of existing knowledge
(Jamrog, Vickers and Bear, 2006), thereby being innovative. Participants in the study
also believed that the use of Hawaiian cultural practices and values are essential
when working with the Native Hawaiian population despite your own ethnicity.
The findings of this study will assist policymakers, administrators and staff to
develop policies and procedures to improve the social and educational status of
Native Hawaiians. This study recognizes the contribution that QLCC has made to the
Native Hawaiian community and the larger community as only one example of
culturally relevant uses for innovation. It is therefore suggested that innovation
within a Hawaiian organization be culturally relevant. Which in this context means:
xiv
1) Innovation should be useful and influence those who work with Native Hawaiian
families; 2)Innovation should be based on Native Hawaiian value system; and 3)
Innovation should be easily adaptable and highly relevant to the Native Hawaiian
population as in the example of Nana I Ke Kumu.

1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Ho’opa’a i na wa i hala, ho’ono’ono’o pono no keia manawa, a me
ka ‘ike i na wa ma hope. (Rooted in the past, focused on the present
with a vision for the future.)

This is the vision statement for the next 100 years of the Queen Lili’uokalani
Children’s Center. It denotes the importance of history, tradition and practices that
were once the foundation of a thriving people and society. Unfortunately, Native
Hawaiians are far from thriving in today’s society. In fact, Kana’iaupuni and
Ishibashi (2003) contend,
by virtually every measure of well-being, Native Hawaiians are among the
most disadvantaged and marginalized ethnic group in the State of Hawai‘i,
with disproportionately high rates of unemployment, poverty, health risks,
disease, adolescent risk behavior, child abuse and neglect, arrests, and
incarceration. These troubling indicators of well-being paint a dismal picture
of the intergenerational cycle of marginalization in which Native Hawaiians
are trapped. The social and economic disadvantages facing Native Hawaiians
today breed apathy and hopelessness among many Hawaiian children, the
effects of which are apparent in their poor educational outcomes. (p. 5)

Education attainment could be the difference between a lifetime of social and
economic disadvantage and a secure promising future. Education is an avenue to
attain prosperity and compete in the world market. Recent economic studies show
that high skills lead to better wages, more equitable distributions of income, and
substantial gains in economic productivity. Higher math performance at the end of
high school translates into a 12 percent increase in future earnings (Achieve, 2009).
In Hawaii, one-third of projected categories of job openings from 2006-2016
requires postsecondary education or training, and these projected jobs pay an average
2
salary twice as much as those that do not require postsecondary education: $50,000
vs. $25,000 (State of Hawaii Department of Labor and Industrial Relations Research
and Statistics Office, 2008). According to the Native Hawaiian Education Act, PL
197-110, Native Hawaiians are underrepresented in institutions of higher education.
The Office of Hawaiian Affairs (2006) reports that only 9.4% of Native Hawaiians
aged 25 or older attained a bachelor’s degree. This underrepresentation in higher
education is attributed to the dismal status of Native Hawaiian students in Hawai’i’s
K-12 public school system.
There are approximately 71,000 school-aged Native Hawaiian students in the
state of Hawai’i (Ng-Osorio & Tibbets, 2010). Seven percent of these students are
enrolled at Kamehameha Schools, another six percent attend other private schools or
are home schooled (Kamehameha Schools, 2009). The remaining 87% of Native
Hawaiian students attend Hawai’i’s public schools, accounting for the largest ethnic
group in the public school system (Ng-Osorio & Tibbets, 2010; Kekahio, 2007).
These students are among the lowest academic achievers when compared to other
ethnic students in Hawai’i (Ka Huaka’i, 2005; Kanaiaupuni & Ishibashi, 2003). As a
result, Native Hawaiian students are the most underprivileged students in the state’s
public school system.
As research depicts, Table 1.1 represents data from different studies about the
education well-being of Native Hawaiians. Education well-being accounts for the
indicators that are correlated with a student’s achievement, such as test scores,
3
school attendance, family involvement and family income level. The Non-Hawaiian
comparison group includes Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, and Non-Hispanic White.

Table 1.1
Education Well-being of Native Hawaiian Students Compared to Other Groups
Indicators of Education Well-being
Native Hawaiian
Students
Non-Hawaiian
Students
Hawaii State DOE Student Population 26%
1
74%
1

Subsidized Meal Eligibility 59%
1
40%
1
Classified SPED Students 16%
1
11%
1
Hawaii State Assessment Mathematic Scores
Demonstrating Proficiency
32%
2
49%
2

Hawaii State Assessment reading scores
demonstrating proficiency
55%
2
69%
2

Timely High School Graduation 70%
2
80%
2

Students enrolled in schools that have not
met the NCLB Adequate Yearly Progress
68%
2
57%
2

Students enrolled in Start up Charter schools 49%
2
11.3%
2

Bachelor’s Degree Attainment 15.2%
3
24%
3
(National
Average)
Experienced Teachers 26%
2
14%
2

Excessive Absenteeism (DOE, secondary
schools, students with more than ten
absences)
40%
2
26.5%
2

Arrest Rates for violent crimes 12%
2
(NH
Adults)
10%
2
(NonNH
Adults)
Illicit Drug Use Reported in the 12
th
grade 60%
2
46%
2

1
Ng-Osorio, J. & Tibbets, K.A. 2010. Department of Education Update 2010: The R & E Annual
Update Series.
2
Kamehameha Schools. 2009. Native Hawaiian Educational Assessment Update 2009: A Supplement
to Ka Huaka’i 2005.
3
College Board Advocacy and Policy Center, 2010.
4
The education well-being of Native Hawaiians has been affected by many of
the factors cited here. A comprehensive study by Ng-Osorio and Tibbets (2010)
revealed that 26 percent of Native Hawaiian students make up the public school
system, yet an astounding 61% of Native Hawaiian students are enrolled in schools
that have not met NCLB’s Adequate Yearly Progress qualifying these schools to be
in the category of corrective action. Thereby placing over double the statewide
average of Native Hawaiian students in schools that provide a sub-standard
education. The Kamehameha School’s Native Hawaiian Educational Assessment
Update (2009) note that schools with 50% or more Native Hawaiian student
enrollment have teachers who are less qualified, less experienced and a faculty which
is less stable. Furthermore, the authors note that Native Hawaiian students are
overrepresented in Special Education classes. Native Hawaiian students throughout
the state considerably lag behind their counterparts in scores on the Hawaii State
Assessment tests.
Table 1.1 provides evidence that the achievement gap between Native
Hawaiian students and their peers are widening. The academic well-being of Native
Hawaiians has been affected by many of the factors cited here. But the overall well-
being of Native Hawaiians are endangered in several other ways. “The stresses of
poverty, socioeconomic disadvantage, and cultural loss that Hawaiian children face
threaten their emotional well-being and their chance at achieving positive social
outcomes at school and at home” (Kana‘iaupuni & Ishibashi, 2003, p. 26).
5
There are a number of approaches to deal with this disparity. Researchers
agree that one solution to this systemic crisis is culturally responsive pedagogy
(Kana’iaupuni, 2003; Gay, 2000; Howard, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 1994; Shade,
Kelly, & Oberg, 1997). Culturally responsive pedagogy is not a new phenomenon or
a passing fad. In fact, “it has been central to tribal nations’ call for improved
schooling since at least the early part of the 20
th
century” (Castagno & Brayboy,
2008, p. 944). In Hawaii, culturally responsive pedagogy has become very popular
with the Hawaiian Charter Schools’ movement, the expansion of Hawaiian
Immersion schools and the increase in Hawaiian focused curriculum. Thirty-five
years have since passed in recognizing the role culture has in education. Yet, Native
Hawaiian students continue to do poorly as posed in Table 1.1.
This was not always the case. In pre-contact Hawai‘i, Native Hawaiians had
a well-organized system for both informal and formal learning (Chun, 2006). Native
Hawaiians come from a history and tradition where learning was organized and
implemented within the ‘ohana (family). Learning was relevant, purposeful to the
community, family and self with the outcome fulfilling a function in society
(Kawakami, 1999). Between western contact in 1776 and present day, something
tainted the learning environment in Hawai’i for Native Hawaiians from a thriving,
vibrant society to a disadvantaged and marginalized one. Researchers agree that the
following events lead up to the present disenfranchised state of Native Hawaiians:

6
Table 1.2
Events and Status of Native Hawaiians in Hawai’i
Year Events and Status of Native Hawaiians in Hawai’i
1778 800,000 to 1,000,000 population estimates
1

1778-
1878
Diseases such as tuberculosis, measles, small pox and syphilis leaves only 10%
of the Native population
1

1819 First whaling ships arrive in Hawaii
2

1820 The first missionaries arrive in Hawaii to Christianize the natives
2
1848 The Great Mahele begins to transform the Hawaiian land tenure system to a
Western one based on private property ownership. Many Native Hawaiians are
dispossessed of their lands. Many foreigners prosper. For the first time in
history, Native Hawaiians are land deficit in their own homelands.
3

1850 Less than 3000 Hawaiian Men (estimation)
10

1872 The last Kamehameha dies with no heir, the people elect a new monarch
3
1873 Hawai’i’s first elected King dies after only one year on the throne, he leaves no
heir.
4

1887 Bayonette Constitution
4

1893 Illegal Overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom
4

1896 The Hawaiian language ban in public schools
5, 6

1898 Annexation of Hawai’i to the United States, Hawai’i’s sovereignty transferred
to the U.S.
3, 4, 7

1907 First permanent military post for the army in the territory of Hawaii, Fort
Shafter
8

1921 Hawaiian Homes Act (Federal Legislation)
9

1959 Hawaii becomes the 50
th
State
8

1
Stannard, David. 1989. Before the Horror: The Population of Hawaii on the Eve of Western Contact.
2
Ii, John, P. 1959. Fragments of Hawaiian History.
3
Kame’eleihiwa, L. 1992. Native Lands and Foreign Desires.
4
Osorio, Jon, K. 2002. Dismembering Lahui: A History of the Hawaiian Nation to 1887.
5
Warner, N. 1999. Kuleana: The Right, Responsibility, and Authority of Indigenous Peoples to Speak
and Make Decisions for Themselves in Language and Cultural Revitalization.
6
Silva, N. 2009. Na Hulu Kupuna: To Honor Our Intellectual Ancestors.
7
Silva, N. 2004. Aloha Betrayed.
8
Hawaii Historical Society. Retrieved February 20, 2011. http://hawaiianhistory.org/ref/chron.html
9
MacKenzie, M.K.1991. Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook.
10
Cook, Tarallo-Jensen, Withy, Berry. 2005. Changes in Kanaka Maoli Men’s Roles and Health:
Healing the Warrior Self.

7
As Table 1.2 depicts since the arrival of foreigners to Hawaii, Native
Hawaiians have been subjected to the loss of their ali’i (Royalty), land, language,
population, sovereign rights, culture, kingdom and ultimately way of life as it was
known. Most profound is the loss of population, not only did the Kamehameha line
die out leaving no heir to the throne; the vast majority of Native Hawaiians were also
dying. A census of 1872 recorded the islands’ total population at its all time low of
56,897, indicating a drop of anywhere from 75 to 95 percent of the pre-contact
population (Howes, 2010). Hawai‘i was also subjected to a territorial status longer
than any geographic area that became a state of the United States—a possible clue as
to our sense of being marginal (Howes, 2010). To address the deteriorating social
and economic conditions of the Native Hawaiian people, in 1921, the U.S. Congress
passed the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (HHCA). Although recent strides
have been made in placing people on the land. Many have died on the waiting list
and there are many Native Hawaiians still waiting. Clearly, Tables 1.1 and 1.2
describe a people needing change.
Statement of the Problem
As the previous sections have illustrated, more than 100 years of cultural
disconnection has occurred to a large extent between Hawaiian families and the
structure of formal education in Hawai‘i. If research suggests positive educational
outcomes occur with the integration of culture into the classroom and the use of
culturally responsive teaching methods, and this has been evolving for thirty-five
years, then why do Native Hawaiian students continue to do poorly in school?
8
Castagno and Brayboy (2008) proposed that although the research plethora on
culturally responsive methods are insightful, it has made little impact on what
teachers do because it is too easily reduced to essentialization, meaningless
generalizations, or trivial anecdotes-none of which result in systemic, institutional or
lasting changes to schools serving indigenous youth. As many researchers have
argued, the goal for contemporary indigenous, students and other educational leaders
should be to develop educational programs, systems and assessments, which are
responsive to minority and Indigenous learners (Au & Kawakami, 1991; Castagno &
Brayboy, 2008). Native American educator Cornel Pewewardy (1993) maintains
that one of the reasons why Native American children experience difficulty in
schools is because mainstream educators, in trying to address indigenous or minority
students’ needs, have traditionally attempted to insert culture into their education, as
opposed to inserting education into their culture (as cited in Ladson-Billings, 1995).
It can also be argued that the vast majority of American schools, including those with
a majority of non-White students incorporate culturally based education anchored
almost exclusively in Euro-American language, culture and values (Asante, 1991).
Bennett (2001) has stated that a Eurocentric curriculum in a multicultural society is a
tool for cultural hegemony.
The incorporation of a students’ own culture and history as a context for
learning is defined as centricity (Asante, 1991). Providing an environment where
students relate socially and psychologically to other cultural perspectives by
fostering centricity and cultural education anchored in a student’s own culture and
9
language is important for Indigenous and minority student learning, success and
well-being (Meriam, 1928; Asante, 1991; Brayboy & Castagno, 2008; Demmert,
2003). A goal for schools and organizations, especially those who serve Native
Hawaiian student populations must be to ensure curricula and pedagogy incorporates
its students’ cultural capital, is integrally connected to their cultural backgrounds and
builds positive cultural identity and self-efficacy.
It is clear that change is needed, perhaps a disruptive innovative change. It is
evident that educational methodologies, learning processes and collaborative efforts
which stimulate and engage Native Hawaiian students must be innovative and
implemented in an effort to help these students reach their fullest potential.
Purpose of the Study
Native Hawaiians come from a tradition of success and resilience. Sumida
and Meyer (2006) report that Native Hawaiians were among the most literate people
in the world in the 1840’s where they had the highest literacy rate west of the
Rockies. By 1893, nearly 100 Hawaiian newspapers were in print and circulation in
the Hawaiian Islands (Sumida & Meyer, 2006). Prior to western contact, the islands
maintained a highly sophisticated society by sustaining 500,000+ people through the
very concise agricultural and hydroponic systems (Kame’eleihiwa, 1989). Native
Hawaiians were experts in sailing, agriculture, fishing, clothing manufacturing, and
medicine (Kame’eleihiwa, 1989). In fact, the following excerpt is taken from
Captain James Cook’s journal “these natives are the strongest, most physically fit
10
people ever seen.” Fast-forward almost two hundred years since western contact,
this is no longer the case.
Based on the information presented above, it is clear that the vast majority of
Native Hawaiian students in public schools are not prepared for post high education
therefore will not be competitive in the entry of workforce. Yet these are our future
leaders. Also shown above, culturally responsive pedagogy cannot stand alone in
educating Native Hawaiian students. The challenges of creating change require
innovation and creative solutions, particularly in the context of limited state
resources for education (Kana’iaupuni & Ishibashi, 2003). Perhaps the greatest hope
for Native Hawaiian public school students may therefore lie in collaborative
partnerships that begin to address these needs (Kana’iaupuni & Ishibashi, 2003).
Research Questions
The Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center (QLCC) is a social service
agency targeting Native Hawaiian families with a commitment to increasing the
overall betterment of their lives. Because of this ambitious and broad goal, QLCC is
a major community partner with schools and other programs that provide service to
Native Hawaiian students and families. As an organization, QLCC recognizes that
change and innovation not only needs to come from systems but also from each
Native Hawaiian student and family. In particular, QLCC provides a unique
program for Native Hawaiian students that initiate lasting behavior change called Ku
Ha’aheo or to stand proud. This program utilizes community mentors, is based on
Hawaiian cultural values, and a monetary incentive all geared toward increasing self-
11
efficacy, self-determination and positive experiences of participants. The innovation
and creativity of programs and organizational structure will be examined in this
study. The following are the research questions:
1. Is the Queen Liliuokalani Children’s Center perceived by key
stakeholders to be an innovative organization?
a. Is the establishment of the Incentive Motivation program an
organizational innovation?
b. Is the use of Hawaiian cultural practices and values within the
delivery of services considered to be innovative?
2. Does QLCC possess three key internal antecedents of an innovative
organization?
a. Individual attributes of the members and innovators;
b. Role of leaders and leadership attributes;
c. Organizational climate and environment.
These questions were chosen in hopes that QLCC and other school partnering
organizations will value and adopt innovation within their own organizations by
dispelling barriers to innovation. Another reason for choosing these questions, in
particular question 1b, goes back to QLCC’s vision statement:
Ho’opa’a i na wa i hala, ho’ono’ono’o pono no keia manawa, a me ka ‘ike i
na wa ma hope. Rooted in the past, focused on the present with a vision for
the future.

For Native Hawaiians, the answers always came from the past. With the resurgence
of the Hawaiian culture in contemporary times beginning with the inaugural sail of
12
Hokule’a to Tahiti, the Punana Leo preschools expansion throughout the state which
led to K-12 Hawaiian language immersion schools, the creation of Hawaiian
language and Hawaiian Studies schools throughout the University of Hawaii system,
and the overall increase of popularity of anything “Hawaiian,” it is important to
signify the relevancy culture has on innovation.
Importance of the Study
The results of this study will provide further insight into the role that
environmental, organizational and leadership antecedent’s play in innovation. The
results will further increase the likelihood of collaborative efforts between public and
private sectors to innovate in educating Hawaiian students. This study will
influence the structure of organizations, specifically in making decisions in designing
and implementing innovative programs that enhance Native Hawaiian student
learners and their families.
The study will also provide insights for different stakeholders, such as private
and public sector leaders, policymakers, and researchers. Leaders will be influenced
by their ability to recognize the possible barriers and antecedents to innovation in
educating Native Hawaiian students. Administrators will be able to recognize the
importance to build networks, lead, and influence innovation in and outside of their
school campuses. Policymakers will be able to understand the importance
collaboration between the public and private sectors have on resources and policies
affecting Native Hawaiian students.
13
Limitations, Delimitations and Assumptions
The design of this action research has limitations. The study of
organizational innovation is vast and heterogeneous (Greenhalgh, Robert,
MacFarlane, Bate, & Kyriakidou, 2004). Many factors affect initiation, adoption,
implementation, and diffusion of incremental to radical innovations in organizations.
Greenhalgh et al. (2004, p. 585) identified following six broad categories of studies
in the area of organizational innovation:
1. The innovation itself.
2. The adoption/assimilation process.
3. Communication and influence.
4. The inner (organizational) context.
5. The outer (interorganizational) context.
6. The implementation process.
However, this study primarily focuses on one category, the inner (organizational)
context which includes innovators, leaders, and organizational climate. Focusing on
the internal antecedents only may not provide a complete picture in explaining why
individuals within the organization and the organization as a whole behave
innovatively. However, these internal antecedents are critically important
components and indicators towards organization’s readiness for innovation (Tang,
1998).
Additionally, the utility of this case study analysis may have a limited
application due to the uniqueness of QLCC. QLCC is a private non-profit
14
organization set up by the last reigning monarch, Queen Lili’uokalani. All of her
assets are used for the implementation towards the betterment of Hawaiian orphan
and destitute families. Because there are no other organization to compare with, the
findings from this study may not be readily generalizable for application with other
organizations. However, the results of this study will provide an insight into one
organization’s innovative behavior within a structure that is commonly considered to
be dominated by Hawaiian traditional values, culture and collective experiences.
The following limitations are noted:
1. This study was limited to subjects who agreed to participate voluntarily.
2. QLCC Staffs’ opinions and responses may be influenced by factors
outside the scope of this study.
3. Administrators’ opinions and responses may be influenced by factors
outside the scope of this study.
4. This study was limited to the number of subjects surveyed and the
amount of time available to conduct the study.
5. The study was limited to the honesty of the respondents in the completion
of the questionnaire.
Delimitations and Assumptions
1. The sample of this study was limited to the Queen Lili’uokalani
Children’s Center administrators and staff.
2. The study was designed to look at the perspective of QLCC’s
administrators and staff.
15
3. The study was not designed to measure educational outcomes in the
program.
Definitions
• Kuanaʻike Hawaiʻi: Hawaiian Worldview.
• Ho’okumu a’e: Hawaiian Innovation.
• Ali’i: Royalty.
• Piko: Center, Beginning.
• Kupuna: Grandparents, or generation of grandparents.
• Mo’opuna: Grandchild or the generation of grandchildren.
• kokua aku, kokua mai; aloha aku, aloha mai: give and receive.
• Ku: To stand erect, also a name of one of the four major Hawaiian gods.
• Hina: To be prostrate, also the name of a female Hawaiian god.
• Pele: A female goddess associated with fire, volcano and new land.
• Beneficiaries: Hawaiian orphan and destitute children being serviced by
QLCC.
Organization of the Study
This study will explore the perceptions that QLCC administrators and QLCC
staff and how innovative QLCC is in meeting the needs of Hawaiian students and
their families via their programs. This chapter provided the background and
statement of the problem, which lead to the purpose and research questions of the
study. This was followed by the significance of the study along with assumptions
and limitations. The chapter closed with the definition of terms.
16
Chapter 2 is the literature review in regards to the study. This was a segue
way into innovation, specifically environmental, organizational and leadership
antecedents to innovation.
Chapter 3 discusses the methodology that will be used in the study. This
includes the research design, sampling and population measures and instrumentation.
The chapter concludes with data collection and data analysis procedures.

17
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
Innovation is rapidly becoming a key strategic driver for both private and
public sector organizations. President Barak Obama mentioned the word
“innovation” nine times in his most recent State of the Union Address. The
implementation of innovative frameworks and interventions across all industries and
organizations are considered to be necessary. Examining the attributes that influence
this outcome provides a pathway towards sustainability. The review of literature will
examine findings regarding factors associated with the perception of innovation in
the delivery of services for Hawaiian students. First, a comprehensive review on the
characteristics of innovation including definitions, types, frameworks, and
antecedents will be discussed. Followed by an in depth review of Hawaiian
innovation and transformational leadership. Subsequently, the literature on will be
from a historical perspective to create a backdrop for cultural constructs. This allows
the lens of Indigenous worldview in applying examining innovation and its
relationship to Native Hawaiian run organizations.
Review of Literature
This literature review was developed using articles obtained by conducting a
search of the online databases from JStor, Proquest, and ERIC. The key words used
in the search include the following: innovation, education, organizations, antecedents,
barriers, perceptions, collaboration, leadership, worldview and transformational.
18
Although Native Hawaiian students are the targeted population of this literature
review, researches conducted concerning Native Hawaiian students are sparse.
Disruptive Innovation
Definition.
Most individuals have read about innovation, heard about innovation and
maybe even tried to be innovative. But few understand what exactly innovation is.
As difficult the phenomenon of innovation is, there is a general consensus amongst
researchers and scholars that innovation in organizations involves the adoption and
implementation of something new (Fuglsang, 2010). Luecke and Katz (2003) define
innovation “as a new method, custom or device—a change in the way of doing
things. It is generally understood as the successful introduction of a new thing or
method” (In Brewer & Tierney, 2010). Duggan (1996) expands the definition of
innovation to include its relevancy to innovative people practices as well as
production processes and products describing it as “the successful exploitation of
new ideas” (p. 503). As Christensen, Baumann, Ruggles, and Sadtler (2006) pose
“when too much attention is devoted to providing more of the same to narrow
populations that are already served, it’s time for a fundamentally different approach”
(p.2). The different approach and implementation of it would be deemed innovative.
No innovation is permanent – a solution to any one problem does not remain
valid from now until eternity. Only change is permanent. In both academic and
practitioner communities, it is commonly perceived that organizations should
innovate to be effective, or even survive, and that research can guide the
19
management of innovation (Damanpour and Schneider, 2006). “The innovation may
be incremental or breakthrough and evident at any level of organization: team,
community of practice, project, program, company, joint venture, alliance,
partnership or supply chain” (Beyerlein, Beyerlein, Kennedy, 2010, p. xiii).
Walker (2006) identified three categories to systematically organize the types
of organizational innovations: “product, process, and ancillary” (p. 313). Offering
existing or new products and services to existing and new ‘customers’ is considered
as product type of innovation under Walker’s (2006) framework. Process
innovations include changes in organization’s rules, procedures, and structures, and
communications as well as changes in relationships and exchanges amongst
members, and between members and external environment (Walker, 2006).
“Ancillary innovations are concerned with working across boundaries with other
service providers, users or other public agencies and thus their successful
implementation is reliant upon others” (Walker, 2006, p. 314).
Innovation occurs in phases, Damanpour & Schneider (2006) refer to these
stages as: initiation, adoption decision, and implementation. The initiation phase
involves recognizing that there is a need to innovate. This phase is an exhilarating
one where brainstorming and the generating of ideas exist. Meyer and Goes (1988)
refer to this phase as the Knowledge-Awareness stage where apprehension,
consideration and discussion occur. Initiation or Knowledge-Awareness is rooted in
the need for change, where change is considered an inherent aspect of creativity
(Matthew & Sternberg, 2006). Although creativity can be found in all phases, it is
20
mainly associated with the initiation phase. Psychologist agree that to be creative,
one needs to generate ideas or products that are relatively novel, useful, adaptive,
high in quality and gain social acceptance (Barron, 1955; Csikszentmihalyi, 1994,
1996; Sternberg & Lubart, 1991, 1995). Creativity requires an environment where
people feel free to challenge assumptions and conventional ways of doing things in
search of more innovative alternatives (Matthews & Sternberg, 2006). Once
brainstorming for solutions have occurred, identifying suitable innovations takes
place with the final proposal for the next phase of adoption decision.
The adoption decision phase provides members of the organization
information on the proposed innovation and how it would suit the organization
(Damanpour & Schneider, 2006). Meyers and Goes (1988) refer to this phase as the
Evaluation-Choice Stage. In this phase organizations evaluate the technical,
financial, strategic perspectives and decides whether or not to accept the innovation
(Meyers & Goes, 1988). It is in this phase that top administrators decide to adopt the
innovation and allocate resources to it.
The last phase, implementation, involves modifying and preparing the
organization to use the innovation (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006). This phase may
include a trial period in order to ease the acceptance of and continued use of the
innovation.
Types of Innovation
There are many types of innovation. Types of innovation can be identified
by the way the innovation looks in an organization. To support adoption and
21
implementation, capacity building among individuals, groups, teams, professional
learning communities, individual schools, partner organizations, entire districts, and
communities is especially important (Bodilly, Chun, Ikemoto, & Stockly, 2004;
Fullan, 2005; Rogers, 2003). Due to the nature of this research, three types are
identified: collaborative innovation, innovation specific and local innovation.
Collaborative innovation is creative thinking transformed into useful outcomes, and
always depends on a social network (Beyerlein, Beyerlein & Kennedy, 2006). The
social network is key to the culture of organizations in regards to the success of the
innovation and regarded as high-quality social interaction. Organizations are
beginning to recognize that innovation is not the result of a lone genius or about
individuality in thinking; rather it is a collaborative process where people from many
different parts of the organization contribute to the creation and implementation of
new ideas (Jassawalla & Sashittal, 2006). In particular, “scholars have focused on
the issue of integration or the coming together of multiple talents to focus on the
common purpose of innovation” (as cited in Jassawalla & Sashittal, 2006, p. 2).
Collaboration has been characterized as the dynamic cooperation across complex,
loosely tied internal and external networks (Hatchuel, 2001).
There is a growing recognition that innovation is not a linear process but
rather a social process involving a multitude of different actors, sometimes referred
to as a social network (Waters-Bayer, can Velduizen, Wongtschowdki, Wettasinha,
2010). Innovation processes can be enhanced by creating more possibilities for
actors to interact. If they are to interact effectively, many social and psychological
22
processes are involved and many personal and institutional changes are then made
(Waters-Bayer et al., 2010). Therefore, the social network of collaboration is
relationship-centered. This network is key to the culture of organizations throughout
the phases of innovation and regarded as high-quality social interaction (Beyerlein et
al., 2010). Research continues to show that world class levels of performance are
impossible without mastery of collaborative methods, processes and designs
(Beyerlein et al. 2010; Matthews & Sternberg, 2006).
Innovation-specific capacity building is necessary for ensuring stakeholders
and systems have the knowledge, values, and skills needed specific to the innovation
being adopted and implemented. Generic capacity building requires general
competencies for working in teams, relationship building, communication, and
broad-based leadership. Both are essential for building capacity among individuals
and systems. Innovation-specific capacity building provides a buy-in from all
stakeholders.
“Local innovation” refers to the dynamics of indigenous knowledge, the
process through which individuals or groups within a given locality discover or
develop and apply improved ways of managing the available resources – building on
and expanding the boundaries of their indigenous knowledge. (Waters-Bayer et al.
2010). Many local innovations are not of a technical nature but rather are socio-
economic and institutional innovations such as new ways of gaining access to
resource-use rights or new ways of organising marketing activities (Waters-Bayer et
al. 2010). Although local innovation has always been happening, it has seldom been
23
recognized even by people who have been documenting indigenous knowledge for
decades. There is a widespread tendency to regard indigenous knowledge as a
treasure chest of ancient jewels that must be stored well and documented for
posterity – before it is lost – rather than seeing the dynamics in the knowledge of the
people.
Framework
Detailed conclusions can be made about the effects that innovation has had
upon any organization or system. However, it is less easy to predict the
consequences and probable success of attempting to transfer those practices onto
other systems when they are implemented without due regard to the existing culture
or value system (Duggan, 1996). All organizations will have different methods of
managing the process of innovation. For purposes of this study, I intend to look at
innovation or the perception of innovation from a Hawaiian indigenous worldview.
The framework for this study is grounded in traditions and collaborations. Barnhart
and Kawagley (2005) explain the significance of worldviews and critical
consciousness:
Indigenous peoples throughout the world have sustained their unique
worldviews and associated knowledge systems for millennia, even while
undergoing major social upheavals as a result of transformative forces
beyond their control. Many of the core values, beliefs and practices
associated with those worldviews have survived and are beginning to be
recognized as having an adaptive integrity that is as valid for today’s
generations as it was for generations past. (p. 5)

Indigenous knowledge has always existed (Smith, 1999; Battiste, 2002;
Meyers, 1998; Kaomea, 2004). Alike many indigenous researchers, one task for this
24
research is to affirm and activate the holistic paradigm of Indigenous knowledge,
specifically Hawaiian knowledge to reveal the wealth and richness of Native
Hawaiian language, worldviews, teachings and experiences. International and
national fields of inquiry and innovation have validated the usefulness and
significance of Indigenous knowledge (Battiste, 2002; Barnhardt & Kawagley, 2005).
In the last decade of the twentieth century, the acceptance of Indigenous knowledge
by scholars and policy makers generated an explosive growth in the number of
publications on the relevance of Indigenous knowledge in a variety of policy sectors
and academic disciplines (Battiste, 2002). The new theoretical and methodological
paradigms that have been created to understand Indigenous knowledge have
illustrated its role in creating shared capacities that can alleviate poverty and create
sustainable development (Clarkson, Morrisette & Regallet, 1992).
Indigenous knowledge comprises all knowledge pertaining to a particular
people and its territory, the nature or use of which has been transmitted from
generation to generation (Cajete, 1995). Indigenous knowledge has been exposed as
an extensive and valuable knowledge system (Battiste, 2002). Infact, the standards
for respecting Indigenous knowledge include international documents such as the
United Nations’ Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (1993), The
United Nations’Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of the Heritage of
Indigenous Peoples (2000), the Indigenous Treaty on the Declaration of Indigenous
Rights (2004), the proposed American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
25
Populations (2001), and in the education arena the Coolongata Statement on
Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in Education (1999).
In relation to Hawai’i and Native Hawaiians, Kana‘iaupuni (2004) proclaims
that the unique contributions Native Hawaiians offer researchers should be
considered because Native Hawaiians have a special sensitivity and perspective of
the world. This special worldview centers on relationships including connections
with their land and genealogy. Like other Indigenous people, the Native Hawaiian
worldview is relational, based on a harmonic integrity of people and nature. It is with
this Native Hawaiian worldview, the following framework is presented.
Ho’okumu A’e: Innovation
Figure 1 depicts a construct of innovation from a Native Hawaiian
perspective.
The following definition of Hawaiian terms are cited here, the content
describing the terms come from Personal Communication throughout the lifetime of
Papaikani’au Kai’anui and her mother, renown Hawaiian Cultural Practitioner,
Hokulani Holt. The illustration in the center is referred to as a piko. The piko
denotes the new life or new beginning (Puku’i & Elbert, 2003). A piko is a center, a
beginning, and a connection in every sense of the definition. All things have at least
one piko, it signifies the very center and provides a connection between the past and
present. The piko which is the fontanel on our head connects us to our past and
kupuna (ancestors). The piko which is our navel connects us to our present family.
The piko, which are our genitals, connect us to the future generations. All these
26
located in our body reminds us that these centers of connection also exist in all living
things and places and for the very same reasons.

Figure 1. Ho’okumu A’e

Kuana’ike is defined as perspective or worldview (Puku’i & Elbert, 2003).
Notice in this illustration, there are both positive and negative space, or black and
white. These spaces represent a Native Hawaiian worldview and a western
worldview, polar opposites. Kuana’ike Hawai’i or Hawaiian worldview is a
commonly held view in Hawaiian culture that there are constant cycles that we are a
27
part of. That all things revolve through cycles of birth, life, death; of giving and
receiving (kokua aku, kokua mai; aloha aku, aloha mai); rising, setting, rising again;
generational learning (kupuna/mo’opuna); water cycles; and others. As stated earlier,
a Native Hawaiian worldview is relational to the environment.
Kaulike is defined as balance (Puku’i & Elbert, 2003). In the Native
Hawaiian spiritual view things were not inherently bad or good they just were. The
value system of good or bad was related to how things or people assisted the overall.
How did it affect the greater good? Just like us, the gods had both attributes. Pele
(the Fire Goddess) can be seen as destroying forests or land but she also makes new
land and brings perspective to human life. Negative and positive are just opposites,
not inherently good or bad. There is balance and duality in all things Hawaiian and it
was imperative that these concepts were maintained. All of our stories and chants tell
about male/female, top/bottom, rising/setting, inland/ seaward balance and duality.
Ku is the erect or rising as is indicated in the rising sun; Hina is the prostrate and
setting as indicated in the setting sun. Ku is male and Hina is female and both must
exist in concept and in reality.
The concepts of piko, kuana’ike Hawai’i, Western perspective and kaulike
make up the framework for Hawaiian innovation. Hawaiian innovation is ever
changing, never ending and constantly improving. Native Hawaiians believed that
one must start with a firm foundation in their lives and in all that they did. Then they
made it more beautiful, more functional, stronger, lighter, smoother, and the many
ways it could be improved, but always starting from making it perfect. If it was not
28
perfect, it must be done over. If it was perfect then how can it then be made more
perfect. A constant challenging of one’s self. The most profound difference between
a western thought of innovation and Hawaiian innovation is learning from the past to
create anew. Learning from the past is more than an intellectual pursuit, it is a
physical connection also. When one reads about how Native Hawaiians made nets, it
is one type of learning. But in a Hawaiian sense, that learning is not complete until
you learn how to perfect making that net yourself. Then once you have perfected
that net, you learn how to perfect the othe kinds of nets, then you learn how to use
that net to catch fish. Once all of that is accomplished then you can experiment with
making a better or different net. Learning from the past is not learning something old,
it is learning how that skill or knowldege can be used today and for tomorrow. It will
then be amazing to see where that can also lead. As figure 1 illustrates, having both
the black and white moving in unison provides a view of differences that still make
up a whole. The flow of the black and white do not blend, they travel together; side
by side, beginning and ending together.
Therefore, an examination of a private non-profit Hawaiian organization,
which is considered to be an innovative organization, was chosen to be studied.
This study hopes to demonstrate that private non- profit organizations with
traditional roots can innovate and can be an innovative organization given the ‘right’
set of antecedents are present. For leaders of the public sector entities, including
administrators of K-12 school systems and higher education institutions, with an
29
increased need to create more innovative organizations, this study can provide an
additional case study and a model for such an endeavor.
The Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center (QLCC) was selected for its
innovative establishment for this action research study. Additionally, QLCC is
considered as a renowned Hawaiian agency that are experts in the field of providing
social services to the Native Hawaiian community (Chun, 1999). An application of a
theoretical framework derived from studies of innovative organizations towards our
case study to examine QLCC. The concentration of internal organizational
antecedents that characterize innovative organization is planned.
Antecedents
Research indicates that the three antecedents to innovation are:
environmental, organizational and leadership (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006). In
the following sections, the antecedents of environmental, organizational and
leadership will be reviewed in depth. Among the three identified antecedents,
organizational and leadership antecedents have a greater influence on innovation
than environmental antecedents (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006).
Environmental Antecedents in Innovation
Researchers posit that environmental characteristics are critical factors in the
ability of an organization to be innovative (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006).
Environmental characteristics may include: community size and wealth, the size of
the market or sector within which the organization operates, cultural (values, beliefs,
past experiences of individuals in the social system), societal/social norms,
30
political/political directives, geographic conditions, access, ability for contact and
information exchange, informal interorganizational networks/interpersonal networks,
intentional spread strategies, wider environments, technological changes, clientele
needs and demands, and the labor market (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006;
Greenhalgh et al., 2004; Rogers, 1995; Mohr, 1969). Among the many
environmental factors mentioned above, three factors were common findings among
the research: the size and wealth of the community, networks, and the market.
Therefore, my study will focus on these three particular environmental antecedents:
size and wealth of the community, communication networks (social, access,
information exchange, interpersonal), and the market conditions to also include
political directives.
Size. The size of the community (market or sector) in which the organization
resides has proven to impact an organizations ability to be innovative. As a result,
external resources and/or extra-organizational resources and information are
available to the community to support innovations. Researchers state that the size of
the community alone explains why urbanized areas have more complex and diverse
environments of local government organizations (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006).
Mohr (1969) echoes this statement by stating, “organizations may be more likely to
innovate when its environment is rapidly changing than when it is steady” (p. 112).
The size of the community is relevant to the study in that Hawaiian organizations are
in various size communities, which yield various external resources. The study will
31
explore whether or not the size of the community in which the organization resides
plays a role in innovation towards meeting the needs of Native Hawaiian students.
Communication Networks. Another environmental antecedent that is critical
for innovation is one of access and the ability for external organizational systems to
have contact and information exchange. Accessibility is also influenced by the size
of the community. Accessibility brings about the ability for contact and information
exchanges, which are essential for innovation (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006). In
other words, a larger community will yield more external resources and accessibility
than a smaller community. Initiation, adoption, and implementation of innovations
are more abundant in wealthier and growing communities (Damanpour & Schneider,
2006). Damanpour & Schneider (2006) state that an organization’s external
communication is among other common predictors of innovation. Greenhalgh et. al
(2004) mimics this statement by indicating external influences such as the
importance of informal interorganizational networks that impact innovation. Mohr
(1969) also state that the social environment with norms that favor change will likely
innovate. Schools as organizations within the community thrive on building
networks for support, therefore, communication networks is likely to be relevant to
the study.
Market. Mohr (1969) contends markets that adhere to the needs and demands
of the clientele and are rapidly changing may be more likely to innovate than
markets that are disconnected with the clientele and are steady. Political directives
within the market also influence innovation. Political directives and/or external
32
mandates are considered political ‘must-do’s’ that will decrease or increase an
organization’s motivation for innovation (Greenhalgh, MacFarlane, Bate &
Kyriakidou, 2004). Greenhalgh et al. (2004) indicated that a policy push that occurs
at the start of innovation increases the organization’s ability to be successful while
making a dedicated funding stream available. However, political directives may
work for or against innovation. In other words, mandates may cause organizations to
lose focus and/or redirect focus on innovation. This research is focusing on a private
non-profit organization whose funding stream does not come from the public sector,
therefore mandates aren’t as likely. However, the market is related to this study
because decisions that take place in support of innovation is dependent on the market.

Figure 2. Organizational Chart for The Queen Lili’uokalani Trust

33
Figure 2 describes the organizational chart of the Queen Lili’uokalani Trust.
The Endowment group is the arm of the Trust that manages its resources via land
management, land development and market investments. In essence, the Endowment
group produces the income for the Children’s Centers to provide services to
Hawaiian families.
To summarize, the environmental antecedents such as the size and wealth of
the community, the social, access, information exchange and interpersonal
communication networks, and the market conditions to include political directives,
affect innovation because these factors in essence determine the extent of extra-
organizational resources and information that will be available to the public and
private sectors that in turn will support innovation (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006).
Therefore, this study will look at the role that these environmental antecedents and
its relevancy on a Hawaiian organization in being innovative in meeting the needs of
Native Hawaiian students.
Organizational Antecedents in Innovation
According to Damanpour and Schneider (2006), organizational antecedents
are more influential than environmental antecedents in predicting the phases of
innovation within an organization. However, researchers caution by sharing that
innovation is successful in context-specific organizations. Thus, an innovation may
be successful in one organization and not in another (Albury, 2005).
Organizational antecedents may include: centralization, formalization,
specialization, professionalism, differentiation (divided into semi-autonomous
34
departments), organizations’ design (size and complexity), financial resources/
economic health, trade unions, and the social system (Damanpour & Schneider,
2006; Greenhalgh, MacFarlane, Bate & Kyriakidou, 2004; Rogers, 1995; Mohr,
1969). Damanpour and Schneider (2006) state that trade unions has a negative effect
on innovation while economic health had a positive effect on innovation.
Damanpour and Schneider (2006) posit that centralization and formalization
negatively impacts innovation while specialization, professionalism, and
differentiation positively influences innovation. They also state that the most
common accepted predictors of innovation are an organization’s complexity, size,
and financial resources.
Common findings found in research done by Damanpour and Schneider
(2006), Greenhalgh, MacFarlane, Bate and Kyriakidou (2004), Rogers (1995), and
Mohr (1969) indicate that the size and complexity of an organization, organizations
financial resources/internal economic health, and the organizational structure are
organizational antecedents of innovation. Therefore, my study will focus primarily
on these three organizational antecedents for innovation in meeting the needs of
Native Hawaiian students.
Organizational Design. The complexity and size of the organization makes
up the organization’s design. These two are considered two of the most important
predictors of organizational innovation. The size of an organization positively
influences the strength and all phases of innovation (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006;
Mohr, 1969). There are arguments to support innovation in large and small
35
organizations. Arguments for large organizations include the amount of financial
resources, diverse facilities, professional and skilled workers, higher technical
potential and knowledge, and better opportunities for raising capital. Arguments for
small organizations include the ability to make quicker decisions due to less
bureaucratic and more flexible structures, greater ability to adapt and improve, and
willingness to accept and implement change (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006). The
study will focus on one Hawaiian organization with ten service units throughout the
state. Studies have indicated size, whether large or small, to have a positive impact
on innovation. For this study, size of the organization will be considered in
determining if it affects the role of innovation.
Organizations that are large and complex such that the organization is divided
into departments and units have better chances of being innovative (Greenhalgh et al.,
2004). The knowledge base in complex organizations is full of depth and diversity
that stimulates creativity. The creativity leads to an increase awareness and cross-
fertilization of ideas. Complex organizations also have more access to information
about different innovations, therefore, will more likely identify and acquire it
(Damanpour & Schneider, 2006). Complexity is relevant to the study in that this
Hawaiian organization is comprised of various departments, service units, lay staff,
profressional staff and consultants.
Financial Resources/Internal Economic Health. Financial resources within
an organization positively influences innovation. Financial resources allow decision-
makers to take risks and invest in new programs (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006;
36
Mohr, 1969). The ability to take risks and invest in new ideas is influenced by the
financial resources of the organization. Organizations that have greater economic
health are able to absorb the cost of failure when taking risks.
Structure. Rogers (1995) defines structure “…as the patterned arrangements
of the units in a system. This structure gives regularity and stability to human
behavior in a system; it allows one to predict behavior with some degree of accuracy”
(p. 24). Coordination among members/units helps to facilitate the cross-fertilization
of ideas. The coordination with members of diverse backgrounds and training, top
managers commitment to innovation, middle managers involvement, and the
motivation of the members to use the innovation all play a role in the structure of the
organization. Time allotted within the organization’s structure is a factor that
attributes to innovation. Borins (2002) posit that providing time to work on
innovation may positively influence the ability to innovate, however, in doing so
may result in reducing other responsibilities and the financial budget. The structure
in this study’s Hawaiian organization may vary from unit to unit (master schedule,
vision that impacts the structure, coordination and collaboration between and among
management and staff). Therefore, the structure of the organization is relevant to the
study.
To summarize, organizational antecedents such as the size and complexity of
an organization, organizations financial resources/internal economic health, and the
organizational structure are factors that influence innovation (Damanpour &
Schneider, 2006; Rogers, 1995; Greenhalgh et al., 2004; Mohr, 1969). Again, this
37
study will focus on one private non-profit Hawaiian organization which mimic the
structure of a school district with various departments, service units that are complex,
have different structures an supports. This study will look at the role that these
organizational antecedents have on this organization in being innovative.
Leadership Antecedents in Innovation
Strategic leaders and/or top managers influence an organizations ability to
innovate by “establishing organizational culture, motivating and enabling managers
and employees, and building capacity for change and innovation” (Damanpour &
Schneider, 2006, p. 220). Leadership characteristics may include age, gender,
education, tenure, and attitude toward innovation, motivation, capacity, competence,
articulates vision, sets high expectations, provides individualized support, is
inspirational, and promotes intellectual stimulation (Damanpour & Schneider, 2006;
Greenhalgh et. al, 2004; Jaskyte, 2011; Waldman & Bass, 1991; Sarros, Cooper, &
Santora, 2008). According to Damanpour and Schneider (2006), a leader’s age,
gender and education are not significant antecedents that influence innovation. The
findings from the aforementioned studies indicated that tenure in management,
managers competitive and entrepreneurship attitude toward innovation, the ability to
collaborate and the characteristics of transformational leadership influenced an
organizations ability to be innovative. Therefore, my study will focus primarily on
manager’s attitude, transformational leadership and the ability to collaborate.
Attitude. Manager’s attitude specifically toward competition and
entrepreneurship positively impacts innovation. Damanpour and Schneider (2006)
38
posit that the attitude of a manager is a stronger antecedent over environmental
antecedents for innovation. Research indicates that it is essential to put individuals
with positive attitudes in key leadership positions and/or roles to drive innovation
(Damanpour & Schneider, 2006). The leaders attitude must exemplify and express
the systems structure (Rogers, 1995). Damanpour & Schneider (2006) indicate that a
managers’ attitude towards innovation, competition, and entrepreneurship weighs
heavily over the individuals environmental and demographic characteristics. In
addition to having a competitive edge, an attitude that creates and supports pro-
innovation cultures, controls the processes of monitoring the environment and
organizational resources, ability to create policies that respond to external changes
and influences strategic decisions are also factors of leadership antecedents (Jaskyte,
2011).
Transformational leadership. Transformational leadership has been
associated with organizational innovativeness (Greenhalgh et al., 2004; Jaskyte,
2011; Waldman & Bass, 1991; Sarros, Cooper, & Santora, 2008). “Transformational
leadership is the process whereby a person engages with others and creates a
connection that raises the level of motivation and morality in both the leader and the
follower” (Northouse, 2010). Factors involved in transformational leadership
include: idealized influence (articulates vision and charisma), inspirational
motivation (sets high expectations), intellectual stimulation, and individualized
consideration (Northouse, 2010; Jaskyte, 2011; Waldman & Bass, 1991; Sarros,
Cooper, & Santora, 2008).
39
In leader-member exchange theory, Tierney (1999) found employees were
more creative and productive under supervision from a leader who is supportive and
whose management style is not top-down. In innovative situations where creativity
is crucial in organizational and programmatic success, leadership styles such as
transformational leadership are needed. The importance of transformational
leadership in the fostering of creativity is defined by Jung (2003),
They provide ideological explanations that link followers’ identities to the
collective identity of their organization thereby increasing followers’ intrinsic
motivation (rather than just providing extrinsic motivation) to perform their
job. By articulation an important vision and mission for the organization,
transformational leaders increase followers understanding of the importance
and values associated with desired outcomes, raise their performance
expectations, and increase their willingness to transcend their self interests
for the sake of the collective entity. (p. 528)

The aforementioned studies described the factors involved in
transformational leadership. Idealized influence, which includes charisma, is the
ability to act as a strong role model. A leader as such has high standards of moral
and ethical conduct and articulates a vision and a sense of mission (Northouse, 2010).
Inspirational motivation occurs when leaders communicate and set high expectations,
motivating and inspiring others to be committed to the vision of the organization
(Northouse, 2010; Sarros et al., 2008). Intellectual stimulation occurs when leaders
stimulate others to be creative, innovative, and to an extent challenge their own
beliefs and that of their leaders and organization (Northouse, 2010; Waldman & Bass,
1991; Jaskyte, 2011). “This type of leadership supports followers as they try new
approaches and develop innovative ways of dealing with organizational issues”
40
(Northouse, 2010, p. 179). Individualized consideration occurs when leaders take
the time to listen the needs of individuals and promote and provide a supportive
climate (Northouse, 2010; Waldman & Bass, 1991; Sarros et al., 2008).
Transformational leadership and its factors are relevant to the study as Top
Administrators within the Children’s Center and Endowment Group will be
interviewed to gain their perspective on their role as leaders, and other staff will be
interviewed to gain their perspective on the role that leadership plays on innovation
in meeting the needs of Native Hawaiian Students.
Collaboration. In collaborative environments, transformational leaders act
more as facilitators, encouraging the staff to put aside differences, think outside of
the box, with the focus always being for the benefit of the issue at hand (Vernon,
2005). Due to the collaborative nature of social service organizations, the leaders
must be able to facilitate the various viewpoints, which may vary from organization
to organization. In this study’s context, the inability to collaborate would be deemed
a barrier towards innovation. Limitations like these are especially apparent in
schools and districts with considerable numbers of young people and families
manifesting social- psychological vulnerabilities and experiencing economic, social,
and cultural hardships. Under these circumstances, educators simply cannot be
expected to “do it all, alone” inside one building. Nor can they achieve good
outcomes by focusing exclusively on what can be done during the restricted hours of
the regular school day. (Anderson-Butcher et al., 2010).
41
Collaboration is seen as a partnership. The best partnerships enable new
interpersonal relationships, including co- operation, coordination, and collaboration
among diverse, once-separate stakeholders (Anderson-Butcher et al., 2010; Lawson,
2004). Together, these new partnerships and interpersonal relationships necessitate
systems changes in schools and districts. They also entail cross-systems changes
involving other systems, especially child welfare, juvenile justice, mental health,
sub- stance abuse, youth development, and the health system. Predictably, schools
and districts with histories of ‘‘walled-in’’ improvement planning typically lack the
organizational mechanisms, leadership and management structures, supportive
cultures, and organizational expertise required for innovative solutions (Flaspohler,
Anderson-Butcher, Paternite, Weist, & Wandersman, 2006; Fullan, 2005; Hatch,
2009; Honig, 2006).
Summary of Chapter
In summary, leaders are often called upon to sift through the myriad of
seemingly-promising innovations to find those that meet their needs, but are rarely
trained in a formal sequence on how to decide whether to pursue or reject new ideas.
Leaders are often well connected to their professional and social networks, and are
thereby aware of new ideas, but awareness of a new idea is a far cry from making the
decision to investigate or reject it, which is where the innovation takes place.
Collaboration emerges in teams largely as a function of the choices made by the
leadership and their carefully considered actions and initiatives (Jassawalla &
Sashittal, 2006). Leading innovation through collaborations can be found at the
42
intersection of leadership, creativity and organizational literatures (Matthew &
Sternberg, 2006). Over managing and/or micromanaging or lack thereof of
leadership negatively impacts an organizations ability to innovate (Kelley, 2005). A
manager’s competitive and entrepreneurship attitude toward innovation, and factors
of transformational leadership influence an organizations ability to be innovative.
The study will look at the role that these leadership antecedents have on innovation
within this context of a Hawaiian organization.

43
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to describe the perceptions of innovation in the
delivery of services by a private non-profit Hawaiian social service agency. The
Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center administrators, middle management, staff: lay
and professional are all stakeholders contributing to the organization’s effectiveness
in the delivery of services. The perceptions of the individuals and the groups of
individuals were described and analyzed in order to determine if potential
discrepancies and agreements in perceptions are present. By providing the
information to make transparency of perceptions possible, QLCC administrators and
staff may be able to serve QLCC beneficiaries more effectively. The ultimate and
intended benefactors of this study will therefore be the Hawaiian families that will be
served by QLCC. This chapter describes sampling procedure, population,
instrumentation, and procedures for data collection and analysis.
Research Questions
1. Is the Queen Liliuokalani Children’s Center perceived by key
stakeholders to be an innovative organization?
a. Is the establishment of the Incentive Motivation program an
organizational innovation?
b. Is the use of Hawaiian cultural practices and values within the
delivery of services considered to be innovative?
44
2. Does QLCC possess three key internal antecedents of an innovative
organization?
a. Individual attributes of the members and innovators;
b. Role of leaders and leadership attributes;
c. Organizational climate and environment.
Research Design
Conducting a study of Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center across the state
of Hawai‘i was thought to help determine if perceptions of organizational innovation
among administrators and staff exist. Patton (2002) states that “formative
evaluations…serve the purpose of improving a specific program, policy, group of
staff, or product” and that “formative evaluations rely heavily, even primarily, on
qualitative methods” (p. 220). This study was designed as a descriptive case study of
the perceptions of QLCC administrators and staff through a mixed method design.
According to Mertens (2009), and others mixed methods use both
quantitative and qualitative methods to add richness to a study. Mixed methods have
many advantages such as adding depth to numbers and including a broader range of
questions in the study format. Powell (2008) noted that mixed methods can give a
triangulation of responses to research questions, resulting in more accurate answers.
Triangulation is the use of multiple data collection methods, multiple
reference points, to strengthen the findings of a study (Patton, 2002; McEwan &
McEwan, 2003). The study utilized focus groups and surveys in order to triangulate
the data to provide a comprehensive view. In addition, multiple reference points
45
such as the perceptions of various stakeholders will strengthen the triangulation of
the results. The analysis of the various perceptions will allow the researcher to
determine the consistencies and/or discrepancies among administration and staff of
QLCC.
The qualitative method of this research was conducted via focus group
interviews with QLCC staff and administrators. These focus group discussions
examined the perceptions of programs that are thought of to be innovative within
QLCC and also gauge the perception of Hawaiian cultural practices as well. Patton
(2002) stated, “detailed case studies can tell the stories behind the numbers…”
because “to simply know that a targeted indicator has been met (or not met) provides
little information for program improvement” (p. 152). Qualitative research is simply
a set of information-gathering techniques or methodologies that seeks answers to
important questions. The three principal characteristics of qualitative research are:
naturalistic, descriptive, and focused on meaning and explanation. This type of
research is naturalistic in that it occurs where the action is, descriptive in that it
contains rich and multifaceted descriptions obtained from interviews and the like, as
well as focusing on explaining and interpreting what is observed, heard and/or read
(McEwan & McEwan, 2003). In addition, qualitative research methods include
interviews, observations, and analyzing documents (McEwan & McEwan, 2003;
Patton, 2002). The purpose of this study was to possibly uncover information that
will aid in program improvement and future program implementation.
46
The quantitative portion of the study is a survey of QLCC staff and
administration. The survey instrument was a questionnaire (Appendix A) that was
developed after reviewing several survey instruments. The questions were chosen
based on the selected common traits and characteristics affiliated with innovative
organizations. The questions on Hawaiian cultural practices were developed through
a number of discussions in and outside of methodology classes.
Sample and Population
This qualitative study utilized purposeful sampling and focused on three of
the ten service units of QLCC where the quantitative portion of the study also
utilized purposeful sampling focusing on the entire organization. Criterion sampling
is described by Patton (2003) as a study of “all cases that meet some sort of
predetermined criterion of importance” (p. 238). In other words, participants have to
meet a set criteria in order to participate in the study. Criterion sampling was chosen
for this study because the participants have to meet the criteria of a QLCC,
administrator and staff. Individuals who met the criteria were deemed candidates for
the study. Focus groups were conducted with groups of staff that represent all levels
of employment with QLCC.
Instrumentation
There are two researcher-designed instruments for this study, a survey and a
focus group. The survey used a 5 point likert scale design containing 67 questions
(Appendix A). The focus group instrument consisted of open ended questions
(Appendix B). The protocol for both instruments included questions that pertained
47
to their perception of administration, organizational structure and effectiveness on
innovation and programmatic related questions.
Data Collection Procedures
Prior to conducting the study and collecting data, the Institutional Review
Board (IRB) process was completed in August 2011 and approval by the University
of Southern California. The approval to begin data collection was therefore granted.
The focus groups were conducted with staff that at the time were current
employees with QLCC. A verbal invitation to participate in a focus group were given
to each QLCC service unit via management. Of ten of the units, three service units
agreed to participate in the study. Two units were from the island of O’ahu and one
from a neighbor island. The data collected seemed representative of the organization
in that the responses between the units were similar. Each focus group ran between
1 ½ hours – 2 hours. Each focus group was tape recorded.
An email by the author of this study requesting participation in the survey
was sent to all QLCC employees (Appendix C). An introduction to the study
describing limitations and a link to the survey was provided. The survey was hosted
on Survey Monkey. The link was available for three weeks after which time
accessibility to the survey was not available.
Data Analysis
Essentially, all qualitative data analysis is content analysis in that the content
of interviews and field notes are analyzed (Merriam, 1998). The process involves the
simultaneous coding of raw data and the construction of categories that capture
48
relevant characteristics of the document’s content (Altheide, 1987). For this study,
data was coded according to response categories for common themes regarding
perceptions of factors that affect the innovative abilities of the QLCC. Then, more
detailed codes were developed to help themes to emerge. The themes evolved around
the following factors: environmental (size of community, communication networks),
organizational (size and complexity of the organization, organizational structure),
and leadership (attitude and transformational leadership) antecedents. These themes
helped illuminate if perceptions were articulated and aligned among QLCC
administrators and staff to show if any strong similarities and discrepancies exist.
The researcher did not use any software in sorting the themes; the work was done
manually. Charts or tables were used to facilitate the data analysis process.
Summary of Chapter
This study was conducted at the Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center over
a period of three months. The Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center does possess
some unique organizational characteristics and therefore the results may not be
generalizable. However, certain factors unique to QLCC may impact the
transferability of this study to other organizations whose target population are Native
Hawaiians. Data was gathered from QLCC because of the organization’s reputation
for being a social service agency that leads the field in providing services that meet
the needs of Native Hawaiians. The samples and units of analysis were purposefully
selected in anticipation of adding more to the field research concerning Native
Hawaiians.
49
Table 3.1
A Matrix of Linkage between Research Questions, Survey and Focus Group
Questionnaires
Research Questions
Survey
Questions Focus Group Questions
1) Is the Queen Liliuokalani
Children’s Center perceived by key
stakeholders to be an innovative
organization?
See Table 3.2 • Do you think the QLCC is an
overall innovative organization?
Why?
1a) Is the establishment of the
Incentive Motivation program an
organizational innovation?
• Can you give me examples of
recent organizational innovations
at the QLCC?
1b) Is the use of Hawaiian cultural
practices and values within the
delivery of services considered to be
innovative?
• Can you provide examples of
cultural practices/values that you
participated in with QLCC?
• Would you consider it to be
innovative? Why?
2) Does QLCC possess three key
internal antecedents of an innovative
organization?
a) Individual attributes of the
members and innovators
• How would you describe the
general personality of the staff and
management of this organization?
• What would you say are their 3
most commonly prominent
personal traits and characteristics
of the staff and management?
• How would you rate the
receptiveness of staff and
managers towards new ideas and
new ways of doing things? Why?
• Could you describe some barriers
and obstacles at the QLCC in
implementing new ideas and
processes?
• Are you aware of some instances
where people overcome some of
the barriers and obstacles? Who
are they and how did they
overcome them?

50
Table 3.1, continued
Research Questions
Survey
Questions Focus Group Questions
2b) Role of leaders and leadership
attributes
• Expect high performance from
followers
• Articulation of a clear vision
• Existence of mutual loyalty,
trust, and support between
leader and member (LMX
Factor)
See Table 3.2 • Could you describe your
understanding of the vision for
future of this organization?
• Do you think everyone on staff
understands the mission and vision
of the QLCC?
• What you think are 3 most
important expectations of you
from your manager?
• How would you rate the level of
trust and loyalty between yourself
and your manager? Why?
• Do you believe you receive
sufficient and appropriate support
from your manager(s)? Why?
2c) Organizational climate (a
composite of structure and culture)
• The employees’ positive
perception of organizational
and work climate
• Innovation is natural
occurrence and innovation is
everyone’s responsibility
• Sufficient freedom for the
exploration of creative
possibilities and experiments
• Rewards and awards for
innovation while tolerating
mistakes
• Do you think people like working
here at the QLCC? Why?
• Who do you think are your most
innovative and creative members
of the staff?
• Who/what is the most critical
factor/influence contributing to
this organization’s innovativeness
and your professional creativity?

51
Table 3.2
Survey Questions
Theme Survey Questions
Clear vision People at the QLCC feel that they are all pulling together for a
common goal.
Clear vision There are mixed messages about what is important at QLCC
Clear vision I am personally in agreement with the stated goals of the QLCC.
Clear vision I understand the mission and goals of the QLCC.
Clear vision In my experience the beneficiaries understand the mission and goals of
QLCC.
Freedom Regulations, policies, and procedures often (at least 50%) stop the
implementation of good ideas at the QLCC
Freedom Members have considerable freedom to act to make necessary changes
at the QLCC.
Freedom The best way to get a long in this organization is to think the way the
rest of the group does.
Freedom Members of the QLCC are expected to deal with problems in the same
way.
Freedom We tend to stick to tried and true ways at the QLCC.
High expectation The leadership at the QLCC sets high standards of performance.
High expectation My supervisor motivates me to perform better than I thought I could.
High expectation My supervisor encourages me to work on problems that have caused
others difficulty.
High expectation Our group at the QLCC has a strong belief in the importance of high
quality output.
High expectation The leadership at the QLCC tolerates incompetent employees.
Incentives Successful innovation is important for career success at the QLCC.
Incentives Around here, a person can get in a lot of trouble by being different.
Incentives QLCC publicly recognizes those who are innovative.

52
Table 3.2, continued
Theme Survey Questions
Incentives The reward system at the QLCC benefits mainly those who don’t rock
the boat.
Incentives Management provides rewards and recognition for innovation and
trying new things.
Innovation is
natural
People in our group encourage each other to try new things.
Innovation is
natural
Around here, people are allowed to try to solve the same problems in
different ways.
Innovation is
natural
The main function of the members in this organization is to follow
orders with come down through channels.
Innovation is
natural
At QLCC, I often have new ideas, but there is too much red tape, so I
tend to not bring up my ideas.
Innovation is
natural
At QLCC, I often introduce new ideas that are implemented and
adopted.
Innovation is
natural
The staff’s ability to function creatively is respected by the leadership.
Innovation is
natural
I am not discouraged to be creative when my new ideas aren’t adopted
for implementation.
Innovation is
natural
Implementing changes take a long time here at QLCC.
Innovation is
natural
Assistance in developing new ideas is readily available.
LMX I trust my supervisor’s ability to overcome any obstacles.
LMX My supervisor supports me and backs me in difficult situations.
LMX I admire my supervisor’s professional skills
LMX My supervisor makes me feel that I can reach my goals without
him/her if I have to.
LMX My supervisor is a lot of fun.
LMX I am willing to apply extra efforts, beyond those normally required to
meet my supervisor’s work goals for our group/unit/department.

53
Table 3.2, continued
Theme Survey Questions
LMX My supervisor would defend me to the organization if I made an
honest mistake.
LMX I respect my supervisor’s knowledge of and competency on the job.
LMX My supervisor is the kind of person one would like as a friend.
LMX I do not mind working my hardest for my supervisor.
LMX I like my supervisor very much as a person.
Tolerance and
Attitude
The attitude around here is that when you are trying new things,
mistakes are a normal part of the job.
Tolerance and
Attitude
My supervisor is ok with honest mistakes when I am trying something
new.
Tolerance and
Attitude
People in this group are willing to cut through bureaucracy in order to
get things done.
Tolerance and
Attitude
This organization can be described as flexible and continually adapting
to change.
Tolerance and
Attitude
This organization is open and responsive to change.
Tolerance and
Attitude
This place seems to be more concerned with the status quo then with
change.
Organizational
Structure
The organizational structure of QLCC allows for a creative
environment.
Organizational
Structure
The organizational structure of QLCC hinders the productivity of
work.
Organizational
Structure
The organizational structure of QLCC helps build capacity for all staff.
Organizational
Structure
The organizational structure of QLCC encourages collaborative
relationships in meeting work goals.
Organizational
Structure
The organizational structure of QLCC allows risk taking in developing
and implementing new ideas possible.
Hawaiian
Culture
QLCC is an organization that promotes Hawaiian cultural values.

54
Table 3.2, continued
Theme Survey Questions
Hawaiian
Culture
QLCC is an organization that practices Hawaiian cultural values in its
day to day operation.
Hawaiian
Culture
QLCC is an organization that embraces cultural learning by Staff
Hawaiian
Culture
QLCC is an organization that practices balance between policy,
procedures and Hawaiian culture.
Hawaiian
Culture
QLCC is an organization that encourages my Hawaiian cultural
practices and beliefs in the work environment.
Hawaiian
Culture
Native Hawaiian practices has been allowed me to be more creative in
meeting work goals.
Hawaiian
Culture
I am comfortable with the integration of Hawaiian culture at QLCC.
Hawaiian
Culture
Hawaiian cultural practices are necessary in meeting the needs of our
target population.
Hawaiian
Culture
QLCC’s services are based on Hawaiian cultural values.
Demographics Which department do you represent at QLCC?
Demographics Which best describes your position?
Demographics Gender
Demographics Age category
Demographics Highest level of education
Demographics Years of employment with QLCC
Open ended Any further comments?

55
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
Introduction
It was argued in the first chapter that the education gap between Native
Hawaiian students in public schools and other students are widening. It was shown
that Native Hawaiian public school students are not prepared for post high education
therefore will not be competitive in the entry of workforce. It was also suggested
that perhaps the greatest hope for Native Hawaiian public school students may
therefore lie in collaborative partnerships (Kana’iaupuni and Ishibashi, 2003). The
purpose of this study was to describe the perceptions of QLCC administrators and
staff regarding antecedents that contribute to being an innovative organization. The
perceptions of the individuals and the groups of individuals were described and
analyzed via a mixed method study.
In this chapter, both survey and focus group data are reported and analyzed,
framed by research questions presented in Chapters One and Three. First,
demographic data of the participants will be presented to give a context for the
results. Second, an overview of what analysis was performed will be discussed.
Third, the findings are organized by the following research questions:
1. Is the Queen Liliuokalani Children’s Center perceived by key
stakeholders to be an innovative organization?
a. Is the establishment of the Incentive Motivation program an
organizational innovation?
56
b. Is the use of Hawaiian cultural practices and values within the
delivery of services considered to be innovative?
2. Does the Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center possess three key
internal antecedents of an innovative organization?
a. Individual attributes of the members and innovators;
b. Role of leaders and leadership attributes;
c. Organizational climate and environment.
Participants
A sixty-seven question survey to all 146 employees was distributed. All
QLCC administrators and staff were e-mailed a link to the survey. The survey
consisted of demographic questions, attitudinal questions about perceptions towards
innovation pertaining to organizational culture, factors perceived as antecedents to
the adoption and implementation of new ideas, and the perception of Hawaiian
cultural practices being innovative. Of the 146 QLCC administrators and staff who
were emailed to participate in the survey, 67 responded representing 46% of QLCC’s
total population. The link to the survey remained open for three business weeks with
one reminder occurring at the beginning of the third week. The following
demographic data are derived from the first eight questions of the survey.
Table 4.1 describes the demographic breakdown of the population under
study. Furthermore, the survey sample shows a significant representation of that
population. Since our survey sample size included close to half of the population
and the demographic make-up of the sample closely resembles the demography of
57
the population, the results of the survey to the population can be generalized
(McEwan & McEwan, 2003).

Table 4.1
Population and Sample
Demographic
Characteristics Population
% of Total
Population Sample
% of Total
Sample
Executive 8 5% 6 9%
Management 16 11% 7 10.5%
Direct Service Staff
1
56 38% 31 45.5%
Community Building Staff
2
24 16% 10 15%
Support Staff 38 26% 11 17%
Practicum Student 4 3% 2 3%
Totals 146 100% 67 100%
1
At minimum a Master’s Degree in social work or other social science.
2
Lay to bachelor’s level degree personnel.

Figure 3 represents the ages of the respondents. Selections were, 2 signifying
21-29 years old, 3 or 30-39 years old, 4 or 40-49 years old, 5 or 50-59 years old and
6 signifying 60 and older. The mean of the respondents were 4.49 or around 45
years old with a standard deviation of 1.198. Shown in the figure, these results did
not follow a normal distribution curve, of note is the over representation of
58
employees in the age group of 60 and older, otherwise known as the Traditionalists
or.

Figure 3. Age Frequency

Figure 4 provides a histogram of the respondents’ years of employment.
Selecting 1 equated to being employed less than five years, selecting 2 meant 5-10
years, selecting 3 meant 11-15 years, selecting 4 meant 16 to 20 years, selecting 5
meant 21-30 years and selecting 6 meant 31-40+ years of employment. Seen here,
significantly represented in this study were those employees whom worked less than
5 years.

1 = 18-20
2 = 21-29
3 = 30-39
4 = 40-49
5 = 50-59
59

Figure 4. Years of Employment

Overview of Analysis
To answer research question number 1, data from three focus group
interviews were analyzed. The three focus group interviews were conducted on three
different units, where a total of 14 QLCC staff members participated. Two focus
groups were held on the island of O’ahu and one was held on the island of Maui. Of
the nine QLCC units invited to participate in focus group interviews, these three
responded with interest. Another two units were scheduled to participate, however it
was decided that during the data collection very little variance in responses occurred
between the units and therefore three focus groups were sufficient to gather data
1 = less than 5 years
2 = 5-10 years
3 = 11-15 years
4 = 16-20 years
5 = 21-30 years
60
representing the population study. Within each focus group, management, direct
service staff (master’s degree), community building staff (non-degree to bachelor’s
level personnel) and practicum students (students working on their master’s degree)
were represented.
Furthermore, the focus group interviews were supplemented by survey
question 67, which is an open-ended question for comments and survey questions
60-66. These questions were scored as Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree,
Strongly Agree, and Not Applicable and changed into numeric scores of 1 to 6,
respectively. This set of questions pertained exclusively to test whether the use of
Hawaiian cultural practices at QLCC was perceived as innovative.
To answer research question number two, the responses to questions 9
through 60, which were scored as Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree,
Strongly Agree, and Not Applicable were changed into numeric scores of 1 to 6,
respectively. A reliability analysis was conducted for each of the categories
associated with innovative attributes and again to the instrument as a whole to
measure the instrument’s internal consistency. Cronbach’s alpha of more than 0.70
is considered reliable. Below (Table 4.2) are the reliability results, these results will
be discussed further as they apply to the findings.
Based on a total 67 survey responses to the survey and 3 focus-group
interviews, these three broad themes emerged: 1) the strong foundation the
organization was built on-The Queen; 2) the ability to be autonomous throughout the
organization’s systems; and 3) the use of Hawaiian cultural practices in a modern
61
day organization. These three themes will be discussed further at the end of the
chapter.

Table 4.2
Cronbach’s Alpha Results on the Survey
Attribute Categories of Innovative
Organizations
Cronbach’s Alpha
Vision .152
Freedom .477
Expectations .531
Incentives -.181
Perception of Innovation .110
Relationship .917
Attitude .240
Impact .551
Hawaiian Culture .875
Total: Overall Innovation .841

Research Question 1: Part 1
The first part of research question 1 asks, is the Queen Liliuokalani
Children’s Center perceived by key stakeholders to be an innovative organization?
The participants in this study reported having perceptions that QLCC is indeed an
innovative organization and provided many examples. The three prominent beliefs
were:
62
1. The ability to be creative.
2. Having the autonomy to make decisions within each unit.
3. Having the support and trust by the leaders and colleagues of the
organization.
Creativity
According to Adams et al. (2006), successful innovative organizations
require their leaders to create a climate that provides “sufficient freedom to allow for
the exploration of creative possibilities, but sufficient control to manage innovation
in an effective and efficient fashion” (p.32). Creativity is also an important element
for innovation (Amabile & Gryskiewicz, 1989). According to a QLCC staff, “it is
the creativeness we can bring to the agency that allows us to use that innovation that
we as direct service workers can implement. I think in that way, yes, we are an
innovative agency.” Another staff person admits, “allows us to be creative and to
look at the social service part of it but with the culture part and just, it’s fun actually
at times, because you can sit down and come up with ideas, look at different ways to
provide the same service and I think that’s been where the agency has been
innovative.”
Responses regarding the encouragement to be creativity surfaced within all
focus group interview questions. Interestingly, the word “creative,” was never
spoken by the interviewer yet, respondents continued to use this choice of
vocabulary when describing why QLCC is perceived to be innovative.
63
Autonomy
Having the autonomy to make unit level decisions was defined as innovative
for the respondents. Feldman (1989) purports, innovation in organizations requires
participants to have a highly developed sense of the legitimate possibilities of
autonomy in organizations. Pink (2009) defined autonomy as acting with choice,
which is somewhat different from independence. Therefore, an individual could be
“both autonomous and happily interdependent with others” (p. 90). A QLCC staff
member admits, “we have that flexibility, we can customize with freedom.”
Another staff person shares,
…here, if you recognize a gap or a need then it is pretty much just discussed
at a unit level. And to me, there are not that many more levels you need to go
before you can justify it and at least do a trial of it. So I think we are
admitting, at least we are much more responsive to the needs of your clientele
in the community.

The importance of autonomy within an organization denotes trust across all
layers and levels. Of further importance, the Hawaiian concept of Kuleana or
responsibility was a correlating response along with autonomy. Kuleana in its
simple description refers to accountability or the courage and discipline to act on our
responsibilities and to accept all consequences (good or bad). Kuleana is also part of
QLCC’s ethical code on conduct.
Support
Scott and Bruce (1994), Dunegan et al. (1992), and Basu (1991) studies
indicated that the existence of mutual loyalty, trust, and support between leader and
member influenced organizational innovation because the leader is able to raise
64
member’s commitment to the organization. Overwhelmingly, respondents continued
to share insight into their belief that QLCC was an innovative organization mostly
due to the support each staff member receives from their leaders starting with Queen
Lili’uokalani. Although the Queen established her trust well over 100 years ago, the
hope and belief she had in the future generations to be successful in all things have
provided an unspoken but important high standards to follow. A staff member shared,
It’s the support from the trustees, administration, unit leadership, and even
the workers, being allowed and encouraged to try new and different
approaches.

Another staff points out the importance of support between colleagues as stated here,
“I think being supportive to one another helps to encourage the individual worker’s
innovation.” Another staff member states,
I have been here a long time, I have seen a lot of management shifts along
with directional shifts. Throughout the many changes, one thing stands out is
the support we receive from our leaders and one another. Even when we
went through bad, bad times and people lost their jobs- we were so
supportive to those that had to leave. The best part was that when it was
feasible, some of them kept in touch and eventually came back to work for
the Queen. Who can say they work for the Queen. I think that is why there
is so much support here.

This response is only an excerpt of many examples and similar responses. This
denotes the strong connection respondents have to the Queen and correlate it to the
foundation that she laid. So persuasive were the responses, this became a common
theme.
65
Research Question 1: Part 2
The second part of research question 1 asks, is the establishment of the
Incentive Motivation program an organizational innovation? The incentive
motivation program (IM) is a unique behavior modification program that QLCC
created and has been implementing for over 15 years. This program is based on the
principles of operant conditioning, which were developed by American behaviorist,
B.F. Skinner (1904-1990). One behavior modification technique that is widely used
is positive reinforcement which is the cornerstone of the IM program at QLCC.
This program is an educational and learning experience for students who
receive a monetary reward from QLCC provided that such participants progressively
achieve certain specific behavioral changes over a period of time. The monetary
reward does not hinge on the work done per se or the time spent at the Learning Site
but rather on specific behavioral targets mutually established and monitored within
the program system.
A staff person commented, “it (IM Program) is innovative, not many people
(other organizations) are doing it. And the kids are getting so much out of it because
the cultural value is in there.” This respondent is describing how the utilization of
Hawaiian cultural values are innovative. Another staff person comments, “Yes, I
think it (IM Program) is (innovative), it depends on how creative you can be and just
kind of try to match what their needs are. And we are allowed to do that.” Here a
staff person states, “where can you find a program such as IM? I’ll tell you, no
where. Only at QLCC. The resources coupled with the reputation we have in the
66
community has made this program a very innovative and popular one.” Here a staff
person mentions, “I have seen this IM program help so many families and teenagers.
Each year we run it, it is different. We have the freedom and creativity to try things
different to tailor it to our opio (youth). I agree, the IM program is very innovative
and creative and supportive!” Another comment by a staff person speaks to the
support the organization provides for innovation, specifically with the IM program,
“So, not only does the organization provide or expect, I mean encouraged innovation,
but the organization also provides the resources and support for us to do that. To
make those things happen which I don’t know it’s available in other organizations in
the way that we have it available here.”
This last positive comment is telling of the organizational culture in that
QLCC has a stable foundation, a reputable establishment and is connected to the
community,
I think when you look at it, we had the foundation when we talk about
foundation, the needs of children and families are always been there
throughout the years. You can see integrating culture into our programs have
always been there throughout the years. Incentive motivation, it had been part
of the agency program for 25 to 30 years. It took the worker, the community,
the backing of administration in the unit management to pull it all together
with a timing of the community, the resources in the community to make
programs like this come out. So, maybe that’s what you are talking about
innovation. To us, it’s just part of our job of doing what is expected of us,
nothing more, nothing less. We are just helping our kids.

Although staff agreed that the Incentive Motivation program was innovative,
a small percentage admitted to not using it. When asked why, responses were
overwhelmingly “the amount of paperwork.” One staff states, “there are easier ways
67
to implement behavior modification without using the IM paperwork, so I don’t
implement IM as prescribed.” The most prominent comment being the lack of
technological use within the IM program to streamline paperwork. A staff states, “I
think a lot of us tend to not go there (participate on the IM project) so much because
it’s just a lot of paperwork. I think that’s the barrier to that project.” Another staff
remarks, “with all the advancement in technology, the IM program should use it to
make the process easier. Too many steps, too much paper, too much manual
tracking, it’s burdensome and a deterrant to implementing it.” Finally, another staff
member agrees, “until our agency finds an easier way to get consents and track the
youth, I won’t use IM, it takes up too much precious time.”
The establishment of the Incentive Motivation program and the stated
comments signify innovation. The creative design, the ability to make changes and
the support by community, staff and resources are all traits of innovation. However,
there are barriers embedded in the program such as the overwhelming amount of
paperwork as mentioned above.
Research Question 1: Part 3
The final part of research question 1 probes, is the use of Hawaiian cultural
practices and values within the delivery of services considered to be innovative?
As the theoretical framework of this study asserts, Native Hawaiian worldview is
relational to the environment and therefore should be intrinsic within Hawaiian
organizations. To answer this portion of the Research Question, both quantitative
68
and qualitative data are presented in Tables 4. This data derives from the survey
interview questions 60-67.
Table 4.3, frequency analysis was performed on the survey items (questions
60-66) which measured the perception of Hawaiian cultural practices as being
innovative. These attributes are then ranked by means in descending order. The
highest attribute reported is survey item 58: “QLCC is an organization that promotes
Hawaiian cultural values”, with a mean of 4.76 on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to
5 (strongly agree). Followed by survey item 61: “QLCC is an organization that
promotes Hawaiian cultural values”, with a mean of 4.63 on the same scale. The
third highest attribute reported is survey item 63: “QLCC encourages my Hawaiian
cultural practices and beliefs in the work environment”, with a mean of 4.49 on the
same scale. Although highlighting the top three survey items, it is important to
recognize that the mean from all items are significantly high or between 4.14 and
4.76. This implies the respondents reports the use of Hawaiian cultural practices
within a Hawaiian organization is indeed innovative.
Furthermore, Table 4.4 or Chronbach’s Alpha for the Hawaiian culture
category achieved statistically significant internal consistency with .875, greater than
the generally accepted threshold of 0.7 (Cortina, 1993). This category of survey
items scored the highest of all categories.

69
Table 4.3
Frequency of the Hawaiian Cultural Practices Perceived as Innovative
Q#
Hawaiian cultural practices perceived as
innovation N Min Max Mean
Std
Deviation
58 QLCC is an organization that promotes
Hawaiian cultural values
66 3 5 4.76 0.466
61 QLCC embraces cultural learning by Staff 66 3 5 4.62 0.519
63 QLCC encourages my Hawaiian cultural
practices and beliefs in the work
environment
63 1 5 4.49 0.780
60 QLCC’s services are based on Hawaiian
cultural values
64 1 5 4.41 0.791
65 I am comfortable with the integration of
Hawaiian culture at QLCC
66 1 5 4.35 0.813
66 Hawaiian cultural practices are necessary
in meeting the needs of our target
population
66 1 5 4.35 0.936
64 Native Hawaiian practices has allowed me
to be more creative in meeting work goals
64 2 5 4.25 0.797
59 QLCC is an organization that practices
Hawaiian cultural values in its day to day
operation
66 2 5 4.24 0.878
62 QLCC practices balance between policy,
procedures and Hawaiian culture
66 1 5 4.14 0.910

Table 4.4
Cronbach’s Alpha for Category Hawaiian Culture
Attribute Category Cronbach’s Alpha
Hawaiian Culture .875

70
To supplement the data from the survey, the following statements by
respondents provide more support for the use of Hawaiian cultural practices in the
workplace being innovative. A staff member shares,
The example that I have is I always think back to Aunty Malia (working)
here. Where else would you have a cultural Kupuna living in house with you
and just being able to share (Hawaiian traditions) things with you. To me, she
was a person who just walked with her ancestors so closely. You could not
help but know that and sense that and learn from that, just being around her.
So that is something I really appreciate and I value as innovative here, just
valuing your kupuna and living it, showing it, you know.

Another staff adds,
Our kupuna were very innovative in that they practiced our Hawaiian culture
to provide healing and restoration for our people. It was always shared and
pono (the right thing to do at the right time in the right way). In our agency,
we are fortunate to be able to continue to share and practice our cultural ways
with our beneficiaries, for these ways and western ways coupled together will
help heal our families. Now that is innovative.

An important point made by another staff member about the ethnic make up of
employees at QLCC is made here. This staff person exclaims the importance of
Hawaiian cultural practices as a modality of service even by non-Hawaiian staff,
I think it just really helps to promote (Hawaiian) culture to provide those
opportunities for our families and then as workers, because we are not all
Hawaiian here at QLCC but there is an acknowledgement at all levels the
importance of the cultural part and there aren’t very many organizations that
recognize this.

In practicing Hawaiian cultural traditions within an organization, QLCC is revered as
the social service agency for Hawaiian families as stated here by a staff person,
I think people try to provide Hawaiian cultural activities or programs but I
think we’re looked at in the community as the one who really knows and are
able to deliver that service to the children and families we work with.

71
Research Question 2
While Research Question 1 was an open-ended inquiry to understand why
QLCC is considered an innovative organization, Research Question 2 was a closed-
ended inquiry to test whether QLCC possesses internal antecedents. As mentioned
earlier, the primary instrument used for answering Research Question 2 was the 67-
question survey. Table 4.5 categorizes internal antecedents for innovation into
subsets or traits. In answering this Research Question, the data are presented in three
parts: 1) Individual Attributes of Members and Innovators, 2) Role of Leaders and
Leadership Attributes and 3) Organizational Climate and Environment.

Table 4.5
Internal Antecedents Associated with Innovative Organizations
Internal Antecedents Categories of Innovative Organizations
1. Members and Innovators
common traits
• Open to Innovation
• Individual belief in the organizations vision
• High expectation of performance
2. Roles of Leaders and
Leadership Attributes
• Relationship: existence of mutual loyalty, trust
and support between leader and member
(LMX)
3. Organizational climate
determinants
• Positive perception of work climate (tolerance,
attitude and impact of structure)
• Freedom for exploration of creative
possibilities
• Incentives for innovation

72
Research Question One: Part 1 — Individual Attributes of the
Members and Innovators
For Part 1 of this Research Question, frequency analysis was performed on
the survey items (questions 7, 8, 10, 11, 17, 18, 19, 20, 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 35 ) which
measured perceptions of individual attributes for adopting innovation. These
attributes are then ranked by means in descending order and presented in Table 4.6.
The highest attribute reported is survey item 7: “I understand the mission and goals
of QLCC”, with a mean of 4.88 on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly
agree). Followed by survey item 10: “I am personally in agreement with the stated
goals of QLCC”, with a mean of 4.76 on the same scale. The third highest attribute
reported is survey item 8: People at QLCC feel that they are all pulling together for
a common goal”, with a mean of 4.58 on the same scale. Of significance is the top
three highest attributes all come from the subset of vision where individual belief in
the organization’s vision promotes innovation.
The results of the Cronbach’s Alpha table shown here indicates that survey
statements associated with these categories achieved statistically significant internal
consistency greater than 0.70 (Cortina, 1993).

73
Table 4.6
Frequencies: Perceived Individual Attributes for Innovation
Q
Perceived Individual Attributes for
Innovation N Min Max Mean
Std
Deviation
7 I understand the mission and goals of
QLCC.
67 2 5 4.88 0.445
10 I am personally in agreement with the stated
goals of QLCC.
66 1 5 4.76 0.609
8 People at QLCC feel that they are all pulling
together for a common goal.
67 2 5 4.58 0.678
20 Our group/unit/department at QLCC have a
strong belief in the importance of high
quality output.
66 1 5 4.32 1.025
32 The staff’s ability to function creatively is
respected by the leadership.
66 1 5 4.08 0.81
28 Around here, people are allowed to try to
solve the same problems in different ways.
67 2 5 4.04 0.661
18 My supervisor motivates me to perform
better than I thought I could.
65 1 5 4.02 1.023
17 The leadership at QLCC sets high standards
of performance.
67 1 5 4.01 1.037
11 In my experience, the beneficiaries
understand the mission and goals of QLCC.
65 2 5 3.91 0.655
27 People in our group/unit/department
encourage each other to try new things.
67 1 5 3.85 0.892
33 I am not discouraged to be creative when my
new ideas aren’t adopted for
implementation.
65 1 5 3.83 0.858
19 My supervisor encourages me to work on
behaviors that have caused problems at
QLCC.
57 1 5 3.53 1.087
31 At QLCC, I often introduce new ideas that
are implemented and adopted.
65 1 5 3.48 0.92
35 Assistance in developing new ideas is
readily available.
66 1 5 3.42 1.024

74
Table 4.7
Cronbach’s Alpha Individual Attributes of Members and Innovators
Categories of Innovation Cronbach’s Alpha
Perception of Innovation .110
Vision .152
Expectations .531
Total Survey on Innovation .841

Research Question 2: Part 2 — Roles of Leaders and Leadership Attributes
For Part 2 of this Research Question, frequency analysis was performed on
the survey items (questions 36-46, 48) that measured perceptions of leadership roles
and leadership attributes for adopting innovation. These attributes are then ranked
by means in descending order and presented in Table 4.8. The highest attribute
reported is survey item 40: “I am willing to apply extra efforts, beyond those
normally required, to meet my supervisor’s work goals for our group/unit/
department”, with a mean of 4.55 on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly
agree). Followed by survey item 46: “I like my supervisor very much as a person”,
with a mean of 4.48 on the same scale. The third highest attribute reported is survey
item 45: “I do not mind working my hardest for my supervisor”, with a mean of 4.45
on the same scale. Of significance, the respondents scored the highest three items
with Agree, Strongly Agree. None selected Disagree or Strongly Disagree as shown
in Table 4.9.
75
Table 4.8
Frequencies: Perceived Leadership Roles and Attributes for Innovation
Q
Perceived Leadership Attributes for
Innovation N Min Max Mean
Std
Deviation
40 I am willing to apply extra efforts, beyond
those normally required, to meet my
supervisor's work goals for our
group/unit/department.
67 3 5 4.55 0.558
46 I like my supervisor very much as a person 67 3 5 4.48 0.560
45 I do not mind working my hardest for my
supervisor
67 3 5 4.45 0.658
43 I respect my supervisor's knowledge of and
competency on the job
67 2 5 4.42 0.631
41 My supervisor would defend me to the
organization if I made an honest mistake.
67 3 5 4.36 0.690
38 My supervisor supports me and backs me
in difficult situations.
67 1 5 4.31 0.802
44 My supervisor is the kind of person one
would like as a friend.
67 1 5 4.19 0.839
36 I admire my supervisor's professional
skills.
67 2 5 4.16 0.809
42 My supervisor makes me feel that I can
reach my goals without him/her if I have
to.
67 1 5 4.13 0.952
48 My supervisor is okay with honest
mistakes when I am trying something new
67 2 5 4.12 .0663
37 I trust my supervisor’s ability to overcome
any obstacles.
67 2 5 4.09 0.900
39 My supervisor is a lot fun 67 1 5 4.06 0.903

76
Table 4.9
Selection Percentages of Leadership Roles and Attributes
Q # Statement Agree
Strongly
Agree Total
40 I am willing to apply extra efforts, beyond
those normally required, to meet my
supervisor's work goals for our
group/unit/department.
39% 58% 97%
46 I like my supervisor very much as a person 48% 51% 99%
45 I do not mind working my hardest for my
supervisor
38% 54% 92%

It is also worth mentioning that the mean results of this set of survey items lie
between 4.55 to 4.09. Highlighting the following two items, 42, “My supervisor
would defend me to the organization if I made an honest mistake,” and 38, “My
supervisor supports me and backs me in difficult situations,” with an agreement
percentage of 88.1% and 89.6% denoting a positive leader-member exchange. These
results show that most respondents believe that a high quality of Leader-Member-
Exchange exists at QLCC.
Dunegan et al. (1992) found that the quality of exchange between leaders and
their subordinates (LMX factor) seemed to significantly shaped the subordinates’
perception of organizational climate for innovation. Scott and Bruce’s (1944) study
also found an individual’s innovative behavior was significantly linked to LMX. In
addition to the survey results, focus group participants mentions the exceptional
77
leadership example of the Queen and the Trustees as being top-notched Hawaiian
leaders.
Referring to a portion of Table 4.1 below, participation in this study by
Executive personnel was over represented showing 9% for the population study
versus 6% of QLCC’s total population. Representation by the next tiered of
management shows a sample size of 10.5% while the total population of QLCC for
this tier is 11%. The very fact that the participation in this study by top leadership
was proportionately significant, may indicate the meaning of the following saying,
“leading by example” or leaders that serve as role models. This is the first study
done on this organization, in the past QLCC has rejected similar requests. As data
depicts, as a group the leaders were in support of this study.

From Table 4.1
Population and Sample
Demographic
Characteristics Population
% of Total
Population Sample
% of Total
Sample
Executive 8 5% 6 9%
Management 16 11% 7 10.5%

Research Question 2: Part 3 — Organizational Climate Determinants
For Part 3 of this Research Question, frequency analysis was performed on
the survey items (questions 12-16, 22-26, 47-57) that measured perceptions of
78
innovation within the organizational climate. These survey items are categorized in
one of the four categories: Positive perception of work climate, freedom for
exploration of creative possibilities and incentives for innovation. These items in
these three categories are then ranked by means in descending order and presented in
Table 4.10. The highest attribute reported is survey item 56: “The organizational
structure of QLCC encourages collaborative relationships in meeting work goals”,
with a mean of 4.09 on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Followed by survey item 55: “The organizational structure of QLCC helps build
capacity of all staff”, with a mean of 4.02 on the same scale. The third highest
attribute reported is survey item 53: “The organizational structure of QLCC allows
for a creative environment”, with a mean of 4.00 on the same scale. Of significance,
these top three survey items come from the category of the perception of the impact
QLCC’s structure has on innovation. Although the lowest ranked survey item 54,
“The organizational structure of QLCC hinders the productivity of work,” with a
mean of 2.11 using the same scale already mentioned, only 4.5% agreed with this
statement. Meaning 95.5% disagreed with this statement. These data support Borins’
(2000, 2002) studies where he finds that traditionally top-down centralized
bureaucratic formal structures do not significantly hinder employees ability to
innovate. In fact, based on respondents here, the QLCC staff believes that the
organizational structure supports innovation.

79
Table 4.10
Frequencies: Perceived Organizational Attributes
Q Perceived Organizational Attributes N Min Max Mean
Std
Deviation
56 The organizational structure of QLCC encourages
collaborative relationships in meeting work goals.
64 2 5 4.09 0.849
55 The organizational structure of QLCC helps build
capacity for all staff.
66 2 5 4.02 0.850
53 The organizational structure of QLCC allows for a
creative environment.
66 2 5 4.00 0.765
50 This organization can be described as flexible and
continually adapting to change.
67 2 5 3.97 0.834
47 The attitude around here is that when you are trying new
things, mistakes are a normal part of the job.
67 1 5 3.91 0.773
51 This organization is open and responsive to change. 67 1 5 3.88 0.826
22 Successful innovation is important for career success at
the QLCC.
66 2 5 3.70 0.894
57 The organizational structure of QLCC allows risk taking
in developing and implementing new ideas possible.
65 2 5 3.62 0.963
49 People in this group/unit/department are willing to cut
through bureaucracy in order to get things done.
66 1 5 3.45 0.995
13 Members have considerable freedom to act to make
necessary changes at the QLCC.
67 1 5 3.43 1.033
24 QLCC publicly recognizes those who are innovative. 63 1 5 3.08 0.867
26 Management provides rewards and recognition for
innovation and trying new things.
65 1 4 3.02 0.893
16 We tend to stick to tried and true ways at the QLCC. 67 1 5 2.88 1.108
14 The best way to get a long in this organization is to think
the way the rest of the group does.
66 1 5 2.61 1.080
25 The reward system at the QLCC benefits mainly those
who don’t rock the boat.
65 1 5 2.54 1.119
12 Regulations, policies, and procedures often (at least 50%)
stop the implementation of good ideas at the QLCC.
65 1 5 2.35 0.991
52 This place seems to be more concerned with the status
quo then with change.
66 1 5 2.33 1.043
23 Around here, a person can get in a lot of trouble by being
different.
66 1 5 2.23 0.957
15 Members of the QLCC are expected to deal with
problems in the same way.
66 1 5 2.21 0.969
54 The organizational structure of QLCC hinders the
productivity of work.
65 1 4 2.11 0.710

80
The Cronbach’s Alpha results for this section, Table 4.11 indicate that the
survey questions achieved statistically significant internal consistency except for the
category of incentives. Although the alpha for “incentive” produced a negative
coefficient, it is considered highly correlated and consistent within the set of four
questions but should not be used to compare with other means.

Table 4.11
Cronbach’s Alpha Results on Organizational Climate Determinants
Attribute Categories of Innovative
Organizations Cronbach’s Alpha
Freedom .477
Incentives -.181
Attitude .240
Impact .551
*Alpha will be negative whenever the average covariance among the items negative. In this case,
there was almost no variation in % of responses for all five questions; thus calculating a negative
alpha.

Summary of Findings
From all the data analysis mentioned earlier, the following three broad
themes emerged: 1) Queen Lili’uokalani is the strong foundation of the organization;
2) the ability to be autonomous throughout the organization’s systems; and 3) the use
of Hawaiian cultural practices in a modern day organization.
81
Finding 1: Queen Lili’uokalani is the strong foundation of the organization
Not many organizations have missions that are as long standing, stable and
committed as QLCC. QLCC derives from the will of the Queen dating back to 1909,
while she was still living. The mission statement, “all the property of the trust estate,
both principal and income, . . . shall be used by the Trustees for the benefit of orphan
and other destitute children in the Hawaiian Islands, the preference to be given to
Hawaiian children of pure or part aboriginal blood” originates directly from her will
and directs all services from the agency. Her will is the very essence of the Queen, a
model leader beyond her time, intelligent, compassionate and visionary. It is
therefore not surprising that respondents found this to be the primary reason for
innovation existing in QLCC as stated in the following comment,
We do what we do for the Queen. As she suffered and was so resilient, we
honor her by keeping her flame alive through her mission and being
innovative in the things we do for the community. It is an honor to be part of
this work family.

Another staff person revealed,
I feel the majority of the administration and staff are committed to being of
service to bring the Queen's vision and mission to life. In addition, most of
the staff are invested in their work and are committed to the beneficiaries and
the communities they service.

It was also mentioned that the Queen was a great role model for those in
leadership positions. The organizational structure of this agency is hierarchal yet top
leaders and management expects all staff to possess and display leadership qualities
no matter where they fit in the organization. The agency also provides leadership
82
opportunities for all staff to take advantage of if so chooses. Here is an excerpt from
a staff member:
My manager entrust me, a simple support staff, to conduct meetings, interact
with beneficiaries and represent our unit in the community. The trust that I
am given helps me be a better person and a leader in our unit and the
community. And I am not the only one, my manager gives all of us chances
to be leaders, it helps develop us all for the better.

Finding 2: The Ability to be autonomous throughout the organization’s
structure
As mentioned via data collection, many respondents were thankful that they
worked in an organization that valued freedom, choice and trust. In turn, they shared
that being creative and having the freedom to create is in alignment with self-
determination. A term that has become important to Native Hawaiians as they
socially define themselves as a group and individual. In providing services, QLCC
staff mentioned being careful to not breed dependency but rather independency
within the context of ‘ohana where a staff person describes,
We are here to hold the hands of the family, walk side by side but not carry
them. We equip them with the skills, healing and determination to thrive. As
an employee, the agency does that for me. I learn via staff development, they
help me make healthier choices during wellness time, I am supported in all
the work I do. I love being here.

Although autonomy is a primary finding, it is important to note that
innovative attributes cannot be utilized if sufficient resources are not provided for
them to act on. Ahmed shares, “appropriate resources (time and money) has become
the top factor for innovation, while insufficient resources has been the most widely
83
cited obstacle.” Thus, the resources provided to the organization via the Queen’s
Trust has taken out the monetary struggle many organizations deal with daily.
Finding 3: The use of Hawaiian cultural practices as a means to innovate
Given all the data provided, it is no surprise that this finding is in the top
three. To be a Hawaiian organization is a challenge. With all the identity shifts
Hawaiians as a people have gone through with colonization, the proper question can
be posed: What is Hawaiian? As mentioned in the focus groups and the survey,
QLCC values their ancestors and have invested tons of resources to capture the
essence of Hawaiian culture, to teach cultural practices to families and to structure its
organization with a cultural foundation. A staff member comments on the use of
Hawaiian cultural values:
The Hawaiian cultural values and concepts that guide the agency's
philosophy of service are based on the belief that within the traditions and
knowledge of our Hawaiian ancestors, there are sound and effective healing
practices that are relevant for today. And although there are practices and
methods of service and evaluation that are uniquely Hawaiian or native, the
fundamental values of ohana, spirituality, respect for the environment and
harmony with all are universal in nature.

Another staff comments,
We continue to look towards the past address our present and our future.
Where else can you find a place of business that honors their ancestors and
traditions this way? I am always humbled that we define what works best for
our people, the way the Queen would’ve wanted it.

Several comments poured in about the tradition of the agency learning from the past.
Besides the document of the Queen’s will, this cultural context seems to be where all
organizational philosophy derives from for QLCC.
84
Summary of Chapter
In summary, this chapter provided an analysis of perceptions for innovation
at the Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center. The data was derived from three focus
groups and a survey. Findings were presented in response to the study’s three
research questions, where three broad themes evolved. Interestingly, these themes
were all connected to the persona of Queen Lili’uokalani. Although she left this
earth in 1917 with no heir, her legacy continues to be strong lived through the efforts
of her Trust. As discussed above, QLCC has features of a traditional organization
where the mission continues to remain unchanged since the Queen set up her will in
1909. Furthermore, ancient Hawaiian practices continue to be the preferred
philosophical mode of services for the beneficiaries as evidenced through the results
of the survey conducted for this study. Yet as determined through this study, the
perception of innovation exists in this organization.
These findings provide evidence to corroborate this study’s framework on
Ho’okumu A’e, Hawaiian worldview. Hawaiian perspectives or worldview
emphasizes the importance of learning from the past. Where learning from the past
is the ability to create value through new uses of existing knowledge (Jamrog,
Vickers and Bear, 2006), thereby being innovative. A discussion of the study’s
findings, implications for practice and future research will be explored in Chapter 5.

85
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This section begins with a brief overview of the problem and purpose of the
study. Next, findings of the study and implications for practice and research will be
discussed. Finally, recommendation for future studies and conclusions of the study
will be presented.
Overview of Problem
More than 100 years of cultural disconnection has occurred for Native
Hawaiians. This study highlights the divide between Native Hawaiian public school
students and the structure of formal education in Hawai’i, evidenced in the status of
Hawaiian students in the public school system in Hawai’i. Research suggests that
positive educational outcomes occur with the integration of culture into the
classroom and the use of culturally responsive teaching methods. In Hawaii, this has
been evolving for the past thirty-five years yet research concludes that Native
Hawaiian students in mainstream public schools continue to do poorly. As stated
earlier, Castagno and Brayboy (2008) proposed that although the research plethora
on culturally responsive methods are insightful, it has made little impact on what
teachers do because it is too easily reduced to essentialization, meaningless
generalizations, or trivial anecdotes-none of which result in systemic, institutional or
lasting changes to schools serving indigenous youth. Therefore, the goal for
contemporary indigenous students and other educational leaders should be to
develop educational programs, systems and assessments, which are responsive to
86
minority and Indigenous learners (Au & Kawakami, 1991; Castagno & Brayboy,
2008).
Providing an environment where students relate socially and psychologically
to other cultural perspectives by fostering centricity and cultural education anchored
in a student’s own culture and language is important for Indigenous and minority
student learning, success and well-being (Meriam, 1928; Asante, 1991; Brayboy &
Castagno, 2008; Demmert, 2003). A goal for schools and organizations, especially
those who serve Native Hawaiian student populations must be to ensure curricula
and pedagogy incorporates its students’ cultural capital, is integrally connected to
their cultural backgrounds and builds positive cultural identity and self-efficacy.
This study posed emphasis for a disruptive innovative change in the delivery
of educational services for Native Hawaiians. Whereby, educational methodologies,
learning processes and collaborative efforts which stimulate and engage Native
Hawaiian students are innovative and implemented in an effort to help these students
reach their fullest potential. The Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center was chosen
to be studied for their innovative collaborative work with Native Hawaiian students
and their families. It was hypothesized that QLCC is an innovative organization and
this study was guided by the following research questions:
1. Is the Queen Liliuokalani Children’s Center perceived by key
stakeholders to be an innovative organization?
a. Is the establishment of the Incentive Motivation program an
organizational innovation?
87
b. Is the use of Hawaiian cultural practices and values within the
delivery of services considered to be innovative?
2. Does QLCC possess three key internal antecedents of an innovative
organization?
a. Individual attributes of the members and innovators;
b. Role of leaders and leadership attributes;
c. Organizational climate and environment.
Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore the Queen Lili’uokalani
Children’s Center staffs’ perceptions of overall innovation occurring within the
organization. Specifically determining whether the organization’s incentive
motivation program and the use of Hawaiian cultural practices were thought to be
innovative; and whether the organization possessed antecedents of innovation via
individual attributes, leadership attributes and the attributes of the organization’s
environment.
This study provides insights into the perceptions on the use of programs
thought to be innovative when servicing Native Hawaiian students such as the
programmatic use of Hawaiian cultural practices and beliefs. This study also set out
to understand what motivates or enables innovative behavior within organizations
that have been around for a long time and are rather traditional. To study these
factors, this study employed both quantitative and qualitative methods. A cross-
sectional study was done using a one-time survey questionnaire, which was sent to
all QLCC staff. Furthermore, three focus groups were conducted. Together, the data
88
presented an interpretation of how innovation is perceived by the staff of a Hawaiian
organization.
Findings of the Study
This study was able to demonstrate that a traditional, hierarchal organization
such as QLCC does possess internal antecedents of innovation. Furthermore, the
staff at QLCC perceived their organization to be innovative. The first research
question involves QLCC staffs’ perception about the delivery of services being
innovative at QLCC. In particular an incentive motivation program and the use of
Hawaiian cultural practices and values. The data from the survey showed that
QLCC staff have positive attitudes towards innovation, are willing to try new things
and are receptive to changes that enhance the lives of Hawaiian children and their
families. Although all staff acknowledged the uniqueness and innovative qualities
of the Incentive Motivation program, one hindrance to the program was the overkill
of paperwork needing to be done. Some staff admitted that they didn’t use the
program in their work because the paperwork was too cumbersome, even though
they believed in the program. Participants also believed that the use of Hawaiian
cultural practices and values are essential when working with the Native Hawaiian
population despite your own ethnicity. This is consistent with Meriam, 1928; Asante,
1991; Brayboy & Castagno, 2008; and Demmert, 2003 findings that by fostering
centricity and cultural education anchored in a student’s own culture and language is
important for Indigenous and minority student learning, success and well-being.
The qualitative data likewise confirmed that QLCC staff believed that the
89
implementation of the agency’s incentive motivation program is innovative and fits
the agency’s interpretation of innovation. This is consistent with Ho’okumu A’e or
the original construct used as the framework of this study as depicted in Figure 5.
This framework’s simple definition is that learning from the past is not learning
something old, it is learning how that skill or knowledge can be used today and for
tomorrow. It is the ability to create value through new uses of existing knowledge
(Jamrog, Vickers & Bear, 2006).

Figure 5. Ho’okumu A’e

90
In this study, more positive attitudes about innovation were found among the
lay staff followed by management. Both groups agreed with the set of questions
defining innovation, of most significance were the level of respect staff received by
leadership to be creative. Here, it is concluded that leaders indirectly influence staffs’
motivation for innovative behavior. This finding coincides with Scott and Bruce’s
(1984) findings that an individual’s innovative behavior was significantly linked to
leadership’s belief, trust and confidence in their subordinates.
The second research question involves factors perceived by QLCC staff as
internal antecedents of innovative organizations. Overall, the organization did
possess these antecedents: individual traits, leadership traits and organizational traits.
The data from the survey showed that for individual traits QLCC staff ranked the
belief in the organization’s vision, mission and goals as the highest. This coincides
with Pearce and Ensley (2004) findings that shared vision occupies a core role in the
organizational innovation process.
Antecedents for leadership appeared in the area of leader-member-exchange
and seeing leaders as role models. An overwhelming response of the Queen being
the mentor/role model for the agency and individuals provides an atmosphere that is
balanced in both tradition and innovation. Again, this coincides with this study’s
overall framework, Ho’okumu A’e.
In the area or organizational antecedents, QLCC believed the richness of
QLCC was the availability of resources allowed autonomy. The organizational
structure provides autonomy and freedom to experiment and seek out new ideas and
91
solutions without the hindrance of the lack of resources that so many organizations
experience. The freedom to create within this existing model at QLCC allows for an
organic structure where mistakes are viewed as an essential and accepted part of
innovation (Ahmed, 1998) as depicted in the survey. Although QLCC is bound to
the Queen’s will in the expending of resources, QLCC is not restricted in the sense
that other organizations are when they receive government funding. This autonomy
allows for the organization to be structured in a way where all levels of participation
are sought and the break down of departmental barriers as well as hierarchies can be
attained (Ahmed, 1998).
Implications for Practice
While QLCC has been very effective in establishing an organizational
climate for innovation and has been able to achieve a high level of organizational
performance, these suggestions are specifically for Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s
Center, the site where this study was conducted and other organizations whose target
populations are Native Hawaiian students and their families. For more than one
hundred years, Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center (in its earlier years was
referred to as Lili’uokalani Trust) has provided social services exclusively to Native
Hawaiian children and their families.
In the early 1970’s, QLCC began examining their work with Native
Hawaiians through applied research and curriculum development, which would now
be referred to as cutting edge or innovative. Basically this curriculum came from
expert Kupuna (ancestors) and QLCC workers. QLCC documented it, trained their
92
workers and implemented it in the delivery of care. Till today, this curriculum
continues to be foundational in the services that QLCC offers. Other organizations
and private practitioners use this curriculum as well. This curriculum is a source
book of Hawaiian cultural practices, concepts and beliefs which illustrate the
wisdom and dignity contained in the cultural roots of every Hawaiian child. This
curriculum is two volumes of published work and is properly named, Nana I Ke
Kumu or Look to the Source. QLCC is currently working on volume three. This
contribution that QLCC has made to the Native Hawaiian community and the larger
community is yet only one example of culturally relevant uses for innovation. It is
therefore suggested that innovation within a Hawaiian organization be culturally
relevant. Which in this context means:
1. Innovation should be useful and influence those who work with Native
Hawaiian families.
2. Innovation should be based on Native Hawaiian value system.
3. Innovation should be easily adaptable and highly relevant to the Native
Hawaiian population as in the example of Nana I Ke Kumu.
The last publishing of Nana I Ke Kumu was 1983, since then QLCC has not
published or conducted large-scale applied research. Yet it should be noted that the
organization continued to define and mold their identity as the premier Hawaiian
social service agency by reorganizing its structure and fine-tuning its priorities in
service delivery. The organization has gone through several shifts in their scope of
work from strictly Individual Family Services to “throw the net” approaches of doing
93
anything and everything related to Hawaiian social welfare and now recently
narrowing it down yet providing flexibility to address specific and unique needs of
the differing communities. During this time, QLCC has also tightened up best
practices in addressing grief and loss for orphan Hawaiian children and their families.
Based on this lag, it is suggested that as the premier Hawaiian social service agency,
QLCC be at the forefront of research, publishing, curriculum development,
implementation and training of similar organizations. It would be beneficial to all if
QLCC workers shared their expertise as presented in the Nana I Ke Kumu example.
QLCC has the resources and the obligation to advance this cause.
Finally, QLCC cannot do this alone. At the onset of this dissertation it was
emphasized the importance that collaboration had in student success. QLCC’s sole
mission and mandate to assist orphan and destitute children is defined through the
organization’s work via the realms of social welfare and historically has ignored the
educational status of its beneficiaries. Although a sister Ali’i trust’s responsibility is
primarily education, QLCC cannot continue to place this burden entirely on another
trust. Nor can the sister Ali’i Trust dismiss social welfare QLCC’s way as their
target populations are the same. True collaboration and partnerships between like
organizations is imperative.
Recommendations for Future Study
This study is limited in scope and time. QLCC is a unique organization and
no other like organization exists. It is therefore recommended that future studies on
94
the perceptions of innovation within QLCC or other Hawaiian organization be
expanded to its consumers.
Second, data collected in this study was limited because the instrumentations
only collected self-reported data about perception of organizational innovation,
perceptions toward the use of programs deemed innovative, perceptions on the
practices and use of Hawaiian culture by QLCC staff and key internal attributes of
innovation. Future research should include detailed data on other factors such as
employee characteristics, and barriers for innovation, which were not the focus of the
investigation of this study, and were not collected.
Third, the findings of this study also suggest that there is much research yet
to be conducted to learn more about how implementation of new technological
resources, such as tablets, iPads, iCloud etc. could lead to potentially more efficient,
effective, environmentally responsible and cost effective working/learning
environment. It is recommended that future researchers of technology explore the
attitudes and use of new technology by the 21
st
century Hawaiian organizations.
Conclusion
The Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center is an icon across the state of
Hawai’i as the social welfare organization for Native Hawaiian children and their
families. The organization has thrived in an environment and world very different
from the one once known to Native Hawaiians. QLCC has been, and continues to be
instrumental to the very survival of orphan Hawaiian children. However, these
95
children and their families’ deserve more than just survival. They should prosper,
succeed and achieve as their ancestors did.
This study aimed to analyze the opinions of the staff of QLCC to determine
whether or not the organization was perceived to be innovative and whether QLCC
possessed antecedents that allowed innovation to live. This study was limited in
scope, and as a result, not generalizable to the larger population. However, for
organizations working with Native Hawaiian families, this study provided useful
suggestions for adopting, implementing and sustaining culturally relevant innovation.

96
REFERENCES
Anderson-Butcher, D., Lawson, H., Iachini, A., Bean, G., Flaspohler, P., Zullig, K.
(2010). Capacity-Related innovations resulting from the implementation of a
community collaboration model for school improvement. In Journal of
Educational and Psychological Consultation, Vol 20. 257-287.

Au, K.H., Kawakami, A.J. (1991). Culture and ownership: schooling of minority
students. Childhood Education, 67(5), 280-284.

Barnhardt, R. & Kawagley, A. O. (2005) Indigenous knowledge systems and Alaska
native ways of knowing. Retrieved September 23, 2008 from
http://www.ankn.uaf.edu/Curriculum/Articles/BarnharddtKawagley/Indigeno
us_Knowledge.html.

Barron, F. (1955). The disposition towards originality. Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 51, 478–485.

Basu, R. (1991). An empirical examination of leader-member exchange and
transformational leadership as predictors of innovative behavior. Doctoral
Dissertation. Ann Arbor, MI, U.S.A.: Purdue University.

Battiste, M. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and pedagogy in first nations education a
literature review with recommendations. Prepared for the National Working
Group on Education and the Minister of Indian Affairs Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada. Ottawa, ON.

Bodilly, S., Chun, J., Ikemoto, G., & Stockly, S. (2004). Challenges and potential of
a collaborative approach to educational reform. Santa Monica, CA: Rand
Corporation.

Brewer, D.J., and Tierney, W.T. (2010). Barriers to innovation in U.S. higher
education. Prepared for the American Enterprise Institute conference,
“Reinventing the American University: The Promise of Innovation in Higher
Education.” http://www.aei.org/event/100218.

Cajete, G. (1995). Look to the Mountain: An ecology of indigenous education.
Durango, CO: Kivaki Press.

Castagno, A., and Brayboy, B. M. J. (2008). Culturally responsive schooling for
indigenous youth: A review of literature. Review of Educational Research,
78(4), 941-993. doi: 10.3102/0034654308323036

97
Christensen, C., Baumann, H., Ruggles, R., & Sadtler, T. (2006). Disruptive
Innovation for Social Change. Harvard Business Review.

Clarkson, L. V. Morrisette, and G.Regallet. (1992). Our responsibility to the
seventh generation: Indigenous Peoples and sustainable development,
Winnipeg: International Institute for sustainable development.

Cortina, J. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and
applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98-104.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of
creativity. In: R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 325–329).
New York: Cambridge University Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1994). The domain of creativity. In: D. H. Feldman, M.
Csikszentmihalyi & H. Gardner (Eds), Changing the world: A framework for
the study of creativity. West- port, CT: Praeger.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and
invention. New York: Harper Collins.

Damanpour, R. and Schneider, M. (2006). Phases of the adoption of innovation in
organizations: effects of environment, organization and top managers. In.
British Journal of Management, Vol 17. 215-236.

Darling-Hammond, L., & Ball, D.L. (1997, June). Teaching for high standards:
What policy-makers need to know and be able to do. Philadelphia, PA:
Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

Dunegan, K., Tierney, P., & Duchon, D. (1992). Toward an Understanding of
Innovation Climate: Explaining Variance in Perceptions by Divisional
Affiliation, Work Group Interactions, and Subordinate-Manager Exchanges.
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management (Special Issue 39), 227-236.

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: theory, research and practice.
Amsterdam: Teachers college press.

Hatchuel, A. (2001). The two pillars of new management research. British Journal of
Management, 12, 33–39.

Howard, Tyrone C. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: ingredients for critical
teacher reflection Theory into Practice, 42 (3), 195-202

98
Howes, Craig (2010). The Value of Hawai'i (Kindle Locations 298-299). Latitude 20.
Kindle Edition.

Jassawalla, A. and Sashittal, H. Collaboration in cross-functional product
innovation teams. In Innovation through collaboration. Eds, Beyerlein, M.,
Beyerlein, S. & Kennedy, F. San Diego, CA: 2006. Chapter 1. JAI Press

Kamehameha Schools (2009). Native Hawaiian educational assessment update
2009: A supplement to Ka Huaka’i 2005. Honolulu: Kamehameha Schools,
Research & Evaluation Division.

Kana‘iaupuni, S. M., & Ishibashi, K. (2003). Left behind: The status of Hawaiian
students in Hawai‘i public schools. Honolulu, HI: Kamehameha Schools,
PASE (Policy Analysis & System Evaluation). Report 02-03:13.

Kana‘iaupuni, S. M., & Ishibashi, K. (2003). Educating Hawaiian Children: How
the Learning Environment Matters. Honolulu, HI: Kamehameha Schools,
PASE.

Kana‘iaupuni, S. M., Malone, N. J., & Ishibashi, K. (2005). Ka huaka‘i: 2005 Native
Hawaiian educational assessment. Honolulu, HI: Kamehameha Schools,
Pauahi Publications. (Policy Analysis & System Evaluation)

Kekahio, W. (2007, May). in Public Schools: Implications of AYP Status in
Predominantly Native Hawaiian Schools. Public Education Brief Series,
Kamehameha Schools Research and Evaluation Division.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! the case for culturally
relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159-165.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy.
American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.

Luecke, R. and Katz, R. (2003). Managing Creativity and Innovation. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.

Matthew, C. and Sternberg R. (2006). Leading innovation through collaboration. In
Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams. Vol 12, pp 27-52.

McEwan, E. and McEwan, P. (2003). Making Sense of Research: What’s Good,
What’s Not, and How to Tell the Difference. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press,
Inc.

99
Mertens, D. (2009). Research and evaluation in education and psychology:
Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods (Third
ed). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publishing, Inc.

Ng-Osorio, J. & Tibbets, K.A. (2010). Department of Education Update 2010: The R
& E Annual Update Series. Honolulu: Kamehameha Schools Research and
Evaluation Division.

Ngugi, Wa Thiong’o. (1986). Decolonising the Mind: The politics of language in
African Literature. London: James Curry.

Obama, B. January 25,2011. Remarks by the President in State of Union Address.
United States Capitol,Washington, D.C. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-
press-office/2011/01/25/remarks-president-state-union-address

Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (Third ed).
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Pink, D. H. (2009). Drive the surprising truth about what motivates us. New York:
Riverhead Books.

Powell, D. R. (2008). Assessing the Quality of Family, Friend, and Neighbor Care:
The State of Research. Zero to Three, v28: 33-38.

Pukui, M.K., and Elbert, S. H. (1986). Hawaiian dictionary, Honolulu, HI:
University of Hawaii Press.

Scott, S. and Bruce, R. (1994). Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path
Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace. The Academy of
Management Journal 37(3), pp. 580-607.

Shade, B.J., Kelly, C., Oberg, M. (1997). Creating culturally responsive classrooms.
Washington D.C.: APA Order Department.

Smith, Linda. (1999). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous
Peoples. London: Zed Books.

Stannard, D. (1989). Before the horror: The population of Hawaii on the eve of
western contact. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its
development. Human Development, 34, 1–32.

100
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in
a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.

Sumida, A.Y., Meyer, M. (2006). T4= teaching to the fourth power: transformative
inquiry and the stirring of cultural waters. Language Arts. 83(5) 437-449.

Walker, R. (2006). Innovation Type and Diffusion: An Empirical Analysis of Local
Government. Public Administration, 84(2), 311-335.

Waters-Bayer, A., van Veldhuizen, L., Wongtschowski, M., Wettashinha, C. (2010).
Recognising and enhancing local innovation processes. In Prolinnova
International Support Team.

101
APPENDIX A
STAFF SURVEY
The Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center
Survey on Innovation
Please select your best answer
1. Which department do you represent at QLCC?
o Administration (Fiscal, ISD, HR, Executive)
o Trust (Trust Office, Endowment)
o Children’s Center (O’ahu)
o Children’s Center (Neighbor Island)

2. Which best describes your position at QLCC?
o Support Staff (Office Assistant, Facilities Maintenance, Office
Supervisor, FMT Supervisor, ISD Staff, HR Staff, Fiscal Staff)
o Direct Service Staff (Social Worker, Direct Service Specialist)
o Community Building Staff (CBF)
o Management (UM, AUM, Dept Manager)
o Executive (PED, DD, SF, Risk Mgmt, Exec. Asst,Exec OA)
o Practicum Student
o Trust/Endowment
o Other (Please Specify)

3. Are you male or female?
o Male
o Female

4. Which category below includes your age?
o 18-20
o 21-29
o 30-39
o 40-49
o 50-59
o 60 or older

102
5. What is the highest level of school you have completed?
o Less than high school
o High school degree or equivalent
o Some college but no degree
o Associates degree
o Bachelor’s degree
o Graduate degree

6. How long have you been employed with QLCC?
o Less than five years
o 5-10 years
o 11-15 years
o 16-20 years
o 21-30 years
o 31-40+ years

Please rate each statement
Please rate each
statement
Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree
Strongly
Agree
7 I understand the mission
and goals of the QLCC.

8 People at QLCC feel
that they are all pulling
together for a common
goal.

9 There are mixed
messages about what is
important at QLCC

10 I am personally in
agreement with the
stated goals of the
QLCC.

103
11 In my experience the
beneficiaries understand
the mission and goals of
QLCC.

12 Regulations, policies,
and procedures often (at
least 50%) stop the
implementation of good
ideas at the QLCC

13 Members have
considerable freedom to
act to make necessary
changes at the QLCC.

14 The best way to get a
long in this organization
is to think the way the
rest of the group does.

15 Members of the QLCC
are expected to deal
with problems in the
same way.

16 We tend to stick to tried
and true ways at the
QLCC.

17 The leadership at the
QLCC sets high
standards of
performance.

18 My supervisor
motivates me to
perform better than I
thought I could.

19 My supervisor
encourages me to work
on problems that have
caused others difficulty.

104
20 Our group at the QLCC
has a strong belief in the
importance of high
quality output.

21 The leadership at the
QLCC tolerates
incompetent employees.

22 Successful innovation is
important for career
success at the QLCC.

23 Around here, a person
can get in a lot of
trouble by being
different.

24 QLCC publicly
recognizes those who
are innovative.

25 The reward system at
the QLCC benefits
mainly those who don’t
rock the boat.

26 Management provides
rewards and recognition
for innovation and
trying new things.

27 People in our group
encourage each other to
try new things.

28 Around here, people are
allowed to try to solve
the same problems in
different ways.

105
29 The main function of
the members in this
organization is to follow
orders with come down
through channels.

30 At QLCC, I often have
new ideas, but there is
too much red tape, so I
tend to not bring up my
ideas.

31 At QLCC, I often
introduce new ideas that
are implemented and
adopted.

32 The staff’s ability to
function creatively is
respected by the
leadership.

33 I am not discouraged to
be creative when my
new ideas aren’t
adopted for
implementation.

34 Implementing changes
take a long time here at
QLCC.

35 Assistance in
developing new ideas is
readily available.

36 I admire my
supervisor’s
professional skills

37 I trust my supervisor’s
ability to overcome any
obstacles.

106
38 My supervisor supports
me and backs me in
difficult situations.

39 My supervisor is a lot of
fun.

40 I am willing to apply
extra efforts, beyond
those normally required
to meet my supervisor’s
work goals for our
group/unit/department.

41 My supervisor would
defend me to the
organization if I made
an honest mistake.

42 My supervisor makes
me feel that I can reach
my goals without
him/her if I have to.

43 I respect my
supervisor’s knowledge
of and competency on
the job.

44 My supervisor is the
kind of person one
would like as a friend.

45 I do not mind working
my hardest for my
supervisor.

46 I like my supervisor
very much as a person.

107
47 The attitude around here
is that when you are
trying new things,
mistakes are a normal
part of the job.

48 My supervisor is ok
with honest mistakes
when I am trying
something new.

49 People in this group are
willing to cut through
bureaucracy in order to
get things done.

50 This organization can
be described as flexible
and continually
adapting to change.

51 This organization is
open and responsive to
change.

52 This place seems to be
more concerned with
the status quo then with
change.

53 The organizational
structure of QLCC
allows for a creative
environment.

54 The organizational
structure of QLCC
hinders the productivity
of work.

55 The organizational
structure of QLCC
helps build capacity for
all staff.

108
56 The organizational
structure of QLCC
encourages
collaborative
relationships in meeting
work goals.

57 The organizational
structure of QLCC
allows risk taking in
developing and
implementing new ideas
possible.

58 QLCC is an
organization that
promotes Hawaiian
cultural values.

59 QLCC is an
organization that
practices Hawaiian
cultural values in its day
to day operation.

60 QLCC’s services are
based on Hawaiian
cultural values.

61 QLCC is an
organization that
embraces cultural
learning by Staff

62 QLCC is an
organization that
practices balance
between policy,
procedures and
Hawaiian culture.

109
63 QLCC is an
organization that
encourages my
Hawaiian cultural
practices and beliefs in
the work environment.

64 Native Hawaiian
practices has allowed
me to be more creative
in meeting work goals.

65 I am comfortable with
the integration of
Hawaiian culture at
QLCC.

66 Hawaiian cultural
practices are necessary
in meeting the needs of
our target population.

67 Your time and mana’o
are appreciated. Any
comments can be added
here.

110
APPENDIX B
THE QUEEN LILI’UOKALANI CHILDREN’S CENTER
FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Do you think the QLCC is an overall innovative organization? Why?

2. Can you give me examples of recent organizational innovations at the QLCC?

3. Can you provide examples of cultural practices/values that you participated in
with QLCC?

4. Would you consider it to be innovative? Why?

5. How would you describe the general personality of the staff and management of
this organization?

6. What would you say are their 3 most commonly prominent personal traits and
characteristics of the staff and management?

7. How would you rate the receptiveness of staff and managers towards new ideas
and new ways of doing things? Why?

8. Could you describe some barriers and obstacles at the QLCC in implementing
new ideas and processes?

9. Are you aware of some instances where people overcome some of the barriers
and obstacles? Who are they and how did they overcome them?

10. Could you describe your understanding of the vision for future of this
organization?

11. Do you think everyone on staff understands the mission and vision of the QLCC?

12. What you think are 3 most important expectations of you from your manager?

13. How would you rate the level of trust and loyalty between yourself and your
manager? Why?

14. Do you believe you receive sufficient and appropriate support from your
manager(s)? Why?

111
15. Do you think people like working here at the QLCC? Why?

16. Who do you think are your most innovative and creative members of the staff?

17. Who/what is the most critical factor/influence contributing to this organization’s
innovativeness and your professional creativity?

112
APPENDIX C
EMAIL INVITE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS STUDY: SURVEY
Aloha QLCC 'Ohana,

My name is Jamee Mahealani Miller. I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier
School of Education at the University of Southern California. I am conducting a
research study as part of my dissertation. The purpose of this study is to examine the
perception of innovation in a Hawaiian organization. This agency has been selected
as an ideal organization for this study. With the approval and support of our
President & Executive Director and Deputy Director, you are invited to participate.

The survey is anticipated to take between 15-30 minutes to complete. Questions will
address your perception of innovation within QLCC. Some demographic
information will also be asked so that I can accurately describe the general traits of
the participants.

No risks or discomforts are anticipated from taking part in this study. If you feel
uncomfortable with a question, you can withdraw from the study at any time and
your answers will not be recorded.

Participation in this study is voluntary. Your identity as a participant will not be
tracked therefore will remain confidential at all times during and after the
study. Your relationship with the Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s Center will not be
affected whether or not you participate in this study.

If you have questions, please contact me at (808)430-3380 or jameemil@usc.edu.

If you would like to participate please click on the following link to complete the
survey. You have until 5:00 pm Friday, February 10th to participate. Your time and
mana'o are greatly appreciated.

Click
here to take survey

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Ho‘okumu a‘e: innovation, the perception of innovation within the Hawaiian language immersion program

PDF

The anatomy of the innovative organization: a case study of organizational innovation within a military structure

PDF

Creating a climate for innovation in education: Reframing structure, culture, and leadership practices

PDF

Innovation in meeting the needs of students with disabilities

PDF

Raising cultural self-efficacy among faculty and staff of a private native Hawaiian school system

PDF

Enhancing professional development aimed at changing teachers' perceptions of Micronesian students

PDF

Native Hawaiian student success in the first-year: the impact of college programs and practices

PDF

Effective professional development strategies to support the advancement of women into senior student affairs officer positions

PDF

Adequacy in education: an evidence-based approach to resource allocation in alternative learning environments

PDF

Persistence interventions for Native Hawaiian students

PDF

Online, flipped, and traditional instruction: a comparison of student performance in higher education

PDF

The relationship of a culturally relevant and responsive learning environment to achievement motivation for Native Hawaiian secondary students

PDF

Innovative collaborative systems of care for at risk youth

PDF

Planning for preeminence: perceptions of prestige in Catholic universities of the western United States

PDF

Factors affecting native Hawaiian student persistence in higher education

PDF

Exploring the reflective practices of secondary, in-service teachers of students from diverse backgrounds

PDF

Culturally relevant pedagogy in an elementary school for indigent native peoples

PDF

An examination of resource allocation strategies that promote student achievement: case studies of rural elementary schools in Hawaii

PDF

Engagement of staff within student-athlete academic services

PDF

Understanding Filipino student sense of belonging in a Hawaiʻi public school

Asset Metadata

Creator Miller, Jamee Māhealani (author)

Core Title The perception of innovation in the delivery of services for Hawaiian students

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 08/29/2012

Defense Date 05/04/2012

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Hawaiian education,Hawaiian worldview,Hawaii's queen,innovation,Liliuokalani,OAI-PMH Harvest,perceptions of innovation,QLCC

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Brewer, Dominic J. (committee chair), Kaholokula, J.Keawe'aimoku (committee member), Picus, Lawrence O. (committee member)

Creator Email jameemil@usc.edu,jmahealani@me.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-92285

Unique identifier UC11289482

Identifier usctheses-c3-92285 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-MillerJame-1174.pdf

Dmrecord 92285

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Miller, Jamee Māhealani

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA