My interest in investigating extraordinary successful managers arose in strategic discussions, where some managers were above other, especially in innovation. Their thinking were much deeper and they were much more leading in the discussions. Since deep thinking (a lot of thinking on its own or rare interaction) is a sign of introversion and leadership (intensive interaction) is a sign of extraversion, I came out with the hypothesis that innovativeness is caused by ambiversion – infrequent and intensive interaction.

The hypothesis of ambiversion as innovativeness was confirmed in the research of development managers as well as other members of top management. As personality is not significantly changeable or compensable, ambiversion should be valued and evaluated when recruiting top managers and succession.

A study of S&P 500 companies has shown that the profitability of innovation (RQ) depends on the company manager’s knowledge of the field. So, it is right to recruit a company manager from within the company, which is what the S&P TOP25 does.

The growth of the long-term value of S&P 500 companies is best predicted by the growth of gross profit. As gross profit is increased by profitable innovations, the growth of gross profit and profitable innovations should be at the hart of the company’s strategy. The focus on profitable innovations gives the strategy clarity and a strong logic.

I have achieved considerable evaluation accuracy in observing the ambiversion of the managers of listed companies, as my my return on investment significantly exceeds the S&P 500 index. Encouraged by this, I invent a more valid observational method to prove the hypothesis of ambiversion as a prerequisite for innovation for S&P 500 company managers.

My hypothesis is that introversion and extraversion are not opposites of the same personality trait, but are different traits created by different needs – the needs for understanding and dominance. The former provides energy for thinking on its own and the latter for intensive interaction. However, this hypothesis remains to be tested.

The key statements of the extraordinary manager’s theory:

  1. An measure of the company’s extraordinary success is the growth of the company’s long-term value.
  2. The growth of the company’s long-term value is predicted by the growth of the gross profit.
  3. The growth of the gross profit is predicted by profitable innovations.
  4. Profitable innovations are predicted by the company’s manager’s knowledge of the field and ambiversion.
  5. The ambiversion is predicted by the needs for understanding and dominance.