Appreciative inquiry

Last updated

Appreciative inquiry (AI) is a model that seeks to engage stakeholders in self-determined change. According to Gervase Bushe, professor of leadership and organization development at the Beedie School of Business and a researcher on the topic, "AI revolutionized the field of organization development and was a precursor to the rise of positive organization studies and the strengths based movement in American management." [1] It was developed at Case Western Reserve University's department of organizational behavior, starting with a 1987 article by David Cooperrider and Suresh Srivastva. They felt that the overuse of problem solving hampered any kind of social improvement, and what was needed were new methods of inquiry that would help generate new ideas and models for how to organize. [2]

Contents

History

Cooperrider and Srivastva took a social constructionist approach, arguing that organizations are created, maintained and changed by conversations, and claiming that methods of organizing were only limited by people's imaginations and the agreements among them. [3]

In 2001, Cooperrider and Diana Whitney published an article outlining the five principles of AI. [4]

In 1996, Cooperrider, Whitney and several of their colleagues became centrally involved using AI to mid-wife the creation of the United Religions Initiative, a global organization dedicated to promoting grassroots interfaith cooperation for peace, justice and healing. This early partnership between URI and AI is chronicled in Birth of a Global Community: Appreciative Inquiry in Action by Charles Gibbs and Sally Mahé. AI was also used in the first (1999) and subsequent meetings of business leaders that created the UN Global Compact. [5] In another of the early applications, Cooperrider and Whitney taught AI to employees of GTE (now part of Verizon) resulting in improvements in employees' support for GTE's business direction and as a part of continuous process improvement generated both improvements in revenue collection and cost savings earning GTE an Association for Talent Development award for the best organizational change program in the US in 1997. [6] : 176 

On May 8, 2010, Suresh Srivastva died. [7]

Bushe published a 2011 review of the model, including its processes, critiques, and evidence. [8] He also published a history of the model in 2012. [9]

Basis and principles

According to Bushe, AI "advocates collective inquiry into the best of what is, in order to imagine what could be, followed by collective design of a desired future state that is compelling and thus, does not require the use of incentives, coercion or persuasion for planned change to occur." [10]

The model is based on the assumption that the questions we ask will tend to focus our attention in a particular direction, that organizations evolve in the direction of the questions they most persistently and passionately ask. [11] In the mid-1980s most methods of assessing and evaluating a situation and then proposing solutions were based on a deficiency model, predominantly asking questions such as "What are the problems?", "What's wrong?" or "What needs to be fixed?". Instead of asking "What's the problem?", others couched the question in terms of "challenges", which still focused on deficiency, on what needs to be fixed or solved. [12] Appreciative inquiry was the first serious managerial method to refocus attention on what works, the positive core, and on what people really care about. Today, these ways of approaching organizational change are common. [13]

The five principles of AI are: [10]

  1. The constructionist principle proposes that what we believe to be true determines what we do, and thought and action emerge from relationships. Through the language and discourse of day to day interactions, people co-construct the organizations they inhabit. The purpose of inquiry is to stimulate new ideas, stories and images that generate new possibilities for action.
  2. The principle of simultaneity proposes that as we inquire into human systems we change them and the seeds of change, the things people think and talk about, what they discover and learn, are implicit in the very first questions asked. Questions are never neutral, they are fateful, and social systems move in the direction of the questions they most persistently and passionately discuss.
  3. The poetic principle proposes that organizational life is expressed in the stories people tell each other every day, and the story of the organization is constantly being co-authored. The words and topics chosen for inquiry have an impact far beyond just the words themselves. They invoke sentiments, understandings, and worlds of meaning. In all phases of the inquiry effort is put into using words that point to, enliven and inspire the best in people.
  4. The anticipatory principle posits that what we do today is guided by our image of the future. Human systems are forever projecting ahead of themselves a horizon of expectation that brings the future powerfully into the present as a mobilizing agent. Appreciative inquiry uses artful creation of positive imagery on a collective basis to refashion anticipatory reality.
  5. The positive principle proposes that momentum and sustainable change requires positive affect and social bonding. Sentiments like hope, excitement, inspiration, camaraderie and joy increase creativity, openness to new ideas and people, and cognitive flexibility. They also promote the strong connections and relationships between people, particularly between groups in conflict, required for collective inquiry and change.

Some researchers believe that excessive focus on dysfunctions can actually cause them to become worse or fail to become better. [14] By contrast, AI argues, when all members of an organization are motivated to understand and value the most favorable features of its culture, it can make rapid improvements. [15]

Strength-based methods are used in the creation of organizational development strategy and implementation of organizational effectiveness tactics. [16] The appreciative mode of inquiry often relies on interviews to qualitatively understand the organization's potential strengths by looking at an organization's experience and its potential; the objective is to elucidate the assets and personal motivations that are its strengths.

Bushe has argued that mainstream proponents of AI focus too much attention on "the positive" and not enough on the transformation that AI can bring about through generating new ideas and the will to act on them. [6] [17] [18] In a 2010 comparative study in a school district he found that even in cases where no change occurred participants were highly positive during the AI process. [19] What distinguished those sites that experienced transformational changes was the creation of new ideas that gave people new ways to address old problems. He argues that for transformational change to occur, AI must address problems that concern people enough to want to change. However, AI addresses them not through problem-solving, but through generative images. [20] Some of this is covered in a 90-minute discussion about AI, positivity and generativity by Bushe and Dr. Ron Fry of Case Western, at the 2012 World Appreciative Inquiry Conference. [21]

Distinguishing features

The following table comes from the Cooperrider and Whitney (2001)[ full citation needed ] article and is used to describe some of the distinctions between AI and approaches to organizational development not based on what they call positive potential: [22]

Problem SolvingAppreciative inquiry
1. "Felt Need," identification of Problem1. Appreciating & Valuing the Best of "What Is"
2. Analysis of Causes2. Envisioning "What Might Be"
3. Analysis & Possible Solutions3. Dialoguing "What Should Be"
4. Action Planning (Treatment)4. Designing "What Will Be"
Basic Assumption: An Organization is a Problem to be SolvedBasic Assumption: An Organization is a Mystery to be Embraced

Appreciative inquiry attempts to use ways of asking questions and envisioning the future in order to foster positive relationships and build on the present potential of a given person, organization or situation. The most common model utilizes a cycle of four processes, which focus on what it calls:

  1. DISCOVER: The identification of organizational processes that work well.
  2. DREAM: The envisioning of processes that would work well in the future.
  3. DESIGN: Planning and prioritizing processes that would work well.
  4. DESTINY (or DEPLOY): The implementation (execution) of the proposed design. [15]

The aim is to build – or rebuild – organizations around what works, rather than trying to fix what doesn't. AI practitioners try to convey this approach as the opposite of problem solving.

Implementing AI

There are a variety of approaches to implementing appreciative inquiry, including mass-mobilised interviews and a large, diverse gathering called an Appreciative Inquiry Summit. [23] These approaches involve bringing large, diverse groups of people together to study and build upon the best in an organization or community.

Uses

In Vancouver, AI is being used by the Dalai Lama Center for Peace and Education. The center, which was founded by the Dalai Lama and Victor Chan, is using AI to facilitate compassionate communities. [24]

See also

Related Research Articles

The United Religions Initiative (URI) is a global grassroots interfaith network.

Edgar Henry Schein is a former professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management. He has made a notable mark on the field of organizational development in many areas, including career development, group process consultation, and organizational culture. He is the son of former University of Chicago professor Marcel Schein.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Action research</span> Methodology for social science research

Action research is a philosophy and methodology of research generally applied in the social sciences. It seeks transformative change through the simultaneous process of taking action and doing research, which are linked together by critical reflection. Kurt Lewin, then a professor a MIT, first coined the term "action research" in 1944. In his 1946 paper "Action Research and Minority Problems" he described action research as "a comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action" that uses "a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action and fact-finding about the result of the action".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">David Cooperrider</span>

David Cooperrider, is the Fairmount Minerals Chair and Professor of Social Entrepreneurship at the Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve University, and Faculty Director at the Center for Business as an Agent of World Benefit at Case.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Generative grammar</span> Theory in linguistics

Generative grammar, or generativism, is a linguistic theory that regards linguistics as the study of a hypothesised innate grammatical structure. It is a biological or biologistic modification of earlier structuralist theories of linguistics, deriving ultimately from glossematics. Generative grammar considers grammar as a system of rules that generates exactly those combinations of words that form grammatical sentences in a given language. It is a system of explicit rules that may apply repeatedly to generate an indefinite number of sentences which can be as long as one wants them to be. The difference from structural and functional models is that the object is base-generated within the verb phrase in generative grammar. This purportedly cognitive structure is thought of as being a part of a universal grammar, a syntactic structure which is caused by a genetic mutation in humans.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social complexity</span> Conceptual framework

In sociology, social complexity is a conceptual framework used in the analysis of society. Contemporary definitions of complexity in the sciences are found in relation to systems theory, in which a phenomenon under study has many parts and many possible arrangements of the relationships between those parts. At the same time, what is complex and what is simple is relative and may change with time.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Participatory action research</span>

Participatory action research (PAR) is an approach to action research emphasizing participation and action by members of communities affected by that research. It seeks to understand the world by trying to change it, collaboratively and following reflection. PAR emphasizes collective inquiry and experimentation grounded in experience and social history. Within a PAR process, "communities of inquiry and action evolve and address questions and issues that are significant for those who participate as co-researchers". PAR contrasts with mainstream research methods, which emphasize controlled experimentation, statistical analysis, and reproducibility of findings.

Robert Kegan is an American developmental psychologist. He is a licensed psychologist and practicing therapist, lectures to professional and lay audiences, and consults in the area of professional development and organization development.

Action learning is an approach to problem solving. It involves taking action and reflecting upon the results. This helps improve the problem-solving process as well as simplify the solutions developed by the team. The theory of action learning and its epistemological position were originally developed by Reg Revans, who applied the method to support organizational and business development initiatives and improve on problem solving efforts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Positive adult development</span>

Positive adult development is a subfield of developmental psychology that studies positive development during adulthood. It is one of four major forms of adult developmental study that can be identified, according to Michael Commons; the other three forms are directionless change, stasis, and decline. Commons divided positive adult developmental processes into at least six areas of study: hierarchical complexity, knowledge, experience, expertise, wisdom, and spirituality.

Harlene Anderson is an American psychologist and a cofounder of the Postmodern Collaborative Approach to therapy. In the 1980s, Anderson and her colleague Harold A. Goolishian pioneered a new technique that is used to relate to patients within therapy through language and collaboration, and without the use of diagnostic labels. This approach to therapy places the patient in control of the therapy session and asks the therapist to focus on the present session and ignore any preconceived notions they may have. This approach was first developed for the use of family and mental health therapists, but has since expanded into a variety of professional practices such as organizational psychology, higher education, and research.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sheila McNamee</span> American academic

Sheila McNamee is an American academic known for her work in human communication and social constructionism theory and practice. She is a Professor of Communication at the University of New Hampshire and founding member, Vice President and board member of the Taos Institute. She has authored numerous, books, chapters, and journal articles. Her work focuses on appreciative dialogic transformation within a variety of social and institutional contexts including psychotherapy, organizations, education, healthcare, and local communities. She engages constructionist practices in a variety of contexts to bring communities of participants with diametrically opposing viewpoints together to create livable futures.

<i>Aspects of the Theory of Syntax</i>

Aspects of the Theory of Syntax is a book on linguistics written by American linguist Noam Chomsky, first published in 1965. In Aspects, Chomsky presented a deeper, more extensive reformulation of transformational generative grammar (TGG), a new kind of syntactic theory that he had introduced in the 1950s with the publication of his first book, Syntactic Structures. Aspects is widely considered to be the foundational document and a proper book-length articulation of Chomskyan theoretical framework of linguistics. It presented Chomsky's epistemological assumptions with a view to establishing linguistic theory-making as a formal discipline comparable to physical sciences, i.e. a domain of inquiry well-defined in its nature and scope. From a philosophical perspective, it directed mainstream linguistic research away from behaviorism, constructivism, empiricism and structuralism and towards mentalism, nativism, rationalism and generativism, respectively, taking as its main object of study the abstract, inner workings of the human mind related to language acquisition and production.

Diana Whitney is an American author, award-winning consultant and educator whose writings – 15 books and dozens of chapters and articles – have advanced the positive principles and practices of appreciative inquiry and social constructionist theory worldwide. Her work as a scholar practitioner has furthered both research and practice in the fields of appreciative leadership and positive organization development. She was awarded Vallarta Institute’s Annual 2X2 Recreate the World Award.

Double-loop learning entails the modification of goals or decision-making rules in the light of experience. The first loop uses the goals or decision-making rules, the second loop enables their modification, hence "double-loop". Double-loop learning recognises that the way a problem is defined and solved can be a source of the problem. This type of learning can be useful in organizational learning since it can drive creativity and innovation, going beyond adapting to change to anticipating or being ahead of change.

Appreciative advising (AA) is an academic advising philosophy that provides a framework for optimizing student-advisor interactions both in 1:1 and group settings. Appreciative advising is based on David Cooperrider's organizational development theory of appreciative inquiry. Appreciative advising also draws from positive psychology, social constructivist theory, and choice theory.

Authentic leadership, while having no formal or unequivocal definition, is a growing field in academic research. The idea has also been embraced by leaders and leadership coaches, who view it as an alternative to leaders who emphasize profit and share price over people and ethics. There appears to be some consensus in the literature about the qualities an authentic leader must have. These include self-awareness, the ability to trust one's thoughts, feelings, motives and values, self reflection, responsiveness to feedback, and the ability to resolve conflict in honest and non-manipulative ways. An authentic leader is supposedly able to further the success of an organization within the confines of social and ethical values, even when that seems impossible. Authentic leadership is claimed to be a superior model due to the greater trust and motivation it invokes in subordinates. Much of the evidentiary basis for authentic leadership has been called into question and papers have been retracted.

Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is an approach that believes improvement is more engaging when the focus is made on the strengths rather than the weaknesses. People tend to respond to positive statements but react to negative statements that concern them. Children are more sensitive to their self-worth and thrive on what makes them feel good, what makes them feel accepted, included and recognized. AI is a powerful tool that can be used in the field of Education to enable children discover what is good about them and dream of what they can do with this realization. Children of today are very sensitive and make decisions in haste which sometimes costs them their lives. In such a situation, AI plays a very vital role.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Harbarian process modeling</span>

Harbarian process modeling (HPM) is a method for obtaining internal process information from an organization and then documenting that information in a visually effective, simple manner.

“The Art of Hosting” is a method of participatory leadership for facilitating group processes, as used by a loose-knit community of practitioners. In their method, people are invited into structured conversation about matters they are concerned about while facilitators act as hosts. This community group understands “hosting” as a certain way of facilitation that is supposed to have the capacity of making emerge the collective intelligence that people possess. As an approach to facilitation, The Art of Hosting is focused on “improved, conscious, and kind ways of growing a capacity to support a deliberate wisdom, unique to being together,” and also relies on a specific attitude to process organization. The practitioners see this methodology of engagement as a way to bring people in complex, social systems into convergence on collective actions, with the participants discovering and proposing their own solutions.

References

  1. ↑ Bushe, G. R. (2013). "The appreciative inquiry model". In Kessler, E.H. (ed.). Encyclopedia of Management Theory. Vol. 1. Sage Publications. pp. 41–44.
  2. ↑ Cooperrider, D. L. & Srivastva, S. (1987). "Appreciative inquiry in organizational life". In Woodman, R. W. & Pasmore, W.A. (eds.). Research in Organizational Change And Development. Vol. 1. Stamford, CT: JAI Press. pp. 129–169.
  3. ↑ Cooperrider, D. L.; Barrett, F.; Srivastva, S. (1995). "Social construction and appreciative inquiry: A journey in organizational theory". In Hosking, D.; Dachler, P.; Gergen, K. (eds.). Management and Organization: Relational Alternatives to Individualism. pp. 157–200.
  4. ↑ Cooperrider, D.L. & Whitney, D. (2001). "A positive revolution in change". In Cooperrider, D. L.; Sorenson, P.; Whitney, D. & Yeager, T. (eds.). Appreciative Inquiry: An Emerging Direction for Organization Development. Champaign, IL: Stipes. pp. 9–29.
  5. ↑ Cooperrider, David. "Current Commentary on AI and Positive Change". AI Commons. Retrieved July 6, 2016.
  6. 1 2 Bushe, G. R.; Kassam, A.; et al. (2005). "When is appreciative inquiry transformational? A meta-case analysis" (PDF). Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 41 (2): 161–181. doi:10.1177/0021886304270337. S2CID   20009087.
  7. ↑ "Suresh Srviastva [sic]". The Taos Institute. Retrieved July 6, 2016.
  8. ↑ Bushe, G. R. (2011). "Appreciative Inquiry: Theory and Critique" (PDF). In Boje, D.; Burnes, B.; Hassard, J. (eds.). The Routledge Companion To Organizational Change. Oxford, UK: Routledge. pp. 87–103.
  9. ↑ Bushe, Gervase (2012). "Foundations of Appreciative Inquiry" (PDF). Bushe's website. Appreciative Practitioner.
  10. 1 2 Bushe, G. R. (2013). Kessler, E. (ed.). The Appreciative Inquiry Model (PDF). The Encyclopedia of Management Theory. Sage Publications. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 23, 2013. Retrieved August 12, 2013.
  11. ↑ Cooperrider, D. L. & Whitney, D (2005). "A positive revolution in change: Appreciative inquiry". In Cooperrider, D. L. Sorenson, P., Yeager, T. & Whitney, D. (eds.) Appreciative Inquiry: Foundations in Positive Organization Development (pp 9-33). Champaign, IL: Stipes.
  12. ↑ "The Appreciative Inquiry Commons". Case Western Reserve University's Weatherhead School of Management.
  13. ↑ Bushe, G. R. & Marhsak, R. M. (2015). Dialogic Organization Development: The Theory and Practice of Organizational Transformation. Oakdland, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
  14. ↑ Wallis, Claudia (January 17, 2005). "The Science of Happiness" (PDF). Time . Archived from the original (PDF) on July 11, 2006.
  15. 1 2 "Background". New Paradigm. Retrieved July 6, 2016.
  16. ↑ Franklin, Scott (February 1, 2007). "Building Strength-Based Organizations". Maintenance Technology. Archived from the original on September 28, 2011.
  17. ↑ Bushe, G.R. (2007). "Appreciative inquiry is not (just) about the positive" (PDF). Organization Development Practitioner. 39 (4): 30–35.
  18. ↑ Bushe, G.R. (2013). D.L. Cooperrider; D.P. Zandee; L.N. Godwin; M. Avital; B. Boland (eds.). Generative process, generative outcome: The transformational potential of appreciative inquiry (PDF). Organizational Generativity: The Appreciative Inquiry Summit and a Scholarship of Transformation. Advances in Appreciative Inquiry. Vol. 4. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. pp. 89–113.
  19. ↑ Bushe, G.R. (2010). "A comparative case study of appreciative inquiries in one organization: Implications for practice" (PDF). Review of Research and Social Intervention. Special Issue on Appreciative Inquiry. 29: 7–24.
  20. ↑ Bushe, G.R. (2013). "Dialogic OD: A theory of practice". Organization Development Practitioner. 45 (1): 10–16.
  21. ↑ "Webcast Plenary Session 6: Prof. Dr. Ronald Fry and Prof. Dr. Gervase Bushe". April 30, 2012.
  22. ↑ "What is Appreciative Inquiry?". Appreciative Inquiry Commons. Case Western Reserve University. Retrieved July 6, 2016.
  23. ↑ http://www.positivechange.org/downloads/AI_and_Spiritual_ResonanceV.Final.pdf%5B%5D
  24. ↑ "Heart-Mind Inquiry". Dalai Lama Center. July 25, 2011. Retrieved July 6, 2016.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.