This study was launched because practitioners of Appreciative Inquiry (AI) instilled awareness for needed AI outcome research. Therefore, the goal of this research was to identify…
Abstract
This study was launched because practitioners of Appreciative Inquiry (AI) instilled awareness for needed AI outcome research. Therefore, the goal of this research was to identify the salient AI processes and levers and the rate of AI success and failure. This study was specific to U.S. municipalities due to a researcher finding AI failure probability therein. In direct opposition, eight U.S. municipalities were identified from the literature as having utilized AI in 14 projects and all were successful even when resistance was present in three applications. A survey revealed 15 AI initiatives identified as successful even when resistance was present in eight, resulting in validation. This study utilized a mixed methods exploratory case study design, sequentially in the mix, consisting of a literature review and application of two unique instruments applied to three populations.
Lynn Clouder and Virginia King
Appreciative Inquiry (AI) has gained prominence as an organizational development approach. For over 15 years, it has had varied use in higher education research as a methodology…
Abstract
Appreciative Inquiry (AI) has gained prominence as an organizational development approach. For over 15 years, it has had varied use in higher education research as a methodology and as a collection of methods. Perhaps the most consistently used, yet most criticized, aspect of AI is the positive stance that its adherents adopt. In this chapter, we survey the prevalence and use of AI, both in the wider literature and in higher education research. We offer our own case study to illustrate the practicalities of employing it and discuss our findings. We suggest that educational researchers are overlooking relevant AI research published within other disciplines; that our own and other case stories can provide guidance for the use of AI in academic contexts; and that AI’s collaborative and positive standpoint has potential as a research methodology influencing policy.
Gervase R. Bushe and Robert J. Marshak
Extending the argument made in Bushe and Marshak (2009) of the emergence of a new species of Organization Development (OD) that we label Dialogic, to differentiate it from the…
Abstract
Extending the argument made in Bushe and Marshak (2009) of the emergence of a new species of Organization Development (OD) that we label Dialogic, to differentiate it from the foundational Diagnostic form, we argue that how any OD method is used in practice will be depend on the mindset of the practitioner. Six variants of Dialogic OD practice are reviewed and compared to aid in identification of a Weberian ideal-type Dialogic Mindset, consisting of eight premises that distinguish it from the foundational Diagnostic Mindset. Three core change processes that underlie all successful Dialogic OD processes are proposed, and suggestions for future research offered.
Generativity is defined in this chapter as the creation of new images, metaphors, physical representations, and so on that have two qualities: they change how people think so that…
Abstract
Generativity is defined in this chapter as the creation of new images, metaphors, physical representations, and so on that have two qualities: they change how people think so that new options for decisions and/or actions become available to them, and they are compelling images that people want to act on. Research and experiences that suggest “positivity,” particularly positive emotion, is not sufficient for transformational change, but that generativity is a key change lever in cases of transformational change, are reviewed. A model of different characteristics of generativity is offered and ways in which appreciative inquiry can be a generative process, increase generative capacity, and lead to generative outcomes, are discussed. Ways to increase the generativity of appreciative inquiry through generative topics, generative questions, generative conversations, and generative action are offered.
Diana Whitney, Amanda Trosten-Bloom and Maria Giovanna Vianello
Leslie E. Sekerka, Anne M. Brumbaugh, José Antonio Rosa and David Cooperrider
Organizational development and change may be initiated from two different starting points. A diagnostic approach begins with an examination of problems to assess and correct…
Abstract
Organizational development and change may be initiated from two different starting points. A diagnostic approach begins with an examination of problems to assess and correct dysfunction. In contrast, the Appreciative Inquiry approach begins by identifying an organization’s strengths as resources for change. An experimental study was conducted to compare the processes and outcomes that arise during the first phase of each approach. Results show that both approaches lead to different but favorable and complementary outcomes. Both participant gender and the gender construction of the dyads in which individuals participated moderate these effects in unexpected ways. The implications for understanding the processes by which both methods work, and the potential for combining them, are discussed
David Cooperrider, David Cooperrider and Suresh Srivastva
It’s been thirty years since the original articulation of “Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life” was written in collaboration with my remarkable mentor Suresh Srivastva…
Abstract
It’s been thirty years since the original articulation of “Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life” was written in collaboration with my remarkable mentor Suresh Srivastva (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). That article – first published in Research in Organization Development and Change – generated more experimentation in the field, more academic excitement, and more innovation than anything we had ever written. As the passage of time has enabled me to look more closely at what was written, I feel both a deep satisfaction with the seed vision and scholarly logic offered for Appreciative Inquiry, as well as well as the enormous impact and continuing reverberation. Following the tradition of authors such as Carl Rogers who have re-issued their favorite works but have also added brief reflections on key points of emphasis, clarification, or editorial commentary I am presenting the article by David Cooperrider (myself) and the late Suresh Srivastva in its entirety, but also with new horizon insights. In particular I write with excitement and anticipation of a new OD – what my colleagues and I are calling the next “IPOD” that is, innovation-inspired positive OD that brings AI’s gift of new eyes together in common cause with several other movements in the human sciences: the strengths revolution in management; the positive pscyhology and positive organizational scholarship movements; the design thinking explosion; and the biomimicry field which is all about an appreciative eye toward billions of years of nature’s wisdom and innovation inspired by life.
This article presents a conceptual refigurationy of action-research based on a “sociorationalist” view of science. The position that is developed can be summarized as follows: For action-research to reach its potential as a vehicle for social innovation it needs to begin advancing theoretical knowledge of consequence; that good theory may be one of the best means human beings have for affecting change in a postindustrial world; that the discipline’s steadfast commitment to a problem solving view of the world acts as a primary constraint on its imagination and contribution to knowledge; that appreciative inquiry represents a viable complement to conventional forms of action-research; and finally, that through our assumptions and choice of method we largely create the world we later discover.
Details
Keywords
David S. Bright, Edward H. Powley, Ronald E. Fry and Frank Barrett
A common concern raised in opposition to Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is that a focus on life-giving images in organizations tends to suppress negative voices. It is supposed that AI…
Abstract
A common concern raised in opposition to Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is that a focus on life-giving images in organizations tends to suppress negative voices. It is supposed that AI sees little value in skeptical, cynical, or negative perspectives. However, when AI is properly understood, all voices – both positive and negative – are seen as essential to the life of organization. The challenge is to create an atmosphere in which the cynical voice, rather than perpetuating dysfunction, can be tapped to build generativity. This chapter describes how to accomplish this objective through the use of analogic inquiry, thus exploring the focus on generativity that is central to AI.
Mihir Ajgaonkar and Keith D’Souza
The subject areas are organizational management, organizational behaviour and human resource management.
Abstract
Subject area
The subject areas are organizational management, organizational behaviour and human resource management.
Study level/applicability
The study is applicable for courses in human resource management and organizational behaviour as part of masters-level programmes in business administration and management, executive development programmes on organization design and development for middle/senior management.
Case overview
In 2003, Elizabeth and Sunil Mehta had founded a voluntary organization, “Muktangan”, focussed on child-centric education through innovative pedagogy for the community of the urban poor. Elizabeth, an educationist, and Sunil, a highly successful business person, joined hands to contribute to the well-being of urban poor to make a difference to their lives. Elizabeth and Sunil presented a proposal to impart education for “the children of the community, by the teachers drawn from the community” to the residents of the slums in central Mumbai. With a humble beginning of running a small pre-school, Muktangan now manages seven schools with 3,400 children and 500 teachers, and a teachers’ training centre with a capacity to train 100 teachers a year. Muktangan won acclaim for its unique pedagogy and a very effective child-to-teacher ratio. Over the years, Elizabeth and Sunil led Muktangan with a strong passion and a “hands-on” approach. Of late, Elizabeth and Sunil faced questions from their donors about the sustainability of Muktangan with respect to leadership and management succession. Elizabeth and Sunil had a vision for Muktangan for self-directed growth with an empowered team. Muktangan embarked on the journey to create a leadership for self-directed growth. Sunil, Elizabeth and team Muktangan conceptualized and implemented a change management intervention with help from an external consultant to build the desired organization.
Expected learning outcomes
Outcomes are understanding issues involved in the leadership, organization design and management of change, particularly of those organizations engaged in social change and development in developing societies.
Supplementary materials
The Muktangan Story: Part A – An Organizational Study; The Muktangan Story Part B – Winds of Change; Teaching Note; References: Bradach J. (1996), Organizational Alignment: The 7-S Model, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA 02,163. Cooperrider D. and Whitney D. (2005), “A Positive Revolution in Change: Appreciative Inquiry”, In The Change Handbook. The Definitive Resource on Today’s Best Methods for Engaging.Whole Systems, by Peggy Holman, Tom Devane, and Steven Cady. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Cooperrider D., Whitney D., and Stavros J.M. (2008), Appreciative Inquiry Handbook for Leaders of Change (Second Edition), Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Greiner, L.E. (1998), “Evolution and Revolution as Organizations Grow”, Harvard Business Review, May-June, 3-11. www.muktanganedu.org/ accessed 12 April, 2018. Kessler, E. H., (2013) (ed.), Encyclopaedia of Management Theory, Sage Publications Kotter, J. P. (1996), Leading Change, Harvard Business School Press, Boston. Lewin K. (1951), Field Theory in social science, Harper & Row, New York. Waterman, R. H., Peters, T. J., and Phillips, J. R. (1980), Structure is not organization. Business Horizons, 23(3), 14-26.
Subject code:
CSS 6: Human Resource Management.