The primary motivator for change should be why the change should occur (inspiration for change). Why, in turn, motivates how the change should occur (process for change). How, in turn, motivates what change should occur (product of change).
In other words, motivations should move from the inside of the circle to the outside: why, then how, then what. (Typically, and ineffectively, people try to motivate in the opposite direction: what, then how, then why.)
While Appreciative Inquiry doesn't have a tidy diagram like the Golden Circle, I've seen a nice little triangle, explained by Paula Gunder and Christina Goff from Los Medanos College (and courtesy of the Basic Skills Initiative Leadership Institute) that gets at some of the key qualities of Appreciative Inquiry.
The bottom layer (or foundation) of the triangle is based upon relationships between people. Within relationships people identify the possible changes that the future holds (the next layer up from the bottom). Possibilities, in turn, allow people to formulate plans for action (the third layer up). And plans, in turn, lead to actions carried out by those people (the top of the pyramid).
The wider the layer, the more important it is. Relationships are the largest portion of the pyramid. They require more time, resources, and consideration, to cultivate. In other words, relationships are a fundamental part of the pyramid. Actions, on the other hand, are the top of the pyramid. That doesn't mean they're the least important part (they are, after all, the endpoint or the product of the change the pyramid represents). But they do require less time, resources, and consideration than the lower layers of the pyramid.
The = (equal sign) is the wrong symbol for this relationship because (of course) Appreciative Inquiry and the Golden Circle are not the same thing. But they are comparable. They are analogous to each other. And they are complimentary.
They are peas in a pod.
They are birds of a feather.
They see eye to eye.
Pick your favorite metaphor.
The analogy suggests that relationships should be the primary motivation for making change (i.e., why). Out of those relationships people will recognize possibilities and formulate plans (i.e., how). Actions, then, are merely the relationships, possibilities, and plans manifest in the doing (i.e., what).
The = (equal sign) is the wrong symbol for this relationship because (of course) Appreciative Inquiry and the Golden Circle are not the same thing. But they are comparable. They are analogous to each other. And they are complimentary.
They are peas in a pod.
They are birds of a feather.
They see eye to eye.
Pick your favorite metaphor.
The analogy suggests that relationships should be the primary motivation for making change (i.e., why). Out of those relationships people will recognize possibilities and formulate plans (i.e., how). Actions, then, are merely the relationships, possibilities, and plans manifest in the doing (i.e., what).
The Golden Circle and Appreciative Inquiry. Different ideas expressed in different language. Yet each one gives meaning and clarity to the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment