Ducklows' Introduction to Appreciative Inquiry

Convention problem-solving techniques begin by identifying shortcomings or needs in the status quo (i.e., what does not exist, or what is not). Appreciative inquiry, on the other hand, identifies what is working in the status quo (i.e., what does exist, or what is). What is not can be translated into what might be (by replacing the problem with a new action that reduces or eliminates the problem), but what is can be translated into what might be, also (by enhancing or strengthening what works in the status quo).

Appreciative inquiry seeks to identify what gives life to organizations, and what activates people’s energies and competencies. As a result, examples, stories, and metaphors can be more important than fact and opinion statements. The communicative patterns that constitute appreciative inquiry, in turn, develop members’ commitment and confidence to their work.

citation: “Appreciative Inquiry: A Paradigm Shift for Social Systems,”accessed 24 July 2015, at http://theducklows.ca/downloads/AISystemsChange.pdf

Asking Not Telling: Edgar Schein on Humble Inquiry

My professional community project is about fostering trust and respect within the relationships between my educational colleagues. Edgar Schein, in his book Humble Inquiry, shows that trust is built when colleagues share vulnerabilities with each other.

For instance, in an interaction, when one person takes a risk by disclosing something, and the other person reciprocates that risk by disclosing something back, then they may develop trust between each other. In short, trust forms: (1) in communicative interactions, (2) when one person gives something, and (3) when the other person gives something back.

Schein claims we live and work in a culture of task-accomplishment (e.g., identifying problems and solutions) rather than a culture of relationship-building (cultivating trust and respect for our colleagues). This claim makes intuitive sense to me because it seems institutional changes on campus occur by designating committees who collect data showing a need for change and implement policy programs that will mitigate, reduce, or eliminate those needs. Building relationships as an approach to institutional change is not the norm.

Humble inquiry, the subject of Schein’s book, is an alternative approach to institutional change. Our conventional culture of “telling” (i.e., speaking to others in order to influence them) presumes that the speaker (the one doing the telling) knows about the other (the one doing the listening). Humble inquiry (i.e., listening to others in order to align our common purposes), on the other hand, presumes that we do not know the other, and that it’s important to ask (inquire) with an attitude of humility.

Humble inquiry asks open-ended questions in order to learn about the other: the questions are not loaded, the interactions are neither scripted nor ritualistic, and the answers are not preconceived.

The challenge for me and my project is to determine ways to supplement the institutional culture of my campus with humble inquiry. The current program of policy committees is not entirely consistent with humble inquiry. But my goal is not to replace one with the other; instead, it is to enhance the current program with alternatives that might bring slow and steady improvements.

citation: Edgar H. Schein. Humble Inquiry: The Gentle Art of Asking Instead of Telling. Berrett-Koehler, 2013.

Appreciative Inquiry, the Golden Circle, and Bread & Butter (and Other Comparable Metaphors)

Simon Sinek's conception of a Golden Circle explains the motivations for change.

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 Golden Circle and Appreciative Inquiry. Different ideas expressed in different language. Yet each one gives meaning and clarity to the other.