880 Research Project

The Role of Appreciative Inquiryin Organizational Development

Shifting Focus:

M. Melissa Genova

24 April 2009Research Concepts and SkillsClemson UniversityHRD 880

Overview

The main objective of this study is to measure the effectiveness of Appreciative Inquiry (AI) against the traditional, deficit-based approach of organizational development (OD) with regard to increasing employee morale.

What is Appreciative Inquiry

Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is a form of organizational development (OD) that looks to make improvements by focusing on strengths rather than deficits within organizations.

AI is the opposite of the traditional “problem – solving” or “deficit – based” approaches.

AI was created in the late 1980’s by David Cooperrider and his colleagues at Case Western Reserve University (Davis, n.d., p.355).

The theory of Appreciative Inquiry is strongly influenced by concepts from the fields of Sociology, Psychology and Biology.

Appreciative Inquiry“4D” Process

DISCOVERY

“What gives life?”

(the best of what is)

Appreciating

DREAM

“What might be?”

(What is the world calling for?)

Envisioning Results

DESIGN

“What should be – the ideal?”

Co-constructing

DESTINY

“How to empower, learn, and adjust/improvise?”

Sustaining

AFFIRMATIVE

TOPIC CHOICE

As adapted from Cooperrider and Whitney, 2005, p.30

Appreciative Inquiry vs.The Traditional OD ProcessTraditional OD Process

Define the problemFix what’s brokenFocus on decayWhat problems are you

having?

Appreciative InquirySearch for solutions that

already exist.Amplify what is workingFocus on life giving

forcesWhat is working well

around here?

Hall & Hammond, 1998

Appreciative Inquiry Builds Bridges Between Cultures

AI was used to build an alliance between:• Monsanto – A publicly held multinational corporation based in the US • MAHYCO – A research-based family business based in India

The companies were paired up and two groups were formed:• AI Group – Used AI strategies to build teams• ME Group – Used more formal, traditional methods

End results:• When surveyed, the AI group had a 72% rate of response vs. 50%

from the ME group.• 75% of AI participants had made progress on their project since the

intervention took place.• 92% of the AI group reported positive results from the intervention.• 93% recommended further use of this method as an alliance building

tool.

Miller, Fitzgerald, Murrell, Preston & Ambekar, 2005

Appreciative Inquiry Improves Output of Cross-Functional Teams

Groups of cross functional teams were studied on their ability to problem solve using the following approaches:

• Creative Problem Solving (CPS) – Focus on problems• Appreciative Inquiry (AI) – Focus on what works

Results:• As predicted, the groups utilizing AI had far higher scores than their

counterparts who used CPS.• While both groups reported increases in the levels of group potency,

the AI groups reported higher levels of post-task group potency as well as a greater degree of group potency from task initiation to task completion.

• The second hypothesis, that the AI groups would report higher group identification than their counterparts, was also found to be true.

Peelle III, 2006

Does Appreciative Inquiry Live Up To It’s Reputation?

The research:• A meta-case analysis was conducted to substantiate the claim that AI is a catalyst of positive, transformational change within organizations.• Twenty cases in which AI was utilized were reviewed.

Results:• Surprisingly only 35% of the cases yielded transformational outcomes.• What the study identified further was, in the cases that were

transformational, had two specific themes in common:• A focus on changing how people think instead of what people do.• A focus on supporting self-organizing change processes that flow from

new ideas.

Bushe & Kassam, 2005

Measures

The studies discussed have used the following measures to study the effects of Appreciative Inquiry:

• Questionnaires administered before and after the study.• A series of tests:

• GP0 – Group potency instrument (pre-test)• GI – The identification instrument (mid-point)• GP1 – Post-task group potency instrument (end).

• Meta-case Analysis

Method

Participants selected for this study are employees at Bits and Bytes, Inc., an IT solutions company in New York:

• Out of six departments, two were selected for this study based on initial results obtained from a modified version of the Employee Morale Survey (Thapar, 2005).

• To obtain a similar baseline, the two departments with the closest scores were chosen for the study.

• The departments were labeled Department A and Department B. • Department A was chosen to receive the deficit-based intervention

approach where their top three problems were the focus.• Department B was chosen to receive the AI intervention tool where

problems were not mentioned. Instead, strengths were the focus.

Employee Morale SurveyEMPLOYEE MORALE SURVEY

This is a survey for the employees of Bits and Bytes, Inc. This survey is intended to give management guidance as to improve the workplace environment. This survey is to be answered anonymously.

Ratings

Please give your assessment of Bits and Bytes, Inc. on the following matters, by circling one of the numbers from one to ten (one being awful, and ten being great)

1. Compensation to employees: 1 2 3 4 5

2. Opportunity for advancement: 1 2 3 4 5

3. Benefits: 1 2 3 4 5

4. Friendly work environment: 1 2 3 4 5

5. Training: 1 2 3 4 5

6. Supervision: 1 2 3 4 5

7. Culture: 12 3 4 5

8. J ob security: 1 2 3 4 5

9. Flexibility in performing job: 1 2 3 4 5

10. Overall satisfaction with job: 1 2 3 4 5

Analysis

• Each intervention was applied over a three month time span.• At the end of the three month period, the Employee Morale Survey was

administered again to gauge improvement in morale amongst each of the departments.

• The ending results were compared to the initial results and any changes in morale were recorded and analyzed.

Bibliography

Bushe, G. R., & Kassam, A. F. (2005, June). When Is Appreciative Inquiry Transformational? A Meta-Case Analysis [Electronic version]. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41 (2), pp. 161-181.

Cooperrider, D. L., & Whitney, D. K. (2005). Appreciative inquiry: A positive revolution in change [Electronic version]. Retrieved February 16, 2009 from http://www.primarygoals.org/Readings/AppreciativeInquiry/PosRevInChange.pdf

Davis, C. (n.d.). Appreciative Inquiry - A tool for transformational learning [Electronic version]. Faculty Guidebook, 355-358. Retrieved February 16, 2009 from https://www.madison.tec.wi.us/cetl/resources/archive/efgb/pdf/3/3_2_4.pdf

Hall, J., & Hammond, S. (1998). What is appreciative inquiry [Electronic version]. Inner Edge Newsletter, 1-10. Retrieved February 16, 2009 from http://www.gaacademiccoach.com/Research/Appreciative%20Inquiry%20Hammond%20and%20Hall.pdf

Miller, M. G., Fitzgerald, S. P., Murrell, K. L., Preston, J., & Ambekar, R. (2005). Appreciative inquiry in building a transcultural strategic alliance. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41(1), 91-110. doi:10.1177/0021886304273060

Peelle III, H. E. (2006). Appreciative inquiry and creative problem solving in cross-functional teams. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(4), 447-467. doi:10.1177/0021886306292479

Thapar, M. (2005, December 3). Use this Form to Evaluate Your Employees or Yourself. Retrieved April 7, 2009, from http://ezinearticles.com/?Use-this-Form-to-Evaluate-Your-Employees-or-Yourself&id=106688

In Conclusion

Thank you for your time and attention.

Questions?

[email protected]