Helen
Spector, Ray Bradburn, Susan Dupre
Purpose:
To introduce the concepts of Appreciative Inquiry to the Future Search
Network Community
To speculate on the places where Ai might increase the power of the
Future Search structures and tasks
To share preliminary results of experiments we have conducted so far
To invite questions, dialogue, and more experiments
Basic
introduction to Appreciative Inquiry
Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is both an intervention philosophy and an
intervention practice. At the practice level AI is a collaborative approach
to seeking, identifying and enhancing the life-giving forces which are
present when a system is performing optimally in human, economic and
organizational terms. As such it is a whole systems, multi-phase, rapid
approach to transforming human systems (organizations, teams, families,
relationships, etc.)
At the philosophical level, AI is an orientation or stance about knowing
and understanding the world, and provides a new "golf bag
into which we can fit our organization development "clubs
such as strategic planning, organization structure redesign, team building,
project and performance evaluation, coaching, diversity work, community
development work, family and interpersonal relations, etc.
AI as an organizational practice, has been developed over the past 10
years by a number of folks, and is principally associated with David
Cooperrider at the Weatherhead School of Management at Case-Western
Reserve University in Cleveland. AI takes as its theoretical framework
Social Constructionism, which holds (at a very oversimplified level)
that we construct our reality in social interaction and conversation,
and that reality does not exist in any essential or objective and fundamental
form waiting to be discovered. AI also holds that energy follows attention
(a very Aikido principle), that we get more of what we put energy into,
and that we can choose what we pay attention to.
AI also draws our attention to "initial conditions, because
it holds that the first question is FATEFULmeaning that what we
inquire into first sets the direction for the rest of the inquiry and
determines where our attention and energy will go. If we inquire into
what is broken, we will find/get more problems, and we all know that
we are trained to be superb problem finders and problem solvers. However,
if we inquire into what is working, we can develop a deep understanding
of what supports us at our best, and then we will get more of that.
The basic AI practice approach is based in story as the conveyer of
meaning and as the principal means of gathering data about our experience.
We can inquire into anything, and we focus the inquiry on our best experiences.
This enables us to then inquire into what supported those experiences
and what we can learn from them that has relevance for our future.
AI is very versatile. You can use it to structure an entire whole-systems
change intervention. You can also use it to set the tone of a conversation
or an event. In this article, we will suggest a variety of places within
the process of developing and conducting a Future Search where AI can
have a positive effect on the outcomes. We will give examples from our
own experiments, where we have them, and we hope our readers will engage
with us and each other in exploring the possibilities presented by the
use of AI and Future Search together.
Future Search from an AI perspective:
In the large-systems approach using AI (called the 4-D ModelLarry,
can we put in one or 2 references for people who want to find out more
about AI?) the phases or steps are Discovery, Dream, Design, and Destiny.
In most material describing the Dream phase, where the process involves
a large group, many times they will refer to Future Search as the method
of choice for developing the dream. Thus Future Search as a whole systems
visioning approach is already part of the larger AI process.
We have been talking about AI for the past 9 months at the West Coast
Future Search Network meetings, and some of us have used it experimentally
in client settings and Future Search conferences we have conducted during
that time. We have found the discussions exciting, and the client/conference
results rewarding. So here goes.
The examples below come from 3 different situations and 3 different
FSC practitioners:
The
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) opted for a Future
Search Conference to address a much-needed improvement of its external
and internal customer service. A conference involving some 50 staff
plus 30 external stakeholders and 10 planning team members was held
after a 10-week planning and preparation phase. The 10 planning team
members served first as conference staff and then as action team members.
Ray Redburn
Mariposa County lies just outside of Yosemite National Park.
Several years ago when floods closed many local roadways the County
experienced a rude awakening regarding their dependency on the Park.
This prompted a local banker to gather a group of citizens to begin
a visioning and planning effort. A Future Search conference was considered
however the planning group wanted to invite and engage all Mariposa
citizens. This led to a design of multiple meetings over a four-month
period which in many ways replicated a Future Search - the past, present,
future and planning. Susan Dupre
Diocese of OhioLeadership Summit to deepen the Bishops
vision. They assembled 125 participants from across the diocese, not
balanced around stakeholder designations. The conference was held over
3 days, using the basic structure of a Future Search, but taking each
task from an appreciative stance. Planning group consisted of diocesan
staff and Bishops. The process of taking the vision out and engaging
others in the diocese about what it means for them, continues in the
diocese. Helen Spector
1. During the planning process:
Many times we encounter clients who are so focused on the negative or
problematic aspects of their situations that they can hardly imagine any
other future. Using AI during work with the Planning Group can help them
envision the possibility of positive outcomes and generate a different
kind of energy to carry the planning through.
An example of this occurred in the Diocese of Ohio, where the initial
discussion focused on all the ways the outcomes of the conference would
produce more problems than they had already. Shifting to an appreciative
stance turned their attention to imagining the best possible outcomes
they might experience from the conference. This generated incredible energy
for going forward in ways that they had not be able to imagine before.
The process of a planning group can be powerfully affected by beginning
with AI. The Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlifes (ODFW) planning
teams firsts moments were AI interviews that led them to declare
the kind of team they wanted to be. They became a team that mirrored their
originally declared attributes. Better yet, they continued to be a highly
effective and high performing team throughout the pre-conference phase
and at the conference.
Some groups want to involve people in the process ahead of time, before
the actual conference occurs. The rationale is twofoldthat more
input can be brought to bear in the conference, and that this builds a
more receptive "audience for the conference outcomes, when
literally the whole system cannot come to the conference. AI interviews
or group conversations in advance allow the broader system to participate,
and provide positive input and hopes for the actual conference participants
to consider as they come together.
Example from Mariposa: The first meetings were held on two nights in various
locations around the County. To set the tone for the entire four months
journey, to tap peoples positive experiences with the County and
to give people a concrete way of inviting others not at one of these first
meetings into the process, AI was used. Individuals were asked to interview
one another, taking notes, using a standard AI format. The notes were
collected and people were asked to interview at least three other neighbors,
colleagues, or friends. Data didnt pour in, however, there was a
visible ripple as people around the County started talking about why they
love living in Mariposa and the effect captured some new people for the
next round of meetings.
Example from Dio of Ohio: We used AI story-gathering formats for groups
of clergy, Commissions and Committees and congregations around the Diocese.
Over 600 people took part, and the data was translated into 3 large wall
murals by a graphic facilitator. These greeted people at the Summit when
they arrived, set a positive tone, and served as a constant reminder that
the participants were part of something much larger than themselves.
The ODFW process provided several opportunities for pre-conference involvement
by the approximately 1000 staff members. A brief survey was made available
to all employees via web page as were in person dialogue opportunities.
Members of the planning team partnered with managers throughout the state
to get in front of as many work groups as possible. Listening to staff
was the principal aim of this effort. A secondary aim was to prompt appreciate
inquiry into ODFWs customer service.
2.
Opening the conference:
Introductions from an appreciative perspective set a tone of positive
possibility and can impact the range of experiences people consider
during the tasks which follow (time lines, mind maps, etc.) It probably
takes more time than we usually plan, to have pairs interview each other
appreciatively and then introduce their partner to the group based on
what they heard.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife: Introductions within the groups
began with the participants "homework. The letter of
invitation instructed each participant to bring two things to the conference:
two different stories of outstanding customer service to people inside
or outside an organization. So the conference began appreciatively with
Mixed groups introductions. Group members introduced themselves by saying
who they were and telling one of their two stories about great customer
service. Later when people shifted to working in stakeholder groups,
they again introduced themselves in terms of their second favorite customer
service story.
Example from Dio Ohio: We did not have the standard mixed groups; rather
we wanted people to work with people they did not know well, to build
relationships and have conversations that they would not ordinarily
experience throughout the conference. SO we had people pair up for initial
introductory stories with people they did not know, and then form larger
groups (4 pairs) also with people they did not know. This generated
tremendous energy and openness that set a precedent for the rest of
the conference.
3.
Analysis of the Past
Time Lines Posting: The milestones that people put on the Conference
Task and Society time lines tend to fall on the negative or catastrophic
side than the positive and generative side of the spectrum. When we
have opened with appreciative interviews, we have noticed some increase
in balance with more generative or positive milestones posted.
Time Lines Analysis: An alternate set of questions to use for organizing
the analysis can be looking for opportunities for change that people
see in the data posted on the time lines. Where the conference has already
devoted more time to introductions, this task may no longer need to
serve the same deep getting-to-know-who-is-in-the-room purpose. This
would not be a good idea, however, it the system is very diverse and
does not have some sense of itself as a system.
ODFW: The four assignments given to the mixed groups analysis of the
time lines were as follows:
A PersonalTell a story about the data in terms of who we are and
what we bring to the conferences task
B. Global Tell the story you find in the data, noting the events that
have shaped who we are today.
C. ODFW Customer Service: Tell us the story in the data and note what
we care about that brings us here to work on our future
D. All Three Time Lines: What patterns and trends for all eras and all
three time lines?
Diocese of Ohio: With 125 people in one conference, we had 12 groups
of 8, we needed a way to have groups share their analysis without sitting
through endless reports. We asked each group to analyze at 1 of the
4 time lines, identify 4 opportunities or challenges for the diocese,
and post them on large pieces of paper (11x17) on the time line itself.
This is, in a way, collapsing the mind-map into the time lines. We later
used these opportunities/challenges as the basis for a second round
of story-telling about the great things that are happening in the diocese,
and what people wish for in particular areas.
4.
PRESENT TRENDS:
In the analysis of mindmap trends , we have experimented with the question
we ask people to use in choosing where to put their dots. We have begun
asking them to focused on opportunities for "us to make a
difference, or areas where we might want to focus our energy (since
energy follows attention and we get more of what we give energy to.)
Stakeholder trendswhat were doing and what we would like
to be doingopportunities for deepening our understanding with
stories, and not just "analytical approaches to trends.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife: The significant AI tilt here
asked the stakeholder group to make the scaled down version of the mind
map as usual. But it then instructed them to show the trends that represent
the greatest opportunity and to add trends that did not appear but which
they saw as important.
5.
PROUDS AND SORRIES:
Many of us find that the brainstorming of Prouds and Sorries leaves
the groups with a fairly superficial understanding and while the emotional
shift may take place from the "owning, we leave a great deal
of information behind as we move to imagining the future. Using AI with
this task provides opportunities for telling stories about our best
experiences and our greatest disappointments. We can use stories in
the small groups or in the reports out, to communicate these important
experiences more robustly and fully. (Prouds and Sorries from an appreciative
stance.)
ODFW Just had groups select a proudest proud and sorriest sorry and
tell a story about each.
6. POSSIBLE NEW TASK:
Introducing novelty into the system directlyWe have experimented
with asking people to tell stories of what are others doing elsewhere
that really excites them. This task helps them to understand that there
are others wrestling with the same issues and finding different solutions.
It also primes the pump with new ideas from other places as well as
with our own best experiences and wishes.
Diocese of Ohio: This exercise allowed people to bring into the conversation
ideas that they would not have had a space for in a traditional future
search format, unless it came in under the guise of "what we wold
like to be doing in the Stakeholder trends analysis. It built
an extra measure of excitement, as people shared stories of other places
that they would like to see happen in their church.
7. IDEAL FUTURE PRESENTATIONS
ODFW: This was done per the standard instructions. But a noteworthy
AI dimension was added during the presentations. Participants had a
worksheet entitled "Listening for Ideal FuturesImportant
Themes Its stated purpose was to discover the Common Ground
desired by the conference. Participants were instructed to capture two
kinds of information from each groups presentation:
1. What the presenting group found most exciting and
2. What the participant as observer would have wished for in that scenario
Mariposa County: In the Mariposa project described above the third meetings
purpose was to focus on the present and future. Unlike previous evening
meetings in scattered places around the County, this meeting was a full
day scheduled at the local Fair Grounds. Approximately 70 people gathered
to create their preferred future. Using general themes from the previous
interviews another interview protocol was developed that focused people
on the future that they wanted for Mariposa. Pairs conducted interviews
and then shared in groups of eight. Following the small group sharing
the whole group gathered in a large semi-circle around a large blank
mural on the wall. People were asked to share something from their small
group that someone else said that excited or moved them. One after another
people rose to share rich stories and hopes for their community. As
people spoke a graphic recorder (Leslie Salmon) drew a beautiful mural
depicting their future. (This artifact has been laminated and has made
its rounds to various locations around the County - Burger King,
the County Fair, the bank.) The challenge was to take this forth and
engage yet MORE people in the community for the next step - planning.
8.
COMMON G ROUND versus COSMIC "YES!:
After the Desired Future Presentations, consider that all of what
we have seen and heard could be and will be part of the future that
these people will create. How does this set the stage differently for
the reality dialogue? It keeps everything in the future vision, and
does not force our common ground statements to such a high level of
abstraction that people can no longer find themselves in the statements.
Then they do not need to fight their way back into the picture in the
REALITY DIALOGUE. They can consider what parts of the future they want
to support with their energy, and let others support what energizes
them, just as we know people will do after the conference.
Oregon DFWUsed Mind Mapping of what participants heard in the
desired futures This "Vision Map yielded a common picture
of the future with all the richness of the presentations and none of
the compromises that normally get made in our development of common
ground. This approach also, served to keep the energy at the large group
level. In the 50 or so FSC events we have participated in (collectively)
we have seen a pattern of fragmentation of the powerful energy generated
up to and through the future scenarios. That fragmentation of the whole
conference energy always occurred during the so-called "Reality
Dialogue. The difference between the energy of this conference
and all others was considerable and it seemed to carry positively through
to the last moment of the conference.
Diocese of OhioOvernight the stories of what makes this a Diocese
that works was turned into a graphic including themes or specifics from
all of the 21 stories told in the Ideal Future presentation. This formed
the basis for people to discuss what they usually would during the Reality
Dialogue. People continued to hold up their particular passions, but
had created in themselves noticeably more "space for the
interests and passions of others. IT set the stage for the next activity,
which in this conference was Possibility Statements, not action plans
per se.
9. ACTION PLANNING:
Provocative Propositions based on what people want to pursue, or
in general groups in support of the vision as a whole serve to provide
a solid base for action planning and in some ways deepen the articulated
vision much better than we generally see in a Future Search Action Planning
round. It shifts the action planning group task work to connecting,
understanding their common purpose and getting their first meeting date
established.
ODFW-- Action Planning was done with an Open Space format. What was
notable here was that all themes identified by the whole conference
had action teams form around them. In my 14 previous Future Search Conferences,
I had never seen this occur. There had always been several themes that
remained unworked. The difference here was the energy of the whole conference
was not subopitmized at the level of the groups as had occurred at previous
conferences not using the AI enhancements.
Diocese of OhioWe formed back into the original groups and people
developed strong, and in some cases poetic statements that captured
the vision they wanted for their diocese. This deepening of vision was
the focus of the conference, and these statements were incredibly moving.
While overlapping, they did not duplicate each other, but together built
a robust and action-able vision for Diocesan Leadership to take forward.
10.
INDIVIDUAL COMMITMENTS:
These take action on the vision to the individual level, and allow those
who want to work in the same arena to find each other. While these are
not an AI innovation, they anchor the energy generated the entire conference
back into the individuals before they leave.
ODFW--Participants sat in a huge 90-person oval and passed the microphone
as each person declared one commitment they were making.
Diocese of OhioParticipants sat in a single circle and shared
their individual commitments. They had developed them after sharing
in pairs what they appreciated most about the conference and what they
wished would happen as a result of the conference. We asked them to
organize themselves in the circle by regions (geographically) so they
could connect further in their actions with those who are located close
to them. The result was very moving. Commitment cards were turned in
as part of the Offertory during the closing prayer service celebration.
11.
CLOSING COMMENTS
ODFW--Each participant called out a one word comment on the conference.
These were overwhelmingly positive, enthusiastic, and encouraging.