Appreciative inquiry (AI) method was first introduced by David Cooperrider and Diana Whitney in 1987. AI is a innovative method for organizational development and change management (Lehtimäki, Kujala & Thatchenkery, 2013; Cooperrider & Whitney, 2005, 6). Appreciation is about valuing things, rather than judging them and it aims to expand the strengths rather than eliminate the problems (Watkins, Mohr & Kelly, 2011, 8).
Inquiry in its simplicity is initiating a thinking process within individuals and groups by asking questions (Grape, 2003, 41). The aim of the method is to engage the members of the organization into positive conversation and to find the things that work for the organization and then try to enhance them even further (Lehtimäki, Kujala &
Thatchenkery, 2013; Reed, 2007; Watkins, Mohr & Kelly, 2011).
The previous models for organizational development have focused on finding the problems within the organization and on how to avoid those problems in the future.
Problem solving models often lead into negative organizational culture in which people are trying to find who to blame for the problems (Egan & Lancaster 2005). The fear of failure may lead into more reserved working environment and cause lack of innovations since the employees are focused on avoiding the mistakes. (Grape, 2003, 33-34). A company must pay attention on what to focus on, if it intends to be successful. If a company focuses solely on problem solving, there is a risk that they do not pay enough attention on developing their know-how and their core processes. This is why one of the
main ideas in appreciative inquiry is that organizations change in the direction in which they inquire. Organization that tries to find problems, will find problems, 5 but an organization that tries to find what is good and what works, will find more good things and can use these to build a better future (Cooperrider & Whitney, 2005, 9-10).
Scientists have been able to prove that creating a positive environment and acknowledging the strengths within the employees have had positive effects on both the employee´s and organizations outcomes (Lehtimäki & al. 2013). Positive atmosphere is connected to the employee´s willingness to be more open to new ideas which leads into more creative and innovative working environment (Grape, 2003, 57). Lehtimäki, Kujala and Thatchenkery (2013) also state that people within the organization create the organization with the way they operate and communicate with each other. With positive atmosphere the employees can learn from each other which creates even more opportunities for organizational development. With AI method the development ideas come from within the organization, instead of coming from outside. This way there is less resistance to change (Egan & Lancaster 2005, 35; van der Haar & Hosking 2004).
The previous models for organizational development have focused on what has happened in the past where as appreciative inquiry focuses on what is good now and how to improve those qualities even more in the future. Lehtimäki & al. (2013) have proven that focusing on the future helps to see challenging situations in a more positive manner.
Appreciative inquiry can be used for any kind of organization, state, community, group or a non-profit organization that desires to enhance its operations in a positive manner. It has been used a lot in healthcare sector and business leaders all over the world are starting to realize the potential of using a positive approach instead of just solving problems (van der Haar & Hosking 2004, 204). Appreciative inquiry can be applied in many different situations from changing the organizational culture, organizational renewal, corporate fusions and as a tool for strategic renewal (Lehtimäki & al. 2013).
Appreciative inquiry is a narrative-based method which starts by engaging all members of an organization in a set of in-depth interviews about the strengths, resources and capabilities that the organization has (Cooperrider & Whitney 2005, 15). People are asked to envision the best possible future for the organization and from there people are asked to craft propositions of how those dreams can be reached. The final stage involves the action plan to carry out the steps needed to reach the desired future goal. This process is called the 4-D cycle or the four steps of AI (Cooperrider & Whitney 2005, 15;
Watkins, Mohr & Kelly 2011, 41).
Figure 1. The 4-D model by Cooperrider & Whitney 2005, 16.
The 4-D circle can be informal such as a conversation with a friend or a colleague, or a formal process that involves all stakeholders in the organization (Watkins, Mohr & Kelly 2011, 99). The appreciative inquiry process doesn´t have a specific formula and every
Topic choice of
Discovecy Appreciating
"The best of what is"
Dream Envisioning
"What could be"
Design Constructing
Co-"What should be"
Destiny Sustaining
"What will be"
conversation is designed for the needed purpose. Mostly the conversations follow the 4-D model as shown in the figure 1 (Coopperrider & Whitney 2005, 15).
In the first step of the 4-D model, Discovery, the stakeholders are mobilized and engaged into conversation about the strengths and best practices. At this stage the key is to identify what is best in the current and previous actions. In the second step, Dream, the goal is to create a result-oriented vision and to discovered potential for future success.
The third step is Design in which the action plans to reach the desired dream is made. In the final step, Destiny, the idea is to strengthen the affirmative capability of the whole system, build hope and sustain momentum for the ongoing change and high performance (Cooperrider & Whitney 2005, 16).
The 4-D model starts with choosing the topic. The topics should be affirmative since the topics become the agenda for learning, knowledge sharing and action in the organization (Reed 2007, 56). The selected topics determine how the 4-D model should be used and how the questions for the interview should be formed. Holma, Lehtimäki and Thatchenkery (2017, 26) address the topics as life-giving forces (LGFs) or core values of the organization. The topics should be chosen so that the selection process involves a cross section of people from throughout the organization. The topics come from preliminary interviews into the organization at its best. These preliminary interviews should be held so that people can raise topics that will then be reframed into affirmative topics for the inquiry (Cooperrider & Whitney 2005, 17).
Appreciative inquiry has been criticized to focus only on sharing positive experiences.
This has been seen harmful since the members of the organization do not have a possibility to address the negative thoughts. Meaningful and important conversations might not happen if people are forced to suffocate their negative feelings (Bushe 2011, 87-88). There has been debate about whether or not it is possible to create positive images about the future if the challenges of the past and present have not been addressed (Egan & Lancaster 2005). Being solely positive might also diminish the transparency and openness of the processes since researchers have noticed that being overly positive all the time has turned into negativity and that people have found it to be tedious and forced (van der Haar & Hosking 2004).
One possible problem with AI method is that the focus group discussions focus a lot on finding a mutual understanding between the participants and everyone might not be able to raise their opinions in order to avoid conflicts. This is why conflicts and differences of opinion should not be consciously avoided but they should be addressed and considered as learning opportunities (van der Haar & Hosking 2004). Van der Haar & Hosking (2004) also emphasize that appreciative inquiry is not a monologue but differences of opinions should be addressed appreciatively.
Van der Haar & Hosking also state that it is important to remember that appreciative inquiry should not be considered only as a research method but as an ongoing process of changing the employee´s ways of thinking and the ways of doing things. Otherwise it might lead into seeing the problems in a new light but not actually help to solve them, in which case the change won´t be efficient and long lasting (van der Haar & Hosking 2004;
Bushe 2011; Egan & Lancaster 2005).
2.4 Communication
Communication plays an important role in creating the organizational culture in any organization (Rayudu, 2010, 4). In volunteer organizations communication has a vital role in creating the mutual understanding and the sense of cohesion among the volunteers (MacNeela, 2008). It is in the nature of volunteering that the reward for volunteering is not the salary one gets at the end of each month, but the feeling of belonging to a group, working for the common good and having fun with like-minded people (Clary, Snyder &
Stukas, 1996). Therefore how things are communicated within the organization has a huge impact on the volunteer motivation and people´s willingness to volunteer (Frey &
Goette, 1999). People exchange information through communication and it a way of creating social constructivism (Kukla, 2013, 23-24). In social constructivism the truth is created by the people within the organization and the way they conceive it (van der Haar
& Hosking, 2004). Appreciative communication creates an environment where people communicate often and freely and new ideas welcomed and wanted (van der Haar &
Hosking, 2004). The aim is to create a positive way of speaking throughout the whole
organization and by doing so focus on the strengths of the organization (Lehtimäki et al., 2013).
Communication is not just about how people talk to each other, part of communication is also the way we listen to each other and how we communicate non-verbally through our expressions and bodies (Rayudu, 2010; Miller, 2007). Speaking respectfully and non-offensively is equally important than making eye contact and not interrupting others.
Written communication, such as instructions, can have a vital role in distributing the information throughout the whole organization (Miller, 2007). It is not all the same how we communicate, since if the message is not understood the same way as the communicator wanted, the receiver is not likely to act as the communicator had originally wanted (Rayudu, 2010, 15-16).
Communication is important in day-to-day actions, but it becomes even more vital when used in a change management setting (Miller, 2007). A change is often seen as a scary and negative thing and if it is communicated poorly or there is a lack of information from the management side, people may easily feel resistant to change (Gilley, Gilley &
McMillan, 2009). It is important to communicate clearly and effectively so that the communication motivates people to act (Gilley et al. 2009, 80). When an organization has a culture of open communication and trust, people can give feedback freely which helps to implement the change (Chreim, 2002). It is important that the communication is two-way, meaning that the organization members can ask questions and raise concerns if they have any. This way communication can act as a motivational tool as well (Gilley et al.
2009; Chreim, 2002). When communicating change it is important that there is face-to-face communication and it is better to communicate “too much” rather than not communicating enough (Zorn, Page & Cheney, 2000).
These days organizations have many digital platforms to distribute knowledge and information and the bigger the organization is, usually the role of these platforms is higher since face-to-face communication is not always possible (Rayudu, 2010, 351).
Bigger companies have more formal channels for communicating were as volunteer organizations and other smaller organizations may use social media channels for communication purposes. Since the smaller organizations are usually driven to use the
less expensive communication sites, the sites are not designed for effective communication purposes and therefore there is a risk of losing information in the process (Aula & Jokinen, 2007). Especially when organization uses instant messages and different types of messengers to communicate, the communication can easily become fragmented and important information can get lost in the message flow (Aula & Jokinen, 2007). Therefore it is important that organizations do not rely solely on digital and online communication in their inner communication.
2.5 Theoretical framework in this study
Volunteering by its nature differs fundamentally from traditional business operations, since the organization members are not bound to the organization by employee employer relationship, where the time spent at work is compensated by salary. The time and emotional commitment the volunteers put in for the volunteer organization make the volunteering personal and meaningful for the volunteers (Clary, Snyder & Stukas, 1996).
Often also the leaders of a volunteer organization are volunteers themselves. These reasons often mean that volunteer organizations are run less professionally and therefore also the organizational development is usually more reacting to problems instead of focusing on actively innovating and planning for the future (Finkelstein, 2008; Alfes, Shantz & Saksida, 2015). This phenomenon can be seen especially in smaller volunteer organizations where the same small group of people is responsible for all the day-to-day operations as well as the management side. If an organization wants to succeed in today´s markets and ensure its prerequisite for operation by gaining sponsors and supporters, the organization has to stand out from its competitors (Alfes et al., 2015; Stebbins &
Graham, 2004). For this reason the organizational development should not be just reacting to problems since problem solving is always fundamentally negative approach and can easily lead into creating tension between the operative people and finding who to blame for the problems. To avoid that type of situation, it would be better to focus on developing the organization through positive qualities. Appreciative inquiry creates a good basis for this approach.
Based on the previous studies the organizational renewal of volunteer organizations should be examined through a new perspective, so that the organizations would not only focus on solving problems, but look actively to the future and find change through positive matters. Since volunteering leans heavily on the idea that the volunteers need to enjoy what they are doing to get the satisfaction, without which they might stop volunteering all together, it is extremely important that the organizational development does not create negative feelings and that the possible negative feelings that the volunteers have are addressed properly and in a right way (Stebbins & Graham, 2004).
In a positive approach all the members of the organization can get their voice heard, which in turn consolidates person’s commitment to the organization and to its goals.
For this reason the theoretical framework of my study will be limited to volunteer organization development with the means of appreciative inquiry, so that the organization could offer such operational environment that volunteering would be rewarding for all the organization members. This way the organization will be able to ensure their future success by making sure that the volunteers are excited about their tasks and want to give out their time for the organization.
Figure 2. The theoretical framework of my study.
Appreciative Inquiry
Organizational Development
Communication
Increasing the feeling of
reward
Communication is important for all organizations, but it plays a vital role especially in a volunteer organization where it is important that the volunteers share a common vision on where the organization is going and work together to get there. This idea is based on social constructivism in which the truth is created by the people within the organization and the way they conceive it (van der Haar & Hosking, 2004). Since there are no employee-employer relationships, communication plays a huge role on personal relationships between the volunteers and if the communication does not work it has a direct impact on how the volunteers perceive the volunteering experience (Wilson, 2000;
Watt, 2003). For them to continue volunteering it has to be fun for them and for that reason the communication has to work between the volunteers. Therefore I wanted to include communication as a part of my theoretical background since my aim is to study how volunteering can be made more rewarding.
3 METHODOLOGY
I chose to use qualitative method for my research since I felt that I would get more in-depth information by conducting interviews rather that doing a quantitative questionnaire.
I chose to utilize focus group interviews as my research method since focus group interviews support the appreciative approach and therefore are most likely to give me new insight on my topic.
3.1 Focus group interviews
Jan Reed (2007) explains that the key feature of appreciative inquiry is that it involves participation from a range of people throughout the organization. The people are asked to explore the environment around them. The AI research is not something that the researchers do in isolation; it requires the help and perspectives of others (Reed 2007, 91;
Cooperridder & Whitney 2005).
Cooperrider, Stavros and Whitney (2008) state that it is best to do as many interviews as possible since it is best to involve all relevant and affected parties in any change effort.
AI method also makes it easy to engage everyone within the change process (Cooperrider, Stavros & Whitney 2008, 111; Grape 2003, 67). Appreciative inquiry interviews can be done by interviewing each individual separately or by using focus group interviews. Participant observation is also used to gather the data (Cooperrider, Stavros & Whitney 2008, 111).
The idea behind AI approach is that the researcher encourages the members of the organization to discuss the best policies that the company has and to find the potential to enhance them even further (Behera, Thatchenkery &Kenney 2008). Focus groups are widely used in qualitative research studies (Walle 2015, 59). The idea of focus groups is to allow participants to share knowledge and personal experiences in order to create new insights about the topic (Reid & Reid 2005). For this reason focus group interviews are a suitable method for appreciative inquiry research.
Conducting a group research rather than an individual setting allows observations of how and why individuals accept or reject others´ ideas. When interaction between a group is stimulated, the group will be able to provide more information than individual interviews would provide (Steward & Shamdasani 2014, 5). Eriksson & Kovalainen (2016, 175) state that the focus group interviews most commonly have two to ten participants. Walle (2015) on the other hand suggests that eight to twelve participants would be ideal group size. The group should be small enough so that synergy can be found within the group but large enough to provide variable insights (Walle 2015, 67).
My role in the interviews, aside from being the researcher, was to be the facilitator for the conversation. As a facilitator I tried to activate the groups to talk to each other from the given topics. I emphasized the informality of the conversations so that I was able to encourage all the participants to speak freely. I also tried to make sure that all the participants got to raise their opinion. I decided to create somewhat homogenous groups so that all the participants would feel comfortable to speak freely. If the members of the group are not comfortable and open to conversation, it can jeopardize the outcomes of the research since I will not be able to gather enough adequate data (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2016). However, I felt that the group dynamics worked well and that I was able to gather enough good quality data.
3.2 Data collection
Successful data collection starts with identifying who the key stakeholders are in the organization. Typically they are people who have interest in and a strong impact on the organization´s future and growth possibilities. These are the people who have valuable insights into the selected topic (Cooperrider, Stavros & Whitney 2008, 206).
Individual and intrapersonal differences include demographic, physical and personality characteristics. Each individual´s unique combination of intrapersonal characters disposes the person to certain behavioral modes in group situations. This affects how the other group members react to the person (Kitzinger 1994; Steward & Shamdasani 2014, 18).