UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies Business School
APPRECIATIVE LEAN THINKING IN SERVICE DEVELOPMENT
Master’s Thesis, Health and Business Katja Reinikka (282978)
23 April 2018
Abstract
UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND Faculty
Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies
Department Business School Author
Katja Reinikka
Supervisor Hanna Lehtimäki Title
Appreciative lean thinking in service development
Main subject
Health and Business
Level
Master’s thesis
Date
23 April 2018
Number of pages 65 + 2
The purpose of this thesis is to study lean service development and the contribution of appreciative inquiry to lean thinking in service development context. In the study, the positive core and the life-giving forces of the case organisation are identified and explored in relation to the ongoing innovation and new service development practices of the organisation. By introducing appreciative inquiry to the lean case organisation, I will generate knowledge about how strength-based approach can enhance lean thinking in the case company and how it should be implemented.
The case organisation of the study is a Finnish company operating in the field of sport, wellbeing and education.
The company has recently started to implement lean thinking in their operations and is yet in the middle of the process. The research is conducted using appreciative inquiry by organising a workshop for the executive board and two semi-structured focus group interviews for the employees of the case organisation. The workshop and its data facilitate the focus group interviews and forming the interview questions. After the data collection, a content analysis and an appreciative inquiry matrix combining the appreciative approach and the goals of lean are constructed. Based on the theoretical framework and the empirical evidence, the concept of appreciative lean thinking is introduced and recommendations for the implementation of appreciative lean thinking in the case organisation are presented.
The research question of the study is “How does appreciative inquiry contribute to lean thinking in service development context?” As a theoretical contribution, this thesis introduces a new concept, appreciative lean thinking, that has not been studied in previous literature. The practical contribution of the study is to provide suggestions for the case organisation for combining appreciative approach to lean thinking in their new service development and innovation.
The key results and recommendations for the case organisation provide suggestions and advice on how to implement appreciative lean thinking in service development. The case organisation is recommended to implement lean in their organisation as a philosophy and not as a strategy. Also, the organisation is advised not to create a formalised NSD process but instead to focus on market acuity and implementing appreciative lean thinking.
The topic of the research was formulated to meet the case organisation’s needs. Even though the suggestions are mainly directed to the case organisation, some ideas are worth implementing or further investigated in similar organisations and contexts.
Key words
Lean thinking, appreciative inquiry, new service development, appreciative lean thinking
Tiivistelmä
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO Tiedekunta
Yhteiskuntatieteiden ja kauppatieteiden tiedekunta
Yksikkö
Kauppatieteiden laitos Tekijä
Katja Reinikka
Ohjaaja
Hanna Lehtimäki Työn nimi
Arvostava lean-ajattelu palvelukehityksessä
Pääaine
Health and Business
Työn laji Pro Gradu
Aika 23.4.2018
Sivuja 65 + 2
Pro gradu –tutkielman tavoitteena on tarkastella palveluiden kehittämistä lean-ajattelua hyödyntäen sekä arvostavan kehittämisen myötävaikutusta lean-ajatteluun palvelukehityksen kontekstissa. Tutkielmassa organisaation positiivinen ydin on tunnistettu sekä tutkittu suhteessa organisaation nykyisiin innovointi- ja palvelukehitystapoihin. Soveltamalla arvostavan kehittämisen mallia leanissa organisaatiossa, tuotan tutkimuksellani lisätietoa ja syvempää ymmärrystä vahvuuksiin ja arvostukseen pohjautuvasta lähestymistavasta ja myötävaikutuksesta lean-ajatteluun. Samalla selvitän, miten malli tulisi ottaa käyttöön kohdeyrityksessä.
Tutkimuksen kohdeyrityksenä on suomalainen urheilu-, hyvinvointi- ja koulutusalan yritys. Yritys on ottanut lean-toimintamallin käyttöönsä hiljattain ja mallin implementointiprosessi on edelleen käynnissä. Tutkimus toteutetaan arvostavan kehittämisen metodia hyödyntäen järjestämällä organisaation johtoryhmälle yksi työpaja- tilaisuus sekä organisaation henkilöstölle kaksi puolistrukturoitua fokusryhmähaastattelua. Työpaja ja siitä kerätyt havainnot ohjaavat fokusryhmähaastatteluja sekä kysymyspatteriston valmistelua. Aineiston keräämisen jälkeen litteroiduista haastatteluista muodostetaan sisältöanalyysi sekä arvostavan kehittämisen matriisi, joka yhdistää organisaation ydinarvot sekä lean-ajattelun tavoitteet. Teoreettisen viitekehyksen ja empiirisen aineiston pohjalta tutkielmassa esitellään arvostavan lean-ajattelun käsite sekä kyseisen mallin implementointiin liittyviä suosituksia kohdeyrityksessä.
Työn tutkimuskysymys on ”miten arvostava kehittäminen myötävaikuttaa lean-ajatteluun palvelukehittämisen kontekstissa?” Tutkimuksen teoreettinen myötävaikutus keskittyy uuden konseptin, arvostavan lean-ajattelun, luontiin ja esittelyyn. Kyseisestä konseptista ei ole aiempia tutkimuksia. Tutkimuksen käytännön panos puolestaan liittyy yritykselle tuotettuihin suosituksiin arvostavan kehittämisen ja lean-ajattelun yhdistämisestä uusien palveluiden kehittämisessä sekä innovoinnissa.
Tulokset ja suositukset tarjoavat kohdeorganisaatiolle neuvoja ja ohjeita arvostavan lean-ajattelun implementointiin palvelukehittämisessä. Kohdeyritystä kehotetaan implementoimaan lean-ajattelu toimintaansa filosofiana eikä strategiana. Tulosten perusteella organisaatiota ei suositella luomaan konkreettista uuden palvelun kehittämisen prosessia vaan kehotetaan keskittymään markkinatietouden ja –ymmärryksen kasvattamiseen sekä arvostavan lean-ajattelun jalostamiseen organisaatiossa.
Tutkimuksen aihe on muotoiltu yhdessä kohdeyrityksen kanssa vastaamaan heidän tarpeitaan. Vaikka työn suositukset ovat pääasiallisesti kohdistettu kyseiselle organisaatiolle, osa ideoista on hyödynnettävissä ja tutkittavissa samankaltaisissa organisaatioissa tai konteksteissa.
Avainsanat
Lean-ajattelu, arvostava kehittäminen, uuden palvelun kehittäminen, arvostava lean-ajattelu
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ... 3
1.1 Lean thinking in service development ... 3
1.2 The purpose of the study ... 4
1.3 Key concepts of the study ... 6
1.4 Case organisation ... 8
1.5 Structure of the thesis ... 8
2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ... 10
2.1 Lean service development ... 10
2.1.1 Lean as a philosophy ... 12
2.1.2 Implementation of lean ... 13
2.2 Appreciative inquiry ... 14
2.3 New service development ... 18
2.4 Theoretical framework of the study ... 19
3 METHODOLOGY ... 23
3.1 Methodological approach ... 23
3.1.1 Social constructionism ... 25
3.1.2 Appreciative facilitation ... 26
3.2 Data collection ... 28
3.2.1 Workshop ... 29
3.2.2 Focus group interviews ... 30
3.3 Analysis of the data ... 33
3.4 Critical evaluation of the methodology ... 35
4 EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF NEW SERVICE DEVELOPMENT ... 37
4.1 Service development in the case organisation ... 37
4.2 Appreciative lean thinking in the case organisation’s service development ... 41
4.2.1 Competence and professional skills ... 41
4.2.2 Succeeding together ... 42
4.2.3 Direct appreciative dialogue ... 44
4.2.4 Trusting each other ... 45
4.2.5 Emotion-driven acting and resilience ... 47
4.3 Summary of the research results ... 48
5 CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION ... 53
5.1 Summary of the study ... 53
5.2 Key results ... 55
5.3 Recommendations for the case organisation ... 57
5.4 Evaluation of the study, future study and managerial implications ... 59
REFERENCES ... 62
APPENDICES ...
APPENDIX 1 ...
3 1 INTRODUCTION
Below I will introduce the topic of my research and explain why it is an interesting and important topic to study. I will explain briefly how the topic has been studied before and what kinds of views researchers have presented in their studies about the topic. I will also elaborate what we already know about the topic and what is the research gap in which I position my own study.
1.1 Lean thinking in service development
This study examines the concept of lean thinking in service development. Lean thinking is a process improvement method that has its roots in a Japanese car-manufacturing system that was initially created to increase value and improve quality of a product and eliminate waste in operations while reducing overall costs (Browning & Sanders 2012; Ellis 2016, 179; Hines et al.
2004; Kouri 2011, 6; LeMahieu et al. 2017). Due to the success of lean in manufacturing, lean has been implemented in diverse industries, from construction to health care (Browning &
Sanders 2012) and also in service sector, in which the external pressures on reducing costs and improving quality are similar as in production industry (Samuel et al. 2015).
Lean services focuses on removing waste and improving efficiency. Waste in lean literature comprises activities that do not create value to the customer. When waste is removed from operations, a flow between the processes that create value to the customer will be established and better positioning, efficiency and lower costs will be achieved. (Browning & Sanders 2012;
Cervone 2015; Marley & Ward 2013.) Waste reduction in lean services has proven to result in improved customer satisfaction. However, the concept of lean services is still in its early stages.
(Piercy & Rich 2009.)
Most of the studies about lean approach focus on investigating lean in automotive, information and electronics industries (Majava & Ojanperä 2017), and the concept is widely examined in health care related studies as well (Kadarova & Demecko 2015). However, more knowledge on the use of lean in service sector and especially in service development is in need. Due to this as well, the concept of lean services is still in its early stages (Piercy & Rich 2009).
4
In this study, I will draw on appreciative inquiry and approach lean thinking with a strength- based approach. Inspired by the article of Shaked & Stampf (2015) and book by Shaked (2013), I will provide more knowledge and understanding about the benefits of applying appreciative inquiry to lean thinking in the context of service development based on the theoretical framework and empirical evidence gathered in this study. As a result, I will introduce the concept of appreciative lean thinking, which has not been studied in academic literature before.
In addition to the research gap and theoretical contribution of the study, I find the topic personally interesting due to the fact that lean thinking is familiar to me from my bachelor degree studies where logistics was my major study. It is interesting to examine a theory that has proven worthwhile in a specific industry and apply it to a entirely different context. Even though lean is developed originally for fixing flaws in the production, i.e. waste reduction, and appreciative inquiry on the other hand for embracing the best in the organisation, I believe that both of the theories have a positive core and a shared goal for efficiency and succeeding. According to Browning & Sanders (2012), the traditional lean practices, in this case waste elimination, can result to the opposite of cost reduction. The authors claim that even greater value could be provided by strategically adding activities instead of simply cutting down them. This statement supports the fact that traditional lean approach might not be as current as expected and that a positive twist could actually be the strategic addition that Browning & Sanders (2012) both call for.
The key concepts of the study are lean thinking, appreciative inquiry and new service development. With the research results, I aim at highlighting how appreciative inquiry can enhance lean thinking in service development context.
1.2 The purpose of the study
The purpose of my research is to study and understand the connection between appreciative inquiry and lean thinking in service development context. The study is conducted for a case organisation that operates in the field of sport and wellbeing. The organisation struggles to systematically deal with new ideas, choose the best ones and lead them from idea to launch. The case company emphasises customer-orientation in their service development and has recently
5
started to implement lean principles in their operations. By recognising operational values of the organisation, I wish to gain more understanding on how to implement lean in an organisation where customer-focus is strong and how lean can be built upon this strong focus. Also, by introducing appreciative inquiry to the lean organisation, I will generate knowledge about how strength-based approach can enhance lean thinking. Since lean is all about creating value to the customer and nothing else (Shaked 2013, 19), it is reasonable to start investigating the topic through lean.
The research question is “How does appreciative inquiry contribute to lean thinking in service development context?” The object of the study is the case organisation’s new service development. The empirical context of the study is the organisation where the interviews and the workshop are conducted. Based on focus group research and observation study results, I plan to identify practices that are crucial and valuable in lean service development.
By answering the research question I will contribute to the existing literature by providing more knowledge and understanding about strength-based lean thinking (Shaked & Stampf 2015) in service development. Strength-based lean approach has been studied by some appreciative inquiry practitioners for example a book has been written about the topic by David Shaked (2013). However, there seems to be a lack of scientific knowledge and research about the subject.
To answer the research question, I have conducted an observation study (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008, 86-89), two focus group interviews (Barbour 2007, 2-3; Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008, 173- 190) and a thematic analysis of the data (Thatchenkery 2017) gathered in these sessions.
The practical contribution of the study is to provide the company recommendations that will help them overcome their difficulties in finding the best ideas and making them happen and reducing the amount of time and other resources (“waste” in lean literature) spent on developing poor ideas. The recommendations will work as the elements of the new service development process of the organisation. The academic contribution, on the other hand, will be combining lean principles with appreciative inquiry.
6 1.3 Key concepts of the study
The key concepts of the study are lean thinking, appreciative inquiry, new service development, social constructivism and appreciative lean thinking. In this section, I will introduce each of these concepts.
Lean thinking is a model for operations management that focuses on the elimination of waste and generation of value to the customer (Hines et al. 2004), originally used in production but nowadays also applied in for example health care, public sector and service sector (Suárez- Bazarra et al. 2012). The origins of lean thinking are in 1950s Toyota car manufacturing (Toyota Production System) and it represents an alternative to capital-intense mass production. In 1970s manuals about Toyota Production System were written and the secrets of lean approach were revealed to companies outside Toyota, however the manuals were in Japanese and it took almost another decade to translate them into English. At first, lean implementation was highly tool-based ignoring most of the human aspects in high-performance work, until in the beginning of 1990s the focus shifted to quality, in the late 1990s to quality, cost and delivery, and in the 2000 to customer value. Also, the principles of lean thinking were summarised as identification of customer value, management of value stream, flow production, inventing pull mechanisms to support flow of materials and finally, elimination of waste. (Hines et al. 2004.)
Appreciative inquiry is an organisational development intervention and a qualitative research method that has social constructivism philosophy embedded in it. Appreciative inquiry focuses on recognising the positive core of a system. Rather than solving and concentrating on the problems, appreciative inquiry focuses on finding out what works best in the system and designing and co-constructing the future. (Bushe & Kassam 2011; MacCoy 2014., Thatchenkery 2017.) Deficit-based problem solving may lead to finding even more problems, whereas focusing on the positive should lead to success (Grant & Humphries 2006; Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 4).
According to Barge & Oliver (2003), deficit language and problem-solving approach rarely results in new vision in organisations, and it increases the level of defensiveness and powerlessness among the employees of an organisation.
New service development (NSD) process is a set of interconnected tasks, activities, actions and evaluation resulting in a new service and its launch. Effective new service development is vital
7
for companies who wish to succeed in their new services and it implies to organisational performance as well. (Santos & Spring 2013.) The need for new service development management and activities in organisations have increased due to heightened competition, increased heterogeneity of customer demands and shortened life-cycles of products and services (Menor & Roth 2008).
Social constructivism is one of the key concepts of the study, as appreciative inquiry requires knowledge of it in order to get it right. Social constructivism emphasises that social reality and knowledge is co-created in everyday activities, conversations and social interaction (Eriksson &
Kovalainen 2008, 14; Bushe & Kassam 2005; Holma et al. 2017; MacCoy 2014; Preskill &
Catsambas, 2006, 125). Social constructivists believe that language, knowledge and action are inseparably connected and that organisations are outcomes of its members’ interactions, which are influenced by their cultural, social, historical, economic and political experiences and incidences (Grant & Humphries 2006).
Appreciative lean thinking combines traditional lean thinking and appreciative inquiry by getting the best out of both worlds creating more sustainable results. Discovering and co-constructing a vision based on the positive core and “the best of what is”, planning ways to reach this vision and implementing ideas that create the most energy makes it possible for the members of an organisation to thrive at work. (Shaked & Stampf 2015.)
Most of the principles behind lean thinking have a positive focus. However, most lean initiatives follow a deficit-based approach to problem-solving, by examining the existing problems in detail, finding root causes and fixing them. There is an assumption that a theoretical “perfect state”
exists in each organisational process and by fixing the inefficiencies and eliminating the waste, the perfect state can be reached. This way of searching for problems leads often to frustration, finger-pointing and blaming each other. (Shaked & Stampf 2015.)
Appreciative lean thinking can make process improvement engaging, creative and resourceful.
Appreciative inquiry uncovers successful past experiences, emphasises them and helps them to be built upon. Appreciative inquiry creates a shared vision of the future, what the future looks like and how to get there. (Shaked & Stampf 2015.)
8 1.4 Case organisation
The case organisation of the study is a Finnish national sport institute. The institute provides vocational upper secondary and further education and training for youths and adults. In addition, the institute offers a wide selection of sports, activities and facilities for professional and amateur sports enthusiasts. The case institute is a member of the sports academy network serving as a coaching centre for athletes and supporting them in combining studies and training. (Ministry of education and culture 2017.) The organisation employs around 60 people.
The case organisation, as all the sports institutes in Finland, receives government funding based on their educational task. The training centres may also be granted other government aids for construction of sport facilities and additional development projects. (Ministry of education and culture 2017.) As the amount of government subsidies have decreased, the sport institutes are forced to find new sources of revenue and develop profitable and quality services that both attract customers and create added value for them.
The topic of the thesis is formed together with the case organisation for their new service development needs. The organisation will form an NSD process to clarify their service development and make it more efficient. At the same time, the organisation has recently started to implement lean in their operations. The purpose of the research is to gain understanding and knowledge about lean service development and contribute to it with appreciative inquiry.
Through the theory of these two, recommendations will be provided to the case organisation on what aspects should be involved in the process the company will later on form, partly based on the master thesis and combining the needs of the organisation. The thesis aims at responding to the organisation’s need for developing their service innovation in order to succeed in the market.
1.5 Structure of the thesis
In chapter 2, I will present the theoretical background of the study. I will conduct a thorough discussion about the topics of lean thinking in service development, what lean philosophy is and how lean should be implemented in a service organisation. I will introduce the origins of lean production management and explain how lean has developed into a popular operations
9
management process for other sectors, as in this case, service sector organisations. I will introduce lean as a philosophy and further elaborate how lean thinking should be implemented in an organisation. Also, in chapter 2, I will present the topics of appreciative inquiry and new service development. Based on these three entities I will be able to construct a theoretical framework of my own study, which will focus on appreciative lean thinking in service development context. In order to do this, I will highlight the positive and strength-based focus of lean and try to establish a link between lean thinking and appreciative approach.
In chapter 3, I will discuss about the methodological choices of my research. I will explain how appreciative inquiry can be utilised in qualitative research and deepen knowledge about social constructionism, a research philosophy that plays a key role in appreciative inquiry. In addition, I will explain the concept of appreciative facilitation and present its role in appreciative interviews.
In data collection chapter, I will elaborate and justify the data collection methods I chose the appreciative initiative in the case company. At the end of the chapter, I will critically evaluate the methodology, data collection and data analysis methods of the research.
Chapter 4 includes the empirical evidence and results of the study. The empirical evidence will be presented based on a content analysis and an appreciative inquiry matrix, which was built to understand the link between lean thinking and appreciative approach in more detail. Based on the evidence from the research, deeper understanding about the service development in the case organisation is generated. Also, I will explain how appreciative lean thinking appears in the case organisation’s service development. At the end of the chapter, I will present a summary of the key findings of my research.
In chapter 5, I will present a final discussion of the findings of my study. I will discuss the empirical evidence in relation to the existing literature of the topic. In this section, I will give my recommendations to the case organisation based on the results of my study. I will also provide an evaluation of the theoretical and methodological limitations of the study and present the practical and managerial implications of the results.
10 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Below I will elaborate what sort of previous research there has been concerning lean management in new service development and how does it guide my own research. I will discuss about lean as a philosophy and how lean should be implemented in service business context. I will also introduce the topic of appreciative inquiry and the theoretical framework for combining appreciative inquiry to lean thinking. Moreover, I will describe the literature, preliminary studies and personal experiences that will support me in understanding the phenomenon I am about to study in my thesis.
2.1 Lean service development
Lean is one of the best-known methods for process improvement. The roots and origins of lean production are in Toyota Production System (TPS). This system was initially created to increase value and reduce waste, which would then again reduce costs, improve product quality and shorten the time of delivery. (Browning & Sanders 2012; Ellis 2016, 179; Hines et al. 2004;
Kouri 2011, 6; LeMahieu et al. 2017.) Starting from the automobile manufacturing industry, lean has established a firm presence and continues to evolve in operations management. (Samuel et al.
2015.)
Manufacturing firms have utilised lean management successfully for some time, which has caused a rise in companies implementing lean techniques and methods also in service sector, in which organisations are constantly battling with similar external pressures to reduce costs, improve quality and increase flexibility (Suárez-Bazarra et al. 2012). Lean service has been proved to reduce waste, improve flow of process and bring more added value for customers (Asnan et al. 2015). The implementation of lean in service sector has also resulted in improved customer service delivery through waste reduction. Even though the benefits of applying lean thinking in service sector have been recognised, the process is still in its early stages. (Piercy &
Rich 2009.)
Five principles that guide an organisation towards a lean model have been recognised: (1) understanding and identifying the real value the customers seek, (2) visualising all the steps in the value stream – stages where value is created and steps that do not generate value from the
11
customers point-of-view, (3) making these steps flow without interruption or delays, (4) implementing a pull based responsive system and (5) engaging all staff members and management in continuously finding ways to eliminate waste that does not create value to the customer. Supporting these principles and applying them in an organisation results for example in positive cultural change and group-based working, and it encourages in bottom-up involvement.
(Hines et al. 2004; Piercy & Rich 2009.)
However, there has been resistance towards applying lean methods in service-based organisations, mostly due to insufficient understanding of what a lean service is. Lean cannot be implemented using manufacturing methods in a service organisation. On the contrary, it must be implemented based on a business model of a service organisation, and it demands notable organisational commitment from the management. (Cervone 2015.)
The difference between lean manufacturing and lean services is that lean manufacturing focuses on process improvement and tuning various components within the process in order to achieve optimisation of the whole. Lean services, on the other hand, focuses on the optimisation of the services through professionalisation of work functions and helping the people involved in adapting to change. (Cervone 2015.)
The essence of lean thinking and lean services approach is about removing waste and improving efficiency. Waste in lean context means activities that do not create value to the customer. When value added steps are extracted from the process, wasteful parts disturbing flow between activities become visible and thus easily identifiable and eliminable. In short, when unnecessary and unproductive things are eliminated, a better position and efficiency and lower costs will be achieved. (Browning & Sanders 2012; Cervone 2015; Marley & Ward 2013.) Identifying waste is essential because it increases costs. Waste can include for example waiting, overprocessing and unused employee creativity. (Majava & Ojanperä 2017).
Value creation in lean literature is often considered the same as cost reduction. Ultimately, the customer decides what is waste and what is not. Value is created when internal waste is reduced and eliminated. If waste and the associated costs are reduced, the overall value for the customer increases. Moreover, value is increased when additional services valued by consumers are offered. (Hines et al. 2004.)
12
While lean relates to high performance and continuous improvement, it is also associated with a culture where disruptions rarely occur. Lean thinking in general emphasises the importance of good relationship with customers and suppliers, since they have a significant effect on the value creation. Customers define the value which the firm produces with the help of the suppliers.
Managing this extended value stream enables the organisation to deliver increased value to the customer more efficiently and cost-effectively. (Marley & Ward 2013.)
The philosophical principles of lean in a service-based organisation are (1) aiming for continuous improvement and (2) respecting people involved in the process. The five goals of using lean are (1) increasing customer value, (2) reducing and eliminating waste, (3) management as a facilitator, (4) involving all employees and (5) continuous improvement. Delivering quality, while reducing costs is a core principle of lean and should be the driving force in all operations.
(Cervone 2015.) Moreover, these principles and goals guide lean service development.
2.1.1 Lean as a philosophy
Samuel et al. (2015) have identified four main themes of discourse within the literature of lean, which are (1) lean as a generic representation of Toyota Production System, (2) lean as process improvement method for organisations, (3) lean as an ideology and a philosophy that has developed over time, and (4) lean as a polarised body of academic literature that has progressed over time. In this study, I will focus on lean as a philosophy that has become a popular tool in the service sector for improving operations. I will examine the similarities and the applicability of appreciative approach to lean philosophy.
Lean thinking is about understanding and adopting the philosophy of constantly inventing ways to reducing waste by applying lean tools and methods for increasing customer satisfaction. It is essential that the lean philosophy is embedded in the minds of the managers and the employees in order to achieve continuous improvement. (Asnan et al. 2015.) Bhasin & Burcher (2006) claim that many organisations seem to fail in their lean initiatives by considering lean as a strategy, when they should view it as a philosophy. Lean should be seen as a philosophy, because if regarded as a tactic or a strategy, one might apply the lean principles only to achieve the end
13
results. Hence, lean should be considered as a mind-set that governs how business and processes are looked at.
Lean philosophy relies on three main goals, which are flow, harmony (pace set by customers) and synchronisation (pull flow) that has to exist in every sector (Bhasin & Burcher 2006). Amer &
Shaw (2014) define lean as a philosophy that comprises a set of principles (Hines et al. 2004;
Piercy & Rich 2009) of organising and managing an organisation that can help the organisation to get on a path of positive learning and improvement. The philosophical principles of lean in a service-based organisation are (1) aiming for continuous improvement and (2) respecting people involved in the process. (Cervone 2015.)
2.1.2 Implementation of lean
Lean implementations, at least in manufacturing context, may sometimes fail due to a sole focus on reducing waste and its methods. Organisations seem to attain significant results in the beginning of lean implementation by concentrating on the most common waste reduction methods. Indeed, waste reduction plays a key role in lean, but alone it does not create a lean thinking organisation. Neither does it generate continuous improvement. (Dombrowski & Mielke 2014.)
As mentioned earlier, lean cannot be implemented based on the same methods in a service organisation as in manufacturing organisations. The implementation must follow the business model of a service organisation and it requires notable organisational commitment from the management. According to Bhasin & Burcher (2006), lean can only be successfully implemented when it is not treated as a strategy but as a philosophy that contains major changes in an organisation. It should not materialise only on the shop floor but instead it should extend to the whole organisation. To achieve successful results from lean, it has to be implemented in its entirety, not piece by piece. Scattering lean tools may confuse the members of an organisation.
Moreover, lean is an entire business philosophy, meaning that it should be implemented as a whole.
14
Bhasin & Burcher (2006) explain that many failures in lean implementation are results of implementing only one or two aspects of lean. Sometimes organisations failing in lean implementation are blaming the company culture for it. Lean should be seen as a philosophy, because if considered as a tactic or a strategy, one might apply the lean principles only to achieve the end results. Hence, lean should be considered as a mind-set that governs how business and processes are looked at.
To put it short, lack of direction, lack of planning and lack of project sequencing often leads to failures in lean implementation. Thus, the following ingredients are viewed as essential in sustainable implementation of lean: simultaneously applying five or more lean tools, viewing lean as a long-term project, having a will and aim for continuous improvement and sponsoring the lean principles throughout the value chain. (Bhasin and Burcher 2006.)
2.2 Appreciative inquiry
Appreciative inquiry is a group process that was originally constructed as a strength-based research-method for organisational development purposes. The main goal has been ever since to identify and further develop the best and right things in the organisations in order to create a better future. (Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 1-2.) Appreciative inquiry allows to discover what is valued and appreciated, and what are the positive and efficient aspects of the organisation (MacCoy 2014; Parkkinen 2015). It stands out from other organisational development processes by being intentionally positive, focusing on previous successes, emphasising participation and highlighting top-down and grass root approach (Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 3).
Appreciative inquiry focuses on identifying the positive core of a system. Normally, problem solving and improvement is associated with identifying key deficiencies and problems, analysing the root causes and creating a plan how to fix the problems. On the contrary, appreciative inquiry considers and organisation as a “solution to be embraced” rather than a “problem to be solved”.
(Cooperrider et al. 2008, 5.) Rather than solving and focusing on the problems of an organisation, appreciative inquiry concentrates on finding out what works best in the system and designing and co-constructing the future. (Bushe & Kassam 2011; MacCoy 2014., Thatchenkery 2017.) Appreciative inquiry (AI) is usually an interview or an intervention for a person or a group, in
15
which through appreciative language the people involved focus on solving the best of what is, what might be and what should be. The basic assumption behind the AI theory is that in every organisation there is something that works well and what is good, which can generate a positive change. In each AI initiative it is essential to find out the life-giving forces of the organisation or process and figure out the future possibilities and potential. (Cooperrider et al. 2008, 3-5.)
The purpose of appreciative inquiry is to create constructive discussions in change processes and encourage the members of an organisation to participation and collaboration (Parkkinen et al.
2015). When people engage together in discussion about what works well, the members of an organisation learn more about each other’s capabilities and build up faith and confidence in their collective ability to perform well (Whitney 2010).
Researchers have found eight core principles behind appreciative inquiry and its implementation.
These principles also serve as a foundation for bringing appreciative inquiry from theory to practice and understanding why so many practitioners believe it works. Cooperrider, Whitney &
Stavros (2008, 8) identified the first five of them and the principles from six to eight have developed over time and are evidence of continuous evolution and improvement of the approach.
(Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 9.) Below, I will introduce the eight principles in detail.
Table 1. Core principles of appreciative inquiry
The constructionist principle Social knowledge and organisational destiny are linked, meaning that reality is constructed by people in social interaction rather than in the minds of individuals.
Knowledge evolves constantly and is shaped by our conversations and experiences with each other.
The principle of simultaneity Inquiry and change are not separate moments; on the contrary, they should be simultaneous. Inquiries should be considered as interventions. Organisational change begins as soon as questions are been asked and people engage in
16
conversations. The questions uncover what is found and what is discovered. This data collects the stories that in which the future is designed, discoursed and constructed.
The poetic principle Human organisations are endless sources of learning, inspiration, and interpretation. An organisation’s story is constantly co-authored by the people within and outside the organisation, including its members and stakeholders. The direction of the organisation is influenced by the choice of the inquiry.
The anticipatory principle Collective imagination and discourse about the future are important resources for the generation of constructing organisational improvement and change. Our image of the future will guide us towards finding ways to achieve it.
The positive principle The power for change requires large amounts of positive feelings and social bonding. Also, attitudes, such as hope, inspiration, and pure joy with constructing with one another are needed. People and organisations move towards their inquiries. Positive inquiries and images result in positive conducts.
The wholeness principle Wholeness introduces the best in organisations and people.
Creativity is stimulated and collective capacity is constructed by involving all stakeholders in a group process. It comprises with perceiving the whole story, engaging with the whole system and sharing one’s whole person.
17
The enactment principle In order to make a change, we have to be the change we want to be and be the living examples of the change. The enactment principle suggests that positive change occurs, when we have a model of the ideal future and we live according to it. The future then again is created in the moment with our words, images and conversations.
The free choice principle The free choice principle represents that people perform better and are more committed when they have a right to choose when and how they are involved. Freedom of choice generates positive change and organisational excellence and liberates personal and organisational power.
Reference: Cooperrider, Whitney & Stavros 2008, 9-11; Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 10-11.
The eight principles of appreciative inquiry (Table 1) are vital for the theoretical basis of the positive revolution in change. The principles clarify the positive images result in positive action.
(Cooperrider, Whitney & Stavros 2008, 10.) The messages behind these principles are that in every organisation and group, there is something that works well. The language we use generates our reality and what we focus on becomes our reality. This reality is created in the moment and there can be several realities. Asking questions of a group or organisation always influences the group somehow. People feel more confident about the future and the journey towards the unknown, when they can carry parts of the past (the known) with them. The parts of the past which are carried forward towards the future should be the best parts of the existing. (Preskill &
Catsambas 2006, 11.)
Appreciative inquiry intervention typically consists of four Ds: discovery, dream, design and destiny. Discovery, as the first D, focuses on engaging people in dialogue and valuing things that are worth valuing, sharing the best of what is. Second, the group imagines and dreams future possibilities and what might be. After that, participants create a vision and design how the
18
destiny could be reached. (Cooperrider et al. 2008, 5-7.) The narrative-based 4-D process engages the members of an organisation in deep dialogue about strengths, resources and competences (Cooperrider & Whitney 2005, 15). In addition to the traditional 4-D model, some AI practitioners have decided to use a different model, which consists of four Is: inquire, imagine, innovate and implement. The 4-I model inquires into the best of what is, imagines what might be, innovates what should be and implements the change. (Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 15.)
2.3 New service development
Selling and creating services are one of the main bases of doing business. Companies aim at introducing new services that create value to existing customers and attract future customers to increase competitiveness. (Edvardsson et al. 2006, 1.) New service development has been criticised as too improvised, which has led to creating systematic and formal models for developing new services. Service sector has adapted these models well and the level of adoption is now the same as in manufacturing firms. (Edvardsson et al. 2013.) The development of a new service is more complex than the development of a tangible product. According to some researchers, the differentiation between new product development (NPD) and new service development (NSD) should not be argued against. On the contrary, some argue that NPD and NSD differ especially in the degree of customer interaction and intangibility. (Menor & Roth 2008.)
According to Santos & Spring (2013) new service development process is a set of interconnected tasks, activities, actions and evaluation resulting in a new service and its launch. Effective new service development is vital for companies who wish to succeed in their new services and it implies to organisational performance as well. Yet, there are numerous organisations which have not implemented a systematic new service development process for their operations. Random experimentation and “let see if this works” seem to be leading attitudes and strategies behind many NSD endeavours. The common mistakes include failing in concept generation and evaluation, not having enough knowledge of the market and not testing the service before launching it. (Froehle & Roth 2007.)
19
Service management theories suggest that the value of a service is co-created with customers.
The term value in this context implies to customers experiencing the richness of a service during and after its use and consumption. (Edvardsson et al. 2006, 1; Grönroos 2001, 82-87.) Services are subjectively experienced processes that are produced and consumed coincidentally. The experience of quality and value are highly affected by the interaction between the consumer and the salesperson. (Gröönroos 2001, 100.) Organisations that involve their customers in the development of their services seem to succeed (Carbonell et al. 2012). In addition, involving customers can decrease the time used for new service development and result in better innovations (Carbonell & Rodriguez-Escudero 2014). Alam & Perry (2002) suggest that NSD process should be constructed as a sequential and linear process; however, some stages can be completed simultaneously in case there is a need to proceed faster with the launch of the new service. The authors also consider idea generation as the most important stage of NSD in which the managers should pay attention to.
Menor and Roth (2008) describe NSD competence as an interrelated and complementary four dimension system. These dimensions are (1) formalised NSD processes, (2) market acuity, (3) NSD strategy and (4) IT knowledge. According to the authors, the first dimension, formalised NSD processes, seem to play a less remarkable role in the success of NSD than the rest of the dimensions. The most essential indicator for NSD competence is market acuity that includes the ability to understand the competitive environment in which the organisation is operating and estimate and respond to customer’s changing needs. (Edvardsson et al. 2013.)
2.4 Theoretical framework of the study
The theoretical framework of the study focuses on new service development, lean thinking and appreciative inquiry. Through this framework and appreciative intervention, I will study how appreciative inquiry contributes to lean thinking in service development context. Most of the studies about lean include a shop-floor focus, which has resulted in limited understanding about contemporary approaches to lean. In my study, I will introduce a new concept, appreciative lean thinking, that contributes to the existing scientific literature on both lean and appreciative approach.
20
Appreciative inquiry suits lean management context well, since one of the fundamental concepts of lean is always focusing on the possibilities, not limitations (Cervone 2015). Appreciative methods always emphasise the positive aspects of things, not the negativities or limitations either.
In order to improve something, it is more useful to look at the times when things were going well, rather than looking backwards at failures and what caused those (Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 27).
When organisations start implementing lean in their operations, they usually have a deficit-based focus; what are the most wasteful parts and how these can be altered (Browning & Sanders 2012). Rarely, we think what actually enabled the parts that are already working well.
Appreciative inquiry, on the other hand, highlights that if you only look for problems, you will find more problems, and if you wish to succeed, you must search for success (Preskill &
Catsambas 2006, 4). A final touch of a strength-based approach could develop lean into a more powerful combination and contribute positively to the lean theory by introducing an advanced lean approach that challenges the traditional application.
The traditional lean approach focuses solely on identifying the problems and removing them in order to achieve the main target of lean: creating more value to customer (LeMahieu et al. 2017).
According to Browning & Sanders (2012) a traditional lean approach can lead to the opposite of cost reduction. Elimination of wasteful activities does not necessary result in cost reduction and better results can be achieved by strategically adding activities to increase value. Due to this, appreciative thinking and strength-based approach could provide a similar effect by focusing on what enabled the parts that are already working well (Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 4) and emphasising these factors in lean. Browning & Sanders (2012) further explain that lack of value more likely stems from doing necessary activities with wrong inputs than doing unnecessary things. Changing the wrong inputs into positive strength-based inputs in this case could generate beneficial lean results.
Lean usually focuses on easily predictable stable and routine processes, such as high-volume production, a stable workforce and the elimination of extra waiting time and inventory. In innovation context however novelty and newness of processes are common. Lean thinking rarely takes these two factors into account and might not suit innovation context as such. Browning &
Sanders (2012) argue that innovations include novel and complex features that are more of a
21
norm when product functionality, diversification and customisation increase. (Browning &
Sanders 2012.)
In figure 1, the effect of strength-based approach, i.e. appreciative inquiry, to lean thinking is visualised in a simplified way. Lean thinking is often used in situations, where a problem needs to be solved. Lean can offer a decent solution to a problem shifting the organisation from not good to good in the figure. In other words, lean is usually considered as a tool that can fix a problem. However, if appreciative approach is included in the process, the organisation can advance from not good to great. Appreciative inquiry shapes lean thinking by generating more depth to it and creating more possibilities for lean approach to be utilised. In this study, I plan to justify the impact of appreciative inquiry in lean thinking through scientific literature and empirical evidence gained from the workshop and focus group interviews.
Lean thinking
NOT GOOD GOOD GREAT
Appreciative approach
Problem NO problem
Figure 1. Applying strength-based approach to lean thinking
Lean thinking and appreciative inquiry can be combined into appreciative lean thinking. The word “appreciate” can be translated as “valuing” or “to increase in value” (Cooperrider &
Whitney 2005, 7) meaning that both theories have a focus on the same object: value. Based on this assumption, adding appreciative approach to lean thinking should add value to lean approach itself.
As appreciative approach concentrates on finding out the positive core of a system and what works best in a system (Bushe & Kassam 2011; MacCoy 2014., Thatchenkery 2017), it makes sense to approach lean thinking with this same approach, in order to understand the similarities between the two concepts. Even though lean thinking focuses on problem solving, it still seems to have a strong positive core; an aim for quality (Suárez-Bazarra et al. 2012), value generation
22
(Asnan et al. 2015) and continuous improvement (Cervone 2015). Moreover, lean recommends involving all employees to a process (Cervone 2015) and appreciative inquiry encourages members of an organisation to participation and collaboration (Parkkinen et al. 2015). In other words, the participative nature of appreciative inquiry (Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 3) in which the future is co-constructed in an organisation (Bushe & Kassam 2011; MacCoy 2014;
Thatchenkery 2017) is similar to lean thinking, which emphasises the involvement of employees in creating a lean organisation (Hines et al. 2004; Piercy & Rich 2009) that can achieve continuous improvement (Cervone 2015.)
Lean thinking is often criticised for having a narrow operational focus only on the shop-floor.
However, lean should be understood as a tool with two levels: shop-floor and customer-centred.
The shop-floor level has a narrow operational focus, but the customer-centred lean thinking can be applied everywhere. (Hines et al. 2004.) If we consider lean as a philosophy, it can be combined with appreciative inquiry. Also, according to Hines (2004), lean has developed and evolved over the years based on the five principles of lean, and the criticism does not take this evolution into consideration.
23 3 METHODOLOGY
In this chapter, I will introduce the methodological approached used in the study. In order to answer the research question, I conducted a qualitative research following appreciative inquiry principles. The data was collected in three parts, during one observation study and two focus group interviews. Below I will elaborate the methodology of these two data collection situations in more detail, since they both are means for collecting data in appreciative inquiry. Appreciative inquiry can be conducted through personal interviews as well, but taking social constructionism into consideration, it makes more sense to observe or interview groups, in which people are co- creating social reality and knowledge together during a process.
In addition to appreciative inquiry and data collection, I will explain how the data was analysed after the interviews. Also, I will critically analyse the chosen study methods.
3.1 Methodological approach
In my research, I adopted an appreciative inquiry approach. Appreciative inquiry is used for many different organisational development purposes in companies, such as strategic planning, culture transformation, increasing customer satisfaction, organisation reform, and management development. Moreover, appreciative inquiry has been used in integrating operations after a merger, in peace building, and in implementing educational reform and economic development efforts. (Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 2.) Appreciative inquiry was chosen for the research approach, as the main goals were to find a link and connection between appreciative approach and lean thinking, and to develop innovation and idea generation in a service organisation that has recently started to lean implementation. Appreciative inquiry proved to be a good choice for examining the case organisations service development and innovation, since the members of the organisation considered that the problem was not that they did not have good new ideas or that they did not know how to develop new services, on the contrary, their wish was to develop new service development. Hence, appreciative inquiry was chosen for a research method, as it focuses on positive attributes in the organisation that may promote sustainable change (Grant &
Humphries 2006).
24
Appreciative inquiry is one way of studying positive organisational behaviour. As a research field, positive organisational development has developed rapidly over the past years. This research approach aims at finding insight into the positive strengths and negative weaknesses and how they interact and limit one another in organisations. (Lehtimäki et al. 2013.) It is common that lean thinking usually involves a deficit-based and problem-solving approach to organisational development. Usually the goal is to reach a perfect state which differs from the current state by including inefficiencies and waste. By eliminating the wasteful aspects, the perfect state can be reached. (Browning & Sanders 2012; Cervone 2015; Marley & Ward 2013.) Involving appreciative inquiry in a research that aims to develop service development and innovation in a lean organisation, offers an intriguing chance to examine how strength-based (AI) approach can enhance lean thinking.
Appreciative inquiry investigates the positive and successful instances even if they are exceptional in a system. As result, these positive inquiries uncover the life-giving forces in the organisation. Appreciative questions inquire into stories, visions, wishes and values. In order to identify the LGFs and generating the better future, the emphasis has to be on the successes rather than on problems and their causes. (Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 77.)
Thatchenkery (2017) has provided a worthy example of appreciative inquiry intervention as a form of organisational analysis that includes six steps. The first step includes the identification of the life-giving forces or core values. In step two, the LGFs or core values are expanded and explored using appreciative interviews in the case organisation by the appreciative inquiry team.
Step three includes a thematic analysis of the data and in step four possibility propositions are constructed. In the fifth step, the findings of the previous steps and possibility propositions are tested and validated in the case organisation. In the sixth and last step, an implementation team from the target organisation is created and mandated.
In my research, the first three steps are included in the methodology, as step one is completed in the workshop, step two in the form of focus group interviews and step three during the data analyses. Only these three steps were used because they provided enough data and information for the main theoretical contribution of the study, for creating the concept of appreciative lean thinking. If the rest of the steps were conducted, the possibility propositions in step four would have tested the lean goals in relation to the life-giving forces more deeply. The propositions
25
would have taken the interviewees from describing the best of what is to designing what might be. In step five, the findings of step four would have been tested on the employees of the organisation through a survey. In the last step, an implementation team who would continue with the results of the appreciative inquiry would be mandated. Even though this information could have provided more support and interesting information concerning lean service development in the case organisation, it was not relevant considering the theoretical contribution of the study.
3.1.1 Social constructionism
In my research, I draw on social constructionism as a research philosophy, as the roots of appreciative inquiry are in social constructionism. According to this philosophy, social reality and knowledge are co-created in everyday activities, conversations and social interaction (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008, 14; Bushe & Kassam 2005; Holma et al. 2017; MacCoy 2014;
Preskill & Catsambas, 2006, 125). Social constructivists emphasise that language, knowledge and action are inseparably connected and that organisations and societies are outcomes of its members’ interactions, which are influenced by their cultural, social, historical, economic and political experiences and incidences (Grant & Humphries 2006). It is desirable to engage as many members of the organisation in appreciative inquiry and focus on articulating the pursued collective futures (Bushe & Kassam 2005).
The reason for emphasising social constructionism in the research is that it also appears in the principles of appreciative inquiry (Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 10). Appreciative inquiry draws on social constructionism (Table 1) and thus seeks contribute to service management literature by emphasising the employees’ daily practices and sense-making as an aspect of customer orientation. The common concern and interest in my study and in social constructivism are in examining how knowledge and reality are created in the daily activities in an organisation.
(Holma et al. 2017.)
26 3.1.2 Appreciative facilitation
In my focus group interviews, I joined the interviews as a facilitator. In academic research it is typical, that a researcher operates as a facilitator during the interviews, in order to ensure that the objectives of the session will be met as far as possible. The facilitator has to be a good listener, empowering, empathetic, flexible and non-judgmental. The facilitator’s main tasks are, in addition to guiding the conversation, explaining the topic and the purpose of the discussion to the interviewees, helping the participants to feel relaxed and listening to them during the interview.
(Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008, 183.)
In addition to regular facilitation of interviews, appreciative facilitation played an important part in my research, as it is a key factor in executing a successful appreciative inquiry intervention.
The reason why appreciative facilitation has been taken into consideration in my research is that in inquiring appreciatively into what works well in an organisation can inspire change and development. The expectations were that appreciative facilitation could uncover hidden creative potential in the case organisation through social interaction. (Dewar & Sharp 2013.) The role of the facilitator is important in redirecting organisational energy and emphasising strength-based action in the organisation. The role includes enabling an appreciative atmosphere of collectivity and participation, in which the members of an organisation join in renewing practices in order to achieve cooperative results. The facilitator has to be genuinely interested in the context of the research and know how to be inquiring when communicating with the participants. Reflexive and generative questions can stimulate innovation and idea developing, whereas reproductive questions create imaginative discussions in which undiscovered opportunities and capabilities emerge. (Parkkinen et al. 2015.) The facilitators role is crucial in the inquiry, and with sufficient orientation and successful execution, appreciative inquiry can generate beneficial results.
In the research, the interview questions were formed in an appreciative manner using appreciative language. In appreciative inquiry context, forming the focus group interview questions is crucial, as it is thought that change begins the moment when appreciative inquiry is started in the organisation and that the wording of the questions can have significant effect on the process itself. Also, the language used in the inquiry by both interviewees and interviewer has an impact on the life of the organisation as the story of the organisation is co-created in social interaction.
The language of the inquiry is critical, as the words should trigger and inspire the best in people.
27
(Bushe & Kassam 2011.) As noted by Parkkinen et al. (2015), reflexive and generative question can stimulate innovativeness and development of ideas, and reproductive questions create imaginative conversations among the members of the intervention that enable the emergence of undiscovered opportunities and capabilities within the organisation. Appreciative inquiry questions should aim to identify and study moments of excellence and solicit information about successful processes and results concerning what is being studied and developed. They should also invite the participants to utilise this information by providing feedback and insights on how the matter should be handled in the future in order to achieve the desired outcomes. When designing interview questions for appreciative inquiry, the emphasis of the study has to be on the successful processes, because through these the life-giving forces and core values of the organisation are being recognised, even though they would be exceptional in the system. (Preskill
& Catsambas 2006, 77.)
While interviewing the members of the case organisation, as an appreciative facilitator, I had to find ways to see and bring the best out of people. As a facilitator, I had to discover ways to give the process to the hands of the people, and to support them in making it their own. (Cooperrider
& Whitney 2005, 46.) Common challenges for the facilitator in focus group interviews are encouraging the participants to engage in an open and interactive discussion, where everyone talks an equal amount. The facilitator has to make the participants feel at ease and confident to speak. (Peterson & Barron 2007.)
In general, I followed the advice on appreciative facilitation provided by existing literature when planning and conducting the interviews. When introducing the topic and the purpose of the research at the beginning of the session, I encouraged the participants to engage in discussion and interact with each other. Also, I emphasised that there are no right or wrong answers to the questions I am about to ask. During the focus group session, I did my best to sustain the conversation and contributed to the conversation by encouraging the participants think about the positive aspects and discuss about the examples and moments of excellence in the organisation.
(Preskill & Catsambas 2006, 77.)
28 3.2 Data collection
In this section, I describe the data collection methods I used in my research. The study and the organisational intervention were conducted using appreciative inquiry approach in the case organisation. Data collection was divided into two parts, workshop and focus group interviews.
The workshop was held in December 2017 for the case organisation’s executive board, which consisted of all together nine people from different parts of the organisation. Two focus group interviews were held in January 2018 for different members of the organisation based on the information gathered in the first workshop. Both of the focus group interviews included three employees from the case company. (Table 2.) The workshop and the interviews were held in the case organisations premises providing a familiar environment for the participants.
Table 2. Data collection
TYPE AND AMOUNT OF DATA
DATE OF DATA COLLECTION
PARTICIPANTS
WORKSHOP Post-it notes (147), observation notes and one workshop record
5th December 2017 9 persons from the executive board of the case organisation, 7 women, 2 men FOCUS GROUP
INTERVIEWS
Two interview records (approx. 75 and 78 minutes) and two transcripts
19th January 2018 Two groups of three.
The first interview included 2 women, 1 man. The second interview included 2 men and one woman.
The workshop was exceptionally facilitated by my thesis instructor, since she had already agreed on conducting an appreciative inquiry workshop for the executive board, before I started to work with the case organisation. However, I took part in the workshop by collecting notes and observing the situation. The focus group interviews were organised and facilitated by me, where
