Appreciative Inquiry
Case Assignment
Scenario 1
In this scenario, the banking institution is trailing money since the banking has engaged in high lending activities but the debtors have not been able to repay but the back is not certain on the reason behind this occurrence. The bank is therefore required to come up with an effective and practicable solution sooner to fix this debt repayment concern or else it will be pushed out of business. With this in mind, it is apparent that the bank is limited by time and for this reason, it is not recommendable for the institution to use appreciative inquiry strategy rather the team should utilize a more conventional organizational development strategy.
Based on the background resources in regard to App recitative Inquiry Approach (AI), I learned that this approach is characterized by distinct benefits but does not work best when it is required to quickly resolve issues due to time limitation. According to Bushe (2011), AI does not cost effective as it requires more time to intervene and resolve issues when equated to other forms of strategies. In addition, AI is not an appropriate tool to utilize while trying to identify solutions to a specific issue (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). In that, the bank is in need of resolving the existing financial issue that has been fueled by the lack of debt payments. The problem is, therefore, clear even though the root cause of the lack of repayment by the debtors is uncertain which makes AI as an inappropriate approach.
The bank should, therefore, adopt a traditional approach to establish the primary cause of the monetary losses based on debts and try to solve the organizational problem using a more straightforward approach that will require less time. This will ensure that the bank does not also fall into such a scenario in the future that involves money and profits loss. The use of a traditional approach is based on the identification of the issue, causes evaluation, potential solutions analysis and action organization (Bushe, 2011). This is the exact approach that the bank needs in resolving the problem speedily and to begin remedial actions in order to end the wave of revenue losses (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010).
Scenario 2
In this scenario, there is a screenplay team that has been working collaboratively for a decade and despite them having enjoyed high ratings the last two years have been difficult for everyone based on the declining rating. Based on the poor relationships and the lack of collaboration among the team members it is apparent that a solution is needed to resolve the issue and focus on the high rating. In this case, since the issue is particularly known the team can utilize Appreciative Inquiry Approach in solving this issue. This is because unlike the traditional development model that focuses on identifying the existing issue AI will be utilized on settling for the best solution since the issue is well known. AI is additional essential because it encourages positive revolution in order for transformation to prevail (Tricia, 2010). This approach mainly inspires enthusiasm and vigor something that seems to be lacking among the team members (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014). The team needs to be encouraged to focus on change by working collaboratively as before in order to increase the performance and productivity of the team which will, in turn, leads to a better rating.
One of the primary belief of AI is that the resources and information that is required in renewing the working organization, selves and society are within (Tricia, 2010). This differs from the traditional approach which depends on professional knowledge to recommend as well as create solutions (Tricia, 2010). What the screenplay team needs is not a solution that will only lead to higher rating but also the inspirations of working collaboratively to achieve high. Without the cooperation, it is apparent that even if a solution to the rating problem is developed there will be no motivation or enthusiasm to achieve high and to work collaboratively in dealing with such issues in the future. This team needs a long run solution which favors AI rather than the traditional one. AI is grounded on the notion that individuals have a choice in regard to how they view the surrounding and act against the existing issues (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014).
Scenario 3
In this scenario, a social networking company is characterized by financial stability based on the money acquired from investors and is headed by experienced and highly motivated employees. However, despite the stability of the business in the few months that management team has led company they all feel that not all is well and they have the potential to work better. I do believe that the team can utilize AI to ensure that the strengths held by the team are used in building their success and improve these competencies even more. This is because AI is very effective for team building that involves collaboration and the cooperation which the team needs (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). In addition, by definition, AI is grounded on the notion that any organization is bound to grow in any given direction in which those that are involved choose, concentrate and guide their attention (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010).
Since the company has financial stability and the team is comprised of members who are highly experienced, knowledgeable and motivated it is clear that all they need is a clear direction to focus on for the success of the firm. In this context, all that is required is the capability, enthusiasm and the energy to move in the same direction by combining their strengths. In this context, it is apparent that AI is the most suitable approach which is focused on transformation and developing the existing strengths rather than faults. The traditional approach is not appropriate for the scenario because there is no problem in the organization rather a strategic direction is needed so that the existing competencies can be focused on success (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014). The team is required to work collaboratively and in order to sustain their motivation and energy, I believe that AI is the most appropriate approach.
Scenario 4
In this scenario, the team believes that the created vision by AI consultant is unfeasible and in my opinion, the thing that went wrong is that the focused on AI implementation rather than trying to establish the actual issues. In that, the consultant went ahead to develop a vision without examining any existing issues. The consultant should have begun by establishing the existing issue along with the team’s competencies and weaknesses. After this, he should have focused on evaluating several solutions that would solve the issue, plan for an action implementation and then create a feasible solution through the solution.
In that, it would have been better if the consultation began by trying to establish what they needed to achieve and why they believed that it was important for them (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). From AI principles it is important to note that the consultation should begin by trying to discover which involves highlighting the positive competences of the team (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014). This is followed by envisioning and reflection of what should be achieved then designing what is desired based on the identified competencies and then developing an action plan to be utilized (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014). In this context, the consultant failed to consider the primary competences of the team when he developed the vision that appeared to be unrealistic.
References
Bushe, G. R. (2011). Appreciative inquiry: Theory and critique. The Routledge companion to organizational change, 87-103.
Gohil, S., & Deshpande, P. (2014). A framework to map a practice as organization development. Procedia Economics and Finance, 11, 218-229.
Tricia K. (2010). A Positive Approach to Change: The Role of Appreciative Inquiry in Library and Information Organizations. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 41:3, 163-177, DOI: 10.1080/00048623.2010.10721461
Whitney, D. D., & Trosten-Bloom, A. (2010). The power of appreciative inquiry: A practical guide to positive change. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
SLP Appreciative Inquiry
Question 1
I once worked with a team that functioned quite well in general based on several positive but also negative aspects. To begin with, the primary positive aspect of the team is that everyone participated actively and desirably during developments or meetings which inspired and motivated everyone to strive even high. In that in cases where some issues arose everyone actively provided creative solutions and a proper channel was particularly utilized that was very inclusive. The group was more focused on outcomes and the set goal rather than the general work that was being achieved. This involved having a concise plan in regard to how each of these goals would be achieved and the role that each individual would play. Everyone should contribute more definitely which helps in balancing the existing diversity with the support of everyone (Bannister, Wickenheiser, Keegan, 2014). For instance, one time that the team performed well was when the members were involved in a crisis since the person who had been keeping records had failed to maintain records leading to financial losses and some members were willing to exit. However, the members through discussions agreed to dismiss those that were involved to encourage trust. In addition, conflicts would be solved without biases in order to discourage low motivation and misunderstandings.
In my opinion, I do believe that these stories can work in AI approach in developing a suitable plan to improve the general performance of a team. In that AI is centered on creating a more focused motivation, energy, and enthusiasm among teams. While working collaboratively conflicts can never be avoided and thus AI can be utilized to create a plan that the members can focus on in achieving success for the long run (Bannister, Wickenheiser, Keegan, 2014). This approach utilizes the competences of the team to create an action plan thus encouraging high performance. Effective teams are able to sustain consistent communication Susan L. (Bannister, Wickenheiser, Keegan, 2014).
Question 2
The efficiency and performance of a team are tested based on the production and transformations that the team creates rather than the amount of work that it performs. It is not the amount of work that mainly counts rather it is the general production or the outcome that matters (Fifolt & Lander, 2013). If the outcome is positive and that matches with the goals of this team then it can be said to be effective. On the other hand, the best performance is the one that seeks to improve the positioning of the team by ensuring that the set objectives are achieved (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014). In this success, every member should have made a share and the success should be an inclusive one. If the issues that affect the team are not known or are from diverse sources and a quick solution is required for sustainability and success than a traditional development model can be useful in the establishment of the existing issues and also try to propose means through the performance of the team can be improved. This is because the model is mainly essential in identifying problems their primary causes and the most suitable solution (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014). In this context after the problem has been established and suitable solutions proposed this then implies that the team will be motivated to achieve even high. Traditional models are more appropriate for such teams based on the need for cost, time efficiency and the limitation of time (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014). In other words, the problems are minor but they need an immediate solution so that the performance of the team can be upheld (Fifolt & Lander, 2013).
Question 3
It is apparent that both AI and traditional development model are essential in creating positive transformation within teams by ensuring high performance as well as efficiency. However, in my opinion for this team, I do believe that a Traditional Organizational Development Model would be more suitable for the team. In that, the issues are particularly minor but the sources of such issues are not well known which in general implies that the issues, the team’s competences, and weaknesses should be established prior to developing visions and the most suitable action plan (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014). In that most teams normally fail because they are not objective and that they are not focused on a single direction (Gohil & Deshpande, 2014). Appreciative Inquiry model is not suitable for this team because it requires more time and is more suitable where the issue is certainly known. In addition, it cannot be forgotten that the consultation might be expensive which is not convenient for small and not fully recognized teams (Fifolt & Lander, 2013). If my team was to find a consultant it would mainly focus on a traditional development consultant. This is because all that the team would require is to establish all that it wants to accomplish and design strategies that would position it in better achievements (Fifolt & Lander, 2013). In addition, the method is appropriate for the long run benefits and is more efficient in regard to time and cost (Bannister, Wickenheiser, Keegan, 2014).
References
Fifolt, M., & Lander, L. (2013). Cultivating Change Using Appreciative Inquiry. New Directions for Student Services, 2013(143), 19-30. doi:10.1002/ss.20056
Gohil, S., & Deshpande, P. (2014). A framework to map a practice as organization development. Procedia Economics and Finance, 11, 218-229.
Susan L. Bannister, Hayley M. Wickenheiser, David A. Keegan. (2014). Key Elements of Highly Effective Teams. Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/133/2/184
