Using Appreciative Inquiry to Facilitate Positive Change

IMAGINATION AND INNOVATION: USING APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY
TO FACILITATE POSITIVE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
Daniel A. Byerley
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts
Department of Communication and Dramatic Arts
Central Michigan University
Mount Pleasant, Michigan
April, 2011

ii
Accepted by the Faculty of the College of Graduate Studies,
Central Michigan University, in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the master‘s degree
Thesis Committee:
Wendy Papa, Ph.D. Committee Chair
Michael Papa, Ph.D Faculty Member
William Dailey, Ph.D. Faculty Member
April 12, 2011 Date of Defense
Roger Coles, Ph.D. Dean
College of Graduate Studies
May 2, 2011 Approved by the
College of Graduate Studies

iii
"We keep moving forward, opening new doors, and doing new things,
because we're curious and curiosity keeps leading us down new paths."
-Walt Disney-
"From the very beginning, we have always sought to reach out to one another…
to bridge the gaps between us...to communicate."
-Spaceship Earth, EPCOT Center-

iv
This thesis is dedicated to Mom and Papa,
my mother, and my family and friends.
Thank you for always believing in me
and helping make my dreams come true.

v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the help and support that the members of my thesis
committee have provided. Dr. Wendy Papa, Dr. Michael Papa, and Dr. Bill Dailey, your
valuable direction from the beginning, consistent positive support, multiple reviews of
the documents, and contributions to the final product were essential to my success not
only as a thesis advisee but also as a scholar. Throughout the process, these faculty
members provided their specific knowledge of communication to help me in my journey
of making this thesis what it is today. Finally, I wish to acknowledge the support of
Central Michigan University in producing this work.

vi
ABSTRACT
IMAGINATION AND INNOVATION: USING APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY
TO FACILITATE POSITIVE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
by Daniel A. Byerley
As contemporary organizations face challenges in the implementation of change
efforts, new methods in evaluation and training and development help aid the process.
Appreciative Inquiry is an affirmative research approach that focuses on the positive
aspects of an organization and what makes it work rather than what problems it may have.
Consortium X is composed of four individual organizations working collectively to
facilitate positive organizational change. An Appreciative Inquiry evaluation was
conducted with the organizations of Consortium X. The responses from the participants
who completed the Appreciative Inquiry survey were analyzed and seven themes
emerged: (1) interpersonal conflict; (2) managing change; (3) teamwork; (4) listening
skills; (5) guest service; (6) leadership; and (7) feedback. A manual was designed to
develop upon these seven themes with seven individual lesson units. These lesson units
contain lessons, activities, worksheets, and evaluations pertinent to the theme. The
manual was reviewed by three professionals, the Dean of Instruction from a California
college, the CEO of a television production company in Los Angeles, and the CEO and
Principal Consultant at a Los Angeles consulting firm. The evaluations supported the use
of the manual as the product of the Appreciative Inquiry evaluation and as a tool to aid in
facilitating positive organization change at Consortium X.

vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................1
Purpose....................................................................................................2
Literature Review .....................................................................................4
Change and Organizations............................................................4
Reactions to Change ...................................................................11
Appreciative Inquiry ...................................................................18
Summary.....................................................................................23
II. A CASE STUDY OF CONSORTIUM X...........................................................25
Consortium Overview.............................................................................25
Appreciative Inquiry Evaluation.............................................................25
Study Design...............................................................................26
Process .......................................................................................29
Results....................................................................................................31
Summary ................................................................................................39
III. DEVELOPMENT OF THE TRAINING MANUAL ..........................................41
Lesson Unit Rationale ............................................................................42
Summary ................................................................................................46
IV. EVALUATION .................................................................................................47
Synopsis .................................................................................................47
Evaluation of the Manual .......................................................................48
Strengths.....................................................................................48
Limitations..................................................................................50
Summary ................................................................................................52
APPENDICES...............................................................................................................54
REFERENCES............................................................................................................164

1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
As time has progressed, change has become the norm for organizations
(Armenakis, Harris, & Mossholder, 1993; Fox & Amichai-Hamburger, 2001; Kunda &
Van Maanen, 1999; Sande, 2008; Wanberg & Banas, 2000). This includes volatile
organizational environments both externally and internally (Preskill & Catsambas, 2006).
Change is the ―mantra of our times‖ (Wanberg & Banas, 2000, p. 65) and the only
constant is change (Sande, 2008; Wanberg & Banas, 2000). Preskill and Catsambas
(2006) argue that organizations are never stagnant – they are always facing and reacting
to various internal and external pressures. In order for organizations to survive, they
must embrace change that reflects turbulent environments, chaos, rapidly changing
markets, and technological revolutions (Kunda & Van Maanen, 1999). It is a very
personal and complex challenge that requires each organizational member to think, feel,
and do all things differently (Duck, 1993). Organizational leaders and researchers must
continually evaluate their organizational environments in order to facilitate internal
change and respond to external change appropriately.
When it comes to investigation and implementation of change, Preskill and
Catsambas (2006) argue that asking questions is fundamental to an organization‘s overall
health, success, and ability to adapt to change. These questions should challenge
assumptions, affirm successes, foster organizational members‘ imagination and
innovation, and most importantly embrace emotions resulting from change. Questions
that create energy and excitement, rather than questions that search for fault and
accusation, promote future organizational success. To embrace these ideals and help

2
facilitate change, the process of Appreciative Inquiry can be used to investigate the needs,
wants, and future goals of organizational members (Preskill & Catsambas, 2006).
This thesis will focus on a specific group of organizations that desire an
investigation into ways to help facilitate a change effort that originates from
organizational members. By using the process of Appreciative Inquiry (AI),
organizational members help create their own vision of what the organization should be
and aid the researcher in creating a training and development manual specifically tailored
to those organizations‘ members. The organizations in focus are all hospitality
organizations based in the Mid-Michigan area (individually referred to as Company A,
Company B, Company C, and Company D, and collectively called Consortium X
hereafter). Consortium X has requested assistance to investigate the various
communication challenges and opportunities in future change efforts and tools to help
ensure successful implementation.
Purpose
This project is intended as an applied communication thesis with the purpose of
providing a tool for the four organizations that comprise Consortium X. This tool will
help Consortium X implement change and deal with the communication related
challenges often associated with the implementation of change. Consortium X may use
this thesis as a training and development tool for current and possible future
organizational change efforts. In addition to Consortium X, other organizations
implementing change and facing an ever-changing workforce may also find the
information useful.

3
This thesis is organized in the following way: Chapter I is the introduction
followed by a literature review on organizational change, reactions to change, and
emotions. It introduces the concept of Appreciative Inquiry as a positive way to create
lasting organizational change. Chapter II describes the case study concerning
Consortium X and the four organizations that compose Consortium X. Next, Chapter II
details the process and the results of the Appreciative Inquiry performed with members of
Consortium X (from management to entry level employees). This will include details of
why the particular Appreciative Inquiry survey questions were chosen. Chapter II
includes a summary of the key needs, values, and ideas that organizational members
revealed through the Appreciative Inquiry process and those found within the literature.
Afterward, discussion and use of a tool will be suggested to help with the implementation
of change. Chapter III explains the steps taken to develop the tool for Consortium X and
its four member organizations – a training and development manual derived from the
specific needs and wants of organizational members discovered through the Appreciative
Inquiry process. Finally, Chapter IV discusses assessments of the manual and limitations
for its use.

4
Literature Review
This literature review includes relevant discussions of organizational change and
the evaluation and investigation approach known as Appreciative Inquiry. First, this
review looks at overall organizational change and its effect on organizational members.
Secondly, a discussion of organizational culture and its connection to change efforts
across an organization is presented. Next, a section examines organizational members‘
various reactions (including emotional) to change efforts and strategies to help ensure
effective change. Finally, this review gives an overview of Appreciative Inquiry as a
positive vehicle for organizational change.
Change and Organizations
It is difficult to convince people to accept change. This rings true for
organizations and their members as well. According to Duck (1993), change is a very
personal challenge that requires each organizational member to think, feel, and do all
things differently. Within the past two decades, organizations have faced more change
than ever (Armenakis, Harris, & Mossholder, 1993; Fox & Amichai-Hamburger, 2001;
Kunda & Van Maanen, 1999; Sande, 2008; Wanberg & Banas, 2000); and in today‘s
world, the only constant is change (Sande, 2008; Wanberg & Banas, 2000).
Whether that change is a minor change of policy or a complete overhaul of
organizational values and direction, it is the organization‘s members that have to be sold
on the idea. Organizational members are the people who are the core of the change
process—the ones who must adopt and adapt to change (Shum, Bove, & Auh, 2007).
They are the people who, as both subjects of change and agents of change, represent the
organizational world. Unfortunately, humans are creatures of habit; thus, they are

5
naturally wired to resist change (Kunda & Van Maanen, 1999; Naidoo, 2010; Wanberg &
Banas, 2000).
Historically, organizational members would have strong ties to their organizations
due to bargains or social contracts such as: a career as payment for loyalty, personal
identity as payment for commitment, and meaningful work if one was dedicated in their
performance (Kunda & Van Maanen, 1999). At one point in time, members would have
publicly displayed pride in their organizations and a passion for their work.
Unfortunately, as time passes, corporations and other organizations have been
challenging these social contracts through reengineering, layoffs, downsizing,
outsourcing, and renegotiated contracts.
Kunda and Van Maanen (1999) argue that some organizations are stressing the
importance of employability instead of guaranteed employment. For example,
organizational members will develop the skills necessary to be hired by someone else if
their current employers discover that they are no longer needed. According to Wanberg
and Banas (2000) it would seem that as changes are made, even the long-tenured
employees are stripped of their roles, or their roles so rapidly change, that they are no
longer performing the tasks they were originally hired to do. The current condition of the
job market has even turned some organizations into treating their managerial staff as
transient, all in the name of competitiveness, profitability, and cost consciousness. As a
result, one can easily see the effects that external conditions have on organizational
members‘ willingness to change in an environment of constant flux (Bryson, 2008).
These internal effects of an organization have drastic impacts on the way
members see their organizational world. This world is created from organizational

6
culture and is imbued with emotion. This organizational change has the ability to create
emotional responses as employees experience first-hand the effects of the organization‘s
transformation (Smollan & Sayers, 2009). Harris and Ogbonna (1998) argue that all too
often, it is the employees that are at the receiving end of the consequences of change.
The following section discusses these personal impacts, their connection to the creation
of organizational culture, and the emotions of employees during the implementation of
change.
At times, organizational members can feel a loss of territory, become uncertain
about what the future has in store, and fear personal failure associated with change
(Wanberg & Banas, 2000). Often, the assumption is that employees will accept change
as willing agents and respond positively to management‘s initiatives (Harris & Ogbonna,
1998). This is not necessarily the case, as we can see that employees and other
organizational members have varied responses to change.
Smollan and Sayers (2009) have found that the cultural change of an organization
provokes emotional reactions, which are often strong. According to Wanberg and Banas
(2000) emotional reactions (such as sadness, anger, disbelieve, and distrust) can stem
from a multitude of responses: such as the perceived outcomes, processes used to
implement change, speed, timing, the nature of the leadership team, employees‘
personalities, and emotional intelligence. Duck (1993) describes change as being
fundamentally about organizational members‘ emotions and values – their personal
beliefs and feelings about situations.
These deep-rooted values exist at the core of organizational member‘s mindset
and ultimately lie within human cognition (Klie, 2008; Pizer & Hartel, 2005; Schein,

7
2004). Eaton (2010) argues that creating the right environment for change is not
something accomplished overnight – one is dealing with beliefs, assumptions, and
emotions that have been ingrained on a daily basis over the span of many years.
Organizational culture is a system of shared meanings, with a set of beliefs, values,
assumptions, customs, rules, and traditions (Klie, 2008; Pizer & Hartel 2005, Schein,
2004). According to Harris & Ogbonna (1998), organizational culture is embedded in the
subconscious and cannot be easily changed by leadership. It creates the symbolic
character, rituals, and embedded meanings of organizations. Armenakis, et al. (1993)
states that socially, organizational members will use reference points in the culture
around them to communicate the clues regarding the meaning of events and
circumstances facing an organization. One of the largest shortcomings of organizational
change efforts occurs when organizations fail to recognize the strength of the culture that
has been communicated by members within it. This cultural strength is the extent to
which all organizational members hold the same values toward the organization and their
role in it. It shapes the behavior and communication of its members in many overt and
covert ways (Smollan & Sayers, 2009). Harris and Ogbonna (1998) argue that the
stronger the organizational culture, the harder it is to implement change.
In order to fully grasp how employees and organizational members‘
organizational culture affects their reaction to change, it is important to understand how
culture is socially constructed. Organizations convey and transmit the values that
construct a member‘s perception of the culture in a variety of ways. Culture creates
emotions and values while providing for organizational members to express themselves
socially in accepted ways inside the organization itself. This culture is the ―glue‖ that

8
holds members together (Smollan & Sayers, 2009). It may gradually change and evolve
or be deliberately determined, be expressed in mission statements or on company
websites, or even be included in orientation and training sessions (Kunda & van Maanen,
1999; Russ, 2009). Also, cultural elements may be communicated through meetings,
management briefings, annual performance reviews, and even informal conversations.
According to Schein (1990), culture is how a group learns to solve its problems over a
period of time – while integrating the external environment into internal problems. This
occurs to organizational members at multiple levels such as behavioral, cognitive, and
emotional processes.
For example, Marty Sklar, vice president and principal creative executive at Walt
Disney Imagineering once told organizational members that: ―From the beginning,
starting with Walt Disney, we have had five things that make me proud to be part of this
Company: high-quality products, optimism for the future, great storytelling, an emphasis
on family entertainment and great talent, passion and dedication from our Cast Members‖
(Disney.com, 2010). Examples like this shed light onto the culture communicated
through affective language and personal narrative, while provoking emotions in the
members of an organization through the visualization of the company‘s direction, values,
and mission.
According to Ewing (2009), the communication that occurs between employees
both on the same hierarchal level as well as cross-hierarchy have an effect on the
construction of culture. Wilson (2010) cautions leaders from following the simple notion
that organizational change occurs only as a top-down or bottom-up approach.
Strandgaard, Pedersen and Dobbin (2006) argue that employee discourse socially

9
constructs the organizational culture. The accompanying social processes also help to
construct the meaning (Gossage, 2010). Deal and Kennedy (1982) define this as the
cultural network (the primary and informal communication within an organization).
While the members have the power to create their own meaning and culture through
social interaction (Gossage, 2010) and stories (LaGuardia, 2008), the meaning they create
is the meaning they are then controlled and constrained by (Allen, 2003).
Deal and Kennedy (1982) identified the characters that create a cultural network.
Storytellers are those who tell stories in order to gain influence and power and impart
legends of the organization onto others. Priests are the designated keepers of the
organization‘s values and keep track of the history of the company like an encyclopedia –
helping other members remember the company‘s direction and equally important past.
The whisperers are those who have power ―behind the throne‖ (p. 90) and their source of
power is the boss‘ ear. Deal and Kennedy (1982) argue that ―Anyone who wants
something done will head to the whisperers‖ (p. 90). Gossips are those who know all the
details about everyone right now. They are not expected to be completely accurate, but
are always expected to be entertaining and can at times help provide the real side of a
story that has gone awry. Secretarial sources are usually the first people organizational
members desiring information turn to. They are most reliable because they are part of a
relatively non-involved network of employees and are therefore unbiased sources. Spies
often start out as storytellers. Spies are the well liked and have access to many people—
helping them keep tabs on the organizational culture. Finally, Deal and Kennedy (1982)
describe the last characters in social networks: cabals. Cabals are a group of two or more
people who band together in order to get ahead in the organization. They are useful for

10
helping promote members as well as provide protection. All of these characters utilize
and influence the role of communication in the socialization of organizational culture.
Consideration must also be placed on the subcultures that exist in an organization.
If we view culture in pluralist terms, these can range from different categories such as
department, professional identity, ethnicity and gender, as well as different value systems.
According to Harris and Ogbonna (1998), the behavior and responses of employees is
often the result of their perception of, and involvement in, not only the overall culture but
also the subcultures of an organization. Some of the most profound subcultures are based
on location, hierarchal position, and service conditions. Armenakis, et al. (1993)
discovered that subcultures could have a profound effect on the implementation of
change, polarizing the organizational members‘ beliefs and attitudes; thus, preventing
acceptance to change.
The values portrayed during an organizational change will also be one of the
driving factors in helping to facilitate change. Organizational members will be more
likely to support organizational change when it aligns with their own values (Smollan &
Sayers, 2009). For example, Smollan and Sayers (2009) found that some of the
resistance to change was due to the new organizational culture appearing to be less
participative than the status quo. It is important to acknowledge the role that
organizational culture plays in both the facilitation and the implementation of
organizational change. For change to be handled and implemented effectively, the
emotions of members that accompany a change, must be handled sensitively (Smollan &
Sayers, 2009; Harris & Ogbonna, 1998).

11
Reactions to Change
According to Elsmore (2001), change on a large scale is accomplished on the
long-term and will often cause pain and stress, especially when it is implemented and
communicated in a top-down manner. For example, Ryan (2005) found that when a
company moved in a cultural direction that was perceived to be going against the current
culture (such as a people-driven culture to one looking out for the shareholders),
numerous negative reactions were found. When organizational members believe in the
values of an organization, their reactions to change tend to be more positive. Research
provides evidence that organizational members respond more positively to change and
become more actively involved with implementation of the change when their emotions
were acknowledged and treated with respect.
Organizational change researchers ask many questions during their search for how
change can and should be implemented. Some of these questions are: How do
organizational members socially construct change efforts? How do they react to change?
What stages of acceptance vary across the organization? The next section offers a few
models developed by researchers that discuss some of the various answers to these
questions.
Harris and Ogbonna (1998) provide a few reactions that employees may have
when confronted with change. The first and foremost goal organizations implementing
change should strive for would be active acceptance. This occurs when organizational
members adopt, agree with, and participate in the change efforts. The second goal would
be general acceptance whereby employees somewhat agree to the change but still hold
on to some of the old ways. Third is dissonance where employees are confused at the

12
individual level, which may result in inactivity or inconsistent actions. Fourth is an
undesirable response, general rejection, where members have broad disagreement with
change tinted with mistrust of the change efforts. Last, and the most undesirable, is
active rejection where there is what Harris and Ogbonna (1998) describe as recognizable
attempts to prevent change from occurring. Fortunately, or perhaps unfortunately, most
organizational members will be in the middle of the two extremes.
Isabella (1990) explained a manner in which many organizational members
interpret the events that surround change as it happens. According to Isabella (1990),
members perceive the events in four stages. First, is anticipation where organizational
members interpersonally communicate through gossip and rumors, which in turn socially
constructs their perception of the reality of the situation. Next is confirmation, where
members experience events that create a more conventional frame of reference where
they establish logical associations that then create a better understanding of events.
Culmination occurs when members, as well as the agents of change, compare new events
and conditions to the old in order to determine which should be kept and which should be
lost. Finally, Isabella (1990) argues that organizational members go through aftermath
where members—especially leadership— review and evaluate the results and
consequences of change.
Jaffe, Scott, and Tobe (1994) offered a final, four-stage model that illustrates the
effect change has on some organizational members. First is denial where members refuse
to accept change and believe it to be unnecessary. Resistance follows, with members
withholding participation, attempting to postpone change, and trying to convince
policymakers to stop change efforts. Exploration then occurs when members experiment

13
with new behaviors to test the effectiveness of new results, which hopefully is followed
with commitment, where members fully embrace the proposed change.
All of these models attempt to explain the process of implementing organizational
change and shed light on the notion that change occurs in small steps that take a long
time to accomplish. According to Armenakis, et al. (1999), some efforts of an
organization to bypass the multiple steps, as well as the social and cognitive processes
that members go through, often fail. The mistake of misunderstanding organizational
members‘ reactions can often negate the entire process of implementing change
altogether.
Erwin and Garman (2009) argue that resistance to change is characterized by
multi-dimensional facets that include: how members react to change (behavioral), how
they think about the change (cognitive), and how they feel about the change (affective).
Organizational members operate in all three of these dimensions simultaneously. In the
affective dimension in particular, Erwin and Garman (2009) agree that members can
experience emotions such as elation, anxiety, anger, fear, stress, enthusiasm, and
apprehension.
Understanding the impact the perception process organizational members go
through when change is implemented will undoubtedly aid in the change process and
ultimately lead to a greater understanding of the organizational culture. For example,
organizational members will react negatively and emotionally when they believe that the
manner in which change is implemented is unfair, when organizational support is not
provided, and when they felt it would be unsafe to voice their dissatisfaction with a

14
change (Smollan & Sayers, 2009). The next section reviews how the affective culture of
the organization impacts daily communication among its members.
The affective culture of an organization molds and shapes the manner in which
emotions are experienced and communicated. This plays a vital role not only during
everyday organizational life, but also during organizational change (Smollan & Sayers,
2009). As examined earlier, organizational culture plays an important role in both
creating the varied emotions during change and impacting their expression and
communication. The affective culture is what Smollan and Sayers (2009) refer to as the
many ways in which emotions are taken for granted in organizations.
There are four main ways in which organizational change, organizational culture,
and emotions are interconnected according to Smollan and Sayers (2009): First,
organizational change can trigger emotions. Second, emotion lies in the heart of
organizational culture, therefore organizational change is very emotional. Third, the
affective culture of an organization impacts the communication and expression of these
emotions. Fourth, specific elements of a culture have an impact to how employees react
to change.
As discussed earlier, the literature and research on organizational change argues
that change, especially cultural change, can create emotional reactions. Smollan and
Sayers (2009) argue that the affective culture of an organization directs organizational
members to how emotions are to be communicated, experienced, and regulated.
Ultimately, all organizational culture is imbued with emotion (Klie, 2008). In order for
an organizational culture to be healthy, Pizer and Hartel (2005) argue, emotional

15
expressiveness should be encouraged and supported while at the same time emphasis is
placed on the emotional elements of the organization.
Emotional labor is essential to be able to lead and implement change. Those who
are responsible for change efforts have a duty to support their ideas with the appropriate
type of emotion in order to sell the change to organizational members (Fox & Amichai-
Hamburger, 2001). This takes what Huy (1999) describes as emotional intelligence—
where an organizational leader or member is able to recognize his or her emotional states,
as well as those of the people around them, in order to communicate in a manner that
helps solve problems and regulate behavior. Leaders can then have the capability to
monitor, recognize, discriminate, and attend to the emotions manifested in the
organizational members. Unfortunately, all too often, leadership concentrates on only
what can be seen, the rational behavior, and only uses rational methods to push a process
forward, forgetting and neglecting the underlying motivations for human behavior—the
non-rational sphere that includes emotions (Fox & Amichai-Hamburger, 2001).
Unfortunately, not all emotions are supported in all organizations (Duck, 1993).
According to Fineman (2008), emotions become cultural privileges when some are
classified as appropriate for display and others are inappropriate. At times,
organizational members feel that they cannot communicate the emotions that they wish to
due to the affective culture of the organization—especially when it comes to change.
Bryant and Wolfram Cox (2006) argue that members may feel the need to hide their
emotions about organizational change due to their perception that it would be seen as
unwelcome resistance. Often, when programs of change are being implemented and even

16
management does not agree with the changes, they feel the need to hide their feelings to
pretend to comply with the changes.
Fox and Amichai-Hamburger (2001) argue that organizational leadership must
communicate with emotions by fully supporting and acknowledging the emotional and
cultural influences of their employees. They point out that a majority of corporate
organizational life is full of rational charts, presentations, meetings, analysis, calculations,
and logical examinations. There is no room for emotions when all of these influences
must be attended to—and therein lies what Fox and Amichai-Hamburger define as the
fault of organizational leadership. Many leaders see emotions as a burden they have to
deal with, not as the potential tool for securing commitment and willingness.
For many members of an organization, emotional management is part of the
perceived professional image of the manager—all defined by the organizational culture.
For example, some managers may feel that emotional expression is a part of upper-
management culture, but when around subordinates, they must be emotionally shutdown.
In a study conducted by Smollan and Sayers (2009), one manager indicated her
frustration with the organization‘s affective culture. She would cry on occasion and was
told she was a ―bit soft‖ and she had to promise herself she would not do it again because
of the ―macho culture‖ (p. 447). Sometimes however, the affective culture is positive,
such as when one of the participants indicated that emotional support from upper-
management provided a degree of comfort. An often unspoken rule in organizations is
the need to control what are perceived as inappropriate emotions and that this socially
constructed set of rules often leads to conflict between what employees expect and what
leaders deliver (Smollan & Sayers, 2009).

17
Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, and Sowa (1986) argue that organizational
members collectively create global beliefs pertaining to their overall perception of
organizations. These beliefs drive organizational members to be more committed in the
values and mission of organizations, especially important when implementing change.
To aid in the support and implementation of change, organizations can provide members
suitable levels of tangible and psychological support. Huy (1999) argues that
organizations should be able to respond appropriately to the emotions and needs of
employees to help facilitate organizational change.
Emotional responses to specific elements of an existing organizational culture help
form the members‘ responses to change. These existing perceptions of the organization
are reflected in their reactions to leadership‘s implementation of change. A change in the
values of an organization will often undermine a member‘s sense of identity (for example,
when a manager loses their status). At the initial stages of change, people will often resist
it. For many organizational members, the manner in which their leaders respond to their
emotions is a key feature in how they reacted to organizational change (Smollan & Sayers,
2009). According to Fox and Amichai-Hamburger (2001), individuals first feel and then
only after having felt, will they justify their feelings. This justification can lead to
embracing change, or resistance. In order to fully support these emotions during change,
the culture of an organization must be willing to adapt in ways that fully reflect the dreams
and desires of how organizational members wish to see the organization after the change
has been implemented. How people communicate about their organization with other
organizational members, shapes their impression of and own personal actions at work
(Krattenmaker, 2001).

18
To discover how to create a change-ready culture that supports the emotions and
efforts of organizational members, social scientists have been researching across
disciplines to discover how to not only support the emotions and efforts of organizational
members, but also allow them to feel a part of the change process. More recently,
researchers have been incorporating more positive-psychology perspectives (research
focused on issues such as optimism, creativity, and emotional intelligence) into their
research of organizations. This has led to the development of a new research initiative
labeled positive organizational scholarship (POS) (Skinner & Kelley, 2006). POS
focuses on the idea that organizations are able to function more effectively when
communicating across and about the factors that make the organization a positive place,
rather than factors associated with negative aspects of the organization (Roberts,
Spreitzer, Dutton, Quinn, Heapy, & Barker, 2005). With the rise of POS, a research
method has emerged that has been successfully applied to organizational change research
for three decades now. This method is called Appreciative Inquiry.
Appreciative Inquiry
Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is an affirmative research approach that focuses on the
positive aspects of an organization and what makes it work rather than what problems it
may have (Berrisford, 2005; Skinner & Kelley, 2006; Whitney & Schau, 1998). AI is
based on social constructionism – the theory that people (as well as organizations) create
reality as they know it through their own interpretation of, and communication about, the
world they live in (Krattenmaker, 2001). Berrisford (2005) states that AI allows for the
use of structured communication to generate a collective image of a better organizational
future. According to Skinner and Kelley (2006), AI has the ability to facilitate the

19
change process in a way that holds true to the values and beliefs of organizational
members, and ultimately mirror the culture, as those members socially understand it. AI
assumes that an organization‘s culture (and dominant stories) changes and evolves as the
organization does. Whitney and Schau (1998) argue that the communicated culture of an
organization tells members what they can and cannot do as well as what to expect from
the organization as a whole.
According to Whitney and Schau (1998) and Krattenmaker (2001), organizations
tend to change in the direction of what they study. Using the basic tenets of AI, an
organization can begin to ask questions that lead to solutions instead of problems. If an
organizational leader is constantly asking for ―solutions to problems‖, his or her
employees will be searching for problems to bring back to them. If, according to
Berrisford (2005), they break the cycle of negative thinking and instead, who asks for
moments of greatness and why/how we arrived at those moments, employees will then be
on the lookout for great moments. After their search, they will most likely return with
explanations answering how employees became happy and how they maintain that
happiness as well as productivity.
Skinner and Kelley (2006) agree that AI is based on three main assumptions. The
first assumption is that every organizational member has a talent that is unique to them
and that they do something well. Collectively, members have major contributions to
offer to not only other organizational members but major stakeholders as well. The
second assumption is that the culture and organizational members‘ perceived images of
the future are socially constructed. These images have the ability to guide member
behavior in times of change as well as stability. The final assumption is the power of

20
positive thinking. According to Whitney and Schau (1998), asking members what they
see works well in the organization, instead of what does not, focuses attention on the
positive aspects of the organization. By assuming the very best in people and
organizations AI offers positive processes and communication for organization change.
Appreciative Inquiry starts by identifying the topic that will drive the research and
questions being asked. This is called the affirmative topic choice. The questions being
asked are vital to the AI process (Krattenmaker, 2001; Preskill & Catsambas, 2006).
Therefore, the topic is important because it determines what exactly an organizational
researcher should focus on when using AI. As mentioned earlier, it is also vital that the
questions be presented in a positive tone and manner representative of AI‘s affirmative
nature (Skinner & Kelley, 2006). Once the topic is chosen, the four-step AI cycle is
begun. This 4-D process assumes that change occurs through thoughtful inquiry and
dialogue (Whitney & Schau, 1998) and consists of discovery, dream, design, and destiny.
Discovery is the intensive search into the best aspects of an organization.
According to Whitney and Schau (1998), discovery gives emphasis to what is working
well in the organization instead of what is not. This normally involves writing questions,
creating interview guides, conducting interviews, and even focus groups (Skinner &
Kelley, 2006). In this stage of the AI process, organizational members are often asked to
give anecdotes and personal narratives that reflect the best experiences they have had in
their organization. Since members‘ understandings of an organization are created
through the way they think and communicate about the organization, the discovery phase
opens a window into their thoughts and internal meanings regarding the organization
(Krattenmaker, 2001). According to Whitney and Schau (1998), personal interviews with

21
organizational members can help explore a member‘s beginnings with the organization,
their daily work, their appreciative stories, and their dreams for the organization‘s future.
This democratic process concludes with stories being shared among all participants for
the collective discovery of underlying themes and common threads that run through them
all.
The Dream stage of AI consists of organizational members reflecting on the
things they have learned from the discovery stage. They reflect and imagine what could
be if those remarkable experiences became the norm. Whitney and Schau (1998) agree
that it is a time for members to explain their dreams and wishes about their work, their
work relationships, and their organization – as well as their role in it. Skinner and Kelley
(2006) state that this step requires that members fully immerse themselves into the AI
process and begin to see their greater purpose. The desired result of this stage is an
image or strategic goal that will then direct organizational members‘ individual efforts
toward the organization‘s greatest potential. This is ultimately a realignment of what
might be.
Design is where organizational members use the discoveries and dreams
developed in the first two stages to be able to identify the qualities needed in order to
achieve those dreams. Described by Whitney and Schau (1998) as a high-involvement
process, the design stage gives organizational members a change to be an integral part of
the change process. In this stage, participants are asked to write down design statements
– ideas that describe the ideal organization. In the past, these statements have been about
many concepts, such as: work environment, interpersonal relationships, structure, power
dimensions, etc. These statements are important to AI because they help define what the

22
organizational should be (Skinner & Kelley, 2006). Whitney and Schau (1998) argue
that by involving the organizational members in the change process from the very
beginning and allowing them to help create actual policies and implementations,
members are quickly reoriented toward the change efforts.
The Destiny phase of Appreciative Inquiry involves the actions that will enable
the organization to reflect and become what was dreamed and discovered in the
beginning stages. Often, as with longer studies and implementations, the destiny phase
results in actual structural changes to the organization. This final stage uses the design
statements to help build a better organization (Skinner & Kelley, 2006) – a ―new‖
organization that members have been a key part of the change process since the
beginning.
Some may criticize AI for asking questions that are too broad. According to
Preskill and Catsambas (2006), by asking the positive questions specific to an AI
evaluation, organizational members will be more open in their responses and the resulting
data has the ability to be more useful. Some organizational researchers may use
traditional approaches to evaluation that might only reveal problems and gaps in
performance. Preskill and Catsambas (2006) argue that AI‘s approach seeks to discover
successes and peak experiences. Both approaches have the capability to discover an
organization‘s problems, but AI discovers how things work when they work well –
insight into the dynamic and fluid systems of an organization.
At its core, AI‘s process includes choosing appropriate perspectives and language.
Traditional approaches to qualitative interviewing and surveys can still provide rich data,
but AI‘s approach provides ―sincere and systematic study of success [that] can lead

23
[researchers] to discoveries about goals, desired outcomes, indicators, evaluation use, and
recommendations for improvement‖ (Preskill & Catsambas, 2006, p. xviii).
Summary
This literature review has come to a very important conclusion: implementing
organizational change is not an easy task. It requires handling of a complicated, sensitive
mission through several stages and different tasks. This is referred to as change
management and according to Sande (2008), is an ongoing, repeatable process.
According to Eaton (2010), organizations must look long-term (mostly because it will
take a long time) and that they must ensure consistency across all communication
channels and leadership.
Smollan and Sayers (2009) argue ―if employee engagement [during change] is to
be authentic, organizations need to craft cultures that are sufficiently strong enough to
embrace change without altering their fundamental ethos and to develop an acceptance
that emotions are a natural part of organizational culture and organizational change‖ (p.
451). According to Bird (2009), management must recognize the stress and emotional
changes involved with change to organizational members. Actively managing the change
process will not only allow for greater awareness of the nature and scope of changes, but
of member‘s reactions to change. Bird (2009) found that the emphasis of listening skills,
coaching rather than simply telling, and leading rather than directing were great starts to
gaining employee trust and helping implement change.
It is vitally important that organizations build a culture that can embrace a
change-ready environment (Shum et al., 2007)—a culture that not only embraces change,
but also is cognizant of organizational members‘ emotions and the strength of the culture

24
beforehand. Appreciative Inquiry discovers how to create a change-ready culture that
supports the emotions and efforts of organizational members. AI allows for
organizational members to dream and discover ways in which the organization works
well and how they can become agents of change – placing change in the direction that
they feel is the ―right‖ direction. An ideal organizational change would occur in a
direction that aligns with organizational members‘ values, their socially constructed
culture, and maintains support for their emotions and efforts.

25
CHAPTER II
A CASE STUDY OF CONSORTIUM X
The preparation and implementation of organizational change is not an easy task.
Now that the general problems and concerns of organizational change have been
addressed, this chapter narrows the focus within Consortium X. This chapter discusses
the Appreciative Inquiry approach, the results from surveys with organizational members
and leaders, and the analysis of emerging themes. This all leads toward the development
of a manual for future use within Consortium X (to be discussed in chapter III).
Consortium Overview
The following is a brief description of the four organizations that comprise
Consortium X:
Company A is a sports bar and grill located in Mid-Michigan. It has three
members of management and 30 part-time or full-time employees.
Company B is a bar and nightclub located in Mid-Michigan. It has two members
of management and 30 part-time or full-time employees.
Company C is a restaurant and bar located in Mid-Michigan. It has two members
of management and 24 part-time or full-time employees.
Company D is a themed restaurant that also includes a lounge, music, and a full
service bar located in Mid-Michigan. It has two members of management and 25 part-
time or full-time employees.
Appreciative Inquiry Evaluation
Appreciative Inquiry has a powerful impact on the way people think and act.
Preskill and Catsambas (2006) argue that AI allows organizational members to look back

26
to past successes in order to achieve peak experiences because they know they are
possible. Consortium X is looking for more effective communication among its
organizational members (especially during implementation of change) and the resources
in which to train and help motivate its employees. Appreciative Inquiry offers
researchers a tool to evaluate an organization, design interviews, surveys, and guides,
develop training systems, and effectively manage an organization‘s capacity for change
(Preskill & Catsambas, 2006).
Study Design
Surveys are the most often used data collection method within organizations.
According to Preskill and Catsambas (2006), surveys usually consist of a predetermined
set of questions distributed via email, mail, or handed to individuals. Surveys were used
for this particular study and this comes with many advantages. Preskill and Catsambas
(2006) argue that when using surveys, the questions are presented in the same manner to
all participants, with no interpretation bias from the researcher, thus reducing chances of
researcher bias. They agree that many participants may feel more comfortable
responding to a survey than to a face-to-face interview. Russ-Eft and Preskill (2001)
offer another advantage: that surveys may increase the chances of receiving a
representative sample.
Some researchers argue that there are some disadvantages to surveys as well.
Some participants may not choose to respond for various reasons including but not
limited to, the feeling that they do not have time to complete the survey (Czaja & Blair,
2005). Preskill and Catsambas (2006) argue that even if participants find the time to
complete the survey, they may not benefit from an attentive listener and nonverbal

27
feedback. Preskill and Catsambas (2006) agree however, that by delivering the survey
online, these disadvantages can be minimized.
The survey measure (Appendix B) created for this project consists of mostly
open-ended appreciative questions. The use of surveys directed at organizational
members aligns with the argument posed by Deal and Kennedy (1982) that in order to
study organizational culture and change, one must interview company people and
diagnose culture from the inside. The main researcher adapted many of the survey
questions from an AI study using Internet-delivered surveys conducted by Preskill and
Catsambas (2006). The project‘s Appreciative Inquiry topic chosen is positive
organizational change. This affects the types of questions posed to participants and
directs them toward a response as such.
The first two sections of questions ask participants to describe their personal
evaluation of the organization they are a member of (Company A through D), including
some experiences where they felt most engaged and effective. This provides the
framework for the first phase of an Appreciative Inquiry evaluation, which strives for an
intensive look at the best aspects of an organization, the Discovery phase. For example:
Starting back at the time you began working at your organization …
What first attracted you this organization?
What were your initial impressions when you joined?
How have your impressions changed since then?
What keeps you here?
If you work here, you have probably experienced some ups and downs, some high points and
low points. Think about a time that stands out to you as a high point – a time when you felt
most involved, most effective, most engaged. It might have been recently or some time ago.
What was going on?
What were the most important factors of your organization that helped to make it a high-point
experience (for example: leadership qualities, rewards, structure, relationships, skills, etc.)?

28
What was especially important/memorable about this experience for you?
Important to any AI evaluation is questions regarding organizational members‘
values. The following stage reflects the Dream phase of appreciative inquiry. According
to Preskill and Catsambas (2006), questions concerning values highlight organizational
members‘ successes and their wishes for the future. They argue that these types of
questions are an essential part of a survey conducted over the Internet and help provide
insight into the dreams members have for their organization. The third section on the
survey includes these value questions:
Think about the nature of your work at your organization…
What aspect of your work do you value most (for example: most interesting, most meaningful,
most satisfying)?
Describe one outstanding or successful achievement or contribution of which you are
particularly proud.
What made it outstanding?
What unique skills or qualities did you draw on to achieve this result?
What organizational factors helped to create or support your achievement?
What is the single most important thing that your organization has contributed to your life,
professionally and/or personally?
In order to facilitate the third phase of the AI evaluation, Design, questions
regarding what the organization should be and what organizational members desire it to
be are posed. The following section empowers members across the organization to design
a new organization where the dreams and discoveries they made in the first sections of
the survey have the ability to become a reality. For example:
As an organization, there are many changes we can make now and in the future to improve and
evolve with the times. However, there are some core strengths, values, and ways of working
that we should continue and keep doing, even as we change in the future.
What are three things your organization does best that you would like them to keep doing – even
as things change in the future?
What three wishes would you make to heighten the vitality and health of your organization?
What part could you/do you want to play in making these wishes materialize?

29
Process
Based on the above reasoning, the survey and its questions were formed. The
main researcher distributed surveys through the online interactive Web site Survey
Monkey (http://surveymonkey.com). Consortium X management and the main researcher
delivered notices via email, the social networking site of Facebook, and printed fliers in
order to advertise the voluntary surveys to members of all four organizations. Only
organizational members from the one of the four organizations composing Consortium X
were able to participate. The collective surveys are referred to as the Appreciative
Inquiry evaluation because they use positive questions regarding values, past successes,
and imagined futures to build a comprehensive look at organizational member‘s desires
for the future of the organization.
The main researcher divided the results into their respective organization (A
through D) and completed a qualitative analysis of emerging themes. The collected
surveys are in essence the transcripts of interviews from which a qualitative data analysis
will begin. Through data analysis, the researcher examined the themes present across the
interviews. The main researcher then combined these themes into a coherent whole that
helped suggest the overall culture (Rubin & Rubin, 2005), and revealed the themes
reflecting the AI evaluation. This was accomplished in several steps as outlined by
Rubin & Rubin (2005).
During the first stage of data analysis, the researcher processed the surveys
through what Rubin and Rubin (2005) refer to as recognition. This initial phase
examined and revealed the concepts, themes, events, and topical markers present in the
surveys. The concepts are the words or ideas that reflect the AI evaluation organizational

30
members reveal through the surveys. Rubin and Rubin (2005) state that the themes are
the summary statements explaining what is happening in the organization. The events
identified in the analysis will be the occurrences that have happened as revealed through
the surveys. Finally, the topical markers (nouns such as places and people) helped string
all of the AI evaluation data together.
The second phase of the data analysis was accomplished by synthesizing and
clarifying the different interviews – and included an explanation of what was meant as
well as a synthesis of the overall narrative (Rubin & Rubin, 2005). As themes began to
emerge and combine with similar themes, the data analysis became what Rubin and
Rubin (2005) refer to as the elaboration phase.
The final phase was the coding phase (Rubin & Rubin, 2005). In this phase, the
researcher placed labels on each concept and theme present in the survey that related to
the goals of the AI evaluation. Additionally, in this phase, the researcher systematically
labeled the concepts, themes, events, and topical markers in order to fully examine them
across the surveys/interviews as a whole. According to Rubin and Rubin (2005), these
codes align with a coding structure. This coding structure was defined in regards to the
content and data discovered as well as its relevance to the AI process. Finally, the main
researcher sorted the data by grouping together all of the data units previously defined
with the same label. This grouping formed the themes that then in turn aided the
development of the subsequent training and development manual for Consortium X.
This manual includes information resulting from multiple sources: literature on
organizational change, training and development handbooks, organizational change
activity books, and information specific to the results of the AI investigation of

31
Consortium X. The manual is divided by the key themes that emerged from qualitative
analysis of the AI results. The manual discusses these themes in detail, with reference to
organizational change literature and texts. Each section offers explanations as to why
that particular information is important and provides activities, training exercises, and a
list of resources that can help the organization and its members meet the objectives of
each section. There are also evaluations to help gauge where the organization is when it
comes to the key issues. Each of the activities included in the divided sections has
instructions for organizational members as well as for organizational leaders helping with
the training and development session. The manual facilitates the final stage of AI process:
Destiny, and bring the AI process full circle.
Results
Respondents from Consortium X completed 32 surveys on the website
SurveyMonkey.com. Their responses ranged from one sentence answers to fully
developed paragraphs detailing their experiences in the past and present as well as wishes
and ideas for the future. The following is an overview of the responses as they related to
their corresponding sections in the survey.
The first two sections of the survey asked participants to describe their personal
evaluation of the organization and describe experiences where they felt most engaged and
effective. Answering the question of what first attracted employees to the organization,
about half of the respondents said that they ―just [needed] a job to make money during
college‖ while the other half said they were drawn to the ―fun,‖ ―high-class,‖ and
―youthful atmosphere‖. The second part of section one asked what participants‘ initial
impressions were when they joined the organization. This section had a heavy emphasis

32
on the relationships that employees first developed with other organizational members
with such responses as:
―Everyone was very friendly.‖
―I enjoy the people I work with and feel like everyone was willing to help one
another to get the job done right.‖
―Friendly co-workers and managers.‖
―Tight knit group of friends and employees that had fun both in and out of
work.‖
This section also included the first responses that hinted toward conflict and references
toward leadership:
―I felt like there were several different people telling me how to do things
different ways.‖
―Disorganized, slow.‖
―Overwhelming at late night.‖
―When I first joined I loved the job but not so much the people I worked
with.‖
When asked how their impressions had changed since first being hired, many
respondents referenced a lack of teamwork and instances of conflict, such as:
―There has been some disagreement between employees and a lack of
communication and cooperation between employees and managers.‖
―Everyone is still really nice but not so helpful anymore.‖
―…there is a lot of unnecessary drama between co-workers.‖
Some respondents felt that their impressions of management also changed:
―I‘m not moving anywhere some lazy co workers poor management, feel I am
being used.‖

33
―[There are] a few more duties, still nothing I can't handle, but there‘s no
recognition.‖
―Managers can show you disrespect and threaten to fire you over trivial things
which can aggravate me.‖
Realizing that their impressions may or may not have changed since their date of
hire, the respondents were also asked what keeps them at their organization. Some said
that the flexible hours and the money was enough to keep them at Consortium X, but
many stated references to the positive relationships they have developed with other
organizational members:
―I enjoy the people that I work with.‖
―I love my co-workers.‖
―My coworkers are my friends.‖
―Besides the paycheck, I love the friendships I've made here, some of the girls
are like family.‖
The second main section of the survey asked participants to think back to a time in
their work with Consortium X that was a ―high point‖; they were then asked to describe it
in detail by answering a few questions. The following are some of the responses
participants gave when asked about their particular ―high point‖. Through their stories,
they referenced themes of teamwork and communication:
―The best time I had at work was during one of the tailgates and we were
completely slammed. We had ticket after ticket hanging up in the window and
food flying everywhere. Five o'clock rolled around and our replacements
came in and instead of everyone leaving we stayed and helped them finish up
the order. At the end of the rush everyone that had come in at five said thanks
for staying and that we all did a great job finishing up the orders.‖ [emphasis
added]
―There was a day that I felt like I was on top of my game. My manager and I
were the only [ones working] during a lunch rush and we got busy really fast.

34
I managed to keep my manager and I on top of the food orders by
communicating … what needed to go out, what needed to be cooked, etc.‖
[emphasis added]
―High points happen when we are all getting along, helping each other out,
everyone is in a good mood, we‘re busy, and having a good time.‖ [emphasis
added]
When asked about the most important factors of their organization in helping to
create positive experiences, participants responded by focusing on the power of feedback
from management and other employees:
―For me personally I would say that when other employees give me positive
feedback I feel like I am doing better and that actually puts me in a better
mood.‖
―After a successful lunch, my manager congratulated me on my ability to keep
both him and I on track. It was the best feeling to be noticed for your abilities
and work.‖
―What made it a high point was that our manager was involved with the
employees and acknowledged our hard work.‖
Other participants stated that teamwork and communication was essential to their best
experiences at the organization:
―Teamwork, communication, experience.‖
―Having good relationships with co-workers make for a high-point experience
because it makes it feel like a team effort, and not just one person doing all the
work.‖
―Teamwork. Relationships. Good moods.‖
―Good experience in dealing with people and Communication skills.‖
After asking about the organizational factors that created this experience,
participants were asked what made this moment or experience extra memorable and
important to them. Many of the respondents answered with statements addressing

35
leadership and feedback:
―The most important thing from this experience is that a manager/boss does
notice your work ethic and abilities to do the job and that they go out of their
way to congratulate and let you know that you are doing a great job. It keeps
me motivated.‖
―It was really nice to hear you‘re doing good because it was something new to
me and you don't get told you‘re doing a good job very often at my work.‖
―It showed how much of a difference a good manager can make in an
employee‘s work ethic and motivation.‖
The third main section of the survey asked participants to think about the nature of
their work at Consortium X. The first question asked what aspect of their work they
valued most. The responses to this question focused on the relationships that
organizational members had with other organizational members and with guests
(customers). Phrases such as ―I like the customers‖; ―the relationships I have with my
customers and coworkers‖; and ―giving the best service possible,‖ describe some of the
aspects employees valued most while working at Consortium X.
When asked to describe one outstanding or successful achievement or contribution
that they (the organizational member) were proud of, many of the responses were guest-
focused:
―I liked that one time I got a compliment on my cooking skills which helped
the server get a larger tip.‖
―Getting notes from customers about how well they liked my customer service
always makes me feel successful.‖
―My achievements and success are always guest based, in that providing an
outstanding experience for them is reason enough for me to feel proud.‖
When asked what made that achievement so outstanding, participants responded
with answers such as ―making more money‖ or ―pay raise‖, alluding to the need and

36
desire for more monetary payment for service to the organization. When the guests
themselves were involved in a situation, the responses focused less on money and more
toward feedback and feeling recognized for good work:
―What made it outstanding was that it picked up my coworkers spirits and
made them work a little bit harder.‖
―Just getting recognition for working hard.‖
―The server was rewarded with a better tip. The fact that good food helps
creates a happy customer is what, in return, makes the waitress happy. It‘s a
never ending cycle.‖
―The fact [that the guest] took their time to write an appreciation [note] makes
it outstanding.‖
The next question in this section was about the unique skills or qualities
organizational members drew upon to make that achievement outstanding. Many
responses referenced experience, organization, patience, and overall better guest service
with answers such as:
―Being personable and having fun with my customers.‖
―Being friendly, nice, and patient helps a lot in the service industry.‖
―Customer service and caring about the well being of our customers.‖
―Just hard work and [being] friendly with the guests.‖
When asked about the organizational factors that helped contribute to this success,
some participants skipped this question, wrote ―none‖, ―n/a‖, or simply said ―eh…‖.
However, some respondents referenced the teamwork and support of fellow
organizational members as well as guest service with responses such as:
―What help create this achievement was the ability of my coworkers to listen
to me and look at me for advice or help. They look for a sense of direction and
leadership.‖

37
―Each situation provides unique factors. Part of what makes an individual
great in this profession is being able to read your guest and provide the type of
service they require.‖
―The support and help from co-workers.‖
The final question of this section asked about the single most important thing that
Consortium X has contributed to their life personally. Besides the usual response of
―money‖ or ―a job‖, some participants explained that they have gained new relationships,
friendships, and that meeting new people was the most important aspect added to their
life. In addition, some organizational members responded with references to gained
experience and leadership skills with answers such as:
―I always feel like I gain experience, personal aspects, and knowledge during
jobs. Adding another to the list is just helping me grow as an individual.‖
―My organization has helped improve my ability to lead and organize. I have
greatly improved my leadership skills due to this job.‖
―They [the organization] have helped me become a great server, they have
given me confidence, and I have made great friends at my job.‖
The fourth main section of the survey asks for responses in regards to the
participants‘ particular organization (A through D) as well as to Consortium X overall.
Specifically, the participants were asked to identify the great things the organization does
as well as some possibilities for improvement to evolve with the times.
The first question of the final three asked about the three things that the
respondents‘ organization does best that they would like to see the organization continue
to do even as things change in the future. Many of the responses provided can be broken
down into three main themes: flexibility of management in regards to scheduling (e.g.
―understanding of schedules‖ and ―they are always good about scheduling people

38
according to their needs‖); teamwork (e.g., ―trying to keep us all working as a team‖);
and finally, guest service (e.g., ―keep the great food, drink specials‖, ―create memorable
experiences‖, ―great service‖, and ―continue customer service‖).
The second question asked for participants to think of three wishes they had to
heighten the vitality and health of their organization. One of the reoccurring themes
emerging from responses to this question was more pay and a better tipping system for
wait staff. Focusing more on the interpersonal aspects of the responses, three main
themes emerged from the participants‘ answers: references to management, interpersonal
conflict among coworkers, and the need for teamwork.
In reference to management, organizational members touched upon concepts such
as: stronger leadership (e.g., ―better management skills‖); increased communication (e.g.,
―I wish management could listen to what I have to say, listen to the employees because
they have great ideas‖); the ability to take charge of a situation; more employee
recognition (e.g., ―It is nice to be praised, but I am not sure that it happens often
enough‖); and finally, more trust (e.g., ―I wish the management would trust us a little
more‖). When describing instances of interpersonal conflict and desire for more
teamwork, participants responded with answers such as:
―At times I feel as though we don't get along well as a team- I wish we could
have ways to get closer and trust each other.‖
―Some of the girls need to find a way to get along because gossip and fighting
make a tough job even harder.‖
―No one seems to be able to listen to each other when we have issues, needs,
or even when shifts are able to be picked up... It's sad that sometimes we can't
stop to listen for 5 minutes to each other.‖

39
After describing their three wishes, the last part of the survey asked participants
how they would make these wishes materialize. Many respondents skipped this question
completely and one respondent expressed concerns that they were cautious about giving
feedback: ―Mine and the rest of the staff‘s comments, ideas, feedback and/or concerns are
not wanted nor permitted without retaliation and threats. It is best to keep your head up
and your attitude as one of being a team player.‖ Others though, expressed that they
would ―practice what they preached‖; ―make a suggestion to supervisors‖; ―respect
managers and follow protocol‖; and finally even ―[take] on more responsibilities and
work as a shift leader to help produce a cohesive work environment.‖
Summary
The responses were fairly well thought-out and to the point. The advantages of the
survey being delivered online are evident in the honest and frank responses from some of
the participants. However, the online nature of the survey may have limited the richness
of the data because follow-up and probing questions could not be posed. In addition,
some managers told the researcher that certain employees felt that the survey did not ask
the appropriate questions to generate feedback. It may have been a limitation to this
study in using the Appreciative Inquiry approach as some organizational members
expressed to the researcher that it was a ―waste of time‖, ―incredibly fluffy and
worthless‖, as well as ―pointless to their needs‖.
Future communication research in organizations resembling that of Consortium X
(e.g., bars, sports bars, pizza parlors, etc.) should find investigative approaches that more
closely resemble the needs of those organizations. Overall the surveys provided enough

40
data to compile a list of themes that aid in the development of the manual for use by
Consortium X. The next section describes the process of discovering these themes and
the overall creation of the manual.

41
CHAPTER III
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TRAINING MANUAL
Seven distinct themes emerged from the analysis of survey results: (1)
interpersonal conflict, (2) managing change, (3) teamwork, (4) listening skills, (5) guest
service, (6) leadership, and (7) feedback. These seven themes comprise the different
mini-lessons and activities of the training manual, labeled as ―units‖ (Appendix B). This
chapter discusses the development of the manual specific to Consortium X and provides a
rationale for the information, activities, and worksheets created or chosen for each unit of
the manual. The creation and use of the manual completes the fourth part of Appreciative
Inquiry, the Destiny phase, wherein management and employees continue to develop the
ideas created in the first three stages.
The development of the manual began with setting objectives for each section and
then providing tools that would help the users (facilitators, trainers, or management) meet
each objective. The objectives came from the literature and the Appreciative Inquiry
evaluation. The objectives were designed so outcomes could be assessed and were
created with specific consideration to the needs, wants, and desires organizational
members portrayed through their survey responses.
Before presenting the seven units, the manual includes an introduction explaining
how the manual is divided up and how facilitators may use it. The next section includes
―trainer instructions‖ as an overall tool for assistance with adult learning styles, training
session guidelines, and essential communication during facilitations. Next is a series of
icebreakers to help trainees get engaged and help newly hired employees get acquainted

42
with each other. The final section of the introduction features a short and personal open-
ended assessment of trainees‘ skills and achievements.
After the introduction, the main manual is divided into three sections. Section
one includes units for all organizational members. This section includes lessons and
activities that all employees from front-line to executive leadership can utilize. The
second section includes learning units specific to organizational leadership. The final
section (Section Three) includes post-training evaluation. The following explains the
rationale for the lesson units in sections one (Units 1-5) and two (Units 6 and 7).
Lesson Unit Rationale
Unit 1 focuses on interpersonal conflict. This theme was chosen due to the
multiple responses from organizational members on the Appreciative Inquiry survey.
Employees referenced many instances where conflict is present in their organization with
responses such as:
―At times I feel as though we don't get along well as a team- I wish we could
have ways to get closer and trust each other.‖
―Some of the girls need to find a way to get along because gossip and fighting
make a tough job even harder.‖
―…there is a lot of unnecessary drama between co-workers.‖
The objectives for this section are as follows: Organizational members will be able to (a)
define interpersonal conflict; (b) contrast verbal aggressiveness and argumentation; (c)
determine positive and negative effects of conflict; and (d) determine effective ways to
resolve different conflict types. The first three objectives are met through the mini-lesson
on interpersonal conflict. The final objective is achieved by the activity for Unit 1, a
problem-solving skills audit.

43
Unit 2‘s theme was managing change. This theme was chosen because it was the
Appreciative Inquiry topic and the main concept for the evaluation used on the survey.
The objectives for this section are: Organizational members will be able to (a) identify
typical problems associated with change processes; (b) identify strategies management
may use to implement change; and (c) identify reasons why some employees may resist
change. To help organizational members identify and achieve these objectives, the
manual provides a lesson on organizational change and multiple activities such as
personal inventories of change abilities and methods of developing skills to help facilitate
change processes.
Unit 3 focuses on teamwork. Multiple respondents addressed the need for
teamwork with answers such as:
―The best time I had at work was during one of the tailgates and we were
completely slammed. We had ticket after ticket hanging up in the window and
food flying everywhere. Five o'clock rolled around and our replacements
came in and instead of everyone leaving we stayed and helped them finish up
the order. At the end of the rush everyone that had come in at five said thanks
for staying and that we all did a great job finishing up the orders.‖
―High points happen when we are all getting along, helping each other out,
everyone is in a good mood, were busy, and having a good time.‖
―Having good relationships with co-workers make for a high-point experience
because it makes it feel like a team effort, and not just one person doing all the
work.‖
The objectives for this unit are: Organizational members will be able to (a) effectively
brainstorm for the best possible solutions to problems; (b) utilize a problem-solving
sequence to solve issues as a team; and (c) determine what makes a group a team. The
first objective is achieved through one of the three activities named ―Brainstorming in

44
Teams‖, the second and third objectives were met through the lesson on teamwork
presented in the unit.
Unit 4 focuses on the theme of listening skills. Bird (2009) argued that the
emphasis on listening skills was essential in gaining employee trust and helping
implement change. Many participants responded with references to listening, for
example: ―No one seems to be able to listen to each other when we have issues, needs, or
even when shifts are able to be picked up... It's sad that sometimes we can't stop to listen
for 5 minutes to each other.‖ The objectives for this unit are: Organizational members
will be able to (a) identify the process of active listening; (b) define the stages of
listening; (c) compare and contrast empathic and objective listening; and (d) recognize
active listening and the techniques needed to succeed in active listening. These
objectives are met through the listening lesson and the exercises assessing personal
listening skills, team listening, and communication skills.
Unit 5 focuses on the theme of guest service. When respondents were asked what
their organization did well and should continue to develop, many referenced guest service
with responses such as: ―keep the great food, drink specials‖, ―create memorable
experiences‖, ―great service‖, and ―continue customer service‖. Other participants
responded with:
―Getting notes from customers about how well they liked my customer service
always makes me feel successful.‖
―My achievements and success are always guest based, in that providing an
outstanding experience for them is reason enough for me to feel proud.‖
This unit is particularly important to Consortium X as it comprises four hospitality
organizations. The objectives for this section are: Organizational members will be able to

45
(a) actively listen to the needs and wants of guests; (b) identify standards of excellent
guest service; and (c) review their own level of guest service. The first objective is met
through the lesson provided and the final two are achieved with the activity ―My Guest
Service Quotient‖.
Unit 6, which is the first unit of Section Two: Organizational Leadership, centers
on the theme of leadership. Organizational members who responded to the survey
referenced leadership multiple times. Some of those responses were:
―I‘m not moving anywhere some lazy co workers poor management, feel I am
being used.‖
―Managers can show you disrespect and threaten to fire you over trivial things
which can aggravate me.‖
The principal researcher decided that a unit identifying current leadership skills and ways
in which to build those skills would be beneficial to Consortium X‘s needs. The
objectives for this unit are: Organizational leaders will be able to (a) define the roles of
leadership; (b) develop methods to lead teams; (c) refine their roles as mentors; and (d)
identify ways to empower employees. The objectives for the unit are met not only
through the lesson on leadership, but also through the five activities which aid
management and future leaders in the organization sharpen and develop their skills.
The final unit of the training manual is Unit 7 and is based on the theme of
feedback. This theme was chosen because of the many references to feedback and
recognition in responses from participants in the Appreciative Inquiry evaluation. Some
of those responses were:

46
―The most important thing from this experience is that a manager/boss does
notice your work ethic and abilities to do the job and that they go out of their
way to congratulate and let you know that you are doing a great job. It keeps
me motivated.‖
―Just getting recognition for working hard.‖
―It was really nice to hear you‘re doing good because it was something new to
me and you don't get told you‘re doing a good job very often at my work.‖
The objectives for this section are: Organizational leaders will be able to (a) identify
methods of employee empowerment; (b) develop positive methods of delivering feedback;
and (c) utilize steps for creating positive feedback. These three objectives are met
through the lesson and activity which helps assess management‘s view of feedback, their
utilization of it, and concepts they can improve upon.
After all seven units, Section Three consists of post-training evaluations to help
evaluate the content of the training sessions. Both evaluations are handout/copy-ready
and include open-ended questions regarding the lessons, activities, and topics addressed.
Using the feedback provided by trainees, facilitators for Consortium X can adapt, change,
modify, and ultimately improve this tool for future use.
Summary
The manual consists of three main sections, prefaced by an introduction to orient
the facilitator. The manual was created by focusing on the needs of Consortium X as
guided by the responses from participants during the Appreciative Inquiry evaluation.
Each unit in the manual consists of training objectives that are each achieved through
lessons and activities. Instructions for each unit of worksheets and activities are provided.
Because of the nature of the manual, a separate user‘s guide was not needed (see
Appendix B).

47
CHAPTER IV
EVALUATION
The purpose of this thesis was to develop a manual that organizational members
and leaders of Consortium X may use to facilitate positive organizational change, aid in
the training of new hires, and provide for the continuous development of current
employees. This chapter includes a synopsis of the thesis as well as evaluations of the
manual for Consortium X. The evaluations provide insight into the effectiveness and
usefulness of the manual and its limitations.
Synopsis
Chapter I of this thesis reviews the literature on organizational change, with
information on change and organizations, reactions to change, and a look into the positive
evaluation tool Appreciative Inquiry. Change is a constant in organizations and often
results in negative emotional reactions by organizational members. Appreciative Inquiry
is an evaluation tool that looks at the positive ways an organization works and also
identifies hopeful changes for the future of an organization.
Chapter II is a case study of the organizations used for this thesis (collectively
referred to as Consortium X). The four organizations used in formation of the manual are
described as well as the Appreciative Inquiry Evaluation study design and process. This
chapter reviews and summarizes responses from survey participants.
Chapter III explains the development of the training manual – the rationale for
each lesson unit, how it was created, and the manner in which objectives were met. It
lists the three sections of the manual, the seven units (which were a result of Chapters I

48
and II), and the overall composition of the tool. The objectives for each unit are met
through activities, lessons, and worksheets concerning the topic of the particular unit.
After the development of the training manual for Consortium X, three individuals
evaluated the manual. Each evaluator commented on the strengths of the manual and
provided ideas for improvement. The following sections in this chapter explain the
findings and implications of the evaluations.
Evaluation of the Manual
In order to determine the effectiveness and usefulness of the lessons, worksheets,
and activities that comprise the training manual for Consortium X, three professionals
were asked to evaluate it. To determine the effectiveness of the manual as a learning tool,
Stephen Eaton, the Dean of Instruction for Bakersfield College in California, evaluated
the manual from an educational and curriculum development specialty. To determine the
manual‘s usefulness as an organization-wide tool, Danny Mannina, CEO of Cinemap
Productions in Los Angeles, evaluated the manual in consideration of its adoption as a
training and development tool. Finally, to evaluate the manual as a training and
development tool, Paul Wolcott, CEO and Principal Consultant at Seventus Consulting
Firm in Los Angeles, provided detailed feedback. Each evaluator was sent the manual
and asked to evaluate it based on usefulness and effectiveness.
Strengths
All three evaluators of the manual were interested in the contents of the manual
and found it to be well constructed, well organized, and accessible to both organizational
members and management alike. Each evaluator provided a list of the manual‘s strengths.

49
This section focuses on each evaluator and includes summary paragraphs detailing what
each found as the manual‘s biggest strengths.
Stephen Eaton, the Dean of Instruction for Bakersfield College, found the manual
to be a well organized and uncomplicated tool to help managers improve their leadership
skills and to facilitate the acceptance of change within their industry. He notes that the
biggest strength of the manual is the many exercises that provide organizational members
an opportunity to gain insight into their own perceptions about change and reactions to
change implementation. Eaton stated that the creator of this manual understands the need
for adult learners to engage in exercises that allow them to participate in the educational
process. He noted that the worksheets have several useful applications and are adaptable
to those involved in the exercises. Eaton explained that the creator of this manual gives
some narrative regarding communication and change theory, but does not overwhelm the
participants or reader with that theory; instead, the exercises move quickly to practical
application.
Danny Mannina, the second evaluator and CEO of Cinemap Productions, stated
that the manual is a well-constructed device that is succinct, dynamic, and has a positive
application to a real-world setting. Mannina categorized his evaluation into three main
points. His first main point is that the manual is comprehensive. Mannina argued that
the manual covers many foreseeable variables of interpersonal communication in a
workplace setting. He stated that it details what an individual‘s wants/needs are and puts
them in the context of a multivariable team situation. Mannina‘s second point is that he
found it to be accessible. He argued that both a ―fresh out of college‖ student and a ―20
years in the industry‖ professional can use the tool and both will have complete ease in

50
understanding and implementing the prescribed evaluations. He found the manual to be
written in a dialogue that ―all ends of the professional spectrum can appreciate and
respect‖ stating that the author‘s natural enthusiasm ―shines through‖. The third main
strength Mannina details it that the manual is succinct. Mannina stated that ―though it
touches on a far-reaching spectrum of workplace scenarios, dialogue, approaches, and
implementation, the project does not, at any point, meander or lose focus.‖
The third professional to evaluate the training manual for Consortium X was Paul
Wolcott, CEO and Principal Consultant at Seventus Consulting. Wolcott also found the
manual to be well organized, with a relatively simple structure. He stated that the
provision of both management and non-management content increases the flexibility of
the program. Finally, he argued that the inclusion of trainer instructions helps less-
experienced facilitators to better understand elements of the program, their foundations,
and how to deliver the program for increased success.
Limitations
Although the evaluators identified multiple strengths, there are also limitations
that need to be addressed. The limitations suggested by the evaluators focused on the
addition of more materials as well as content that focuses on more experienced
facilitators. Several of the limitations could be resolved by adding additional focus to the
introduction of materials and units, the addition of social media and web content, and
better evaluative measures to measure whether the objectives of each unit were met or not.
Eaton suggested that the addition of supporting materials would be helpful. He
appreciated that the author moved quickly to practical exercises and did not burden the
user with too much supporting research. Depending on the consortium or organization‘s

51
make-up and the facilitator‘s talents, providing example situations for discussion or video
links for multimedia examples might engage the participants more fully. He added that
even beginning scenarios for role-play and video would provide the facilitator more
avenues for ensuring that management and employees have a fuller understanding of how
conflict and change can manifest themselves in the workplace.
Mannina stated that the ―packaging‖ of the materials might limit the project‘s
broad appeal. He argued that the success of the project lies in its ability to be both
understood and implemented by a far-ranging group of people. He recommended that
instead of stating ―…these helpful overviews will aid an inexperienced or new trainer…‖
that the manual should set up the evaluations by stating that they are especially
appropriate not only for new trainers but also for the following three groups:
1. Established trainers, managers, and workplace leaders who are finding it
difficult to communicate with their crew and seek pertinent materials to
evolve their interpersonal communication skills.
2. Workplace teams looking to build group morale and improve overall efficacy
and function amongst its individual team members.
3. Workplace pairings and/or teams experiencing a group dynamics meltdown
and need clear and understandable tools to exact positive change and resolve
conflict.
Having established these four groups early on, potential facilitators using the manual will
better understand it to be a valuable tool for the entire lifetime of their project. Mirroring
Eaton‘s suggestion of added multimedia tools, Mannina also suggested that, in the ―age
of the Internet‖, the target audience could use a final section on multimedia and videos to
build upon the evaluations.

52
The final evaluator, Wolcott, made suggestions for improvement of the manual as
well. He explained that the manual lacks content for less experienced facilitators to both
use in the moment or leverage in preparation to clarify, enrich, or better explain concepts
or topics. He also stated that there is an imbalance between the degree to which the
sections are introduced/explained as compared to the amount of interpretation, guidance
and/or debrief that is provided. Agreeing with the other two evaluators, Wolcott added
that a section of multimedia would prove beneficial in the engagement of trainees.
Summary
The manual was found to be practical and helpful, and each evaluator felt that
even with its limitations, it could be implemented immediately, without amendment.
Although it was found to be helpful, well organized, accessible, and succinct, there were
some limitations offered by evaluators. The limitations could be overcome with the
inclusion of additional materials (e.g., multimedia, videos, e-books), more descriptive
instructions and overviews, and mini-lessons for less-experienced facilitators. Each
evaluator found the manual to be well written with multiple real-world applications.
Based on the feedback of the evaluators, the manual creator made three
adaptations to the final manual for Consortium X. First, the inclusion of a final section of
multimedia examples (e.g., video clips and activities from feature films) counter the
limitations suggested that multimedia and discussion of television and film examples
relating to lesson units be included. Second, a revised introduction to the manual was
added that responded to Mannina‘s need for an introduction to evaluations by stating that
they are especially appropriate not only for new trainers but also for three more groups:
(1) Established trainers, managers, and workplace leaders who are finding it difficult to

53
communicate with their crew and seek pertinent materials to evolve their interpersonal
communication skills; (2) Workplace teams looking to build group morale and improve
overall efficacy and function amongst its individual team members; and (3) Workplace
pairings and/or teams experiencing a group dynamics meltdown and need clear and
understandable tools to exact positive change and resolve conflict. Finally, Wolcott
expressed concern that the manual lacked content for less experienced facilitators. To
counter this limitation, the manual creator added a section addressing common issues
with facilitating, adult learning styles, training session guidelines, and essential
communication during facilitations (labeled as ―Trainer Instructions‖).

55
APPENDIX A
APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY ORGANIZATIONAL SURVEY
1. Starting back at the time you began working at your organization …
What first attracted you to this organization?
What were your initial impressions when you joined?
How have your impressions changed since then?
What keeps you here?
2. If you work here, you have probably experienced some ups and downs, some
high points and low points. Think about a time that stands out to you as a high
point – a time when you felt most involved, most effective, most engaged. It
might have been recently or some time ago.
What was going on?
What were the most important factors of your organization that helped to make it
a high-point experience (for example: leadership qualities, rewards, structure,
relationships, skills, etc.)?
What was especially important/memorable about this experience for you?
3. Think about the nature of your work at your organization…
What aspect of your work do you value most (for example: most interesting, most
meaningful, most satisfying)?
Describe one outstanding or successful achievement or contribution of which you
are particularly proud.
What made it outstanding?
What unique skills or qualities did you draw on to achieve this result?
What organizational factors helped to create or support your achievement?
What is the single most important thing your organization has contributed to your
life, professionally and/or personally?
4. As an organization, there are many changes we can make now and in the future
to improve and evolve with the times. However, there are some core strengths,
values, and ways of working that we should continue and keep doing, even as
we change in the future.

56
What are three things that your organization does best that you would like to see
them keep doing – even as things change in the future?
What three wishes would you make to heighten the vitality and health of your
organization?
What part could you/do you want to play in making these wishes materialize?
Measure adapted from:
Preskill, H. & Catsambas, T. (2006). Reframing evaluation through appreciative inquiry.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
•
•
•

57
APPENDIX B
THE TRAINING MANUAL

58
A Manual for Consortium X:
Conflict, Leadership, and Guest Service
Daniel Byerley
Central Michigan University

59
Table of Contents
Introduction
Trainer Instructions
Icebreakers
Session Opener
Section One: All Organizational Members
Unit 1: Interpersonal Conflict
Unit 2: Managing Change
Unit 3: Teamwork
Unit 4: Listening Skills
Unit 5: Guest Service
Section Two: Organizational Leadership
Unit 6: Leadership
Unit 7: Feedback
Section Three: Post-Training Evaluation
Training Evaluation
Follow-Up Interview
Section Four: Multimedia Activities
Training Manual References

Using Appreciative Inquiry to Facilitate Positive Change

Using Appreciative Inquiry to Facilitate Positive Change

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Using Appreciative Inquiry to Facilitate Positive Change

Similar to Using Appreciative Inquiry to Facilitate Positive Change (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Using Appreciative Inquiry to Facilitate Positive Change