Advances in Developing Human

Resources
http://adh.sagepub.com

Individual Leader Development: An Appreciative Inquiry Approach

Rama Kaye Hart, Thomas A. Conklin and Scott J. Allen
Advances in Developing Human Resources 2008; 10; 632
DOI: 10.1177/1523422308321950
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://adh.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/10/5/632

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Academy of Human Resource Development

Additional services and information for Advances in Developing Human Resources can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://adh.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://adh.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations http://adh.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/10/5/632

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

Individual Leader Development:

An Appreciative Inquiry
Approach
Rama Kaye Hart
Thomas A. Conklin
Scott J. Allen

The problem and the solution. Leader development, expanding an

individuals leadership capacity, may include learning to transform perspectives as one objective.This paper explores how such transformation might be achieved through appreciative inquiry (AI).The authors
define AI and transformative learning and articulate a perspective
being advanced which highlights the relationship between them. Using
two illustrative examples from organizational and educational settings, the authors describe the AI process and propose how the
process might be conducted to achieve transformative leader development. Through these examples, they explore the types of affirmative questions that guided participants conversations and led to
commitment to action and shift in perspectives that are important
elements of transformative learning.The authors propose that AI may
increase a leaders capacity to generate his or her role anew through
inner work and an inside-out orientation (Hunt, 1987). They consider ways in which AI can be coupled with other sources of learning,
expanding its use beyond a tool for developing organizational
leadership capacity through large-systems organizational change to
one that is focused on developing individual leader capacity.
Keywords: appreciative inquiry; transformative learning; leader development
Leader development is seen as expanding a persons capacity (McCauley &
Van Velsor, 2005). Moreover, it is based on developing individual abilities
associated with the formal role (Day, 2001). On the other hand, leadership
development involves expanding an organizations capacity to generate
leadership for its work (McCauley & Van Velsor, 2005), and building and
Advances in Developing Human Resources Vol. 10, No. 5 October 2008 632-650
DOI: 10.1177/1523422308321950
Copyright 2008 Sage Publications

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

Hart et al. / INDIVIDUAL LEADER DEVELOPMENT

using strengths in relating interpersonally within the organization (Day, 2001).

In other words, leader development is development at an individual level, and
leadership development involves interaction between the individual and the
larger social and organizational environment.
Leader development tools and sources of learning have been the focus
of many organizational scholars (Cacioppe, 1998; Conger, 1989; Davis, 2001;
Day, 2001, 2004; Fulmer & Wagner, 1999; Hernez-Broome & Hughes, 2004;
London, 2002; McCall, Lombardo, & Morrison, 1988; McCauley, 2001;
Pernick, 2001; Yukl, 2002). Conger (1992) suggests that leader development
approaches can be categorized into four primary areas:
1. Personal growth: Programs that induce participants to reflect on their
behaviors (such as their orientation toward risk or personal intimacy),
values, and desires.
2. Conceptual understanding: Programs that foster a conceptual understanding of leadership theory (oriented by nature) focused on the issue
of leader development through a cognitive understanding of the phenomenon.
3. Feedback: Programs where feedback constitutes a large portion of the
time and emphasis is placed on measuring the participants skill in a
wide range of leader behaviors.
4. Skill building: Program designers identify what they perceive to be the
key leadership skills that can be taught. These are formulated into modules and introduced to participants who practice or model specific
behaviors. Participant performance is critiqued, and feedback directs
them to strengths and weaknesses. Participants then practice and refine
their skills.
In addition to personal growth through building self-awareness, selfregulation, and self-motivation (Day, 2001), conceptual understanding is critical to individual leader development. It is our belief that such new insight
requires transforming perspectives, as described by Mezirow (2000), who suggested that learning occurs when existing meaning structures (e.g., frames of
reference) are transformed or newly created.
In this paper, we will present appreciative inquiry (AI; Cooperrider &
Srivastva, 1987) as an approach that can help generate transformative learning.
We will define AI and transformative learning and articulate a perspective
being advanced which highlights the relationship between them. We will
describe the AI process and propose how the process might be conducted to
achieve transformative leader development, drawing on illustrative cases
where we have employed it in workplace and educational settings. Finally, we
will consider ways in which AI can be coupled with other sources of learning
to build leader capacity in individuals and identify opportunities for further
research.

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

633

634

Advances in Developing Human Resources

October 2008

Appreciative Inquiry
AI, a methodology most frequently used for organizational change, is
rooted in social constructionism (Berger & Luckmann, 1966) and inspired by
the positive psychology movement (Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005).
Since its original conception as an alternative approach to traditional action
research for organizational change, AI has been applied, researched, and documented as a transformational approach for a variety of uses, including developing leadership capacity in organizations (Bushe & Kassam, 2005; Kierein &
Gold , 2000; Ludema, Whitney, Mohr, & Griffin, 2003). Specifically, AIs usefulness as a tool for engaging participants in a collective process of reframing
and generating possible futures has been demonstrated in many different contexts, including organizations (Cooperrider & Avital, 2004; Cooperrider &
Whitney, 2001; Ludema et al., 2003), personal relationships (Kelm, 2005;
McNamee & Gergen, 1999; Stavros & Torres, 2005), adult education (Lander,
2002), and diversity enhancement (Fry, Barrett, Seiling, & Whitney, 2002).
The positive principle, a central assumption within AI and one that is shared
by the positive psychology movement, is illustrated by the Pygmalion effect
(Livingston, 1969) commonly understood as the self-fulfilling prophecy
(Merton, 1968). To explain the power of positive image, Cooperrider also borrowed from the biological sciences, drawing an analogy between the
heliotropic nature of plants and human systems (1990). Just as a plant will
grow toward the sun, organizations will also move toward images of their
future that are life-giving and hopeful. The alternative possibility of moving in
the direction of destructive images of the future, as outlined by Polak (1973),
can be equally compelling. The conscious choice to focus on a life-giving
image rather than one of imminent demise mobilizes enormous energy and differentiates AI from other organization development approaches. This image is
generated from the aggregate of experiences shared among participants that
capture peak moments, life-giving factors, and stories of personal and organizational excellence.
The core principles of AI are supported by adult development and psychology literature. Know yourself (Laertius & Yonge, 2006) has long been
respected as a quintessential element of personal development and central to
the idea of actualizing ones potential. Hunt (1987) encouraged the reliance on
and acknowledgement of experience as valid. He suggested regain your trust
in yourself and your experience as an avenue to understanding human affairs
and to cut through the mystique of the experts, the experiments, and the surveys as royal roads to knowledge (p. 3). Similar sentiments have been shared
by Rogers, who asserted evaluation by others is not a guide for me. Experience
for me is the highest authority (1961, p. 23).
AI is predicated on narrating and reflecting on ones lived experience, ones
contribution to, and the conditions surrounding that experience. This reflection
provides the groundwork for creating images of possibility for transformation.

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

Hart et al. / INDIVIDUAL LEADER DEVELOPMENT

From a constructionist perspective, AI involves small-group dialogue to identify

connection points and generatively build shared meaning out of experiences so
that action can be taken collectively. This concept of reflection-in-action (Schn,
1983) is also supported by Schumacher (1973) in his writing on the value of
doing inner work (p. 297) as an avenue to greater contribution to others and
our projects. He asserts that the guidance for this cannot be found in science or
technology but must be undertaken in the traditional wisdom of humankind
through relationship and introspection.

Transformative Learning
In a previous issue of this journal, Brooks (2004) provided a review of
transformative learning theory and its potential contribution to human resource
development (HRD) in an increasingly complex organizational context.
Brooks examined several theoretical perspectives on transformative learning,
including that of Jack Mezirow (1978), who is widely regarded as having contributed most to the development of transformative learning theory. Mezirow
focused his work on how individuals interpret and make meaning of their
experiences. He defined learning as the process of using a prior interpretation
to construe a new or a revised interpretation of the meaning of ones experience in order to guide future action (Mezirow, 1996, p. 162). Likewise,
Merriam and Caffarella (1999) suggested that learning can consist of a
change in one of our beliefs or attitudes (a meaning scheme) or it can be a
change in our entire perspective. A change in perspective is personally emancipating in that one is freed from previously held beliefs, attitudes, values and
feelings that have constricted or distorted ones life (p. 320).
Transformative learning is adaptive workthere is likely no clear solution
or process (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002). New meaning-making systems must be
introduced to yield new results. As Mezirow described,
Transformative learning refers to the process by which we transform our taken-for-granted
frames of references (meaning perspectives, habits of mind, mind-sets) to make them more
inclusive, discriminating, open, emotionally capable of change, and reflective so that they may
generate beliefs and opinions that will prove more true or justified to guide action. (2000, p. 7)

Mezirow (2000, p. 22) suggested that transformation usually occurs in some

form of the following 10 stages:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

A disorienting dilemma
Self examination with feelings of fear, anger, guilt, or shame
A critical assessment of assumptions
Recognition that ones discontent and the process of transformation are shared
Exploration of options for new roles, relationships, and actions

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

635

636

Advances in Developing Human Resources

October 2008

6.
7.
8.
9.

Planning a course of action

Acquiring knowledge and skills for implementing ones plans
Provisional trying of new roles
Building competence and self-confidence in new roles and relationships
10. A reintegration into ones life of conditions dictated by ones
new perspective
A few of these stages deserve commentary. First, a central theme of Mezirows
work is the concept of a disorienting dilemma. According to Allen (2007),
A disorienting dilemma is a life event or crisis that forces individuals to see their world, their
relationships, and/or their lives in different and new ways. As an aside, it does not necessarily
have to be one event; a disorienting dilemma can be a string of events or combination of events
that cause people to change their views. (p. 34)

Mezirow underscored the need for critical reflection following the experience
of a disorienting dilemma.
Brookfield (1986) asserted, Education is centrally concerned with the
development of a critically aware frame of mind, not with the uncritical assimilation of previously defined skills or bodies of knowledge (p. 17). In other
words, when individuals practice reflecting on experience and construe a new
or a revised interpretation of the meaning of ones experience in order to guide
future action (Mezirow, 1996, p. 162), the transformative potential from the
experience is greater.
Mezirow also emphasized the need for discourse to make meaning of experience. Discourse may occur with a close friend, a therapist, or colleagues.
Regardless of the venue, discourse offers individuals an opportunity to explore
potential meaning for the experience. In addition, Mezirow underscored the
importance of action, which offers learners the opportunity to try new roles,
build efficacy and confidence, and integrate the new ways of being into
their lives.

The Transformative Nature of AI

There are several ways AI may support Mezirows elements of transformative learning. First, a disorienting dilemma may precede the decision to participate in a learning process such as AI. Second, AI requires participants to see
themselves anew as having the capacity to juxtapose their excellence in the
past with the capacity to construct a possible future. Because AI is based in a
social process as well as an internal one, it supports the need to make meaning out of experiences collectively. And finally, AI is fundamentally an actionoriented approach, requiring participants to choose the most critical areas
related to their topic and then make commitments to take responsibility for

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

Hart et al. / INDIVIDUAL LEADER DEVELOPMENT

specific action. In their discussion of the connections between AI and transformative learning for organizational change, Donovan, Meyer, and Fitzgerald
(2007) highlighted the complementary aspects between AI and transformative
learning as comprising stories and narratives, reflexivity at the individual and
organizational levels, and the ability of AI to provide the strategy to create
change necessary for transformative organizational learning to be successful.
Critics of AI as a viable approach for transformative learning may argue
that by placing a singular focus on life-giving forces and positive and/or successful experiences, leaders may not engage in the examination of how mental models have developed and consequently fail to unmask counterproductive
routines (Argyris, 2000). However, we stress that AI can help people generate
a new frame or mindset and end the downward spiral into defense mechanisms
reminiscent of Argyris and Schns Model 1 theory-in-use (1974). As Barrett
suggests (1995), Generative learning requires an appreciative approachan
ability to see radical possibilities beyond the boundaries of problems as they
present themselves in conventional terms. High performing organizations that
engage in generative, innovative learning are competent at appreciating potential and possibility (p. 37).
Thatchenkery and Metzker (2006) applied this notion to the individual, seeing reframing as a major component of what they call appreciative intelligence. They assert that appreciative intelligence involves insight, shifting how
something is viewed in the present. They do not deny that the negative elements exist. But appreciative intelligence, they add, also involves appreciating
the positive and then seeing how the future unfolds. They suggest that there are
four qualities exhibited by people with appreciative intelligence, including
persistence, conviction that ones actions matter, tolerance for uncertainty, and
irrepressible resilience.
By engaging in such a reframing and radical shift of perspective from the
status quo and from theories-in-use, AI allows individuals to generate something beyond espoused theory: an ideal theory through imagining what is possible in the future based on what has been most successful in the past.
Powerful evidence to support this assertion comes from studies of after-event
reviews, which test whether differences exist in the ability to learn from failures and successes. Ellis and Davidi (2005) found that after-event reviews that
include an opportunity to reflect on successes as well as failures generate an
increased ability for participants (soldiers conducting navigation exercises) to
revise their mental models compared to reviews that focused solely on learning from failures.

Applying Appreciative Inquiry to Leader Development

The process of conducting AI is based on conversations guided by affirmative questions which can help generate new insight and awareness. These

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

637

638

Advances in Developing Human Resources

October 2008

Discovery:
What has
been?

Destiny:
What will
be?

Affirmative
Relationships and
Topic Choice

Dream:
What could
be?

Design:
What
should be?

FIGURE 1:

Appreciative Inquiry 4-D Cycle

questions are explored by all participants in a social system through smallgroup conversation. This process begins to reflect the interdependent nature of
dialogue and its contribution to the creation of a reality based on the synergistic power of each persons thoughts, actions, and words.
AI is typically conducted using the 4-D cycle (Cooperrider & Whitney, 2001).
The 4Ds represent the four phases of AI: discovery, dream, design, and destiny.
Figure 1 illustrates the 4-D cycle and the activities conducted during the process.
The discovery phase is devoted to reflection on high points and peak experiences related to the organization generally and to the topics of interest more
specifically. This experience allows participants to appreciate life-giving factors (the best of what was and is) through a cocreated conversation, in which
interviewer and interviewee are at once describing and generating an affirmative memory of what has worked in the past. The discovery phase lays the
groundwork for the process by building an appreciative vocabulary, giving
participants the opportunity to benefit from the positive affect experienced
when they were at their best, and provides content to build upon in the subsequent phases. To illustrate, in an AI process for leader development, the discovery stage may include questions such as:
When have you experienced great leadership at [your organization]?
Think of a peak moment or high point in your experience of
leading here or elsewhere.

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

Hart et al. / INDIVIDUAL LEADER DEVELOPMENT

What did you/others do to help that take place?

What happened as a result of that leadership?
What was life-giving about that leadership?
What gave life to that leadership?
What did you value most about that experience? Yourself?
Others? The organization?

The dream phase of AI is spent focusing on the possible future, or what

might be for the participants. This phase is an unconstrained look at the ideal.
In the case of leader development, this involves having participants imagine
their greatest potential as a leader and envision that potential realized.
Participants are encouraged to use the affirmative images described during the
discovery phase to help them envision how they might practice leadership in
the future. Thus, they use their constructed narrative of what has worked well
as a lens through which they may begin to reframe what is possible for the
future. By focusing on the ideal, perspective transformation is facilitated:
Participants shift their point of view from one that is informed by deficits they
might have experienced in organizational leadership and/or by their own
leadership gaps to a new perspective fed by reflections on the qualities that
have contributed to leadership success. The participants are asked to reflect on
these questions individually, in small groups, and again in a plenary discussion. Examples of the questions during this phase include:
What are my highest hopes for leadership at [my organization]?
What would I see happening at [my organization] if great
leadership lived at all levels of this organization?
Who might I be as a leader?
What would great leadership look like in me/us?
What would I/we be doing as a great leader(s)? What are those
activities that we would be engaging in if we were great leaders?
What would have to happen for this to occur?
How would we relate to each other (peers) in this organization?
How would we relate to our subordinates here?
What would we be creating in the organization? Ourselves?
Others?
The third phase of the AI process, design, begins in a plenary group with
time available for the group to discuss its thoughts on what has been shared.
Observations, interpretations, and new meanings are expressed in the interest
of gathering a clearer understanding of what each small group generated. In
addition to the pursuit of clarity, there is also one last opportunity to get on
the ballot. This offers one last chance for participants to present something
that they felt passionate about before moving on to the final step.

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

639

640

Advances in Developing Human Resources

October 2008

At the close of this discussion participants are given the opportunity to

identify what was most important for them individually. This is introduced by
describing the idea of a gallery walk similar to a stroll through an art museum
where they can review and reflect on the jewels that have been created. Once
participants have an opportunity to review those factors believed to contribute
to peak leadership, they are asked to rank the three items that are most relevant
for them personally.
After this step, they return to their small groups to generate a provocative
proposition to present to the large group. These statements bridge the best of
what is with what might be based on the themes that emerge. They reflect
the leader characteristics identified as essential to excellence and are created
with attention to the following criteria:
Is it provocativedoes it stretch, challenge, or interrupt?
Is it groundeddoes it represent the ideal as a real possibility?
Is it desiredif it could be actualized, would the organization
want it; is it a preferred future?
Is it stated in affirmative and bold terms?
In the destiny phase, participants commit to actions to help them move from
the individually identified items that are central to creating peak leadership
capacity to the manifestation of this potential in their work lives. This step is
best summarized by answering the question, Who will do what by when and
how will we know? Following this session participants are asked to make a
public commitment to what they will do to enact greater leader potential on the
premise that a public commitment encourages follow-through beyond what an
unspoken personal commitment might engender.

Appreciative Inquiry in Practice

We will describe two examples to illustrate how elements of transformative
learning can be achieved through the use of the AI methodology described
above. The first example is an inquiry into leader development in middle- and
lower level managers at a multinational corporation that manufactures industrial and commercial products in the electrical, fluid power, truck, and automotive industries. Statements representing individual commitments to action
represented the outcome of the AI process, and illustrate how AI can address
an action orientation through a dialogic process. In the second example, AI is
conducted in a classroom environment to engage students in leading their
learning experience through a cocreation process. Participants reported the
impact the exercise had on their learning, which reveals that transformation in
perspective can occur.

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

Hart et al. / INDIVIDUAL LEADER DEVELOPMENT

AI for Leader Development Among Managers

The AI Process
The Midwestern manufacturing organization had approximately 59,000
employees with customers in more than 125 countries and a production presence in 29 countries. The AI workshop was conducted with 45 to 50 managers
coming together from six different facilities across the country for a 2-day
retreat. The morning of the first day was occupied with comments from the
vice president of the division, a review of their lean corporate philosophy, and
a brief discussion of high performance work places. The actual workshop
began in the last hour of the morning session on Day 1 prior to lunch when the
facilitator presented a high-level review of the AI process and how it related to
leader development.
The retreat was intended to help production managers see the link between
individual leader behavior and business results, to challenge and change behavior, and to develop effective positive language to drive results and encourage high
performance. The specific objectives of the training were to develop:
Skills to build and motivate a team to increase ownership, accountability, and results.
Managerial courage and risk-taking ability.
Leadership skills to coach and recognize employees and
achieve higher performance levels.
This group of managers had not received training for a number of years,
was reportedly feeling neglected, and had experienced significant turnover in
recent years that led to limitations among the current cohort. AI was selected
as the ideal approach for this work because it leverages best experiences in a
given topic area. Because the group consisted of those who had experience and
others who were new to their manager role, AI would enable participants to
reflect on best experiences of leading or being led in the current or previous
contexts. The same small groups of 4 to 5 stayed intact over the course of the
event. They moved through the four stages of the AI process including the discovery, dream, design, and destination phases.
The image driving the group design was the possibility that at the end of
this workshop there would be enough relationship among participants that they
might call each other to follow up on ideas and commitments after the workshop ended and each of them returned to their respective facility. The randomly composed small groups included members from the same facilities
(there were only six facilities represented) who knew one another as well as
those from other facilities who were meeting one another anew.
Once groups were established, a brief get-acquainted exercise was completed among dyads to facilitate relationship development. This exercise
had an appreciative orientation to it that fostered stories of success. The

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

641

642

Advances in Developing Human Resources

October 2008

participants used this exercise to introduce one another to the entire group. The
questions that were asked included:
What is your name and where are you from?
Tell me of your greatest success in your life, not just at work
but as you consider your entire life so far.
What is your greatest hope for your life? What do you hope to
accomplish before you shuffle off this mortal plane that would
make your life complete?
The AI questions described previously were presented to participants in the
dream step of the AI 4-D model. They were intended to be provocative stimuli to unleashing their greatest hopes for the organization and their leader
potential. The conversations during the stages of AI were facilitated by participants while the facilitator moved among the groups to provide clarity of the
process.
Analysis and Discoveries
Thematic analysis (Boyatzis, 1998) was used to interpret the commitment
statements made during the destiny stage of the AI process. The authors analyzed the statements individually and then compared their coding to establish
a measure of reliability and to identify the codable statements while attending
to the greatest distinctions between them. Ongoing dialogue between the
authors of the study contributed to inter-rater reliability that yielded the categories reflected in the paper. Three areas for leader development emerged from
this case example: (a) self development, (b) employee development, and (c)
change leadership. Statements reflecting these themes are captured in Table 1.
This case is limited in that the individuals were not asked directly about the
nature of their developmentwhether the experience was transformational or
not. However, several elements described by Mezirow (2000) as being critical for
transformative learning were present for this group of managers. After the event,
the participants in this AI process anecdotally reported that they moved from feeling neglected and demoralized as a result of significant turnover for the past
several years to being able to identify multiple ways in which they could develop
themselves and their employees. This situation created an opportunity for the disorienting dilemma provided by AI in that it represented a novel approach to interpreting their experience and a realization of their agency in constructing and
being able to change it. The products of the experience, the commitment statements, do represent an orientation to actionone of the factors Mezirow
describes as comprising transformative learning (2000).
The significant discussion component of AI seeks to facilitate greater discovery of self and deeper understanding of that self in relation to others. AI
also relies on relationship building that emerges through the interview process

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

643

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

will take initiative and lead

will participate
want to take a stand and find my voice
want to be consistent
want to be a solution, not a problem
will finish what I started
will not be afraid to ask for help
will be confident in my persuasion skills
between management and staff (build trust)
I will be honest
I will MBWA (manage by walking around)
I will be cautious of first impressions
I will grow through self-development
I will practice leading
I will practice what I preach
I will be impartial
I will take the time to be a better listener
Listen, listen, listen
I will take the time to hear what theyre
saying
I will look 'em in the eye when Im listening
I will take risks and trust people

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I will encourage participation and buy-in

from our group
I will delegate responsibility
I will recognize and appreciate others
I will network and call on others
I will help others understand
I will set the expectation that we will work
well together
I will be accessible to employees
I will coach and give feedback
I will give up ownership of tasks
I will teach others the business at my level
I will help others be more self-sufficient
I will empower others
I will share successes of individuals on my
team with others outside my team and not
protect my empire
I will be specific in praise
I want to be a coach
I want to get to know my staff
I want to delegate and develop others
I want to develop trust and maintain
my sanity
I want to support employees in
their advancement

Employee Development

I will look for opportunities to make things

better
I will keep a positive attitude
I will promote and support change and
company actions
I will help others understand
I will drive out fear
I will be a genuine cheerleader
I want to facilitate change
I want to have the courage to change

Change Leadership

Commitment Statements Resulting From Appreciative Inquiry Into Leadership

Self Development

TABLE 1:

644

Advances in Developing Human Resources

October 2008

and small-group focus. These conversations have the potential to reveal facets
of self in relation to issues salient to the organization and how those are
engaged at the intersection of work and self. That these commitment statements emerged for participants reveals some tacit understanding (Polanyi,
1983) of activities and relational orientations that, heretofore, have not materialized or may have been neglecteda growth in conceptual understanding of
what it means to be a leader (Conger, 1992).

AI for Transformative Learning in the Classroom

The AI Process
Our second example refers to Conklins (in press) use of AI with numerous
organizational studies classes to engage students at the beginning of the
semester in cocreating the learning experience. Specifically, the objectives of
conducting the AI include:
To provide an opportunity for students to learn about and experience a process that is being increasingly used in organizational
life and which they are likely to encounter once they enter the
work force.
To confront tacit and explicit norms of learning (powerless,
other oriented, and recipient versus creator).
To create an experience that fosters greater self-reliance, independence, self-direction, and autonomy.
To invite students into a more responsible opportunity for their
education through an exercise that celebrates their experience
as valid, worthy, and reliable. (Conklin, in press)
The questions used for the four phases of the AI process are similar to those
identified above; however, the focus is on learning rather than leading.
Analysis and Discoveries
In an effort to ascertain the level of transformation from the in-class exercise, students complete a follow-up questionnaire at the completion of the
exercise to reflect and comment on the meaning, if any, of the exercise for
them in the class, as well in the larger arena of their lives. Numerous comments were shared that reflected some transformation in their perspective. The
questions asked of the participants included:
What did you like about this exercise?
What happened that you found life-giving, freeing?
What did you learn from this exercise?

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

Hart et al. / INDIVIDUAL LEADER DEVELOPMENT

How do you feel now about possibilities in other domains of

your life after having engaged in this exercise?
Are there new possibilities for you to impact other domains of
your life and thereby change your experience there? (Conklin,
in press)
Conklin (in press) described how several responses reflected a shift in point
of view as a result of this exercise. Students provided feedback such as:
The group (AI) experience of sharing with others really opened
up my line of thinking.
Reflecting on what was successful was life-giving and
reminded me that I do have leadership and management skills.
I will think more big picture of how Id want something to go
and plan more around how that situation can be more ideal.
I see new possibilities in group activities and my professional
life, as well as with significant others.
It (the exercise) makes me wonder what possibilities exist and
makes me relate what is discussed in class to many other
aspects of my life.
I feel like I can lead a group now.
I feel more open to possibilities.
I see opportunity to apply strengths to areas other than work.

Conclusions and Implications

Implications for Human Resource Development
As illustrated through the case study above, using AI for leader development resulted in greater self-awareness, commitment to self and employee
development, and a commitment to serving as leaders of change for the organization. In what ways can HRD professionals employ AI to assist in leader
development initiatives that accomplish these goals? We suggest using AI as a
complementary approach to other HRD tools for leader development, specifically focusing on two areas: action learning and executive coaching.
Action learning is defined as:
Learning from concrete experience and critical reflection on that experiencethrough group
discussion, trial and error, discovery, and learning from and with each other. It is a process by
which groups of people (whether managers, academics, teachers, students or learners generally) address actual workplace issues or problems, in complex situations and conditions.
(Zuber-Skerritt, 2002, p. 114)

An AI-focused action learning process would incorporate critical reflection

by seeking to learn from failures as well as successes in terms of the problem.

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

645

646

Advances in Developing Human Resources

October 2008

The notion of problem in action learning simply means challenges requiring

adaptive solutions (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002) that are complex, do not have a
right or wrong answer, and, if left alone, result in escalating issues. Group discussion and relational dialogue are integral components of both action learning and AI. The inquiry process for action learning traditionally focuses on
problem identification and problem solving. From an AI perspective, the identification of the focus area would come through topic choice and problem
solving would be replaced by inquiry into the ideal past and future for that
topic. In conducting AI-focused action learning, attention must be placed on the
need for reflective learning throughout the process (Conger & Benjamin, 1999),
remembering what Doltlich and Noel (1998) suggested: Self-reflection is
what distinguishes action learning from normal work (p. 31).
Success with such an approach has been illustrated by Peele (2006). In a
study comparing teams engaged in creative problem solving versus teams
employing appreciative inquiry, Peele found that individuals in the AI teams
reported higher self-efficacy and a stronger sense of team cohesiveness than in
the problem-solving teams. In addition, Avital (2005) describes how AI has
been successfully used in concert with action learning in information systems
education. The workshop he designed incorporates AI with collaborative participatory design, shifting the traditional thinking in information technology
design from a perspective that highlights mistakes, errors, and ways their
design process has failed to one that captures successes and seeks to recreate
those successes in future initiatives.
Executive coaching is another area that can be conducted in concert with
AI. Witherspoon and White (1996) divided coaching into three distinct categories: coaching for skills, performance, and development. Coaching for skills
helps individuals acquire specific knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Coaching
for performance assists individuals in performing better in their current roles
to correct ineffective behaviors in a reactive or proactive manner. Because goal
clarity may be difficult to define, coaching for performance may be a longterm endeavor. Coaching for development focuses on the future; this is coaching in a proactive manner for high-potential individuals and could be easily
approached through an AI perspective.
The benefits accrued by coaching may be strengthened by AI and would
enhance the potential for transformative learning. First, the term coaching
implies a long-term and in-depth relationship as opposed to a seminar or classroom experience (Niemes, 2002; Tobias, 1996). AI, as we have explained,
occurs most successfully in relational conversation, and the intersubjectivity
involved with the AI process would well serve the lengthy leader/coach relationship. As a result, the AI-centered coaching intervention can meet the specific needs of individuals (Niemes, 2002; Tobias, 1996; Witherspoon & White,
1996), which sustains their focus and assists them in developing new habits
and ways of being (Tobias, 1996). A final benefit is that the learning is of

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

Hart et al. / INDIVIDUAL LEADER DEVELOPMENT

immediate relevance to the individual being coached (Bennett, 2003; Niemes,

2002). AI-centered coaching would guide the leader/coach conversations in
realizing the ideal vision each leader has generated for his self-development
and effective action within his career and organizational life.
Implications for Research
In this paper, we have expressed the possibility that AI provides an
approach to perspective transformation in leader development. We illustrate
how this is possible through examples of an AI in an organizational setting for
leader development and an educational setting for learning design, and we cite
support for this perspective emerging in theory and research.
Bushe and Kassam (2005) provided an excellent template for evaluating AI
as a tool for transformational change in organizations. However, they point out
that systematic research linking AI to outcomes is limited. There are field studies linking AI to learning outcomes through follow-up assessment, such as
what Burns (2005) accomplished when evaluating the effectiveness of AI for
whole systems change with educators. The work of Neville (2008) and Avital
(2005) illustrated applied research in which AI was used to develop replicable
pedagogical approaches and which resulted in positive learning outcomes.
We acknowledge that further research specifically measuring outcomes
related to transformative learninghow AI helps leaders develop new frames
of reference, habits of mind, and points of viewis critically necessary. AI
methodologies and potential applications to HRD will be significantly
strengthened by studies that examine its effect on outcomes related to leader
development, learning, as well as organizational change.
An important area for research will be an exploration of the relationship
between transformation perceived as a result of participation in the AI process
and behavioral changes in the workplace. For example, are the commitments
to action sustained after participation in AI? Also, comprehensive research
must be conducted to examine whether the elements of transformative learning as described by Mezirow (2000) can be accomplished through an AI
process for leader development or whether AI for transformative learning is
best approached through a combination with other more critical methodologies such as action learning or creative problem solving.

References
Allen, S. J. (2007). Adult learning theory and leadership development. Leadership
Review, 7, 26-37.
Argyris, C. (2000). Flawed advice and the management trap: How managers can know
when theyre getting good advice and when theyre not. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

647

648

Advances in Developing Human Resources

October 2008

Argyris, C., & Schn, D. (1974). Theory in practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Avital, M. (2005). Innovation information systems education I: Accelerated systems
analysis and design with appreciative inquiry-an action learning approach.
Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 15, 289-314.
Barrett, F. J. (1995). Creating appreciative learning cultures. Organizational Dynamics,
24(2), 36-49.
Bennett, B. (2003). Developmental coaching. Training Strategies for Tomorrow, 17(4),
16-19.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966) The social construction of reality: A treatise in
the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and
code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Brookfield, S. (1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brooks, A. K. (2004). Transformational learning theory and implications for human
resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 6(2), 211-225.
Burns, S. (2005). The so what test: A case study of strategic educational change.
Organization Development Journal, 23(4), 92-95.
Bushe, G. R., & Kassam, A. F. (2005). When is appreciative inquiry transformational?
A meta-case analysis. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41(2), 161-181.
Cacioppe, R. (1998). An integrated model and approach for the design of effective
leadership development programs. Leadership and Organization Development
Journal, 19(1), 44-53.
Conger, J. (1989). The charismatic leader: Behind the mystique of exceptional
leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Conger, J. (1992). Learning to lead: The art of transforming managers into leaders.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Conger, J., & Benjamin, B. (1999). Building leaders: How successful companies
develop the next generation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Conklin, T. A. (in press). Creating classrooms of preference: An exercise in appreciative inquiry. Journal of Management Education.
Cooperrider, D. L. (1990). Positive image, positive action: The affirmative basis of
organizing. In S. Srivastva & D. L. Cooperrider & Associates (Eds.), Appreciative
management and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cooperrider, D. L., & Avital, M. (Eds.). (2004). Advances in appreciative inquiry:
Constructive discourse and human organization (Vol. 1). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Cooperrider, D., & Srivastva, S. (1987). Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. In
R. W. Woodman & W. A. Pasmore (Eds.), Research in organizational change and
development (Vol. 1, pp. 129-169). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Coopperrider, D. L., & Whitney, D. (2001). A positive revolution in change. In
D. L. Cooperrider, P. Sorenson, D. Whitney, & T. Yeager (Eds.), Appreciative inquiry:
An emerging direction for organization development. Champaign, IL: Stipes.
Davis, N. (2001). Building muscle: Developing leaders with follower weight.
Organization Development Journal, 19(3), 27-25.
Day, D. (2001). Leadership development: A review in context. Leadership Quarterly,
11(4), 581-613.
Day, D. (2004). Leadership development. In G. Goethals, G. Sorenson, & J. Burns,
(Eds.), The encyclopedia of leadership, volume 2. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

Hart et al. / INDIVIDUAL LEADER DEVELOPMENT

Doltich, D. L., & Noel, J. L. (1998). Action learning: How the worlds top companies
are creating their leaders themselves. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Donovan, L. L., Meyer, S. R., & Fitzgerald, S. P. (2007). Transformative learning and
appreciative inquiry: A more perfect union for deep organizational change.
Proceedings of the Academy of Management, Philadelphia.
Ellis, S., & Davidi, I. (2005). After-event reviews: Drawing lessons from successful and
failed experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 857-871.
Fry, R., Barrett, F., Seiling, J., & Whitney, D. (Eds.). (2002). Appreciative inquiry and
organizational transformation: Reports from the field. Westport, CT: Quorum.
Fulmer, R., & Wagner, S. (1999). Leadership: Lessons from the best. Training &
Development, 53(3), 29-32.
Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2002). Leadership on the line. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Business Review.
Hernez-Broome, G., & Hughes, R. L. (2004). Leadership development: Past, present,
and future. Human Resource Planning, 27(1), 24-32.
Hunt, D. E. (1987). Beginning with ourselves: In practice, theory, and human affairs.
Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Kelm, J. B. (2005). Appreciative living: The principles of appreciative inquiry in personal life. Wake Forest, NC: Venet Publishers.
Kierein, N. M., & Gold, M. A. (2000). Pygmalion in work organizations: A meta-analysis.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 8, 913.
Laertius, D., & Yonge, C. D. (2006). The lives and opinions of eminent philosophers
(C. D. Yonge, Trans.). Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC.
Lander, D. A. (2002). Teaching and learning research literacies in graduate adult education: Appreciative inquiry into practitioners ways of writing. Canadian Journal of
University Continuing Education, 28(1), 31-55.
Livingston, I. S. (1969). Pygmalion in management. Harvard Business Review,
47(4), 81-90.
London, M. (2002). Leadership development: Paths to self-insight and professional
growth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ludema, J. D., Whitney, D., Mohr, B. J., & Griffin, T. J. (2003). The appreciative
inquiry summit: A practitioners guide for leading large group change. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
McCall, M. W., Lombardo, M. M., & Morrison, A. M. (1988). The lessons of experience:
How successful executives develop on the job. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
McCauley, C. D., & Van Velsor, E. (Eds.). (2005). The center for creative leadership:
Handbook of leadership development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McCauley, C. D. (2001). Leader training and leader development. In S. J. Zaccaro &
R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), The nature of organizational leadership: Understanding the performance imperatives confronting todays leaders (pp. 347-383). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McNamee, S., & Gergen K. J. (1999). Relational responsibility: Resources for sustainable dialogue. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Merriam, S. B., & Caffarella, R. S. (1999). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive
guide (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press
Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective transformation. Adult Education Quarterly, 28, 100-110.
Mezirow, J. (1996). Contemporary paradigms of learning. Adult Education Quarterly,
46(3), 158-173.

Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009

649

650

Advances in Developing Human Resources

October 2008

Mezirow, J., & Associates. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives

on a theory in progress. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Neville, M. (2008). Using appreciative inquiry and dialogical learning to explore dominant paradigms. Journal of Management Education, 32(1), 100-117.
Niemes, J. (2002). Discovering the values of executive coaching as a business transformation tool. Journal of Organizational Excellence, 61-69.
Peele, H. E. III. (2006). Appreciative inquiry and creative problem solving in crossfunctional teams. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(4), 447-467.
Pernick, R. (2001). Creating a leadership development program: Nine essential tasks.
Public Personnel Management, 30(4), 429-444.
Polak, F. (1973). The image of the future (E. Boulding, Trans.). Amsterdam, NY:
Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company.
Polanyi, M. (1983). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith.
Rogers, C. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Schn, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action.
New York: Basic Books.
Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is beautiful. London: Abacus.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress:
Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60(5), 410-421.
Stavros, J. M., & Torres, C. B. (2005). Dynamic relationships: Unleashing the power
of appreciative inquiry in daily living. Taos, NM: Taos Institute Publications.
Thatchenkery, T., & Metzker, C. (2006). Appreciative intelligence: Seeing the mighty
oak in the acorn. San Francisco: Barrett Koehler.
Tobias, L. L. (1996). Coaching executives. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice
and Research, 48(2), 87-95.
Witherspoon, R., & White, R. P. (1996). Executive coaching: A continuum of roles.
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48(2), 124-133.
Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Zuber-Skeritt, O. (2002). The concept of action learning. The Learning Organization,
9(3), 114-124.
Rama Kaye Hart is an assistant professor in the Department of Organizational Learning
and Development at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Her teaching, research, and consulting interests and areas of focus include group dynamics and
leadership, organization development, virtual/global team effectiveness, and interpersonal relationships and communication in groups.
Thomas A. Conklin is an assistant professor in the Organizational Learning and
Leadership doctoral program at Gannon University. His research interests are in
leadership, appreciative inquiry, phenomenology, pedagogy, and careers.
Scott J. Allen is a visiting assistant professor at John Carroll University. His research
and interests include leadership, transformative development, emotional intelligence
and organizational change.
This refereed journal article is part of an entire issue on Emerging Practices in
Leadership Development. For more information or to read other articles in the issue,
see Ardichvili, A., & Manderscheid, S. V. (2008). Emerging Practices in Leadership
Development. (Special issue). Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(5).
Downloaded from http://adh.sagepub.com by simona ponea on October 4, 2009