Appreciative inquiry

Inside an organisation, it is good to give sufficient attention to the achievements and successes that have been realised by employees. Too often difficulties and problems are highlighted. This can result in negative reactions and, in addition, it can deprive employees of the needed energy to bring about change(s). An organisation is not a problem that must be solved.

Unfortunately many training companies follow this approach. Dynamo wants to make a difference! In contrast to traditional programs Dynamo does not want to stress the organisation’s shortcomings but to focus on what ‘lives’. With other words, Dynamo wants to use the energy present in an organisation to bring the desired changes. Appreciative Inquiry or appreciative research starts with the assumption that every organisation and its employees have positive and successful experiences. First, those involved share these experiences. Next, they are used as a starting point to think about the desired future, naming the needed ‘ingredients’ to achieve this, stating what can be done now. Through this process, participants feel more engaged to work together to achieve a new, positive and shared image of the desired future.

Appreciative Inquiry is so successful because this approach leads to permanent, self-reinforcing results for the whole system. In the past 20 years it has developed into one of the most successful approaches to create change.

Where does Dynamo use Appreciative inquiry?

Organisational development and change

For an organisational development plan that is co-created with both leaders and employees from the organisation instead of a consultant organisation that designs a new structure which must then be sold internally.

Trainings where significant buy-in is needed

Client orientation, changing culture, improvement projects

Appreciative Inquiry is not about implementing change to achieve a specific goal. It concerns the change process itself, the bringing together of people, starting discussion and connecting with one another.” (Barrett, Fry & Wittockx, 2010)