An Appreciative Approach to Inclusive Team-building
8
AI Practitioner February 2010 11 Volume 12 Number 1 ISBN 978-1-907549-00-7 More Articles at www.aipractitioner.com An Appreciative Approach to Inclusive Team-building ABSTRACT The team process-journey started because of growing staff turnover and a desire to move from leading from the top down towards leading with a focus on inspiration, motivation and co-creating learning. By working with social constructionism, the focus turned on how meaning and actions are constituted in the activities and co- operation between us. This article is about a team implementation process I led as manager of 50 employees at the restaurant and catering centre of the Region Hospital in Randers, Denmark. The staff is organized in three different sections: the clinical dietician office, the restaurant for the staff of the hospital and the group working in the catering centre. I implemented a team structure with the 45 employees in the catering centre and the restaurant. Recently an external review of the quality and size of our production concluded that we are very competent and effective. But what it didn’t focus on was job satisfaction and the way the work is organized. This made me think that something vital was missing. As one of the employees said: Now we have proof that we do everything effectively, but how about the way we feel? Although we are effective and professionally qualified, we experience some staff turnover, which creates extra work for the remaining staff. They tire of doing this too often. This has been discussed several times in our local works committee (a small group of seven). Having trouble recruiting qualified staff means it is even more important to create an organization and a work environment that is motivational, challenging and giving. In the last couple of years I have dreamt about evolving the organization towards working in teams. I want us to move from leading in a way where we as leaders are in charge of all the details of the day-to-day routines and make choices about the daily duties, towards leading with a focus on inspiration, motivation, co- creating learning and not least, creating a great work environment. Between the middle managers and the employees it has been a process of maturing, not always welcome, and sometimes phrased like this: ‘Do we have to make a change again?’ AIP February 10 Sloth and Hornstrup: Inclusive Teambuilding Bente Sloth has a Diploma in Systemic Leadership and Organisation Studies. A manager for five catering centres with 100 employees in a hospital in Denmark. She and her staff at Region Hospital Randers received an award from the Danish Gastronomic Society for their work in achieving high-quality meals in public health care. Contact: [email protected] Carsten Hornstrup MSc, Political Science and MSc, in Systemic Leadership and Organization Studies, is a director and organsational consultant for MacMann Berg. Author and co-author of books and articles, his focus is developing systemic, appreciative and constructionist practices within organisations. Contact: [email protected] www.macmannberg.com
Transcript of An Appreciative Approach to Inclusive Team-building
AI Practitioner February 2010
11
Volume 12 Number 1 ISBN 978-1-907549-00-7
More Articles at www.aipractitioner.com
An Appreciative Approach to Inclusive Team-buildingABSTRACT
The team process-journey started because of growing staff turnover and a desire to move from leading from the top down towards leading with a focus on inspiration, motivation and co-creating learning. By working with social constructionism, the focus turned on how meaning and actions are constituted in the activities and co-operation between us.
This article is about a team implementation process I led as manager of 50 employees at the restaurant and catering centre of the Region Hospital in Randers, Denmark. The staff is organized in three different sections: the clinical dietician office, the restaurant for the staff of the hospital and the group working in the catering centre. I implemented a team structure with the 45 employees in the catering centre and the restaurant.
Recently an external review of the quality and size of our production concluded that we are very competent and effective. But what it didn’t focus on was job satisfaction and the way the work is organized. This made me think that something vital was missing. As one of the employees said: Now we have proof that we do everything effectively, but how about the way we feel?
Although we are effective and professionally qualified, we experience some staff turnover, which creates extra work for the remaining staff. They tire of doing this too often. This has been discussed several times in our local works committee (a small group of seven). Having trouble recruiting qualified staff means it is even more important to create an organization and a work environment that is motivational, challenging and giving.
In the last couple of years I have dreamt about evolving the organization towards working in teams. I want us to move from leading in a way where we as leaders are in charge of all the details of the day-to-day routines and make choices about the daily duties, towards leading with a focus on inspiration, motivation, co-creating learning and not least, creating a great work environment.
Between the middle managers and the employees it has been a process of maturing, not always welcome, and sometimes phrased like this:
‘Do we have to make a change again?’
AIP February 10 Sloth and Hornstrup: Inclusive Teambuilding
Bente Slothhas a Diploma in Systemic Leadership and Organisation Studies. A manager for five catering centres with 100 employees in a hospital in Denmark. She and her staff at Region Hospital Randers received an award from the Danish Gastronomic Society for their work in achieving high-quality meals in public health care.Contact: [email protected]
Carsten HornstrupMSc, Political Science and MSc, in Systemic Leadership and Organization Studies, is a director and organsational consultant for MacMann Berg. Author and co-author of books and articles, his focus is developing systemic, appreciative and constructionist practices within organisations.Contact: [email protected] www.macmannberg.com
AI Practitioner February 2010
12
Volume 12 Number 1 ISBN 978-1-907549-00-7
The leaders agreed to create an organization with more influence and more possibilities for everyone to use all of their competencies. The dream is that by working in teams, we can create more job satisfaction and hopefully reduce staff-turnover.
In the beginningI chose to gain inspiration from Appreciative Inquiry (Cooperrider et al, 2005) with the hope of facilitating a co-construction of the change process, to create more shared ownership and involvement from all the employees. In this article I describe how the appreciative approach had an impact on the process and the result, with a special emphasis on how communication works in a social system – my organisation. My focus is on finding a way to work together so we can co-create positive development and social-organizational transformation.
In Bateson’s words; ‘to be the difference that really makes a difference’. (Ølgaard, 1991) I will try to unfold the merger of ‘the idea’ and ‘the act’ into a powerful integral unity. (Cooperrider et al 1987, part 1:7).
Possibilities and challengesIn our daily life we use words like respect, dialogue and development and yet…if we want to co-create a culture that gives us the possibility of co-creating mutual narratives, it is important to understand the social constructionist approach to organizational change. Social constructionism focuses on how meaning and actions are constituted in the activities and co-operation between us: you can only exist in a social system if others take part in the creation of meaning (Pearce et al 2005).
The processWhen we decided in our local works committee that we would implement a team approach and co-create social cohesion, I invited all employees to a meeting to introduce them to the ideas of building teams with the mindset of Appreciative Inquiry. The agenda for the first meeting was inspired by the way Hornstrup et al (2003) see AI.
Before the meeting, employees received a written ‘short story’ of what the establishment of team working is, and how the idea of AI works. Employees then received an introduction to AI and the idea of working in teams and what I believed that could mean for them in the future.
The main focus at the first meeting was keeping a positive atmosphere, both in the meeting but also in the forward-focused work of building the teams, taking its point of origin as the positive things we do. We have an often-told story, one told with a smile, about why this positive style is a good idea. For the last two years I have said every time we discuss problems to be solved that we must talk about challenges and possibilities, not problems and obstacles. At first it didn’t feel like the right thing for me to say, because colleagues became angry for not dealing with the problems that were occupying their daily lives. They would rather talk about the problem itself. Yet slowly they realised that talking and thinking positively became ever more adaptable. As one employee said, smiling:
‘Yeah, yeah, we know what you mean – you want us to look at challenges and possibilities instead of problems and obstacles.’
‘Yeah, yeah, we know what you mean – you want us to look at challenges and possibilities instead of problems and obstacles.’
AIP February 10 Sloth and Hornstrup: Inclusive Team-building
AI Practitioner February 2010
13
Volume 12 Number 1 ISBN 978-1-907549-00-7
Choosing an intentionally positive approachSo, my experience and one of the reasons to choose an intentionally positive approach, is that the more you talk about positive things, remembering to recognize that there is something to deal with in a positive way, the more self-fulfilling it becomes. Or said in another way: where the focus goes the energy flows.
Next they were placed in small groups of four or five, discussing what the possibilities and challenges were in making this kind of organizational change. I had made small handouts with three questions they should ask each other. The idea was to talk about the best experience they have had in working together and their wishes for the team process. (Hornstrup et al, 2003) Before that exercise I showed them how to do it, by performing a short interview with three employees, arranged in advance.
Sitting in the small groups talking and interviewing each other created a number of reactions. Some thought that it ‘was about time’. One said it was something she ‘had been looking forward to’. Several commented that:
‘It is very difficult when it comes to reality, only to talk about things that matter without talking about problems and obstacles.’
In many of them I saw an odd, calm look. When I asked why, one said: ‘It gives a nice calm feeling in my stomach when participating in this, knowing that only positive things are talked about.’
I interpreted this as a sense of relief, because according to past experiences the strong employees sometimes bullied the less strong into silence or ‘agreement.’
Space to talk about difficult issuesOne of the groups though got into a loud and not very forward-thinking discussion without any positive approach in their conversation. I talked to them about what they would do if one of the team members worked too slowly or didn’t solve the given task. Who should then ‘take charge’ and talk to the colleague? There were a lot of thing that could go wrong, they pointed out. One of them said, ‘I am not going to be a part of this team building process if no one knows who the boss is!’ Another said, ‘How much are you going to expose us, isn’t it too soon?’
I realized then that the group was five of the stronger employees, who usually exhibit authority in deciding the daily work. I tried to talk with them about laying the past to rest and tried to show them how the future could look if they tried this approach. Yet they remained unsatisfied.
I became irritated with them for appearing to destroy the positive setting. I felt an urge to stop them by saying this was not the time and we could take on the discussion the next day. But it was also important for me to recognize them and not to focus the time to solely deal with that kind of challenge, so I had to think fast about what to do. I said:
‘I am beginning to understand your worries and your concern and I think it is important that we recognize and give room for that too. So I will ask you, what is the worst thing that could happen by trying to work in teams?’
Where the focus goes the energy flows.
AIP February 10 Sloth and Hornstrup: Inclusive Team-building
AI Practitioner February 2010
14
Volume 12 Number 1 ISBN 978-1-907549-00-7
For a second you could hear a pin drop, so quiet was the room. I felt momentarily nervous about the reaction, but suddenly they began to smile. They saw that there can also be room for the things that are difficult to talk about. I was very relieved because to be so irreverent (Cecchin et al, 1992) to exactly this group is something I could not predict the outcome of. Also I perceived a silent sigh of relief from the others in the room.
This first meeting ended on a fairly positive note while leaving me with the impression that some didn’t quite ‘see the light’ or perhaps were not ‘enlightened.’
Much happened after this first session, but space considerations preclude me describing that in more detail.
Reflections after the processThere are several ‘lenses’ I can employ in reflecting on this work. I have tried to show above that a lot is going on in my organization and through research I can define the best way forward. Two areas have my attention:
Relational recognitionWhat part does recognition play? The struggle for recognition can be seen in the way employees create unrest, as some strong-willed employees do. Honneth says (Honneth, 2006) that you have to understand the person you work with or ‘do business’ with as a special kind of person in order to get recognized yourself.
It has a kind of: ‘...inherent compulsion for reciprocity that, without any use of force, compels the subject to also recognize the other in a certain way’. (Honneth 2006, p 65, my translation)
As I experience and interpret this, when the strong employees from the staff meeting utter their dissatisfaction and nervousness, maybe it is their way of expressing a need to be recognized despite the team development work. Perhaps too they are unable to articulate their needs. By challenging them to engage with team development, I have to be aware of how I can ensure that the conditions for recognition are available to them in this new way of working.
Communication and social systems In understanding why communication can go wrong, as it did in the first staff meeting, it is meaningful to say that social systems are systems of communication. We, the system, reproduce ourselves by the way we continuously attach communication to communications. That is not a result of human action but a facet of social systems. These social systems are autopoetic systems that in an ongoing recursive process attach communication to communication. Luhmann also claims that communication doesn’t think, it communicates. So by communicating you just communicate! You can’t know what the other person is thinking, because you can’t look inside the other communicator’s head. So we won’t know exactly what s/that person thinks, only what the individual says they think or mean. (Kneer et al, 1997) If we look at the way Gergen talks about words in a certain relationship to each other or in a social construction, they tend to serve in a game that is about describing and verifying. As there was between the strong employees at the staff conference, there is a mutual ritual that works in a special way, because they know and understand each other well. (Gergen, 1997)
AIP February 10 Sloth and Hornstrup: Inclusive Team-building
It is important that I am transparent about the process and my way of seeing it, informing and involving employees in an appropriate way.
AI Practitioner February 2010
15
Back to Table of Contents
Volume 12 Number 1 ISBN 978-1-907549-00-7
Perspectives for the futureThe kind of learning I get from working with this assignment becomes an anchor in constituting these new patterns and coherences for the future. But it also has a managerial effect because of the awareness we as leaders show of the process. It is also important that I am transparent about the process and my way of seeing it, informing and involving employees in an appropriate way.
And what is my personal learning? I have learnt that I can, maybe too easily, get angry if the employees don’t co-operate in the way I ‘think’ they should. But if I try to keep calm and consider once again what to do, and try using ‘irreverent’ thinking instead, we can maybe together find new directions to co-construct this process of change. So I have learnt a lot by listening to the employees and more than I could have thought of or planned on my own.
ReferencesCooperrider, David L, Whitney, Diana, Stavros, Jacqueline M. (2005). Appreciative Inquiry Handbook. Brunswick, OH: Crown Custom Publishing, Inc.
Cooperrider, David l. Srivastva, Suresh. (1987). Appreciative Inquiry. Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc
Gergen, Kenneth J. (2005). Virkelighed og relationer. Dansk Psykologisk Forlag.
Gergen, Kenneth J., Gergen, Mary (2005) Social konstruktion ind I samtalen. Dansk Psykologisk Forlag
Honneth, Axel (2006). Kamp om anerkendelse. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag
Hornstrup, Carsten, Loehr-Petersen, Jesper m.fl. (2005). Systemisk ledelse – den refleksive praktiker. Dansk Psykologisk Forlag.
Kneer, Georg, Nassehi, Armin (1997). Niklas Luhmann – introduktion til teorien om sociale systemer. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag
Luhmann, Niklas (2000). Sociale Systemer. Grundrids til en almen teori. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag
Pearce, W. Barnett (2007). Kommunikation og skabelsen af sociale verdner. W. Barnett Pearce og Dansk Psykologisk forlag
Ølgaard, Bent (1991). Kommunikation og økomentale systemer. Akedemisk Forlag
AIP February 10 Sloth and Hornstrup: Inclusive Team-building
AI Practitioner February 2010
International Journal of Appreciative Inquiry
Inside:
Back Issues at www.aipractitioner.com
20 Appreciating Action Learning by Geoff AllanCombining AI and action learning sets.
Neuroscience: a New Friend to OD and AI by Richard CoeLooking for answers about how the brain functions, especially in different social circumstances and sensory environments.
25
AI KI DO by José OtteAI combined with Akido creates a connection between East and West which can be used in organizations to create positive change, positive leadership and organization culture transformation.
29
Part 2: Combining AI with Other ModelsCreating a Bridge Between Deficit-based and Strength-based Problem Solving: the Journey of a Six Sigma Master Black Belt by David ShakedThe challenge of combining the energy and creativity of AI and process mapping with post-it notes and deep statistical analysis.
16
11 An Appreciative Approach to Inclusive Teambuilding by Bente Sloth and Carsten HornstrupA leader talks about her journey towards leading with a focus on inspiration, motivation, co-creating learning and not least, creating a great work environment.
4 Introduction to The Inside and Outside Worlds of an AI Practitioner edited by Geoffrey Allan, Steve Loraine and Anne Radford
8 Part 1: Personal Challenges of Organisational LeadershipFragile Practice, Humble Learning, Extraordinary Outcomes by Joan McArthur-BlairEducation is all that matters. It is the greatest gift a government can give people. Generative leadership requires both humbleness and passion.
AIP February 10 The Inside and Outside Worlds of an AI Practitioner
AI Practitioner February 2010
International Journal of Appreciative Inquiry
Inside continued:
Back Issues at www.aipractitioner.com
43 The AI Circle: A Place to Develop Our Skills and Ourselves by Jeanie CockellCreating a space for our internal selves to show up (who we are) as we share our strategies for working in our worlds (what we do).
Reshape to Reframe: Living AI in our Bodies by Roz KayOur mental frameworks are deeply rooted and they shape our bodies in ways that impact our listening, seeing, attention and more.
47
54 AI Research Notes by Jan Reed and Lena HolmbergResearch Notes carries news of AI research which is about to start, is in progress or has been completed. Contributions are from researchers around the world.
59 About the May 2010 IssueGuest Editors: Loretta Randolph and Neil Samuels This issue will be devoted to Individuals and Organizations Flourishing Through Time.
IAPG Contacts and AI Practitioner Subscription Information60
39 ‘We’re in it Together’: Living Well with Dementia: Creating a Regional Strategy for the East Midlands by Julie BarnesOn 2 October 2009, 180 people from across the East Midlands, UK and from all parts of local health, social care and community services came together with people with dementia and their carers to create a regional vision for living well with dementia.
51 Confessions of an AI-coholic: The Road to LEAD by Ada Jo MannLEADing from your strengths.
Part 3: Evolving Our Practice Through Reflection and Working in New WaysIt’s Not the Events – It’s the Spaces In Between by Sarah LewisA story about working with what you can, not what you can’t.
34
AIP February 10 The Inside and Outside Worlds of an AI Practitioner
AI Practitioner February 2010
60
Volume 12 Number 1 ISBN 978-1-907549-00-7AI Practitioner
IAPG Contacts and AI Practitioner Subscription Information
ISSN 1741-8224 Subscribe at www.aipractitioner.com
International Advisory Practitioners Group IAPG
Members of the International Advisory Practitioners Groupworking with AIP to bring AI stories to a wider audience
Druba Acharya, Nepal
Gervase Bushe, Canada
Sue Derby, Canada
Sara Inés Gómez, Colombia
Lena Holmberg, Sweden
Joep de Jong, Netherlands
Dorothy Liebig, Germany
John Loty, Australia
Sue James, Australia
Maureen McKenna, Canada
Liz Mellish, Canada
Dayle Obrien, Australia
Jan Reed, United Kingdom
Catriona Rogers, Hong Kong
Daniel K. Saint, United States
Marge Schiller, United States
Jackie Stavros, United States
Bridget Woods, South Africa
Jacqueline Wong, Singapore
Margaret Wright, United Kingdom
AIP SubscriptionsIndividualsNGOS, students and community groupsSmall organisationsUniversity/Research Institute Large organisationshttp://www.aipractitioner.com/subscriptions
Back Issues and Articleshttp://www.aipractitioner.com/issueshttp://www.aipractitioner.com/articles
Change of subscriber detailshttp://www.aipractitioner.com/customer/account/login/
Publication Advertising/SponsorshipFor the advertising rates, contact Anne Radford.
Disclaimer: Views and opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect those of the publisher. Every effort is made to ensure accuracy but all details are subject to alteration. No responsibility can be accepted for any inaccuracies.
Purpose of AI PractitionerThis publication is for people interested in making the world a better place using positive relational approaches to change such as Appreciative Inquiry.
The publication is distributed quarterly: February, May, August and November.
AI Practitioner Editor/PublisherThe editor/publisher is Anne Radford. She is based in London and can be reached at [email protected]
The postal address for the publication is:303 Bankside Lofts, 65 Hopton Street, London SE1 9JL, England.Telephone: +44 (0)20 7633 9630Fax: +44 (0)845 051 8639ISSN 1741 8224
AI Practitioner © 2003-2010 Anne Radford
Back to Table of Contents
