[Ailist] Deficit and Constructionist Approaches

[Cheri Torres]

Brian and others,
I think a fallacy begins as soon as an either/or is established and by
setting up constructionist-based approaches as "positive". Constructionism
is not about positive or negative; it's that we socially construct our
cultures, systems, and realities--this encompasses deficit-based approaches
as well.

An AI approach "merely" suggests that if we are constructing it, let's
figure out how to construct the best possible future together drawing on all
the research and all that we know about generativity, innovation,
creativity, decision-making, collaboration, resilience, relational dynamics,
systems, and conversation.

Cheri

On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Brian Guest <brianjguest at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Perhaps some list members would like to comment on, or add their own
> experience or reflections to, the following argument on balancing the two
> approaches?
> Thank you,
> Brian Guest
>
>
> Extract from “The Irrational Side of Change Management” by Carolyn Aiken
> and Scott Keller, McKinsey Quarterly April 2009:
>
> It takes a story with both + and – to create real energy.
>
> The “deficit based” approach—which identifies the problem, analyzes what’s
> wrong and how to fix it, plans, and then takes action—has become the model
> predominantly taught in business schools and is presumably the default
> change model in most organizations. Research has shown, however, that a
> story focused on what’s wrong invokes blame and creates fatigue and
> resistance, doing little to engage people’s passion and experience.
>
> This has led to the rise of the “constructionist based” approach to change,
> where the change process is based on discovery (discovering the best of what
> is), dreaming (imagining what might be), designing (talking about what
> should be), and destiny (creating what will be). The problem with this
> approach is that an overemphasis on the positive can lead to watered down
> aspirations and impact.
>
> The reason is that, as humans, we are more willing to take risks to avoid
> losing what we’ve got than we are to gain something more. Some anxiety is
> useful when it comes to spurring behavioral change. We believe the field of
> change management has drawn an artificial divide between deficit-based and
> constructionist-based approaches and stories.
>
> While it is impossible to prescribe generally how the divide should be
> split between positive and negative messages (as it will be specific to the
> context of any given change program), we strongly advise managers not to
> swing the pendulum too far in one direction or another. Consider Jack Welch,
> former CEO at GE, who took questions of “what’s wrong here?” (poorly
> performing businesses, silo-driven behavior, and so forth) head-on, as well
> as “imagining what might be” (number one or two in every business, openness,
> and accountability).
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David Eccles
> School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain is the list
> administrator. For subscription information, go to:
> http://mailman.business.utah.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/ailist
>



-- 
Cheri B. Torres, Ph.D.
Collaborative-by-Design
Asheville, NC
828-225-5088