Search results

As they say, “Change is the only constant.” Thriving and surviving during a period of extraordinary collision of technological advances, globalization, and climate change can be daunting. At any given point in one’s life, a transition can be interpreted in terms of the magnitude of change (how big or small) and the individual’s ontological experience of change (whether it disrupts an equilibrium or adapts an emergent way of life). These four quadrants represent different ways to live in a highly dynamic and complex world. We share the resulting four-quadrant framework from a quantitative and a mixed methods study to examine responses to various ways we respond to transitions. Contingent upon these two dimensions, one can use a four-quadrant framework to mobilize resources to design a response and hypothesize a desired outcome. Individuals may find themselves at various junctions of these quadrants over a lifespan. These four quadrants provide “requisite variety” to navigate individual ontology as they move into and out of fluid spaces we often call instability during a time of transition. In this chapter, we identified social, cognitive, psychological, and behavioral factors that contribute to thriving transition experiences, embracing dynamic stability. Two new constructs were developed, the first measures the receptivity to change, Transformation Quotient (TQ) and second measures the range of responses to transitions from surviving to thriving, Thriving Transitional Experiences (TTE). We hope our work will pave the way for Thriving to become a “normal” outcome of experiencing change by transforming the lexicon and expectation of engaging with transitions.

The role and potential contribution of a positive lens to the design of systems and organizations is the focus of this essay. The positive lens refers to an emerging perspective in the social sciences that emphasizes a positive stance toward our capacity to construct better organizations and technologies through a positive discourse. Joining a positive lens onto organizing with the transformative power of design thinking opens new horizons and uncovers previously overlooked possibilities for creating organizational and social well-being. We discuss the core practices that drive design and argue that they hold the key for applying a positive design attitude.

In this volume of Advances in Appreciative Inquiry, leading scholars from the fields of art, management, design, information technology, organization development, and education come together to chart new directions in Appreciative Inquiry theory and research as well as new intervention practices and opportunities for design in organizations. While diverse in topic and discipline, each of the following original chapters treats the reader to a view of Appreciative Inquiry's revolutionary way of approaching familiar questions of information and organization design and vice versa.

This chapter discusses how the special qualities of poetic language can inform new principles for organizational design. Appreciative inquiry makes extensive use of poetic language – of stories, metaphors, and imagery – to facilitate the discovery of high-point experiences and the articulation of desired future states. It is commonly believed that through this narrative mode of knowing, appreciative dialogue awakens the imaginative and relational possibilities for successful transformation of organizational systems. In a critique of current practice, the chapter suggests that the unleashed generative capacity for change is not fully utilized because of appreciative inquiry's reliance on logico-scientific discourse during its design conversations. This return to modernist managerial practice is unfortunate, if we accept the need for alternative ways of knowing and talking in our efforts to create more just and sustainable forms of organizing. In an attempt to renew existing thinking, the chapter explores the question of what becomes possible when we embrace the poetics, rather than the pragmatics, of organizational design. It describes four qualities of poetic language – imaginative, ambiguous, touching, and holistic – which may inspire the design of organizations that are both more daring and caring in character.

In this chapter we consider the meta-models that are applied to the design of organizations and information systems, and especially the implicit assumption about organization and information that are at the core of these models. We explore these assumptions and suggest that they share common dimensions which can be used to structure the current discourse on design and design processes.

The emerging global economy is characterized increasingly by knowledge intensive firms which require that diverse, specialized knowledge workers develop unique knowledge competences, and also collaborate in ways to create new knowledge that enhances the performance of the organization. Information technologies are increasingly playing an integrative role in knowledge intensive firms as a way of achieving mutual learning. However, the information systems field has predominantly been driven by the notion of integration as a rational design process and an end state to be achieved through a static incorporation of knowledge domains. It has failed to consider the interpretive dynamics associated with the integration of differentiated knowledge and expertise. Argues a new role for information technology, one that supports the exploration of differentiated theories of meaning and knowledge and facilitates the conduct of dialogue among highly differentiated experts as a basis for integration.

The common view of design sees in it a way of reacting to our problems. To the question, “What are the boundaries of design?” Charles Eames asked in return, “What are the boundaries of problems?” Another view – taken in many of the works presented here – sees design as a response to opportunities. And never have opportunities been more abundant. “We are as gods,” declared Stewart Brand, “and might as well get good at it.” Or, as Bruce Mau has more recently framed it, “Now that we can do anything, what will we do?”