Appreciative Inquiry at Los Angeles Universal Preschool (LAUP): The LAUP/UDEM Dream Team

By Terri Egan, Nancy Westrup Villarreal, and Daphne Deporres

Client Organizations

For over a decade we have collaborated on field projects teaching AI to students in graduate programs at Pepperdine University and the Universidad de Monterrey. This tells the story of one of these collaborations—a unique project with two clients: Los Angeles Universal Preschool (LAUP) and sixteen students pertaining to the 59th cohort from The Universidad de Monterrey master’s in organization development program.

Los Angeles Universal Preschool (LAUP) is a non-profit organization supporting high-quality preschool (pre-k) education for the children of Los Angeles County (LAC). Started in 2004, LAUP was designed to be an independent public benefit corporation, funded by First 5 Los Angeles (F5LA). LAUP is a provider-focused organization that exists to provide continuous quality improvement (CQI) programs to providers throughout Los Angeles County and focuses on expanding preschool capacity and enrollment, and improving the quality of pre-K classroom delivery. Built to be efficient, flexible, and scalable, LAUP is an emergent model for universal pre-k programs state- and nationwide.

Universidad de Monterrey is a private institution located in Mexico created forty years ago. The Master’s in Organization Development Program has been in existence for thirty of those years, achieving an outstanding level of prestige in Latin America.

Client Objectives

This project combined the educational objective of learning about AI and international consulting for the University of Monterrey’s master’s in organization development students with an employee engagement action research project for LAUP.

LAUP’s original objective, as stated by the CEO, was to ascertain the status of employee engagement at LAUP using an appreciative approach. In a subsequent meeting LAUP staff in the organization effectiveness area requested that the project also focus on the integration of various departments.

What Was Done

This project took place over two and a half days and touched approximately 90 percent of the organization. The authors co-created the design along with the self-named LAUP/UDEM Dream Team made up of sixteen graduate students from UDEM and fourteen internal LAUP staff facilitators.

The LAUP facilitators were from twelve areas of the organization, selected as those who could champion the change and interact easily with others. The UDEM students were working professionals in the second year of their graduate program in organization development.

Day 1 a.m.: The project began with a half-day Appreciative Inquiry workshop conducted by Terri and Nancy at the LAUP site for a group of approx 110 employees. The group represented a mix of levels and positions throughout the organization.

We briefly introduced key concepts of AI illustrated with stories from our own client experiences. The initial interview protocol focused on the topic of a learning community and included the standard generic protocol questions. After the paired interviews, small groups were formed and participants identified themes, created a vision of their shared future, and wrote provocative propositions. This process would become the basis for the topic selection for an all-staff AI meeting the next day.

Day 1 p.m.: The LAUP/UDEM Dream Team met to debrief the morning and select the focus of inquiry for the next day’s half-day workshop with the entire LAUP staff. The challenging role of being both clients and consultants was underscored for the UDEM students who took the role of observers as Terri and Nancy facilitated a dialogue that included some tension about whether the AI process would result in any specific action.

This was a special learning experience and challenge for the UDEM students because they were simultaneously seeing how to interact with groups in another culture and language as well as another paradigm.

Ultimately, the topics of trust, respect, and communication were identified for the next day. The group broke into LAUP/UDEM pairs to design a process for the next day. Each pair would facilitate a small group of eight to twelve LAUP employees. Each pair created specific interview questions and a design for the Discovery and Dream phases of the process that they would lead for the small group of eight to twelve staff the next day.

The day closed with each pair presenting their discovery protocol and small group design. A key learning point for the afternoon was that, in creating the design for the next day, the LAUP/UDEM Dream Team had moved into the Design phase. This was critical to identify because of earlier concerns that AI in the organization had not moved beyond the Dream phase. The iterative nature of the cycle was reinforced through the intervention.

A quote from one of the UDEM students sums it up the first day as follows:

“The first day I lived AI, I was able to see the faces of the people when they would discover their perfect dream and had the opportunity to draw it. I enjoyed feeling that energy. That day I learned that positive energy has great strength, but the facilitator must take care of because it can easily collapse.”

Day 2 a.m.: The morning kicked off with an introduction and skit designed by one of the LAUP/UDEM pairs. The skit, illustrating that one can take an appreciative perspective on any situation, including being stuck in traffic in Los Angeles, drew laughter and set the stage for the day. Soon the meeting room was filled with the buzz of approximately 125 LAUP employees and sixteen UDEM students going through the Discover and Dream cycles.

At the end of the morning each small group presented their images and propositions to the entire room. Individual commitments were generated in the small groups. The checkout was an open invitation to comment on the morning with one word generated by each group.

During this phase it was challenging for the students and facilitators to progress through the process as planned. Some groups moved more quickly, while others lagged behind. This was because some had lived through the process the previous days and others were doing it for the first time. The LAUP/UDEM facilitators found ingenious ways to attend to those who finished early by opening up additional dialogue while the other groups continued working. Nancy and Terri served as observers and coaches throughout the morning.

Day 2 p.m.: The LAUP/UDEM Dream Team met to plan the next stage of the process. The challenge was how to best bring the themes, images, and provocative propositions created in the morning forward in the organization.

The team would have two hours in the morning with the senior leaders from LAUP. A two-fold process was designed. First, the leadership team would be introduced to AI through a brief paired interview and theme experience. Second, thought-provoking questions were created for each image and provocative proposition. The day ended with questions about AI and a discussion of how things were going with the intervention. One challenge identified was the persistent distraction of BlackBerries in the culture. The creative solution: A BlackBerry Free Zone for the next morning.

Day 3 a.m.: The LAUP/UDEM Dream Team met with the senior leaders. One pair facilitated an icebreaker and paired interviews on the question: “Tell the story about the time you first fell in love with LAUP?” Following the interviews, themes, images, and provocative propositions were created. After a break, the room was set up as a gallery with the previous days’ images, propositions, and the accompanying questions set up on the wall. Gallery music was selected, and the senior leaders were led in and given time in silence to review and reflect on what had been created the day before. The UDEM/LAUP facilitators created this design.

The session with the senior leaders closed with a guided imagery and individual commitments elicited from the senior leaders. The CEO asked each of the key groups of stakeholders, the senior leaders, the LAUP facilitators, and the UDEM students to comment on what the process had meant to them.

The LAUP/UDEM Dream Team discussed how to continue the work that they began. Specific plans were proposed including the following.

Outcomes for LAUP

As a result of the AI experience with UDEM students, LAUP is more educated about AI and consequently more likely to engage in appreciative-type activities. Organizational members express that they can see the value in an appreciative approach. In the past, people did not necessarily understand how the AI philosophy might be applied beyond its use in the LAUP coaching model, where AI serves as a pillar of one of the organization’s core competencies.

When exploring the post-AI session landscape for tangible outcomes, participants report that the organization successfully gauged the temperature of how engaged LAUP’s employees are. While areas for improvement were readily identified, the fact that employees were so engaged and passionate about the experience suggested they were largely engaged, as well as satisfied. Employee engagement includes the ability to conceptualize a vision for the organization and to be excited about it. Conversely, if employees weren’t engaged, it would be difficult to see oneself in the vision. On the whole, employees at LAUP were clearly able to place themselves within a positive vision of the future.

From another perspective, it was surmised that a measure of engagement and satisfaction was required on the part of employees to respond enthusiastically to questions about “LAUP at its best.” The themes of respect, trust, and commitment were identified as present in the organization and as areas for improvement.

Employees generally left the session feeling energized and enthusiastic, willing and able to make a contribution to the ideas that came up. However, the question remained, “What are the tangible results?” Participants evidenced energy and commitment, but what about a plan?

Upon review, LAUP has the information needed to move forward. It is clear to the steering committee that the organization needs to follow on and activate the nascent ideas and plans that were conceived during the AI experience. Employees recognize the need for a group to take the lead, with the consciousness that organization-wide ownership of the plans and processes whose inception occurred during the AI process will be necessary for true success. All are aware that nothing is going to magically emerge from the process without commitment to action. The two facilitators who participated in this interview committed to providing this leadership and partnering with others who share their passion. As a result of the conversation it was recognized that momentum needs to be sustained and several “next steps” were articulated:

• Gather the LAUP facilitators
• Capture the data and centralize it (in OE)
• Present data at an all-staff meeting
• Facilitators facilitate discussion about next steps
• Staff re-state, re-visit, renew personal commitments

At the conclusion of the interview with the two staff, a learning surfaced: every time the group discusses the AI process and what came out of it, more ideas are generated. A re-energizing solution-generator kicks into gear triggered by the briefest discussion of the seminal experience. The outcomes of the AI experience can appear to be dormant, but in fact are at the ready, waiting to catalyze further movement.

A final comment: due to the multiple leaders involved in different aspects of the project, a perceived gap between the AI process and follow-on resulted. The interview recounted herein resulted in a recontracting session among a few staff members in the position to provide leadership and support for this effort.

Outcomes for UDEM

The key objectives for the UDEM students were to learn about AI and have an experience working with a client system in an international context. These quotes (translated from the original Spanish by Nancy) are drawn from the reflection papers UDEM students wrote about the AI experience. They suggest that both objectives were met.

Learnings

Repeatedly, the importance of flexibility and comfort with an emergent process on the part of the facilitator was reinforced in this experience. As one UDEM student charged with observing and facilitating the overall flow of the second day intervention stated:

Staying present in the experience rather than being concerned about the past or the future was also highlighted.

As another student found, powerful questions and topics come from dialogue within the client system:

For the three authors, the opportunity to collaborate reconfirmed the fun and power of an ongoing partnership. Specific lessons from the faculty perspective:

• Transfer knowledge and skill to the client as quickly as possible. Nancy, paraphrasing the wisdom of Maria Montessori: “Never do for the students (clients) what they can do for themselves.”
• Support from the organization is vital. Access to the organization, logistical support, and the symbolic participation from senior leaders, including the CEO, was graciously provided by LAUP.
• The best AI interventions build capacity within the client system. An internal group of facilitators is a key success factor.
• Tension can sometimes emerge in the context of people discussing what they most long for—process facilitation skills are very helpful when working with AI. Keep the focus on the fact that in every frustration or negative comment is a hidden gem of desire and possibility.
• Teaching and learning is easier under conditions of mutual trust.