AI and CLCP

AI and CLCP: Resonances, distinctions and opportunities

Introduction

I have read the article “Appreciative inquiry to promote local innovations among farmers adapting to climate change”. I have compared the approach described in the article to my view of CLCP. I have noted the areas of the Appreciative Inquiry approach where I felt there was resonance with CLCP and where I felt there were distinctions between the two approaches. I have then looked for areas where the AI approach could add to CLCP.

Resonances between AI and CLCP

1. Both approaches recognise ‘The power of dreams’. In the article the community builds its dream when it ‘envisions what might be’ (page 4). The dream is a positive image of the future and it has the same purpose as in CLCP. In AI, the community builds its dream in a different way that I find interesting (see below).
2. ‘Our positive image of the future leads to our positive actions’ (page 4). A clear resonance with CLCP. It feels as though it is used more powerfully in AI. Whereas CLCP uses an appreciation of strengths as the stimulus for action, AI places more emphasis on the dream as the driver for action.
3. We acknowledge each other as human beings. I wrote this down after my first reading of the text, but I found it hard to put my finger on a particular piece of text. The closest I got was ‘appreciation of a sense of being valued’ (page 6). I think that the idea permeates the text. I suspect that the same might be said of many of our texts. Probably the strongest resonance I found.
4. I like the ‘principle of simultaneity’. Inquiry and change are not separate, but simultaneous movements. Perhaps the nicest definition of ‘learning from experience’ that I have come across.

Distinctions between AI and CLCP

1. AI creates reality through dialogue. The Constellation stimulates action. Appreciation sits at the heart of both approaches, but it feels that they are in service of different directions to the same destination.
2. AI: a community is a mystery to be embraced (page3).
3. Constellation: a community takes action, learns from its experience and learns-and-shares with its peers.
4. Perhaps the different levels of abstractions mark a deeper distinction between the approaches.
5. AI: The present is the basis of the dream. Discovery looks at our exceptional/peak moments and uses them as a basis for the Dream. The image of the future is grounded in the ‘positive present’ (that is a lovely phrase).
6. Constellation. The present is the reference to define where we are, where we REALLY are.
7. The 4D cycle of AI: I didn’t get a sense of the ‘discipline’ of the learning cycle. For example, in the exhaustive comparison between PS (Problem solving and AI) the distinction between the linear PS and the circular AI is not emphasised. I see the learning cycle as the basis of CLCP

The Power of AI

Here are some aspects of AI that I would be enthusiastic to integrate into CLCP.

1. I like very much the use of current outstanding examples as a starting point for the action plan (page 18). These are the exceptional peak moments discussed in the discovery phase. It feels like the positive deviance approach applied in a very elegant way in the AI cycle. We could easily add into CLCP as part of the action planning step.
2. I like the creation of organisational structure to support the community effort. (Page 19). I have felt that our process is weak in the phase of plan execution. I think that this approach would enhance the exhortation to ‘just do it’.
3. I like their examples to emphasise that AI do not ignore the problems but reframe them. In a beautiful generalisation, the article contrasts a positive vision with the vocabulary of deficit. So the deficit statement, ‘I don’t have food’ becomes ‘I want good food’. I think our dream building process leads us in this direction but the article has specific examples that help me.