Pre Phd candidate/guest
Cees Hoogendijk participes as a dual PhD in the programme of Leiden University Dual PhD Center The Hague. Present working title: 'Organizing Generativity: a Conceptual Framework to Appreciate and Inquire the Fitness of Organizational Interventions'.
For the sake of generativity, we should be aware that the following working titles preceded the present one:
September 2017: 'Organizational Freedom'
December 2017: 'Organizational Freedom, an Appreciative Inquiry into Organizational Enlightening'
July 2018: 'An Appreciative Inquiry into Organizational Generativity'
September 2018: 'Genarrativity: Reshaping the Generativity of Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life'.
October 2018: 'Genarrativity: Reviewing the Generativity of Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life'.
January 2019: 'Organizing Generativity: a Conceptual Framework to Appreciate and Inquire the Fitness of Organizational Interventions'.
Friendly view: see my poster presentation
Click here to open the PDF with a brief, accessible and illustrated introduction to my research.
Information about the PhD-under-construction in five alineas
1. In very short, Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is a possibility oriented, dialogical development approach to enable and enforce people and organization's well being. (source: David Cooperrider a.o., multiple publications) The method is mainly delivered in the form of coaching and large group summits, which I would call interventions. Less common is in the delivery of AI in the form of teaching employees in organizations to become an AI practitioner themself, a process which I would call an inner-vention.
2. Appreciative Inquiry bears the promise to discover the life giving elements in organizations to further build upon. "To spread AI into the world" is the motto of AI-practitioners. Being an experienced AI practitioner myself, both in AI intervention and AI innervention, I am interested in the possibility of AI being generative in the sense of: does AI-behaviour to another give rise to growing AI-behaviour of that other? My research questions are: "What can be found about (this kind of) generativity of AI summits?" and "What can be found about (this kind of) generativity of the AI-innervention, going on in the City Council of The Hague?". My main research goal is to reveil the 'maximum' generative potential of Appreciative Inquiry.
3. To 'measure' the generativity of AI-processes requires a clear description of what it is to be generative. Surprisingly, as my first inquiries showed, there seem to be various different definitions, interpretations and applications of the quality called generativity (source: 125 publications). Some of those support my own 'propagative' interpretation, which at least gives confidence for the relevancy of my inquiries. Within the domain of Appreciative Inquiry, generativity is frequently used (source: Gervase Bushe a.o., multiple publications), and mainly associated with producing new, unexpected and appealing ideas - not really my propagative, replicative interpretation. Furthermore, the variety in interpretations and applications - from Sociology to Information Technology, from Psychology to Organization Studies - is of such an extent, that I can't just 'choose' my definition and use it for my AI case studies. What my findings suggest to me is that my research, and perhaps organization studies in general - can benefit from a framework called Generativity (with capital G) that not combines but collects the most relevant meanings, and that can help to find out to what kind and which 'level'of generativity one is looking at.
4. The comments you are now reading, are dated 9th October 2018. I am in the midst of preparing and writing my PhD chapter "In Search of Generativity" that should create the framework Generativity: the foundation for analyzing my two sets of case material (intervention/innervention). My research process into the meaning of generativity shows in itself various characteristics of generativity: constructive dialogue with my sources; giving birth to new knowledge, nurturing it and letting go of it; receiving unexpected insights that suddenly appear; becoming more of a researcher by doing research; affecting others with my inquiries to start inquiring themselves. In this I find myself meandering between Baron Munchhausen (who pulled himself up through his bootstraps) and Gödel (creator of the Incompleteness Theorem). I could scholarly refer to an article about explorative research (Stebbins, 2011), but I have to warn the reader that the definition of explorativity is also quite generative...
5. And what about Genarrativity (with an a)? Remember Derrida and let's see what this word tries to tell us.
More about Cees Hoogendijk
Cees Hoogendijk (1959) graduated in mathematics and physics, studied humanities and is working on his PhD titled ‘An Appreciative Inquiry into Organizational Generativity’ using Appreciative Inquiry (AI) both as object and method of his research.
Cees fulfilled leadership positions in HRD and OD. As of 2005, Cees is independent professional, expert in learning organizations, co-founder of the Dutch AI Academy, co-creator at Instituto IDeIA, associate at TAOS Institute, author of various books on interpersonal and organizational development, speaker and CFO of diversity & inclusion processes. (CFO = chief facilitating officer). His mission: Humanization of Organization. For more information see www.panoptics.org.