Appreciative Inquiry Facilitator

Appreciative Inquiry Facilitator

When to Use

Use this skill when:

• A user wants to design or facilitate an Appreciative Inquiry (AI) summit, workshop, or team session and needs help structuring the 4-D cycle (Discover, Dream, Design, Destiny)
• A user needs to write paired interview protocols, including question design calibrated to elicit genuine peak-experience stories rather than generic positive answers
• A user is trying to craft Provocative Propositions (also called Design Statements or Possibility Propositions) that are grounded in the positive core and written in affirming present tense
• An organization or community is planning a large-scale participatory change process and needs help sequencing the summit agenda, forming table groups, and creating a harvest plan
• A coach, OD practitioner, HR leader, or community organizer wants to shift a deficit-focused conversation (performance reviews, strategic planning, post-conflict reconciliation) into a strengths-based inquiry
• A facilitator needs to adapt AI methodology for small groups (under 20 people), virtual environments, or time-constrained settings (60--90 minutes)
• A user is preparing facilitator guides, participant workbooks, or post-summit action-tracking frameworks for an AI engagement
• A team wants to embed appreciative practices into recurring rituals -- staff meetings, one-on-ones, onboarding, quarterly reviews

Do NOT use when:

• The user needs a root-cause analysis, failure mode investigation, or structured problem-solving process -- use a Systems Thinking or 5-Whys methodology skill instead
• The organization is in an acute crisis requiring immediate triage (safety incidents, financial insolvency, legal emergencies) where problem diagnosis is genuinely unavoidable before forward movement
• The user wants a traditional strategic planning process with SWOT analysis, gap assessment, and remediation roadmaps -- use a Strategic Planning skill instead
• The user needs individual performance management, disciplinary documentation, or corrective action planning -- these require a different HR methodology
• The request is about building survey instruments for statistical benchmarking or voice-of-customer quantitative research -- use a Research Design skill
• The user needs conflict mediation where one party denies wrongdoing and legal or HR investigation is required before dialogue
• The context involves trauma processing, grief work, or clinical mental health intervention -- refer to trauma-informed facilitation or therapeutic frameworks
• The user needs a training curriculum on AI theory rather than facilitation guidance -- use an Instructional Design skill

Process

Step 1: Establish the Affirmative Topic Choice

The single most important design decision in any AI process is choosing the right affirmative topic. Everything downstream -- interview questions, Dream exercises, Provocative Propositions -- is shaped by this choice.

• Reframe the presenting concern into its positive opposite: "High turnover" becomes "Magnetic culture that attracts and retains extraordinary people"; "Poor interdepartmental communication" becomes "Seamless cross-functional collaboration that multiplies impact"
• The affirmative topic must be genuinely desired by participants, not just by leadership. Topics imposed from above generate compliance, not energy
• A well-formed affirmative topic is specific enough to be actionable but broad enough to invite diverse stories. "Employee wellness" is too vague; "The conditions under which our people do their best work and feel most energized" is well-formed
• Test the topic by asking: "If we fully achieved this, would it address the underlying concern?" If yes, the reframe is valid
• For multi-topic summits (3+ days, 100+ people), identify 3--5 affirmative topics that form a coherent thematic cluster
• Involve a small steering committee (6--12 people representing different levels and functions) to co-create and validate the affirmative topics before finalizing them
• Document the original presenting problem and its affirmative reframe side-by-side. This helps skeptics see that AI is not ignoring real challenges -- it is approaching them from a generative angle

Step 2: Design the Paired Interview Protocol

The paired interview is the engine of the Discover phase. It generates the raw material -- stories, values, strengths, wishes -- that every subsequent phase depends on.

• Write 3--5 interview questions per topic. The first question should always invite a peak-experience story: "Tell me about a time when you felt most proud, most engaged, or most alive in this work. Walk me through what happened, who was involved, and what made it exceptional."
• Follow the story question with a values question: "Without being modest, what do you most value about yourself that you brought to that experience?"
• Include a life-giving factors question: "What do you think are the core strengths of this organization that made that peak experience possible?"
• End with a wishes or forward-looking question: "Looking forward, what are your deepest hopes or three wishes for this organization?"
• Each interview should run 20--25 minutes per direction (45--50 minutes total for the pair). For time-constrained settings, reduce to one question per direction with 8--10 minutes each
• Instruct interviewers to listen deeply and take notes on specific words, images, and metaphors the storyteller uses -- these become the raw language for Provocative Propositions
• Pair people who do not normally work together. Cross-functional and cross-hierarchical pairing generates richer data and breaks down silos as a side effect
• Provide printed interview guides. Do not rely on participants to remember questions. The guide should include space to record key quotes, themes, and standout phrases

Step 3: Facilitate the Discover Phase and Map the Positive Core

The Discover phase moves from individual stories (pairs) to collective themes (tables) to organizational patterns (whole room). Each level of aggregation extracts higher-order meaning.

• After paired interviews, bring pairs into table groups of 6--8. Each person shares the most compelling story or insight from their partner (not their own) -- this creates generosity and cross-pollination
• Give table groups 20--25 minutes to identify 3--5 themes that emerged across all the stories at their table. Themes should be expressed as vivid, evocative phrases, not abstract nouns. "The time people stepped up without being asked" is better than "initiative"
• Have each table report 2--3 themes to the whole room. Use a visual harvest wall, sticky notes, or a projected document to capture everything in real time
• As themes accumulate, cluster them into a Positive Core Map: a visual diagram showing the organization's deepest strengths, organized into 4--6 categories (e.g., People & Relationships, Processes & Practices, Leadership & Culture, Impact & Purpose, Innovation & Learning)
• The Positive Core Map becomes the foundation document for the entire summit. Post it visibly and refer back to it throughout the Design and Destiny phases
• Plan for a dedicated harvest team of 2--3 people whose sole job is to capture outputs, quotes, and themes in real time. Do not rely on the lead facilitator to do this
• Allocate 2.5--3.5 hours for the full Discover phase in a summit setting. Rushing it produces thin material for Design

Step 4: Facilitate the Dream Phase

The Dream phase expands possibility thinking. Its job is to stretch the group from "what has been" to "what could be" -- not incrementally, but aspirationally.

• Open the Dream phase by sharing the most evocative stories and themes from Discover. This reconnects participants to the energy generated during interviews and provides the launching pad for imagination
• Use a creative visioning exercise as the primary Dream method for groups of 20 or more. Give table groups 35--45 minutes to create a 4--5 minute skit, news broadcast from the future, documentary trailer, illustrated magazine cover, or visual mural showing the organization at its absolute best 3--5 years from now
• Brief the groups carefully: "This is not a presentation of current reality. It is a creative performance of your preferred future as if it has fully arrived. Be specific. Show, don't tell."
• For more analytical or introverted groups, offer an alternative: a guided visualization (10 minutes) followed by individual journaling (5 minutes), partner sharing (5 minutes), and table synthesis (10 minutes)
• Each table then distills its Dream into 2--3 "Dream Statements" using the frame: "We are an organization/community where... We are known for... The impact we create is..."
• Facilitate a whole-group convergence: post all Dream statements and conduct a dot-vote or structured discussion to identify the 4--6 Dream Themes that carry the most energy and resonance across the full group
• Dream Themes become the design architecture for the next phase. They should feel both inspiring and grounded -- connected visibly to the Positive Core, not invented from nothing

Step 5: Craft Provocative Propositions

Provocative Propositions (PPs) are the most technically demanding output of any AI process. They are design statements written in the present tense that declare the desired future as if it already exists.

• Each PP must satisfy four criteria simultaneously. It must be (1) grounded -- rooted in documented examples from the Discover phase; (2) desired -- reflecting what participants genuinely want, not what leaders prescribed; (3) provocative -- stretching beyond current reality in a way that challenges the status quo; and (4) positive -- written in affirming, declarative language with no deficit framing
• The standard PP structure: "[Organization/team] is a place where [specific desired condition]. We [observable behavior or practice that makes it real]. As a result, [impact on key stakeholders]."
• Form Design Teams of 5--8 people who self-select around each Dream Theme. Each team writes 2--3 PPs for their theme
• Give Design Teams 45--60 minutes to draft their PPs. Circulate as a facilitator and offer coaching on these common errors: future tense ("will be" instead of "is"), deficit framing ("no longer struggles with" instead of a positive statement), vagueness ("is a great place to work" instead of describing specific practices), and disconnection from the Positive Core (invented aspirations with no evidence base)
• Conduct a Gallery Walk: post all PPs on walls around the room. Give participants sticky dots (3 per person) to vote for the PPs that resonate most strongly. Give them sticky notes to add suggestions or enhancements
• Refine the top-voted PPs in a brief whole-group session. A complete AI process typically yields 8--15 final PPs across all design themes
• PPs are organizational commitments, not individual goals. They describe the system, not the person. They are the equivalent of a constitutional charter for the change initiative

Step 6: Facilitate the Destiny Phase

The Destiny phase (sometimes called Deliver) converts aspirational design into self-organized, committed action. The key principle is that action must be self-chosen, not assigned.

• Open Destiny by reading the final PPs aloud. Ask the group: "Which of these propositions calls to you most strongly? Where do you see yourself contributing?"
• Use Open Space Technology or Innovation Fair format: propositions are posted as "stations" around the room. Participants physically move to the station that most interests them and self-organize into Innovation Teams of 4--8 people per proposition
• Each Innovation Team completes an Action Charter with five fields: (1) the PP they own, (2) the first three concrete actions they will take within 30 days, (3) the owner or champion for each action, (4) resources or support needed, (5) how they will know they are making progress
• Have each team present a 2-minute "commitment statement" to the full group. Public commitment dramatically increases follow-through compared to private planning
• Each participant writes a personal commitment card: "I personally commit to [specific action] by [specific date] to contribute to [PP title]." These are signed and shared with a partner who serves as an accountability buddy
• Design a post-summit rhythm: Innovation Teams should meet every 2 weeks for the first 90 days, report progress monthly to the broader organization, and reconvene for a 90-Day Celebration event to share stories of progress and recalibrate
• Appoint an AI Stewardship Team of 3--5 people (not the facilitation team) who sustain the process after the summit ends -- tracking action charters, circulating stories, and integrating AI practices into organizational routines

Step 7: Design the Facilitation Architecture and Logistics

The physical and temporal design of an AI event is as important as the content. Poor logistics undermine even the best process design.

• Room setup: Round tables of 6--8 people. Never rows or classroom style. Tables should be close enough for energy but spread enough for movement. Assign seats using a pre-designed seating chart that ensures cross-functional and cross-hierarchical mixing
• Table composition: For groups of 50+, rotate table assignments at each phase transition (after Discover, after Dream) so each person builds relationships with 18--24 different people across a 2-day summit
• Participant ratio: One facilitator per 50--75 participants for plenary facilitation; one table coach per 4--5 tables for small-group support
• Time allocations for a 2-day summit: Day 1 Discover (3.5 hours active), Dream kickoff (1 hour). Day 2 Dream completion (2 hours), Design (3 hours), Destiny (3 hours). Total active process time: 12.5--13 hours over two days
• Documentation: Assign a harvest team. Use large sticky notes, chart paper, and digital photography. Consolidate all outputs into a Summit Report delivered to participants within 5 business days
• Energy management: Plan a physical energizer or movement break every 75--90 minutes. AI summits are cognitively and emotionally intense. Music during table work, creative expression during Dream, and celebration during Destiny all serve energy management functions
• Virtual adaptation: For virtual summits, use breakout rooms of 5--6 for interviews and table work. Use a shared digital whiteboard (Mural, Miro, or equivalent) for positive core mapping and PP gallery walks. Reduce session length to 3 hours maximum per day and build in more frequent breaks

Output Format

When responding to a user's AI facilitation request, structure the output as follows. Adapt sections based on the specific request (e.g., a user asking only for interview questions needs the Interview Protocol section, not the full Summit Agenda).

## Appreciative Inquiry Facilitation Plan

### Context Summary
- Organization/Group: [name or description]
- Affirmative Topic(s): [positively framed change focus]
- Group Size: [number of participants]
- Format: [Summit / Workshop / Team Session / Coaching / Virtual]
- Duration: [total time available]
- Facilitator Experience Level: [novice / experienced / expert]

---

### Affirmative Topic Reframe
| Presenting Concern | Affirmative Topic |
|---|---|
| [original problem statement] | [positive reframe] |
| [original problem statement] | [positive reframe] |

Rationale: [1--2 sentences explaining why these reframes are well-formed and
will generate useful inquiry]

---

### Paired Interview Protocol

**Topic:** [Affirmative topic title]
**Estimated time:** [X minutes per direction]

**Question 1 -- Peak Experience (Story Question)**
[Full question text -- specific, evocative, and story-inviting]

**Question 2 -- Values (Depth Question)**
[Full question text]

**Question 3 -- Life-Giving Factors (Organizational Strengths)**
[Full question text]

**Question 4 -- Wishes (Forward-Looking)**
[Full question text]

**Interviewer Instructions:**
- Take notes on specific words, images, and metaphors your partner uses
- Listen without interpreting or fixing
- Ask follow-up probes: "Tell me more about that." "What made that possible?"
  "What was your role in that?"
- After the interview, underline the 3 most important insights to share
  with your table group

---

### Summit / Session Agenda

**[Event Title]**
**Dates/Times:** [schedule]
**Location/Platform:** [venue or virtual tool]

| Time | Phase | Activity | Owner | Materials |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [time] | Welcome | Framing and AI overview | Lead facilitator | Slides, printed guide |
| [time] | Discover | Paired interviews | Participants | Interview guide |
| [time] | Discover | Table sharing and theme ID | Table coaches | Chart paper, markers |
| [time] | Discover | Positive core mapping | Lead facilitator | Harvest wall |
| [time] | Dream | Creative visioning exercise | Lead facilitator | Art supplies/props |
| [time] | Dream | Dream statement creation | Table groups | Workbook page |
| [time] | Dream | Theme convergence | Lead facilitator | Dot votes, wall space |
| [time] | Design | Design team formation | Participants | PP writing guide |
| [time] | Design | Gallery walk and refinement | All | Sticky notes, dots |
| [time] | Destiny | Innovation team formation | Participants | Action charter form |
| [time] | Destiny | Action planning | Innovation teams | Charter template |
| [time] | Destiny | Personal commitments | Participants | Commitment cards |
| [time] | Close | Celebration and next steps | Lead facilitator | -- |

---

### Provocative Propositions (Draft or Examples)

**Dream Theme: [theme title]**

PP 1: "[Organization] is a place where [desired condition]. We [observable practice].
As a result, [stakeholder impact]."

PP 2: "[Organization] is known for [distinctive quality]. [Specific behavior or
ritual] ensures this quality is experienced by every [role]. The result is
[concrete outcome]."

PP 3: [third PP following same format]

**Grounding note:** These propositions are rooted in the following Positive Core
evidence: [2--3 specific themes from Discover that validate these PPs as
achievable, not invented]

---

### Destiny Action Charter Template

**Innovation Team:** [PP Title]
**Team Members:** [list]
**Meeting Cadence:** [frequency]

| Action | Owner | Deadline | Resources Needed | Progress Indicator |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [specific first step] | [name] | [date] | [what is needed] | [observable sign] |
| [specific first step] | [name] | [date] | [what is needed] | [observable sign] |
| [specific first step] | [name] | [date] | [what is needed] | [observable sign] |

**First meeting date:** [date]
**90-Day check-in date:** [date]
**Report-back to organization:** [method and date]

---

### Facilitation Notes and Cautions

- [Specific guidance relevant to this group's context, culture, or constraints]
- [Anticipated resistance and how to address it]
- [Energy management recommendations for this format]
- [Modifications recommended for this group's experience level or culture]

---

### Post-Summit Sustainability Plan

- **AI Stewardship Team:** [recommended composition]
- **Stories to circulate:** [channels and cadence]
- **Embedded practices:** [specific recurring rituals to sustain AI culture]
- **90-Day Celebration:** [design suggestion]
- **Annual rhythm:** [how to re-engage the inquiry each year]

Rules

1. Never reframe a topic so positively that it becomes dishonest. If an organization has had a serious safety incident, "Radical safety excellence" is a valid affirmative topic. "We are already safe" is not. The inquiry must be grounded in real evidence from the Positive Core, not wishful thinking.

2. The first interview question must always invite a specific story, not an opinion. "What do you think about our culture?" produces abstractions. "Tell me about a time when you were most proud to work here -- walk me through what happened" produces narrative evidence. Stories are the data of Appreciative Inquiry.

3. Provocative Propositions must be written in present tense, active voice, and without deficit language. Past tense ("we have created"), future tense ("we will become"), and negation ("we no longer struggle with") all weaken the design statement. Present tense declarative is the only correct form.

4. Do not allow leadership to pre-write Provocative Propositions before the summit. PPs that are not generated by participants carry no motivational energy and signal that the AI process is theater. Leadership can suggest affirmative topics during pre-summit design; participants must generate the propositions themselves.

5. Cross-functional and cross-hierarchical pairing is mandatory, not optional. Pairing people who already work together closely produces redundant themes and misses the connective tissue function of the Discover phase. The seating plan and interview pairing strategy must be designed in advance.

6. A summit with no harvest team is a summit that will be forgotten. Real-time documentation by dedicated harvesters -- not the lead facilitator, not participants -- is a non-negotiable structural requirement for any event with more than 20 people.

7. Do not skip the positive core mapping step. Moving directly from interview sharing to Dream without synthesizing a Positive Core Map causes the Dream phase to float free of evidence. PPs drafted without a visible Positive Core Map are typically disconnected from organizational reality and fail the "grounded" criterion.

8. Action commitments in the Destiny phase must be self-chosen and specific. "I will support the wellness initiative" is not a commitment. "I will bring the Walking Meeting practice to my team's Monday standup starting October 14" is a commitment. Facilitate specificity by asking: "What exactly will you do? By when? How will you or someone else know you did it?"

9. Virtual AI facilitation requires smaller breakout groups and more structured prompts. Groups larger than 5--6 in a virtual breakout room produce dominated conversations and passive participation. Every virtual small-group exercise needs a printed or displayed facilitation prompt, a designated timekeeper within the group, and a note-taker who will paste outputs into a shared document before the group returns to plenary.

10. Appreciative Inquiry is not positive thinking, toxic positivity, or the suppression of legitimate concerns. If a participant raises a real problem during an AI session, acknowledge it directly: "That is a real challenge. Let me ask: when has this challenge been at its least severe? What was different then?" This redirects toward inquiry without dismissing the concern. Facilitators who reflexively shut down negative comments damage trust and undermine the process.

Edge Cases

When the Group Has Experienced Recent Trauma or Loss

Organizations that have recently gone through layoffs, a leader's death, a public scandal, or a serious safety event require a modified opening. Do not jump directly into peak-experience stories.

• Open with a brief, facilitator-led acknowledgment of the difficulty: "Before we look forward, let's take a moment to honor what has been hard." Allow 5--10 minutes of structured sharing using a grief-to-growth frame: "What have we learned about ourselves and each other through this difficulty?"
• Then transition: "Even in difficult times, there are moments of grace, resilience, and people showing up for each other. Tell me about one of those moments." This creates a bridge from the pain to the Discover phase without bypassing it
• Do not attempt to facilitate the full 4-D cycle in a single session when trauma is recent. Consider a two-stage design: a 90-minute "healing and honoring" session followed by a full AI summit 4--6 weeks later

When Leadership Wants Predetermined Outcomes

This is the most common AI process failure mode. A sponsor who says "We want the summit to produce buy-in for the reorganization we have already decided on" is not describing an AI process -- they are describing a communication exercise.

• Facilitate an explicit conversation with the sponsor before accepting the engagement: "Appreciative Inquiry works because participants genuinely influence the outcome. If the outcome is already decided, I recommend a different approach -- a structured town hall or change communication campaign. Would you like to talk through the difference?"
• If the sponsor genuinely wants AI but also has non-negotiable constraints (a budget ceiling, a regulatory requirement, a structural change that cannot be reversed), those constraints should be disclosed to participants at the start of the summit as "given conditions" within which the inquiry will operate. Hidden constraints discovered by participants mid-summit destroy trust instantly
• Document this conversation and the sponsor's commitments in writing before proceeding

When the Group Is Highly Skeptical or Cynical

In organizations with a history of failed change initiatives, participant cynicism about "another workshop" is common and legitimate.

• Name it directly in the opening: "Some of you may be thinking 'here we go again.' That skepticism is earned, and it is welcome data. One of our goals today is to figure out what makes change actually stick in this organization -- and that requires your honest experience, including the times change has failed."
• Use the cynicism as inquiry material: "Tell me about a time when a change initiative at this organization actually worked. What made it different?" This both honors the skepticism and redirects it toward generative analysis
• Keep early exercises low-stakes and brief. Do not open with a 45-minute paired interview when trust is low. Start with a 5-minute pair share on a single question to demonstrate that AI conversations feel different from typical workshops
• Debrief the exercise explicitly: "How was that different from what you expected?" This metacognitive reflection accelerates trust-building

When the Group Is Very Small (Under 10 People)

The standard AI summit format assumes mass participation for diversity of perspective. With very small groups, the architecture must change.

• Conduct paired interviews as normal, but instead of table-group aggregation, bring all pairs into a single whole-group sharing circle. Every person shares their partner's story -- no table layer needed
• The Positive Core Map is created by the whole group together on a single large sheet of paper or whiteboard
• Dream phase: skip the creative performance exercise (too theatrical for 6 people) and use guided visualization followed by individual journaling and whole-group sharing
• Design phase: the whole group writes PPs together rather than in separate design teams. Aim for 3--5 PPs total
• Destiny phase: each person owns one or more commitments. No need for formal Innovation Teams -- create a shared accountability document instead
• Total time for a small-group AI process: 3--4 hours is sufficient for a meaningful full-cycle experience

When Operating Across Multiple Languages or Cultures

AI was developed primarily in Western organizational contexts. Several of its conventions require cultural calibration.

• "Without being modest, what do you value about yourself?" is deeply uncomfortable in high-context, collective cultures (many East Asian, Southeast Asian, and Indigenous contexts) where individual self-promotion violates social norms. Reframe as: "What strengths do your colleagues, family, or community see in you?" or "What did your contribution make possible for the people around you?"
• The peak-experience question assumes participants have experienced moments of exceptional engagement. In organizations where workers have experienced exploitation or marginalization, modify to: "Tell me about a time when this work felt most meaningful to you, or when you saw the organization at its best."
• For multilingual summits, provide interview guides in all participant languages. For large multilingual groups, create language-specific table clusters for small-group work and bring a translator into plenary for whole-group sharing. Do not rely on participants to self-translate during emotionally rich exercises -- cognitive load kills depth
• In cultures with strong power distance, participants may be reluctant to share critical wishes or dissatisfactions even within the AI frame. Use anonymous written input (sticky notes without names) as an alternative to verbal sharing during the wishes question

When the 4-D Cycle Must Be Compressed Into a Single Hour

Full AI requires 2--3 days for a summit or 3--4 hours for a meaningful workshop. When a team has only 60--90 minutes, a stripped-down but structurally complete micro-AI can still be effective.

• 5 minutes: Appreciative check-in -- "Share one thing that went well this week" (whole group round-robin)
• 10 minutes per direction: Single paired interview question -- "Tell me about a recent moment when our team was at its best. What were we doing? What made it work?" (20 minutes total)
• 15 minutes: Whole-group positive core harvest -- "What themes do you notice across our stories? What are our core strengths?"
• 10 minutes: Quick Dream -- "If we fully amplified these strengths over the next 6 months, what would be different? What would others notice about us?"
• 10 minutes: One PP per table (or for the whole group) -- written together using the present-tense format
• 10 minutes: Personal commitments -- one commitment per person, stated aloud or written on an index card
• This micro-format does not replace a full AI process but builds AI literacy and demonstrates the methodology in action. It is appropriate for ongoing team meetings as a recurring practice

When Provocative Propositions Are Too Vague After Multiple Revision Rounds

Sometimes Design Teams produce PPs that remain abstract and inspiring-sounding but operationally empty ("We are an organization that values every person"). This is the most common PP failure mode.

• Ask the team: "If a new employee joined this organization tomorrow, what would they see, hear, or experience within the first week that would show them this proposition is real?" Force behavioral specificity
• Ask: "Which element of our Positive Core Map directly supports this proposition? Can you name the specific stories that prove this is achievable?" If the team cannot, the proposition is not grounded and needs rewriting
• Ask: "What is provocative about this -- what does it challenge or stretch beyond your current state?" If nothing about the statement is uncomfortable, it is not provocative enough
• A useful diagnostic: read the PP aloud and ask the group to rate it on a scale of 1--5 for (a) groundedness, (b) desire, (c) provocation, and (d) clarity. Any dimension scoring below 3 needs targeted revision. Do this rating exercise in 3 minutes -- it surfaces disagreements quickly and efficiently

Example

User Input: "I'm an OD consultant facilitating a 1.5-day AI summit for a 120-person regional hospital. The presenting problem is high nursing staff turnover -- 28% annually, well above the 18% industry average. Leadership wants to use AI rather than a traditional engagement survey. I have two co-facilitators and a budget for printed materials. The summit is in 6 weeks. Can you help me design the full process?"

Output:

## Appreciative Inquiry Facilitation Plan

### Context Summary
- Organization: Regional hospital (120 participants)
- Presenting concern: 28% annual nursing staff turnover (industry avg 18%)
- Affirmative Topic(s): See reframe below
- Group Size: 120 participants
- Format: 1.5-day AI Summit
- Facilitation Team: Lead facilitator + 2 co-facilitators
- Duration: Day 1 (afternoon, 4 hours) + Day 2 (full day, 7.5 hours)
- Facilitator Experience Level: Experienced OD consultant

---

### Affirmative Topic Reframe

| Presenting Concern | Affirmative Topic |
|---|---|
| High nursing turnover (28% annually) | A Place Where Nurses Choose to Stay and Grow |
| Staff feeling unsupported and burned out | The Conditions That Energize and Sustain Our Caregivers |
| Lack of career advancement visibility | A Culture Where Every Nurse Sees a Future Here |

**Rationale:** These reframes address the structural drivers of turnover
(belonging, sustainability, career development) without making the
summit feel like a retention intervention. The language centers nurses'
experience and agency, which generates more honest and energized stories
than deficit framing.

**Recommended primary affirmative topic (to anchor interview questions):**
"A Place Where Nurses Choose to Stay and Grow: Discovering the conditions
that make this hospital the best place to build a nursing career."

---

### Paired Interview Protocol

**Topic:** A Place Where Nurses Choose to Stay and Grow
**Estimated time:** 20 minutes per direction (40 minutes total per pair)

**Question 1 -- Peak Experience (Story Question)**
"Think back over your time working here -- or in any healthcare setting
if you are newer -- and recall a time when you felt truly proud to be
a nurse in this organization. A moment when your work felt most
meaningful, when you were most energized, or when you and your team were
genuinely at your best. Tell me the story of what happened. What were
the circumstances? Who was involved? What did you do? What made that
moment possible?"

**Question 2 -- Values (Depth Question)**
"Based on that story, and without undervaluing what you bring: what
are the qualities, strengths, or commitments you personally contributed
to that experience? What do your colleagues count on you for?"

**Question 3 -- Life-Giving Factors (Organizational Strengths)**
"When nurses in this hospital decide to stay -- when they have other
options but choose to be here -- what do you believe they are choosing?
What does this hospital offer, formally or informally, that you cannot
easily find elsewhere?"

**Question 4 -- Wishes (Forward-Looking)**
"Imagine this hospital has become the most sought-after place for nurses
to build their careers in this region. Nurses are recommending it to
colleagues. Recruitment is easy and retention is exceptional. What has
changed? What are your three wishes for what this place has become?"

**Interviewer Instructions:**
- Take notes on specific words, images, and metaphors your partner uses
- Listen without problem-solving, interpreting, or offering advice
- Use these probes if the conversation stalls:
  "Tell me more about that."
  "What specifically made that possible?"
  "What was your role in that moment?"
  "How did that make you feel, and what did it show you about this place?"
- After the interview, circle the 3 most compelling insights or phrases
  to share with your table group

---

### Summit Agenda

**Event Title:** "Choosing to Stay: Building the Future of Nursing at [Hospital]"
**Day 1:** 1:00 PM -- 5:30 PM | **Day 2:** 8:30 AM -- 4:30 PM
**Location:** [Main conference center, round tables of 8]
**Facilitation Team:** Lead facilitator (plenary), Co-facilitator 1
(table coaching, east half), Co-facilitator 2 (table coaching, west half)
**Harvest Team:** 2 designated staff (not facilitators), with chart paper,
digital camera, and shared Google Doc

| Time | Phase | Activity | Owner | Materials |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day 1, 1:00--1:30 | Welcome | Framing, agenda overview, AI introduction | Lead | Slides, printed workbook |
| Day 1, 1:30--1:50 | Discover warm-up | Appreciative check-in: "Share your name, role, and one moment this week when you felt the heart of nursing" | Lead | None |
| Day 1, 1:50--3:20 | Discover | Paired interviews (20 min each direction, 5 min debrief) | Participants | Printed interview guide |
| Day 1, 3:20--3:35 | Break + energizer | -- | Co-fac 1 | Music |
| Day 1, 3:35--4:20 | Discover | Table sharing: each person shares partner's story; table identifies 3--5 themes | Table coaches | Chart paper, markers |
| Day 1, 4:20--5:00 | Discover | Whole-group positive core mapping: tables report; harvest team builds wall map | Lead + harvest | Wall space, large stickies |
| Day 1, 5:00--5:25 | Dream intro | Framing the Dream phase; assign creative groups; brief exercise instructions | Lead | Workbook page |
| Day 1, 5:25--5:30 | Day 1 close | Reflection prompt: "Sleep on this -- what future are you most excited to help build?" | Lead | Index card |
| Day 2, 8:30--9:00 | Reconnect | Morning check-in; review positive core map; energizer | Co-fac 2 | Posted map |
| Day 2, 9:00--10:00 | Dream | Creative visioning: groups create 4-min "news broadcast from the future" showing hospital 3 years from now | All | Props box: hats, name tags, simple costumes |
| Day 2, 10:00--10:45 | Dream | Group performances (4 min each, 15 groups = 60 min; use 12 groups for time if needed) | All | Minimal staging |
| Day 2, 10:45--11:15 | Dream | Dream statement creation: each table writes 2 dream statements; post on wall | Table coaches | Chart paper |
| Day 2, 11:15--11:30 | Dream | Dot vote convergence: identify top 4--5 dream themes | Lead | Dot stickers |
| Day 2, 11:30--12:00 | Dream--Design bridge | Announce 5 design themes; participants self-select design teams | Lead | Sign-up sheets |
| Day 2, 12:00--1:00 | Lunch | Informal relationship-building; tables remain mixed | -- | -- |
| Day 2, 1:00--2:00 | Design | Design teams draft 2--3 Provocative Propositions each | Design teams | PP writing guide, chart paper |
| Day 2, 2:00--2:30 | Design | Gallery walk: all PPs posted; participants use dots + sticky note feedback | All | Dot stickers, sticky notes |
| Day 2, 2:30--3:00 | Design | Refinement and finalization: teams revise PPs based on feedback; lead facilitator reads all final PPs aloud | Lead + teams | Final PP poster |
| Day 2, 3:00--3:40 | Destiny | Innovation team formation by PP; complete Action Charters | Innovation teams | Charter template |
| Day 2, 3:40--4:00 | Destiny | Personal commitment cards: written, then shared with accountability buddy | All | Index cards |
| Day 2, 4:00--4:20 | Destiny | Public commitment: one representative per team shares team's first action | Team reps | None |
| Day 2, 4:20--4:30 | Close | Celebration, acknowledgment, next steps, 90-day rhythm announcement | Lead | -- |

---

### Provocative Propositions (Draft Examples for Design Teams)

**Dream Theme 1: Belonging and Psychological Safety**

PP 1: "[Hospital] is a place where every nurse -- new graduate or
20-year veteran -- feels genuinely welcomed and backed by their team.
We have established unit-level buddy systems, weekly team check-ins that
open with appreciative reflection, and a culture where asking for help
is a sign of professional maturity. As a result, new nurses reach full
clinical confidence 30% faster and choose to renew their contracts at
exceptional rates."

PP 2: "Our nursing units are communities where conflict is addressed
with directness and care, not avoidance. Charge nurses are equipped
with strengths-based facilitation skills and practice them weekly.
As a result, nurses describe their team as the primary reason they
stay at this hospital."

**Dream Theme 2: Career Visibility and Growth**

PP 3: "Every nurse at [Hospital] has a visible, individualized growth
pathway that connects their clinical strengths to the roles they want
to hold in 2 and 5 years. Our Clinical Ladder program is known in
the region as the most transparent and accessible in healthcare.
As a result, internal promotion fills 70% of senior nursing vacancies
and nurses cite career opportunity as a top reason for choosing to stay."

**Dream Theme 3: Workload Sustainability**

PP 4: "[Hospital] is an organization where nursing workload is
continuously calibrated to e

…(truncated)