Instrumental Questioning:

The Role of Questions in Design and Management

Michel Avital
Questions are a fundamental element of doing design. Design starts with asking questions,
argued J. Christopher Jones in the beginning of the second edition of his book Design Methods
(1980). He wrote: Like any cookbook it is hardly to read right through but it is to be used, in
pieces, as and when one wants to know how to do it. The very simplest and quickest way to
use it is to read only questions to be asked by the design team ...The next simplest is to use the
(specified) criteria (for design) to answer the same question.@
Designers aim to plan and specify how to realize the desired futures that they imagine.
Their work is iterative--it evolves in many small trial-and-error steps. In each step, they look
critically at their design object and attempt to assess the effect and contribution of the latest
design iteration to their overall design objectives. In Donald Schons words, they enter into a
reflective conversation with the situation. Managers, too, follow virtually the same iterative
processes. The success of a complex and iterative process is dependent predominantly upon the
kind of questions they ask. The importance of asking the right questions is intuitively clear if one
can envision how questions both enable and constrain what would be explored, and how questions
not asked represent areas not explored. Questions are the seeds of the ideas, solutions, and design
blueprint to come. Understanding the dyad refinement-reflection is fundamental for both designers
and managers.
By its very nature, the way we ask has an acute effect on the answers we get. Designers
are no different from those who search for a school of rainbow trouts--their catch-of-the-day is
largely determined by where they look and what tools they use. Requirements specification and
design characterization are largely dependent on who the designers ask, what, when, and most
importantly, in what way. In that sense, the nature of the inquiry determines both the process and
the product of the design. Different modes of inquiry generate different design strategies, which in
turn can be expected to yield different design blueprints.
In their inquiry, both designers and managers tend to adopt a problem solving approach.
Little or no attention is given to the ontology of inquiry implied in the problem solving approach.
We approach design as a process of identifying and solving problems--this is generally taken for
granted and treated as a black box. The question of how the applied mode of inquiry implied by a
problem solving approach affects the process and product of design is rarely explored.
Problem solving is an ubiquitous approach in the context of design. One way to shed light
on the effect of the problem solving approach on design would be to juxtapose it with
appreciative inquiry, which is a fundamentally different approach used in organizational design
and development. The appreciative inquiry approach was chosen not only because it is radically
different from the problem solving approach, but also because I wish to respond to calls
suggesting that design should be done in a social context, use cross-disciplinary tools, take a
holistic approach, be responsive to human needs, and be responsible and ethical (e.g., Papanek,
1984; Mason, 1998).
1

Due to limits of space, I will not discuss the problem solving approach except to say that it
is implied in most approaches to design. Appreciative inquiry is a social constructionist approach
to organizational development introduced by Cooperrider & Srivastva (1987) as a form of action
research. As a product of the socio-rationalist paradigm, appreciative inquiry builds on Lewin's
(1951) conviction that social existence is governed by our interpretation of the circumstances, and
Gergen's (1982, 1994) notion of a socially-constructed reality.
Appreciative inquiry holds that through our presuppositions, choice of method, and
language we largely create the world we later discover. Thus, the questions we ask are fateful. The
very first questions we ask are the seeds of transformation. The image of the future guides the
present actions. In the spirit of Vicker's (1980) 'appreciative systems', the appreciative inquiry
approach asserts that positive images have long-term inspiring capacity and propel a more
sustainable momentum for change (Cooperrider, 1990).
The cornerstones that underlie appreciative inquiry may be best expressed by David
Cooperrider (1998) at the Academy of Management meeting:
"Appreciative Inquiry is about the coevolutionary search for the best in people,
their organizations, and the relevant world around them. In its broadest focus, it
involves systematic discovery of what gives 'life' to a living system when it is most
alive, most effective, and most constructively capable in economic, ecological, and
human terms. Appreciative Inquiry involves, in a central way, the art and practice
of asking questions that strengthen a system's capacity to apprehend, anticipate,
and heighten positive potential. It centrally involves the mobilization of inquiry
through the crafting of the 'unconditional positive question' often involving
hundreds or sometimes thousands of people. In Appreciative Inquiry the arduous
task of intervention gives way to the speed of imagination and innovation: instead
of negation, criticism, and spiraling diagnosis, there is discovery, dream, and
design. Appreciative Inquiry seeks, fundamentally, to build a constructive union
between a whole people and the massive entirety of what people talk about as past
and present capacities... Appreciative Inquiry deliberately, in everything it does,
seeks to work from accounts of a 'positive change core'Band it assumes that every
living system has many untapped and rich and inspiring accounts of the positive.
Link the energy of this core directly to any change agenda and changes never
thought possible are suddenly and democratically mobilized."
A naive metaphor that illustrates the rudimentary difference between the problem solving
approach and the appreciative inquiry approach is the image of a partially filled glass of water that
may be seen as "half empty," or as "half full." Building on the contrast between logical empiricism
and socio-rationalism, the problem solving approach and the appreciative inquiry approach are
juxtaposed in the following table.
A Comparison between the Attributes of the Problem Solving and
Appreciative Inquiry Approaches in the Context of Design
2

Problem Solving

Appreciative Inquiry

Paradigmatic Dimension
# Inquiry Character
Reality Picture

Given objective reality &

Universal truth

Socially constructed

Unit of Analysis

Structure and processes

Groups and values

Focus of Inquiry

Value chains, constraints,

and discrepancies

Capabilities, strengths, possibilities,

visions of a "better world"

Source of Wisdom

Assimilate "best practices"

Draw from situated knowledge

Generative Capacity

Solve ad hoc problems within the

prevailing paradigm

Conducive for insight and learning

Perspective

Critical, deconstructive, cynical

Accommodating, constructive, faithful

Form of Communication

Logical relations and procedures

Personal concerns, narratives,

and myths

Before/After Picture

"As is" and "To be"

"Best of what is" and "What can be"

Thrust

Integration, efficiency,
Effectiveness and control

Organizational transformation,
learning, and development

Institutional Role

Purposive/ Goal seeking

Pluralistic/ Life-giving

Agency Role

Independent
Subject to task and structure

Interdependent
Subject to social influence

Root Metaphor

Organization as "a problem to be

solved"

Organizing as "a possibility to be

embraced"

# Organizational Image

The development of an appreciative inquiry based mode of inquiry as an alternative to the

ubiquitous problem solving approach may open new horizons and uncover previously overlooked
possibilities, which will eventually contribute to the overall organizational well being. The
appreciative inquiry approach may be one of those underutilized tools that did not find their way
to the arsenal of designers. I do not argue that the appreciative inquiry approach should replace
the problem solving or any other approach. I suggest that it provides a new vocabulary and new
perspectives of looking at design, which may let new possibilities to emerge. After all, words
create worlds.
This note aims to focus our attention on questioning in the context of design, and to
suggest that the way designers and managers ask questions has a crucial effect on the process and
product of their work. Both designers and managers are currently trained and being rewarded for
3

providing answers, and not for asking good questions. In developing vocabularies and taxonomies
of managing as designing, we have an opportunity to encourage them to persistently pursue and
ask provocative questions.

Michel Avital
Case Western Reserve University