De afgelopen jaren presenteerde ik mijn onderzoek op verschillende wetenschappelijke conferenties. Hier een overzicht:

International Conference on SDT 2010: Conference on Self-Determination Theory (13-16 May 2010 – Ghent). Dit was het begin van een reeks wetenschappelijke congressen. De resultaten van mijn bacheloronderzoek presenteerde ik hier met een poster.
Abstract: Appreciative Inquiry (AI) has gained growing popularity as an approach to organizational development and change. This study, based on the responses of 331 participants working either in an AI or a non-AI organization, explores if experiencing an AI approach during organizational change improves the level of Psychological Capital. It is conjectured that AI increases the self-determined motivation of employees hereby impacting on Psychological Capital. From within the Self Determination framework the mediating effect of relatedness, autonomy and competence on the relationship between AI and Psychological Capital is investigated. Results show a significant main effect of experienced AI. This effect is fully mediated by autonomy and competence.

ECPP 2010: European Conference on Positive Psychology (2010 – Copenhagen)

WAIC 2012: World Appreciative Inquiry Conference (2012 – Ghent). Hier presenteerde ik de eerste resultaten van mijn masteronderzoek onder de titel: “The Impact of Appreciative Inquiry on Employee Work Engagement.”De gebruikte powerpoint kan je hier bekijken. De volledige tekst kan je via deze link raadplegen.
Abstract: Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is implemented worldwide as a successful method for organizational change. Questions, however, remain as to what turns AI into an effective method. This paper investigates the relation between the characteristics of an AI-approach and work engagement. In an AI-approach, employees are encouraged to share their best practices, to connect to each other in taking initiative and to co-create what they feel as the best thing for the organisation. Appreciation and connecting are the two important vectors in the AI-model. Work engagement grows in work climates where adequate job and personal resources are available. We believe these resources grow and become salient through an AI-approach. It is therefore conjectured that the implementation of AI furnishes the necessary job and personal resources to satisfy the basic psychological needs, and the intrinsic motivation, hereby creating an impact on work engagement. Based on the characteristics of an AI-approach, a Connecting and Appreciation at Work scale was developed to measure AIbehavior. Our conjectures were tested by means of a survey among 132 employees of Flanders and the Netherlands. Based on the responses, we found that a higher level of selfreported connecting and appreciation is related to an increased level of work engagement. Moreover, this relationship is fully explained by employees’ intrinsic motivation and satisfaction of basic psychological needs. Therefore, it can be concluded that an AI-approach creates the adequate job and personal resources to satisfy the basic psychological needs and to enhance intrinsic motivation, hereby creating an impact on work engagement. More quantitative research on the effect of an AI-approach on employees can contribute to understand the mechanisms, underlying in AI and increasing its success in organizational development and change.

ECQI 2018: European Congress of Qualitative Inquiry – (2018 – Leuven). Dit is een congres dat gericht is op kwalitatief onderzoek. Met met mijn huidig onderzoek ga ik vooral aan de slag met action research. De gebruikte methode hebben wij besproken tijdens dit congres.
Abstract: Increasingly citizens take initiatives and start activities at a local community level as an antidote against the social exclusion and polarization that they observe in society nowadays. How can we, as researchers sharing these concerns, support this kind of initiatives?
The workshop invites participants to enter a generative co-inquiry into the possibilities of action research within local initiatives of citizens: What kind of research practices can make a difference by connecting differences within a community? Action research in local initiatives for community building should: (a) explore together with the actors their differences as well as action possibilities to embrace these differences and connect actors in a richer and warmer community-life; and (b) connect these micro practices and reflect on them in order to co-create shared knowledge that can be validated. The rationale for this kind of research is inspired by the inter-related approaches of action research, appreciative inquiry, multi-actor collaboration and dialogic organization development, amongst others.
The workshop starts with the description of a concrete emerging initiative in a rural village in Flanders. In this case a small group of inspired citizens started thinking on “how to return to a ‘more social’ society, against the current flow. Not a society in which groups focus on themselves, but a society that strives for openness and co-existence… to contribute to such a society by providing support with practical matters, but also with a listening ear, an encouraging attitude.” They initiated various small projects like a repair café, a local farmer market and community meals. While organizing these activities and experiencing success and failure, there was a permanent questioning how to involve the municipal administration and other actors that were hesitant to participate, and how to bridge political and ideological differences
The question for researchers is which kind of research is helpful for this case, as well as for many similar initiatives elsewhere, to come closer to its ideal of coherent and lively local communities as building blocks for an inclusive and sustainable society.
The participants in the workshop will be invited to develop in small groups a research strategy for this case, specifying which actors should be involved in which ways in different stages of the research process. The potential and limitations of these proposals to address and bridge differences (socio-economic, ideological-political, ethnic-religious, disciplinary-paradigmatic, …) will be analyzed in a plenary session. The organizers of the session will act as a panel drawing the attention to the perspectives of the different actors involved in the case.