Access to this full-text is provided by MDPI.
Content available from Sustainability
This content is subject to copyright.
sustainability
Article
The Role of Appreciative Inquiry to Supporting Students’
Healthy Transition into the Post-Graduate World: A Case Study
at the University of Malta
Rebecca Dalli Gonzi 1, * and Joan Camilleri 2
Citation: Dalli Gonzi, R.; Camilleri, J.
The Role of Appreciative Inquiry to
Supporting Students’ Healthy
Transition into the Post-Graduate
World: A Case Study at the University
of Malta . Sustainability 2021,13, 5365.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105365
Academic Editors: Jesus Granados
Sanchez and Marc Rosen
Received: 2 March 2021
Accepted: 3 May 2021
Published: 11 May 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
1Department of Construction and Property Management, Faculty for the Built Environment,
University of Malta, MSD 2080 Msida, Malta
2Counselling Services, Health and Wellness Centre, University of Malta, MSD 2080 Msida, Malta;
joan.camilleri@um.edu.mt
*Correspondence: rebecca.e.dalli-gonzi@um.edu.mt
Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to explore ways to integrate student self-development into
preparation for a post-graduate internship. The research problem to be investigated is the identified
gap in support services for student wellbeing and self-esteem alongside academic development prior
to entering the professional sphere. The Faculty for the Built Environment within the University of
Malta conducted this as a pilot study in collaboration with the Counselling Services Unit to support
students in finding ways to improve their work/study balance. The methodology used was an
appreciative inquiry through workshops and focus groups over two academic years. The main
findings suggest that students requested time management and resilience techniques to strengthen
their study–work–life balance and develop an improved work ethic once university life is complete.
Students who felt valued throughout the study period appreciated their ideas and self-identity more
than others. Results were presented to the faculty staff who suggested an action–response approach
to transition management. Conclusions indicated that the strength of the approach undertaken
served to manage students’ transition from academic life to career entry, conduct a gap analysis
to identify issues between students and staff, and facilitate a discussion of values and ethics in
preparation for post-graduation career performance.
Keywords:
appreciative inquiry; action research; work–life balance; university student; transi-
tion management
1. Introduction
In recent years, the Faculty for the Built Environment within the University of Malta
has incorporated the teaching of values and ethical practice. While students appreciated
this contribution, they expressed their concerns about the integration of ethics and values
into their professional lives given the constant reports of malpractice in the construction
sector. Examples of malpractice in the construction sector can leave an impression on
young graduates, especially when such practices are not addressed through a proper legal
system. In Malta, the construction industry is one of the main pillars of the country’s
economy. In fact, the construction and real estate industries contributed to 13.5% of the
total gross value added in 2016 [
1
]. In this regard, graduates are exposed to a rapidly
growing sector upon entering professional practice and preparation was deemed essential
to maintain ethical practice in the years following graduation.
The Faculty for the Built Environment benefited from further study of the impact of
teaching values and ethics to students, identifying issues students face prior to entering
the profession and resources needed to integrate education into their professional practice.
This facilitated the faculty staff to provide appropriate support. The authors, based in
the Faculty for the Built Environment and Counselling Services Unit in the Health and
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105365 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 2 of 16
Wellness Centre, respectively, pointed out that previous studies at the University of Malta
had quantitatively investigated students’ physical-mental health and available psycho-
social–emotional support [
2
], as well as the impact on students and staff of the measures
taken by the University to continue academic training during the pandemic COVID-19 [
3
].
2. Research Gap
Dickerson and Helm-Stevens (2011) [
4
] highlight how the success of educational insti-
tutions is influenced by healthy interactions between the institution, students/families, and
the community. Students are essential stakeholders who could inform these institutions on
what interventions could better support them. Their involvement in creating a positive
environment that provides them with resources and structure is therefore essential. For
this to actualize, the support of institutional leaders is also needed. Effective leadership en-
hances faculty learning through communities that focus on improving student learning by
engaging in open learning conversations. These concepts highlight the role of educational
leaders in fostering the creation of a learning community that focuses on the relationship
between what is taught, what is learned [
5
], and how this is practiced. In this manner,
students learn how to learn [
6
], a skill they may carry into their post-graduate professional
life which would support them to adapt to the construction field while retaining the values
and ethics embraced during their university course.
The authors were motivated to explore the lived experience of students who, having
received an education in values and ethics, are now preparing to enter the workforce.
During the study, they assessed students’ strengths and needs, what strategies students
used to integrate the values and ethics taught into their professional practice, and what
resources they needed to facilitate this integration. The findings and insights gained were
shared with faculty staff to inform future training. The fusion of the approaches chosen—
thematic analysis, appreciative inquiry, and action research—supported the process. The
use of contemporary management techniques while maintaining a democratic, bottom-up
perspective gave students a voice. No similar studies have previously been conducted at
the University of Malta. As part of the research process, student feedback was collected
between 2019 and 2021.
3. Rationale of this Research
Quantitative studies regarding student wellbeing were carried out at the University of
Malta in 2009 [
2
] and in 2020 [
3
]. The former study indicated that 65% of the students felt
regularly satisfied and confident in terms of their wellbeing, 35% felt so occasionally and
5% did not feel the above. The latter percentage consisted mainly of first-year and single
students. Over 50% of the students reported feeling regularly overwhelmed, exhausted
and stressed. Third- and fifth-year students tended to feel more stressed and overwhelmed
than first-year or single students.
The authors observed that first, third, and final-year students tend to be students in
transition. First-year students are in transition from college school to university, third-year
students decide to pursue a post-graduate degree or employment, while final-year students
move into professional practice. In total, 40% of the students surveyed said that they
find it difficult to discuss problems with anyone, including family and friends. Only 28%
of student respondents reported feeling actively involved in courses, with 25% stating
that they were encouraged to actively contribute their ideas during lectures. Half of the
students surveyed felt that both academic and nonacademic staff were unsupportive. It
is therefore not surprising that 96% of the students surveyed found university life very
stressful, with exams and assignments being the biggest source of stress.
Cefai and Camilleri (2009) [
2
], while providing valid recommendations on how the
university could support its students, recommend that further studies are carried out
in collaboration with student bodies, taking into account students’ views on this issue,
particularly the avoidance of professional help due to stigma.
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 3 of 16
The Salt survey (2020) [
3
], which explored the wellbeing of students and staff during
COVID-19, found that 66% of students who responded were dissatisfied with how the
change from face-to-face teaching to online teaching was communicated and delivered.
Conversely, academics were generally satisfied with the transition to distance learning.
Students expressed high levels of concern about the physical health, safety, and wellbeing
of their loved ones (47%) and their own mental and emotional wellbeing (32%). While
students welcomed the idea of conducting future tests/examination sessions using distance
learning modalities, academic staff expressed dissatisfaction regarding the increase in their
workload and level of connectedness with students.
Both studies seemed to indicate that students and academics had differing opinions
and were not sufficiently engaged in conversations about a mutually beneficial path for-
ward. The authors felt that this conversation was necessary to create a healthy environment
for students to remain and support them in their respective transitions. The way forward
was to give students a voice, particularly those in their third and final years of study, and
to try to provide the interventions they wanted. This was seen as a means of motivating
students, enhancing their wellbeing and supporting them to continue to practice the values
and ethics they had been taught in their professional practice.
Therefore, the aim of this research was to analyze students’ perspectives and needs
in self-development. In doing so, the research presents a pilot study to establish a model
for the sustainable implementation of preparatory pathways prior to students’ entry into
the professional sphere. The research pathway comprised two phases. The first phase
consisted of an appreciative inquiry using thematic analysis to analyze discussions, and the
second phase consisted of an action research component. The collaborative project between
the Faculty for the Built Environment and Counselling Services Unit raised awareness at
three levels: student level, faculty staff, and at a university-wide approach to change. The
paper is organized as follows. A review is provided of the major literature that has been
used to identify intervention models and supportive practices in the delivery of services to
meet student needs. An overview of the qualitative data collection and analysis conducted
follows. Key findings derived from the observation process with students are presented
along with conclusions and recommendations to overcome existing challenges and future
research directions. The study was conducted in accordance with the faculty research
ethics committee of the University of Malta. UREC FORM ID Code (7954_01032021). The
university benefited from understanding students’ lived experiences and needs from a
multifaceted perspective in order to implement appropriate supportive interventions. If
self-management and critical, self-reflective skills were adopted by young professionals
charged with designing built environments, it could improve ethical implementation and
enable change in the country’s building policies and standards. Self-development of future
professionals could improve leadership in the built environment [7].
4. Research Aims and Objectives
The aim of this appreciative inquiry was to:
(a)
Increase understanding of the lived experience of students in their final year of study
as they prepare to enter the world of work;
(b)
Gain insights into the strategies used and resources required by students to better
manage the impending role and identity change;
(c)
Support the emergence of themes that identify ways to facilitate a healthy transition.
5. Literature Review
Universities play a vital role in supporting national development by offering un-
dergraduate and graduate students training at a cognitive-psycho-social-spiritual level.
Thereby, students may become open-minded, active citizens, generating equality and
inclusion, and possibly developing into political leaders [
8
]. In this sense, tertiary insti-
tutions play a change-agency role, catalyzing the enhancement of individuals’ quality
of life, improving decision-making and social mobility [
9
]. In universities, faculties fre-
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 4 of 16
quently attempt to improve service provision by introducing new evidence-based best
practices to cater for shifts in the students’ needs, while maintaining sustainability and
increasing accountability [
10
]. However, as highlighted during the Joint Action on Mental
Health and Well Being: Driving Mental Health at Work Conference held in Berlin in 2014,
though policy is drawn following professional research and interventions, respecting ethi-
cal evidence-based practice, implementation is not straightforward. Given their central
role as culture carriers, academics and research leaders are meant to become the first to
lead change and then to engage in the kind of intersubjective dialogue, which is essential
to support students’ self-development [
11
]. If change was to begin with the academic
and research leaders, this would focus on self-knowledge, awareness of the field and the
interaction between the two [
12
]. Research and work-based experience, however, indicates
that change is perceived as a frequently undesired adaptation to external events, jolting
leaders into awareness [
13
,
14
]. A permanent change could be experienced as a shift in
personal identity, involving shifts in underlying processes, leading to the modification of
self-perception. Change implementation studies, therefore, need to focus on processes,
eliciting how stakeholders reacting to organizational interventions may generate collective
action and social movements [
15
]. A paper published by [
16
], Waters and White (2015),
outlines a process for creating positive school change designed to foster citizenship, virtue
and wellbeing in students.
Students in final-year university programs find themselves at the threshold of a
significant shift. They need tutor leaders who equip them for their upcoming professional
start. Students in their final years transition from passive recipients to independent,
autonomous learners and this gap has been identified, providing the motivation to initiate
the research. The key argument of this study is that final-year preparation, which entails the
application of academic values built through the years, constitutes a powerful influencer
in the student’s post-graduate life. However, this has been largely neglected, particularly
from the student’s point of view. Furthermore, this highlights the necessity to direct the
research study towards a specific cohort, that requires a different tuition experience to
students in lower years. In creating such an environment, the student–teacher experience
can be unique, built on trust and feedback exchange, thus allowing for the exploration
of emergent student needs and requirements as part of the preparatory exercise. This
presents a topic of interest to new future teachers, academic bodies, and heads of schools
in preparing high quality careers.
5.1. Managing Change
Delivery in nonroutine or time-urgent situations requires an approach to achieving
balance between control and autonomy within a constant demand for satisfactory output
performance [
17
]. In a top-down approach to change, management, command and the
launching of change comes from the strategic apex of the organization and usually involves
a cycle of change determined by top-management [
18
]. Since the 1980s, planned change
faced increasing levels of criticism due to its perceived inability to cope with radical,
coercive change situations [
19
]. Pettigrew (1990) [
20
] argued that the planned approach was
too prescriptive and did not pay enough attention to the need to analyze and conceptualize
organizational change [
21
]. The approach does not allow scope for widespread consultation
or involvement and presumes that all stakeholders in a change project are willing and
interested in implementing it [22].
Alternatively, an emergent approach to change implementation means that a model
for change is built on a continuous process [
22
] and nonlinear thinking forms the basis
for emergent approaches to change [
23
]. Emergent can be understood as an individual or
organization responding to the opportunities and threats in the environment (ibid) and
responding and adapting to the changes that are constantly emerging. This method ensures
that the design of a response to change is appropriate for the current contextual change
in the environment and addresses the functions that a service delivery could provide to
meet the emerging needs. In this regard, Reynolds [
23
] (2004) argues that when school
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 5 of 16
change is approached as both a top-down and bottom-up approach, the bottom-up process
involves diagnosis and action, while the top-down process provides direction and goals.
Approaching the bottom-up approach leads to a strengthening of the possibilities of an
inclusion process for generating ideas and perspectives, which can then be transferred to
hierarchical levels in the school structure. Furthermore, Copland [
24
] (2004) adds that what
facilitates successful change in schools is the use of an inquiry process that is central to
building capacity for school improvement. Implementing change and introducing change
management into school environments through this process is what empowers students to
identify, learn, evaluate and contribute directly, while the researchers of the process have a
direct hand in shaping and building the processes that will bring about the relevant change.
5.2. Managing Transition
While change is visible and consciously experienced, transition, the process underlying
it, is often unconscious and requires a process of investigation to become visible. Sometimes
transition is seen as a process that occurs after the change has been implemented and refers
to “letting go of the old
. . .
identity
. . .
focused
. . .
it starts with an ending” ([
13
], p. 7).
Transition is more likely to occur when stakeholders/students/staff perceive that the
university has created a positive holding environment, while organizational development
is more likely to occur when leaders/staff are motivated, professionally mature, and have
developed most forms of intelligence.
Theoretically, the lived experience of transition during an institutional change may de-
velop as follows: Stakeholders (management/staff/students) become aware that habitual
interventions are not achieving expected outcomes [
2
,
3
]. This awareness may precipitate
inner crises, as stakeholders observe that they need to change their mindsets and the way
they feel about things if they are to achieve their goals. Stakeholders, encountering an un-
desired need to change, may initially experience shock, leading to anger, bargaining, stress,
anxiety and confusion. For positive outcomes, they require support [
25
,
26
], otherwise they
will continue using past effective coping mechanisms that are no longer appropriate [
27
].
If at this stage stakeholders embark on a process of self-awareness and re-evaluation by
questioning the expected outcomes, transition may begin within “the neutral zone
. . .
a
psychological no man’s land between the old and new reality” ([
13
], p.8). Remaining in this
zone is the hardest part of transition, wherein creative innovation may occur, leading to
reorientation. By increasing the reacting agent’s awareness about one’s reaction to change,
the agent’s emotions, cognitions, and behavior would be impacted. If one could reach such
insight, one might find it easier to accept and participate in the change [
28
]. Outcomes
would include learning resulting in self-growth, insight, working through, resolving the
problem, and achieving mastery [
29
]. The process could be facilitated by awareness of
one’s possible self, as this accelerates recognition of a desired identity and sense of self [
30
].
5.3. Underlying Processes
In the process of inquiry, self-development results from the conscious experience that
arises from the mutual interaction between one’s sensorimotor abilities and the environ-
ment [
31
]. Assimilation and accommodation of experience leads to adjustment, which
cannot necessarily be verbalized but is experienced implicitly. After reflection, the change
can be explicitly verbalized and consciously registered. At this stage, a patterning of habits
and values occurs, and the process involves awareness, intuitive insight, and cognition.
A holistic understanding of how meanings emerge during interactions is offered by the
psychotherapeutic perspective, which explains how the inner dialogue between the var-
ious selves and/or partial functions of the self clarifies the person’s needs, desires, and
goals [32]. Three questions are asked by the three subfunctions of the self:
- Id function: what are my needs? Current or due to unresolved past issues;
- Ego function: what do I want? Cognitive part of the decision-making process;
- Personality: who am I/who do I need to become? To meet the needs of the ego.
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 6 of 16
Leaders’ awareness of the need for change develops in the interaction between their
personality functions and the organizational field. It is through the interaction between
its subfunctions that the self decides that change is needed and that this change needs to
evolve and commit [
11
,
33
]. This occurs during the accommodation phase of the transition
process. The organizational conditions in which self-development occurs include the
balance between the empowering and constraining organizational environments that
provide the background for its emergence, and the simultaneous interaction between the
stakeholders: management, students, and staff.
In order to facilitate organizational change, it is important to understand how the
group/organization arrived at its current situation. Individuals, groups, and organizations
need to resolve unfinished business, give new meaning to core beliefs, and create positive
intermember communication [34].
The literature review informed the choice of methodology. For students to assimi-
late and accommodate the values and ethics imparted during their training and retain
them during their professional lives, they need to achieve a permanent change in their
role/identity/sense of self. If students could self-reflect, increasing their self-awareness,
awareness of the field and the interaction between the two [
12
], they might be able to
uphold imparted values and ethics in their professional lives. This involves shifts in under-
lying processes leading to the modification of self-perception. This reorientation of one’s
outlook on life is accessible only through students’ stories regarding this experience [
35
].
The methodology is needed to commence a conversation between stakeholders so as to
increase the university’s knowledge about the needs, wants and resources of the students.
This information needs to be obtained from the students themselves, giving them a voice
in chapter, and possibly commencing a social movement [15].
6. Methodology
Informed by the literature review and work-based experiences, within the local con-
text, the authors focused on the lived experiences of students. Their voices became the
core of this study. From this perspective, a quantitative methodology was considered
inappropriate as structured approaches do not acknowledge the individuality/autonomy
of human nature and provide overly simplistic information. Furthermore, two such studies
have already been conducted by the university. The methodology needed to respect the
underlying processes influencing respondents and their understanding of personal/socio-
cultural circumstances. Qualitative methodology provides space for meanings about
human interactions while acknowledging the existence of different realities [36–38].
Due to the focus on raising awareness of positive aspects and initiating social move-
ments, appreciative inquiry and action research approaches were deemed appropriate
for this project [
39
–
42
]. This encouraged wider participation in the findings and led to
higher levels of engagement in both the successful completion of the study and the im-
plementation of the findings. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the stories and texts
of the participating students as they told them during the focus groups [
36
,
38
]. The lived
experience was considered an important source of data-rich information [
43
]. Triangulation
of data sources was used, with data coming from: (a) the students’ narratives during the
focus groups; (b) the authors’ observations of participants during the university-based
interventions; (c) feedback from the faculty members with whom the findings were dis-
cussed. The presence of the authors as insiders turned researchers raised ethical concerns
as this could have implications for the study in terms of bracketing. Personal integrity and
its ethical expression were achieved by introducing a heuristic approach to the study [
37
].
The methodology was divided into two phases:
Phase 1: An appreciative inquiry approach was used. This approach is based on
the principle that positive organizational change can be achieved through collective in-
volvement [
15
], with stakeholders focusing “on human ideals
. . .
peak experiences and
best practices
. . .
” ([
16
], p. 2) rather than problem-solving. Conversations, supported
by open-ended questions within unstructured interviews, became the means of creating
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 7 of 16
shared meaning/role/identity [
44
], providing stakeholders with an opportunity for dia-
logue and inquiry, supporting the development of relationships and trust; giving a voice
and empowering participants to become part of the proposed changes. This sustained the
elevation of the human potential, personally and collectively by regarding study/work as
a way of learning and growing [
6
,
31
]. Thus, solutions emerged spontaneously, supporting
the planning of what could be further improved [
9
,
39
]. Three focus groups were held
at T1-T2–T3 (T1—time of first meeting with focus group; T2—time of second meeting;
T3—time of third meeting).
In the focus group held at T1, volunteering undergraduates were offered a safe space
wherein to freely express their needs and concerns. Students voiced the need to clarify
their identities as they transited from undergraduates to post-graduates/professionals and
their need for support while doing so. These concerns were addressed during the second
focus group held at T2. A presentation was used as a platform for discussion, during
which undergraduates: described how positive experiences supported their sense of self-
actualization; deemed that their lived experience required improving; deemed that some of
the strategies they used to cope with the transition from undergraduate to post-graduate
lives worked while others did not; described lacking sufficient inner resources to cope with
this transition. These insights became the research questions:
•Mention three things you deem are going well for you.
•Mention three things you deem need improvement.
•Mention three strategies you are using to improve them.
•Mention three resources you require to be better able to achieve your goals.
During the focus group held at T3 the research questions were discussed with the vol-
unteering undergraduates. Themes were allowed to emerge spontaneously from these dis-
cussions.
Phase 2: An action-research approach was used, consisting of plan–act–reflect cy-
cle [
39
]. Given the need to raise awareness through critical self-reflection, [
12
] Barber’s
(2012) model was adopted, comprising the stages of change: precontact, orientation, identi-
fication, exploration and resolution. Within this cycle, action and reflection were present
throughout: (a) precontact: awareness of micro-/macroinfluences, conscious/unconscious
processes, different levels of experience and personal politics; (b) orientation/contract:
facilitators and participants agree on goals and logistics, prepare activities, iron out difficul-
ties; (c) identification/listening: problems are identified, interpersonal and environmental
issues observed, remedies discussed and solutions attempted; (d) exploration/action: im-
pact of implementation of plans/strategies on participants and facilitators is observed and
evaluated; (e) review/resolution: measures of success, termination of alliance and final
reflections on processes take place. The action-research cycle: focus groups were conducted
during the orientation/contract phase in which both researchers acted as mentors. One
researcher took on the role of an advisory mentor, facilitating self-exploration, raising
self-awareness and awareness of psycho-emotional needs, and addressing the personal self.
The other researcher assumed an academic mentoring role that bridged academic course
concerns and career pathway knowledge. During an informal conversation, students
expressed the need to: (a) engage and discuss their potential concerns about their course;
(b) reflect on their lives outside of university (work–study–life balance); (c) reflect on their
qualities as architects, areas that worked well for them and areas that needed improvement.
During the identification/listening phase, five one-and-a-half-hour focus groups were
conducted with 10–12 final year students, once per group in April 2020. Through the
focus groups, students learned more about themselves, their identities, and their value in
the context of the architectural practice in which they grew up [
33
,
34
]. Each focus group
consisted of three parts: (a) an ice breaker, (b) a presentation titled “Self-Identity and
Self-Realisation”, and (c) a final exercise in which participants described what they learned
from the workshop.
Informed by feedback received for longer groups in a more informal setting, a sub-
sequent identification/listening phase took place in November 2020. Students who had
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 8 of 16
participated in the previous phases were invited. The students learned about their role
in their family, identity growth, values in architectural practice, family dynamics, and
growing into a whole person. Six focus groups were conducted, each consisting of approxi-
mately 6 students. The presentation was replaced with four appreciative inquiry research
questions: What is going well for you? What needs to be improved in your life? What
strategies do you use to achieve this goal? What resources do you have/what resources
would you need to achieve this goal? Care was taken to ensure that the sessions did not
clash with lectures. The sessions took place on a web-based platform called Zoom. A report
of the results was provided to the faculty members for feedback.
During the exploration/action phase, the results of these discussions were imple-
mented. Three one-and-a-half-hour focus groups were held for an average of 5 to 6
third-year students. These sessions followed the approach of appreciative inquiry and
covered the research questions previously listed.
Sample and participants: the population was accessible. In this case, since data from
the entire academic year of the students were to be analyzed, the data set of the entire
population was used. Data were needed from each member of the population in this case.
To ensure internal consistency, two groups were used over a two-year period. Precontact
phase: students first approached the researchers and expressed concern for their wellbeing
and asked for support. This was followed by a discussion about how to manage the
transition between final year and starting a career.
Data collection: During data collection, the author of the Counselling Services Unit took
notes on various aspects of the focus groups, including the room, the people involved, and
the events recounted. Students’ responses to the icebreaker and the research questions were
transcribed verbatim, keeping in mind that a transcript never quite faithfully captures the
fluidity of the gestures relative to the words uttered. As insiders, the authors did their best
to maintain a researcher identity and made every effort to bracket what they knew about
the university in order to keep an open mind and listen to the students without bias or prej-
udice [
44
]. The focus groups: Following the initial interventions—ice-breaker/presentation
or research questions—the focus groups took the form of long conversations during, with
customary turn-taking rules applied, although students’ interventions were more extended
than usual given the context.
Thematic analyses: Phenomenological reduction was adopted to elicit the themes. This
consists of description, horizontalization, and verification. Through horizontalization,
a hierarchy of patterns would be allowed to emerge spontaneously from obtained data,
verifying emergent themes through all the phases. Thus, the invariant meaning upon which
all would agree would be allowed to emerge spontaneously, while appreciating what fell
out of the pattern and working with both [
45
]. As themes were identified, transcripts
were repeatedly reviewed to ensure that one did not move beyond the state of affairs.
Once sufficient information was available, insights were gained into what this meant
to students. Reflection was carried out in its context with intentionality, content and
direction. Interpretation followed, common patterns of meaning and invariant structures
were identified, while what came out of these patterns was appreciated and work was
carried out with both. Interpretation of the transcribed material explored the conversational
dynamics of the language by focusing on content and function and being sensitive to
particular themes. Reflection was made on what was said and how it was said, with the
how grounding the what. Thus, a thematic map was created [
38
]. The weight of each
theme was determined by the number of occurrences in a conversation or by its frequency
among participants [43].
Empirical credibility, reliability and validity were built into this approach as follows:
results emerged through a bottom-up, top-down interaction; Beer (2001) [
43
] argues that
the combination of bottom-up and top-down strategies is essential to address the important
failure rates of change initiatives that are reported in the organizational change literature;
through participant feedback, it was ensured that the process was correctly understood.
Evidence shows that the quality of feedback has a huge impact on students learning and
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 9 of 16
motivation, which presents an important reason to provide feedback to teachers, i.e., so
awareness is obtained, thus building teacher realization to meet learning needs (Mag,
2019) [
25
]. The interventions carried out were in real life situations; hence, the mentors in
the project were directly involved. This ensured students were familiar with the members
of staff involved in this research project. The adoption of a phenomenological approach
was appropriate, as the study of consciousness and direct, lived experience became the
overarching orientation of this inquiry. This approach holds that since participants actively
construct meaning from their experiences, the interpretation of the arising phenomena from
what the participants are saying stays close to the lived experiences of the person’s complex
human nature in the world. The validity of analytical/ethical knowledge is assessed from
the integrated perspectives of the researcher, participants, and readers [36,37,45].
Positionality of the researchers: Adopting Langdridge’s (2009) [
45
] approach to reflexive
criticism, the authors hermeneutically acknowledged the impact their lived experiences
and theoretical orientations had on themselves, before commencing the interviews with
the participants. Gadamer ’s (2004) [
44
] hermeneutic of suspicion indicated that a re-
searcher could never be sure of having totally understood what participants were saying,
as there was usually a gap between what was said and what was appropriated. During
the researcher–participant interactions, meanings could be challenged and new ones more
consonant with the circumstances that could arise, which participants could adopt or
otherwise, as meanings change dynamically since they are not objectively real. Therefore, a
psychotherapeutic approach was adopted during the focus groups to critically balance out
the authors’ constructs as researchers [37].
Limitations of the study: Due to the small sample size, the generalizability of the
results is limited. The study was conducted on a purposive population at the University
of Malta, an island in the heart of the Mediterranean, with a very distinct history and
socio-cultural climate.
The research took place in the midst of a pandemic that brought unexpected and un-
precedented changes, which exacerbated the sense of stress and lack of safety experienced
by the students during the research. The interviews were not entirely unstructured as
students were not used to talking about themselves in a free-flowing process. The per-
sonalities of the authors and their professional roles within the university, as well as their
roles as researcher-practitioners, all impacted on the cocreation of meaning, particularly in
acquiring student participants and the focus group process itself.
7. Results
All groups reported concerns about current practices in their profession and the
impact on their careers. They expressed concerns about ethics and post-graduate education
and recognized the need to act as change agents. Some felt that the university had not
adequately prepared them for this role, others felt that the relevant authority had not
taken this form of intervention into account, stating that “the training has changed but
the warrant remained the same”, and others did not relate the role of architect to that of
a change agent—“this is not what I signed up for” and, furthermore, “if I do not do the
work, (the builders) will find someone else to do it” and “I need to make a living”.
Gender issue concerns were voiced by some young female students reporting appre-
hension regarding how acting as change agents amongst male counterparts would impact
their work:
“I do not think (the constructors) will respect me because I am a woman. They do not respect
the men at times either”.
The author from the CSU observed a parallel process between this comment passed
by a female built environment student and that of a Head of Department (HOD) in another
study she had carried out within the Maltese National Healthcare Services, whereby it had
been difficult for the female HOD to: “gain respect of the tough man (medical consultants)
in the clinic and they do not trust a woman” (Session #5, line 104) [46].
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 10 of 16
7.1. Orientation/Contractual Phase Results Gave Rise to Themes Mirroring the Conversation
between the Three Partial Functions of the Self
The Orientation/Contractual phase results gave rise to themes mirroring the conver-
sation between the Three Partial Functions of the Self: (a) Needs, (b) Wants, and (c) Identity
(Table 1below).
Table 1. Students’ replies categorized according to the partial functions of the self.
Needs
Safety: Most students voiced the need for their profession to be safeguarded. They reported the
need for safety and empathy until they are strong enough to stand on their own two feet.
Concerns about financial stability were noted. “the law, its application, simple activities of daily
living –we are not taught these things”. “We need ethics but also practical applicability–too
much academia.”
Emotional-transferential support-empathy: Most students voiced the need for support to retain good
mental health and freedom from anxiety. Students acknowledged that it is habitual to feel
stressed due to exams and thesis projects. They requested improved communication means.
Students noted time pressures. “I procrastinate but design takes a long time, exams come straight
after. We need time.” “A lot of work and at times the teachers explain in a way that they think we
know everything.”
Wants
Respect: Most students desired respect for their profession and discussed how they could act to
concretely achieve this. “I would like to make a name for myself.” “Integrity is being true to
yourself. To garner respect, honour regardless of what it is.”
Creativity: Some students noted the impact of design creativity in the community. They reported
that they would produce better designs if they had less contextual constraints on their creativity.
“Being creative can get muffed out there at work.” “I need much more place to be creative.”
Peer support: Others noted the need for the introduction of group work. They reported that, for
this to happen, they had to become better team players. “Yes it’s nice to work in groups–if you
can trust.” “In group work you compare with others what you do, but”
Identity
The students reported issues related to identity. Most expressed reluctance to assume the role and
identity of change agents for various reasons including that: “it was not what they signed up for”;
they just wanted a “peaceful working life”; given the current construction ambience reigning in
Malta, they were concerned about their appreciation in the field as young graduate architects
upholding strong ethical values; “this was not what people wanted”: “if you do not do what the
contractor wants he will find someone else”. On the other hand, some students also noted that
one should “not settle. Aim higher, improve yourself personally so you improve
yourself professionally”.
This set of results indicates that the students need to make their voices heard and
to be allowed to be more creative. They expressed feeling unsafe in the construction
field and unsupported to engage in change agency. They needed more support from the
university. If the university provided a healthy holding environment and supported the
development of trust/peer support, they would be better equipped to face the field of
construction and retain the imparted ethics and values. These results were substantiated
further by the following indicators. Participants requested that more sessions akin to this
are a requisite and should be held earlier in the course sessions in a more informal space
and should be longer. During future sessions, more time should be dedicated to individual
feelings rather than be related to the course—“It is important to talk about something like
this and understand that you are not alone in your thoughts and actions”. Discussions
would preferably focus on university life rather than the future. Current issues would be
more relevant.
The evaluation exercise collated at the end of the session presented the following
results as indicated in Table 2below.
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 11 of 16
Table 2. Synthesis of the evaluation form.
Very Moderately Not at
All Do Not Know
How relevant was this exercise to you? 11 5
How engaged did you feel in this exercise? 10 6
How would you rate the facilitation style? 6 9 1
Would you recommend this event to colleagues in other courses? 12 3 1
The workshop participants reported feeling happy about being given this opportunity.
These results indicated that when students are interpolated and their voices are heard they
engage to a greater extent than when imparting knowledge is top-down, as indicated by
the 28% engagement rate in the study conducted by Cefai and Camilleri (2009) [2].
7.2. Identification Phase Results Informed by the Results Obtained during the Orientation Phase
The appreciative inquiry/action research intervention moved on to the identification
phase, wherein the task became that of eliciting more in-depth discussions with the par-
ticipants about more personal experiences and self-perceptions. Three support groups
of, on average, five students each were held. During the sessions, which lasted about an
hour and a quarter, the students were introduced to the session with an explanation of the
purpose of holding the discussions. They were then asked in an informal manner, as per
their request, to reflect on resources required to carry out the above.
•Things that are going well at the moment;
•Things that need improving;
•Strategies to improve them;
•Which resources they had ad which they required to be rendered available
To achieve this goal, a support group approach was utilized, wherein the sessions
intended to support engagement and participation by providing students with an op-
portunity to voice their views and opinions on their experiences on campus and outside
of university.
Their contributions and feedback were noted and transcribed. Table 3below demon-
strates a summary of the issues collected from the students’ concerns in the support group.
The summary of the results described in Table 2indicates the emergence of the
following themes under the umbrella of research questions. These results also show the
extent to which students’ mood was affected by the COVID -19 pandemic and the lockdown
taking place at the time of the research. The students’ voices are represented through their
verbatim responses which underpin the themes:
Things that are going well (each student was asked to list 3):
•The family is the main source of support for the students.
•Students’ life has slowed down due to COVID-19 lockdown.
•Students reported requiring less travelling time.
•
In some students, less travelling resulted in increased focus. Students noted that
during the COVID-19 pandemic, but also before that, what was going on well for them
was “receiving help from your colleagues and vice versa”, “being happy enjoying my
course”, and being keen on “my subjects because they are new and exciting” It was
the “connection with their other students, having my interests seen to, which help me
feel I am at University”. One student was appreciative of the Science Students Society
which “helped me remain in touch with University”. “Exercise cheered” them up, as
also did “having more time with my pets”.
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 12 of 16
Table 3. Summary of results.
3 Things
Going Well
No. (Number of Times
the Theme Recurred
During the
Conversation)
3 Things Needing
Improvement No. 3 Strategies Used No. 3 Resources Required No.
Less
travel/slower
process
6Time mgmt. vs.
procrastination 9
Better time
management to include
structuring the day and
activities, taking
weekends off
14
Peer support/mutual
confrontation–work in a
group
8
Family support
5
Healthier
lifestyle/diet/
exercise
5
Extracurricular
activities:
pets/hobbies/exercise.
4Support from
family/friends 3
Peer/social
support 3Working from safe
space 5
Preparing more for
tutorials, which became
a presentation rather
than a discussion.
3 Physical touch 3
Being more
focused 3Nee to be even
more focuses 5 Having values 2 Work environs need
screening 3
Tutorials more
manage-
able/less
nervous easier
to talk.
2 More socialization 5 Self-observation 2 Yoga/meditation 2
Extracurricular
activities;
Pets/Hobbies/
Exercise
3
More validation
from tutors/others.
Currently they had
less time with tutor
and they cannot
sketch online.
5 Communication issues 1 Extracurricular activities:
Pets/Baking/Exercise 2
Time
management 2Self-discipline and
self-validation 4More teamwork
opportunities 1Focus on clients’
needs/empathy 1
Me time/Sleep
more 2
Stress management
4 Increase self-esteem 1 Being pragmatic 1
More working on
site/
IT skills
2 Professional support 1
Normalization—I am like
others 1
Things that need improving:
•
Initially, staying at home felt like being on holiday, with quite a few students noting
that they “took procrastination to the next level”.
•Other students reported needing to be more focused as the family distracted them.
•Working from home did not necessarily imply working from a safe space.
•
Sitting in front of the PC led to their missing extracurricular activities, precipitated
boredom, unhealthy eating habits and lack of exercise.
•
On an equal level, the students reported requiring less critical and more validating
lecturers and tutors.
•
Students missed being at university and “needed to meet their peers” and have “better
social interactions”. They felt “too secluded” indoors. “Socialisation suffered” as
students had to stay at home “ruminating over what they would be doing if they were
at University”. Some noted that this had turned them into “workaholics”. Though
they regularly had lectures online they had not apparently thought to use this medium
to meet informally for an “e-coffee break”. Needing less time to commute due to the
partial COVID-19 lockdown had translated itself into more “free time” but students
needed to “learn to make time for study”. The issue of lack of time management arose
frequently during the discussions. A significant comment was that “at home you do
not know when to stop . . . you get tired and procrastinate”.
Strategies suggested:
•
The great majority of students noted that they required better time management and
scheduling for their work.
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 13 of 16
•
Tutorials had become a well thought out presentation rather than a discussion. Stu-
dents especially missed the open-format period where a new idea could emerge
during a creative interaction with the tutor.
•
Students noted that they needed to develop the ability to observe themselves rather
than live in repetitive patterns.
•Students noted that lecturers’ communication skills needed enhancement.
•
Contextual values also need to develop. Students suggested that lectures could “start
fifteen minutes before” so they would have time to speak to each other. On the other
hand, some students noted that they “kept the camera off” as they would still “be in
their pajamas”. Other students suggested that they required “more feedback” and
that “feedback on my progress needs to be given to me”. Students suggested that
study groups could be set up as such interactions would “support my mental health. I
feel isolated”. Few students felt they could take the initiative with words such as “the
University should
. . .
” the “tutors ought to
. . .
” and we “need to make time for
. . .
but” forming the introduction to many of the suggested strategies.
Resources required:
•
Students highlighted that peer support and working in a group could be healthy
resources. Such encounters would support them to confront their abilities with those
of others. Trust and respect of intellectual property was required for this to happen.
•
More support from family and friends was required in areas that were not necessarily
university related. For instance, some students reported missing friends’ physi-
cal touch.
•
Students reported that some places offering remunerated internship made them feel
irrelevant. Smaller and younger firms tended to be more supportive.
Students noted that they wanted “to make new friends”, to “be listened to more”, and
“to find ways of reaching out”. They also expressed the need for “more time for myself”,
and “more time to sleep”. Life–work balance was required, and for this students requested
being taught “coping mechanisms
. . .
I am a deep thinker and at times this makes me
procrastinate and I feel guilty”, “time management because I am a perfectionist and my
brain does not stop”, and how to better focus on what they were doing as “if I work in the
here-and-now I would be more consistent”. Students also requested to be “given more
experience during the course” so they could be better supported to learn what they had to
do at the place work once they were employed in the construction market.
8. Discussion and Post Hoc Reflections
During the discussion, students and authors found themselves reflecting and verbaliz-
ing their reflections, rendering them conscious and acknowledging them [
47
]. Although at
some moments this led to them coming to grips with their problems, at other moments it
led to insight and self-growth. An example of such a moment was when a student reflected
that “you’re not who you are if you do not do what you want to do”, thus linking identity
and agency. Focus groups conducted within an appreciative inquiry approach and within
an action research framework could be a way in which change can be explicitly verbalized,
consciously registered, owned and acted upon. Stern (2003: 28) [
47
] calls it a “moment of
encounter”. Presumably, this is not the norm. Informed by this observation, the authors
reflected that the focus groups had enabled students to be motivated to reflect and that the
appreciative inquiry approach had opened the door for the conversation between students
and staff to begin. It is possible that the authors were able to become the bridge between
students and faculty when they discussed their findings with faculty members. The authors
also observed that meeting students in this way greatly reduced the tension present when
staff solicited feedback from students in traditional ways.
The results of this study confirmed that students face a major transition during their
final year at university as they prepare to move from students to professionals. They
recognized that in order to maintain the ethics and values instilled in them during their
university years, they must automatically assume the identity of change agents to work
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 14 of 16
within the structure of their society. Some students distanced themselves from taking
such a position, while those who wanted to continue upholding these values expressed
anxiety and inner conflict as they felt unprepared to do so. They expressed that they
needed the following elements in order to apply the theoretical values and ethics in
practice: Respect: students expressed a desire for more respect for their profession and
discussed how they could achieve this specifically. Creativity: students expressed a desire
to create healthier living spaces for themselves and others and emphasized that they could
produce better designs if they had fewer constraints on their creativity. Peer support: the
need to introduce group work would help students become better team players. Identity
development: students reported that they were hesitant to identify with some of the
architects who represented their profession in the field. Most expressed reluctance to take
on the role and identity of change agents for a variety of reasons: they simply wanted
to lead a quiet working life; given the current atmosphere in the construction industry
in Malta, they were afraid that people would not recognize them as professionals if they
adhered to ethical practices, as this was not what people wanted. All groups reported fears
about how current practices in the profession would affect their careers. Students expressed
fear that in order to remain ethical and maintain training, they would automatically become
change agents without training.
The students realized that if they became professionals, they would become the culture
bearers in their field. Students reported experiencing an internal struggle as they imagined
trying to maintain the values and ethics they had internalized during their formative years
at the university in a consumerist and hostile marketplace. If they wanted to bring about
culture change, they would be affected by the process of change implementation.
Research enabled the strength of the current academic system and the alienation
and demotivation process that students went through when they had to choose between
gaining financial independence and working within their own ethical parameters. Scholar-
ship, technology, and industry coexisted with feelings of shame and the annihilation of
individuality. A labor-intensive construction sector was seen as male-archetypal oriented,
with men as leaders and women as followers, with creativity suppressed in favor of mass
production of concrete structures and speed of construction bringing more financial gain
to those involved [12,47]. The students still lacked the courage to face their problems, but
slowly a thought process began. These feelings were exacerbated by the fear and apathy
caused by the end of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Way Forward and Recommendations
The study showed that students need a more positive environment that promotes
feelings of trust with each other and with faculty. If change is to be brought about, they
would need to continue to support each other as professionals. The study also revealed
that students need training in self-reflection to support their self-actualization. Armsby
(2013) [
48
] highlights that the integration of professional and academic identities is bene-
ficial as one identity supports the other. This step would include knowledge building to
enable students turned professionals to bring about policy change. Change management
through transition leadership adopting an appreciative inquiry approach could prove a
useful tool within the university setting and beyond. Following the discussion with faculty
members, some became interested in investing in a mentoring skills course which has now
become an ongoing event.
Author Contributions:
This article is the result of the joint work by both authors. The primary
research topic was derived from a mentoring program designed for the Faculty for the Built Envi-
ronment, carried out for final year students under the supervision of R.D.G. and J.C. This initial
research study was further adapted and reviewed by both authors. Thereafter, both authors edited
the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 15 of 16
Institutional Review Board Statement:
The study was conducted according to the guidelines of
the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Faculty Research Ethics Committee, Faculty for
the Built Environment, University of Malta (Unique form id. 7954_01032021 date of approval 24
March 2021).
Informed Consent Statement: Passive (opt-out) consent was made possible to all participants.
Data Availability Statement: Data sharing is not applicable to this article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
KPMG Malta. Construction Industry and Property Market Report; KPMG Economies and Regulation Advisory Services: Malta, 2017.
Available online: https://propertymalta.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Final- Report-02102017- KPMG.pdf (accessed on 31
March 2021).
2.
Cefia, C.; Camilleri, L. Healthy Students, Health Lives: The Health of Maltese University Students; European Centre for Educational
Resilience and Socio-Emotional Health, University of Malta: Msida, Malta, 2009.
3.
Cuschieri, S.; Attard, J.; Bartolo, P.A.; Attard, L.; Cilia, J.; Cacciottolo, J. Learning, Teaching and Assessment during the Pandemic at the
University of Malta. Findings of the SALT Surveys; University of Malta: Msida, Malta, 2020.
4.
Dickerson, M.S.; Helm-Stevens, R. Reculturing Schools for Greater Impact: Using Appreciative Inquiry as a Non-Coercive Change
Process. Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2011,6. [CrossRef]
5.
Jansen, C.; Cammock, P.; Conner, L. Schools as Learning Communities?—Leadership through Appreciative Inquiry. John Ben
Shepperd J. Pract. Leadersh. 2010,5, 121–144.
6.
Gray, D.E. Facilitating management learning: Developing critical reflection through reflective tools. Manag. Learn.
2007
,38,
495–517. [CrossRef]
7.
Somerville, M.; Farner, M. Appreciative Inquiry: A Transformative Approach for Initiating Shared Leadership and Organizational
Learning. In Review of Research and Social Intervention; Experts Projects Publishing: România, 2012; Volume 38, pp. 7–24, Available
online: www.rcis.ro and www.scopus.com; (accessed on 12 December 2020).
8.
Yizengaw, T. Challenges of Higher Education in Africa and Lessons of Experiences for the Africa-U.S. In Higher Education
Collaboration Initiative; NASULGC: Washington, DC, USA, 2008.
9.
Nevis, E.C. Blocks to creativity in organisations. In Creative License: The art of Gestalt Therapy; Spagnuolo-Lobb, M., Amendt-Lyons,
N., Eds.; Springer Wien: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 291–302.
10.
Azzopardi Muscat, N.; Calleja, N.; Calleja, A.; Cylus, J. Malta: Health Systems Review. Health Syst. Transit.
2014
,16, 1–97.
[PubMed]
11.
Wheeler, G. Contact and creativity: The Gestalt cycle in context. In Creative License: The Art of Gestalt Therapy; Spagnuolo-Lobb,
M., Amendt-Lyons, N., Eds.; Springer Wien: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 163–178.
12. Barber, P. Facilitating Change in Groups and Teams: A Gestalt Approach to Mindfulness; Libri Publishing: Oxfordshire, UK, 2012.
13. Bridges, W. Managing Transition; Da Capo Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2003.
14.
Haslam, A.S.; Reicher, S.D.; Platow, M.J. The New Psychology of Leadership: Identity Influence and Power; Psychology Press: New
York, NY, USA, 2011.
15. Riessman, C.K. Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2008.
16.
Waters, L.; White, M. Case Study of a school wellbeing initiative: Using appreciative inquiry to support positive change. Int. J.
Wellbeing 2015,5, 19–32. [CrossRef]
17. Carnall, C. Managing Change in Organizations, 5th ed.; Pearson Education: Harlow, UK, 2007.
18. Balogun, J.; Hope Hailey, V. Exploring Strategic Change, 2nd ed.; Financial Times/Prentice Hall: London, UK, 2004.
19. Burnes, B. Managing Change: A Strategic Approach to Organisational Change, 4th ed.; Prentice Hall: London, UK, 2004.
20. Pettigrew, A.M. Studying strategic choice and strategic change. Organ. Stud. 1990,11, 6–11. [CrossRef]
21.
Dalli Gonzi, R. Change and Continuity Management in the Public Sector: The DALI Model for Effective Decision-Making; Emerald
Publishing: Bingley, UK, 2019.
22. Holbeche, L. Understanding Change: Theory, Implementation and Success; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 2006.
23.
Reynolds, D. School Effectiveness, School Improvement; Continuum International Publishing Group: London, UK; New York, NY,
USA, 2004.
24.
Copland, M. Leadership of inquiry. Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement. Educ. Eval. Policy Anal.
2003
,2,
375–395. [CrossRef]
25. Mag, A.G. The Value of Students’ Feedback. MATEC Web Conf. 2019,290, 13006. [CrossRef]
26. Arkowitz, H.; Engel, D. Ambivalence in Psychotherapy: Facilitating Readiness to Change; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2006.
27. Beck, J.S. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy: Basics and Beyond, 2nd ed.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011.
28. Evans, K.R.; Gilbert, M.C. An Introduction to Integrative Psychotherapy; Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, UK, 2005.
29.
Stiles, W.B. Assimilation of problematic experiences. In Psychotherapy Relationships That Work: Therapist Contributions and
Responsiveness to Patients; Norcross, J.C., Ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2002; pp. 357–365.
Sustainability 2021,13, 5365 16 of 16
30. Oyserman, D.; Bybee, D.; Terry, K.; Hart-Johnson, T. Possible selves as roadmaps. J. Res. Personal. 2004,2, 130–149. [CrossRef]
31.
De Jaegher, H.; Di Paolo, E.A. Participatory sense-making: An enactive approach to social cognition. Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci.
2007
,
6, 485–507. [CrossRef]
32.
Muller-Ebert, J.; Josewski, M.; Dreitzel, P.; Muller, B. Narcissism in Gestalt therapy. In Quaderni di Gestalt; Spagnuolo-Lobb, M.,
Salonia, G., Eds.; Istituto di Gestalt H.C.C.: Ragusa, Italy, 1989; Volume 8–9, pp. 7–45.
33.
Chidiac, M.A.; Denham-Vaughn, S. An organisational self: Applying the concept of Self to groups and organisations. Br. Gestalt J.
2009,18, 42–49.
34.
Denham-Vaughn, S.; Gawlinski, P. Field-relational coaching for Gestalt beginners: The PAIR model. Br. Gestalt J.
2012
,21, 11–21.
35. Bamberg, M. Stories: Big or small: Why do we care? Narrat. Inq. 2006,16, 139–147. [CrossRef]
36.
Langdridge, D.; Hagger-Johnson, G. Introduction to Research Methods and Data Analysis in Psychology, 3rd ed.; Pearson: London,
UK, 2013.
37. McLeod, J. Case Study Research—In Counselling and Psychotherapy; Sage Publications Ltd.: London, UK, 2010.
38. Cresswell, J.W. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design—Choosing among Five Approaches; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2007.
39.
Hughes, I. Action Research in Healthcare. In The Sage Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice, 2nd ed.;
Reason, P., Bradbury, H., Eds.; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2008; pp. 381–393.
40.
Cooperrider, D.; Whitney, D. Appreciative Inquiry: A Positive Revolution in Change; Berrett-Koehler: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2008.
41.
Mohr, B.; Watkins, J. Appreciative Inquiry: Change at the Speed of Imagination, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: San Francisco, CA, USA,
2011. [CrossRef]
42.
Baek-Kyoo, J. Executive coaching: A conceptual framework from an integrative review of practice and research. Hum. Resour.
Dev. Rev. 2005,4, 462–488.
43.
Beer, M. How to Develop an Organization Capable of Sustained High Performance: Embrace the Drive for Results-Capability
Development Paradox. Organ. Dyn. 2001,29, 233–247. [CrossRef]
44. Gadamer, H.G. Truth and Method, 2nd ed.; Continuum: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2004.
45.
Langdridge, D. Relating through difference: A critical narrative analysis. In Relations-Centered Research for Psychotherapists
Exploring Meaning and Experience; Finlay, L., Evans, K.R., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: London, UK, 2009; pp. 213–225.
46.
Camilleri, M.J. The Lived Experience of Leaders during Change and Transition. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Metanoia Insti-
tute/Middlesex University, London, UK, 2017.
47.
Stern, D.N. On the other side of the moon: The import of implicit knowledge for Gestalt therapy. In Creative License: The Art of
Gestalt Therapy; Spagnuolo-Lobb, M., Amendt-Lyons, N., Eds.; Springer Wien: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 21–35.
48.
Armsby, P. Developing professional learning and identity through the recognition of experiential learning at doctoral level. Int. J.
Lifelong Educ. 2013,32, 412–429. [CrossRef]
Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
