Discovery and action dialog

The purpose of Discovery and Action Dialogues (DADs) is to help groups uncover and adopt effective behaviors already present within their community - especially those used by individuals who succeed despite facing the same challenges and constraints as others. These are known as positive deviant (PD) practices. DADs:

Enable peer learning by surfacing successful behaviors from within the group.
Foster creativity and safety, allowing participants to invent and explore new practices.
Reduce resistance to change, since people choose which practices to try based on real, relatable examples.
Promote ownership and accountability, as solutions come from the frontline, not top-down directives.

In essence, DADs empower people to discover what already works and scale it through shared insight and voluntary action.

Time needed
25-70 minutes

Preparation

Offline Format	Online Format
Flip chart, paper or record the meeting to capture insights and actions	Prepare virtual whiteboard template (e.g. Miro)
Prepare split into groups (5-15 people)	Prepare split into groups (5-15 people)

Set the stage
1. Define the Focus Area: Define a clear, actionable focus area. Examples:
  - “How do we reduce production incidents in our payments service?”
  - “How can we improve collaboration between Dev and Ops on this product?”
  - “How can we increase adoption of our new CI/CD pipeline?”
  - “How can we avoid last-minute chaos before each release?”
2. The focus should be :
  - Concrete (“production incidents in service X”)
  - Behavior-oriented (“what we do”, not “what they should do”)
  - Within participants’ influence
3. Explain the Purpose: Briefly explain the DAD process. Emphasize that the goal is to learn from what went well, understand why, and then decide how to intentionally do more of it.
Step-by-step and timing
1. State the purpose of the initiative being discussed and assign one person that will record ideas and actions in the group (5 min)
2. In the group, ask seven progressive questions (in following order). This is the core of this structure.
  1. What is happening now?
    
    “What do you see around you related to [defined focus]?”
    
    “What are people actually doing?”
  2. How do you contribute (positively or negatively)?
    
    “In what ways do you personally help or hinder this situation?”. Keeps focus on agency and responsibility
  3. What prevents you from doing this or taking these actions all the time?
    
    “What gets in your way when you try to do the right thing?”. Look for obstacles people can influence.
  4. Do you know anyone who is already successful despite these obstacles?
    
    “Who is handling this well, and what are they doing differently?”. Surfacing “positive deviance” – local people already succeeding.
  5. Do you have any ideas?
    
    Based on previous question, very concrete: behaviors, not vague statements.
  6. What needs to be done to make it happen?
    
    “What’s one thing you could start doing this week?”
    
    “What support or conditions would help you?”
  7. What will you do, and who will help you?
    
    Participants commit to small, specific actions they can take now.
    
    Identify peers/supporters.
  - Address them to the whole group and give everyone the opportunity to speak to each question. Make sure your recorder captures insights and action ideas as they emerge - big ones may emerge when you least expect it (15 - 60 min)
  - As a facilitator: Circulate and prompt groups to go beyond superficial answers (e.g., "We had good communication" to "What kind of communication?" or "What made it good?"). Keep time.
3. Ask your recorder to recap insights, action ideas, and who else needs to be included
  - As a facilitator: Ensure actions are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (5 min)
Hints
1. Stay neutral. Don’t offer solutions; keep asking “What have you seen work here?”
2. Keep it grounded. When answers are vague (“We need better communication”), ask:
  - “What does ‘better communication’ look like in a typical day?”
  - “What do they actually do differently?”
3. Watch time. Move the group forward through the questions.
4. Include quiet voices. Use rounds, potentially 1-2-4-All first to warm up, or chat contributions if online.
5. Avoid blame loops. If conversation turns to blaming “management” or “other teams,” gently redirect:
  - “Given that this is our current reality, what can we do ourselves?”
Examples of use
1. Project Retrospective / Post-Mortem (Technology/Any Project Team)
  - Focus Area: "Our recently completed software release [Project Name]."
  - Use of DAD: “When have we delivered efficiently and what helped?”
  - Outcome example: Identified peer pairing and clear sprint goals as success factors - became standard team habits.
2. Enhancing student engagement in online classes
  - Focus area: Teachers noticed low participation in remote learning.
  - Use of DAD: Facilitators asked teachers “What do you do when students are most engaged?”
  - Outcome example: They found that using breakout groups and shorter sessions improved focus. The method spread across departments.
3. Improving cross-team communication in a tech company
  - Focus area: Product and design teams complained about unclear requirements.
  - Use of DAD: A mixed group discussed “When does communication between teams flow easily?”
  - Outcome example: They realized that short, daily informal syncs helped more than long weekly meetings. Teams adopted a lightweight “open office hours” model
Link with other Liberating Structures
1. Use TRIZ questions instead of first three:
  1. What can you do to make sure that problem X becomes much worse?
  2. Is there anything you are doing that in any way, shape, or form looks like any of the practices you just listed?
  3. What is preventing you from stopping these practices?
2. Use results as input for: Improv prototyping
Link to Liberating Structures page
Discovery and action dialog
Link to virtual whiteboard template (Miro)

Discovery and action dialog

Feedback