Most organisations are good at action. They set goals, make decisions, implement plans and measure results. Many are also reasonably good at reflection. After an initiative, they conduct a review: What happened? What went well? What should we do differently next time? But the most demanding situations require something more.
They require us to learn while we are acting. This is where Action Inquiry comes in. Developed by William Torbert and colleagues, Action Inquiry brings together action, reflection and development. Its central insight is simple: We can act and inquire into our own action at the same time.
Rather than waiting until after an event to reflect, we develop the capacity to notice ourselves, others and the situation while the situation is unfolding.
For leaders working in increasingly complex and uncertain environments, this is a powerful shift.
1. The Problem with Reflection After the Event
Imagine a manager dealing with a conflict between two departments. During the meeting, the manager becomes frustrated. She interrupts. She pushes for a quick solution. The meeting ends with apparent agreement.
Later, she reflects: “I should have listened more.” That is useful learning. But something important has already happened. Her way of acting helped shape the situation. The deeper Action Inquiry question is: “What was happening in me while I was acting?”
Perhaps she notices: “I became anxious when the discussion slowed down.” Then: “I interpreted disagreement as resistance.” Then: “I felt responsible for solving the problem.”
Now the manager is beginning to notice not only what she did, but the assumptions and internal dynamics that shaped what she did.
That is Action Inquiry.
2. Action Inquiry is More than Reflection
Reflection typically looks backward: “What happened?”
Action Inquiry adds a second question: “What is happening now, including in me, as I act?”
And eventually a third: “What might I do differently in this moment?”
The movement can be represented as: Action → Awareness → Inquiry → New action
rather than: Action → Outcome → Reflection → Learning
The latter is useful. The former becomes especially valuable when situations are changing faster than we can afford to wait for the next review cycle.
3. Three Domains of Awareness
One of the most accessible ways to introduce Action Inquiry is through three simultaneous fields of attention:
Self-awareness: What is happening in me? My emotions. My assumptions. My intentions. My habitual reactions. My fears. My identity. My desire to be right.
Other-awareness: What is happening between me and others? How are people responding? What might they be experiencing? What am I inviting or preventing in the relationship?
Environmental awareness: What is happening in the wider situation? What systemic forces are at work? What constraints exist? What is changing around us?
A leader who can hold all three simultaneously has a much larger field of awareness from which to act.
4. The Leader as both Actor and Observer
Action Inquiry asks us to occupy two positions simultaneously.
We are the person acting and the person observing the person acting.
Imagine a leader saying during a difficult conversation: “I’m noticing that I’m becoming defensive.” That sentence is small but significant. The leader is no longer completely immersed in the reaction.
There is now a degree of separation, “I am experiencing defensiveness” rather than “You are attacking me.” That small distinction creates choice.
The leader can now inquire, “What is happening here?” instead of automatically reacting.
5. Action Inquiry Begins with Our Own Assumptions
Consider a manager who says: “My team isn’t taking enough ownership.” That statement may be true.
But Action Inquiry asks: “What do I mean by ownership?” “What am I expecting them to do?” “What assumptions am I making about how responsibility should look?” “What might they be seeing differently?”
Perhaps the manager discovers: “I equate ownership with acting quickly.” But the team may understand ownership as: “Thinking carefully before committing.”
The disagreement is not necessarily about commitment. It may be about different frames of reference.
Action Inquiry therefore helps leaders distinguish between what is happening and the meaning I am making of what is happening.
6. Action Inquiry and Sensemaking
This is where Action Inquiry connects strongly with Karl Weick’s work on organisational sensemaking. Weick emphasises that people continually construct meaning from ambiguous situations. We do not simply perceive reality and then act. We interpret. And our interpretations influence what we notice and how we act.
For example, “They are resisting change” can lead to: persuade → pressure → monitor.
But “They may be making sense of a change that I have not explained sufficiently” can lead to: listen → inquire → clarify.
The external situation may be unchanged. But the leader’s meaning-making has changed. And therefore the possible action has changed.
7. The Hidden Loop
Much leadership behaviour operates through an invisible loop:
Situation → interpretation → emotion → action → response → reinforced interpretation
For example: Employee questions decision, Leader interprets it as resistance, Leader becomes defensive, Leader gives stronger instructions, Employee withdraws, Leader thinks: “See? They don’t take ownership.” The pattern reinforces itself.
Action Inquiry interrupts the loop. The leader notices: “I’m interpreting questions as resistance.” Then asks: “What else could be happening?” That question creates a different possibility.
8. Action Inquiry and Vertical Development
Action Inquiry is also significant because it is not merely a set of techniques. Torbert’s work connects Action Inquiry with developmental stages of meaning-making, often described through different action logics. This suggests that leaders do not merely need more skills. They may need to develop their capacity to see and make meaning differently.
A leader operating from a more unilateral orientation may ask: “How do I get them to do what needs to be done?”
A more relational orientation may ask: “How do we create a solution together?”
A more systemic orientation may ask: “What pattern is producing this situation, and what role am I playing in sustaining it?”
The developmental movement is therefore not simply more knowledge, but a larger and more differentiated way of making sense of reality.
9. Action Inquiry in Challenging Conversations
Consider a manager speaking with a staff member whose performance has declined.
A conventional approach might be: “Your performance isn’t meeting expectations. You need to improve.”
Action Inquiry might begin with the same accountability but introduce inquiry: “I’ve noticed a change in your performance. How are you seeing what is happening?”
Then the manager notices internally: “I’m feeling impatient.” Rather than allowing impatience to drive the conversation, she becomes curious. “I’m noticing I want to jump in with solutions. Let me understand your perspective first.”
Now three things are happening simultaneously:
Self: What am I experiencing?
Other: What is this person experiencing?
Situation: What is actually happening?
That is Action Inquiry in practice.
10. Action Inquiry in Team Meetings
A team can develop Action Inquiry habits through simple questions. When something goes wrong: “What happened?” Then: “What did we assume was happening?”
Then: “What did those assumptions lead us to do?”
And: “What might we see differently now?”
Finally: “What experiment should we try?”
The team learns not only from outcomes. It learns from its own patterns of thinking and acting.
11. Action Inquiry in Organisational Change
Change creates uncertainty. When uncertainty increases, people often revert to familiar habits. Leaders may:
- centralise decisions;
- communicate more;
- monitor more closely;
- become more directive;
- seek greater certainty.
But these responses may actually reduce organisational adaptability.
Action Inquiry asks: “What is uncertainty causing us to do?” “Is that response helping?” “What assumptions are driving our response?” “What does the situation require from us now?”
This turns change itself into a source of learning.
12. Action Inquiry and Psychological Safety
There is an important relational dimension here. People cannot inquire deeply if they are constantly protecting themselves. A team practising Action Inquiry therefore needs to develop the ability to say: “I may be part of the problem” rather than: “Who caused the problem?”
This does not mean blaming oneself. It means recognising: I am part of the system I am trying to change.
For leaders, this can be uncomfortable. But it is also liberating. If I am part of the pattern, I may have some influence over changing it.
13. Action Inquiry and coaching
Action Inquiry fits naturally with coaching. A coach can help a leader explore: “What happened?” “What did you notice in yourself?” “What were you assuming?” “What did you want to achieve?” “What might the other person have experienced?” “What else might have been happening?” “What could you experiment with next time?”
The coach is not simply helping the leader find a better answer. The deeper purpose is helping the leader develop a better way of observing themselves while acting.
14. A Simple Action Inquiry practice
A useful workplace practice can be reduced to five questions:
1. What is happening? Separate observation from interpretation.
2. What am I making it mean? Identify the story or assumption.
3. What is happening in me? Notice emotions, bodily reactions, intentions and impulses.
4. What else might be happening? Expand the field of perspective.
5. What action would be more useful now? Choose an experiment rather than automatically repeating the habitual response.
This can take less than a minute. It can be practised in the middle of a meeting.
15. From Reaction to Response
Perhaps the most practical benefit of Action Inquiry is the space it creates between stimulus and response. Without inquiry: Something happens and I react.
With inquiry: Something happens, I notice, I inquire and I choose.
That difference is the beginning of agency. And agency is particularly important in complex environments because leaders rarely control everything that happens. They can, however, develop greater awareness of how they participate in what happens.
16. Action Inquiry and Agency Development
This is one of the deeper connections between Action Inquiry and leadership development. Agency is not simply: “I can make things happen.”
A more mature understanding of agency is: “I can notice how I am participating in the situation and choose how I want to participate.”
The first is about control. The second is about responsible participation. This distinction becomes crucial in complex systems. A leader cannot control staff morale, stakeholder responses, demographic change, technological disruption or government policy.
But the leader can inquire: “How am I responding?” “What am I reinforcing?” “What possibilities am I opening or closing?” “What is mine to do?”
17. Action Inquiry and Appreciative Inquiry
Action Inquiry and Appreciative Inquiry can complement each other beautifully.
Appreciative Inquiry asks: “When are we at our best?”
Action Inquiry asks: “What are we doing, thinking and assuming when we are at our best?”
Appreciative Inquiry helps us discover generative patterns. Action Inquiry helps us become conscious of how we participate in those patterns.
For example: “When does this team collaborate exceptionally well?” followed by: “What are we doing differently?” “What assumptions are we holding?” “What enables us to act this way?”
The combination moves from appreciating excellence to learning how to reproduce it intentionally.
18. Action Inquiry and Motivational Inquiry
There is a similar complementarity with Motivational Inquiry.
Motivational Inquiry asks: “What matters to you?”
Action Inquiry asks: “How are your values and motivations showing up in your action?”
A leader may say: “I care deeply about empowering my staff.”
Action Inquiry might ask: “When you feel anxious about performance, what happens to that intention?”
Perhaps the leader discovers: “When I’m anxious, I take control.”
Now a developmental opportunity appears. The gap is not between values and knowledge. It is between intention and action under pressure. That is precisely what Action Inquiry helps us explore.
19. The Deeper Purpose: Developing the Capacity to Learn
Ultimately, Action Inquiry is not primarily about making better decisions. It is about developing people and organisations that can learn while living through complexity.
Such organisations do not need to know everything before acting. They can: Act, Notice, Inquire, Learn, Adapt, Act again. This creates a living learning system. And in environments where conditions continually change, that capacity may be more valuable than having the perfect strategy.
20. From Knowing to Noticing
Traditional leadership development often asks: “What do leaders need to know?”
Action Inquiry adds: “What do leaders need to notice?”
And eventually: “What do leaders need to notice about themselves while they are acting?”
This is a profound shift.
Because our greatest leadership blind spots are often not things we don’t know. They are things we cannot yet see.
We may know that collaboration matters. But can we notice our own controlling behaviour when we feel anxious?
We may know that listening matters. But can we notice our impulse to formulate our response while someone else is speaking?
We may know that psychological safety matters. But can we notice how our authority changes what others are willing to say?
This is where development becomes embodied and real.
21. A Final Practice for Leaders
The next time you find yourself in a difficult meeting, pause for ten seconds.
Ask yourself: What is happening? What am I making it mean? What is happening in me? What might the others be experiencing? What is the wider system asking of us?
Then ask: What action would I take if I were seeing this situation more fully?
You do not need to solve the entire situation.
You only need to create enough awareness to make your next action more intentional. That is the essence of Action Inquiry. Not reflection after the fact. Not analysis before action. But the development of a capacity to act, observe, inquire and learn simultaneously.
In an increasingly complex world, perhaps the most adaptive leader is not the one who always knows what to do. It is the one who can remain sufficiently aware and curious to discover what the situation requires while acting within it.
Action without inquiry becomes repetition. Inquiry without action becomes reflection. Action Inquiry brings the two together, so that action itself becomes a source of learning and development.
