Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

SOAR: A Framework to Build Positive Psychological Capacity in Strategic Thinking, Planning, and Leading

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Theoretical Approaches to Multi-Cultural Positive Psychological Interventions

Abstract

Today’s challenging global business and economic environment makes it necessary to develop strategic thinkers who perform well together and deliver results. Traditional ways of thinking about strategy may limit one’s ability to effectively address and adapt to the ever-changing conditions and turbulent environment in which organizations operate. A McKinsey Quarterly study of 1300 global executives found that the highest performing organizations had a clear purpose, an understanding of strengths, shared aspirations, and leaders who knew how to unleash opportunities with a result-driven process. This chapter introduces SOAR (Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations, and Results), an evidenced-based framework that is a profoundly positive approach to strategic thinking, planning, and leading used by hundreds of international organizations to build strategic capacity at the individual, team, and the organization level. SOAR’s operating system is Appreciative Inquiry, one of the most effective and widely used approaches for fostering positive change. SOAR creates a reservoir of positive energy to frame issues from a solution-oriented perspective that is generative and focused on strengths, new ideas, innovations and the best in people to emerge. SOAR begins with a strategic dialogue among all stakeholders in a team or organization into what is working well (strengths), what are possibilities for growth (opportunities), what are individual and shared desires (aspirations), and what are measures of success (results). In this chapter, the convergence of research and practice on SOAR is discussed. Next, results are presented of empirical research on SOAR’s role in building positive strategic capacity via the SOAR profile, a rapid assessment instrument used by individuals and teams to create a baseline understanding of one’s natural ability to think, plan, and lead strategically from a SOAR-based perspective. The chapter concludes with a discussion of SOAR’s role in promoting an inclusive environment that facilitates performance among multicultural teams and organizations in which SOAR-based strategy is a dynamic and generative process that focuses on strengths, whole system solutions, and stakeholder inclusion while building positive psychological capital.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Annarelli, A., & Nonino, F. (2016). Strategic and operational management of organizational resilience: Current state of research and future directions. Omega, 62, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.08.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benito-Ostolaza, J. M., & Sanchis-Llopis, J. A. (2014). Training strategic thinking: Experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 785–789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.11.045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bushe, G. R. (2007). Appreciative inquiry is not about the positive. OD Practitioner, 39(4), 33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bushe, G. R. (2013). Generative process, generative outcome: The transformational potential of appreciative inquiry. In D. L. Cooperrider, D. P. Zandee, L. N. Godwin, M. Avital, & B. Boland (Eds.), Organizational generativity: The appreciative inquiry summit and a scholarship of transformation (pp. 89–113). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bushe, G. R., & Marshak, R. J. (2014). Dialogic organization development. In B. B. Jones & M. Brazzel (Eds.), The NTL handbook of organization development and change (2nd ed., pp. 193–211). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. (2003). Foundations of positive organizational scholarship. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline (pp. 3–13). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S., & McNaughtan, J. (2014). Positive organizational change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(4), 445–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886314549922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S., & McNaughtan, J. (2016). Positive organizational change: What the field of positive organizational scholarship offers to organization development practitioners. In W. J. Rothwell, J. M. Stavros, & R. L. Sullivan (Eds.), Practicing organization development: Leading transformation and change (4th ed., pp. 338–347). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S., & Spreitzer, G. M. (2012a). Introduction: What is positive about positive organizational scholarship. In K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 1–14). New York: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S., & Spreitzer, G. M. (Eds.). (2012b). The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship. New York, NY US: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: Bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 296–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. L., Cox, J. D., & Stavros, J. M. (2016). Building collaboration in teams through emotional intelligence: Mediation by SOAR. Journal of Management & Organization, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2016.43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. L., Cox, J. D., & Stavros, J. M. (2018). SOAR as a mediator of the relationship between emotional intelligence and collaboration among professionals working in teams: Implications for entrepreneurial teams. SAGE Open, 8(2), 2158244018779109. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018779109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. L., & Stavros, J. M. (2013). Creation of the SOAR profile: An innovative tool to evaluate strategic thinking capacity. First Annual Research Day. Southfield, MI: Lawrence Technological University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. L., & Stavros, J. M. (2014). Psychometric properties of the SOAR profile. Second Annual Research Day. Southfield, MI: Lawrence Technological University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. L., & Stavros, J. M. (2016). Relationship among emotional intelligence, SOAR, and team-based collaboration: Implications for a strengths, opportunities, aspirations, and results (SOAR) based approach to coaching psychology. In L. E. van Zyl, A. Odendaal, & M. W. Stander (Eds.), Meta-theoretical perspectives and applications for multi-cultural contexts of coaching psychology (pp. 257–278). New York: Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. L., Stavros, J. M., & Zerilli, M. (2017). The SOAR profile (TSP) 2.0: A rapid assessment tool to help individuals and teams build strategic capacity. Fifth Annual Research Day. Southfield, MI: Lawrence Technological University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooperrider, D. L., Whitney, D. D., & Stavros, J. M. (2008). Appreciative inquiry handbook: For leaders of change (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Kohler Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craighead, C. W., Ketchen, D. J., Dunn, K. S., & Hult, G. T. M. (2011). Addressing common method variance: Guidelines for survey research on information technology, operations, and supply chain management. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 58, 578–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 253–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, B. L., & Dutton, J. E. (2008). Unpacking positive organizing: Organizations as sites of individual and group flourishing. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(1), 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, B. L., & Losada, M. F. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing. American Psychologist, 60(7), 678–686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.7.678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, C. M., Simmering, M. J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., & Babin, B. J. (2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gable, S. L., & Haidt, J. (2005). What (and why) is positive psychology? Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glovis, M. J., Cole, M. L., & Stavros, J. M. (2014). SOAR and motivation as mediators of the relationship between flow and project success. Organization Development Journal, 32(3), 57–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graetz, F. (2002). Strategic thinking versus strategic planning: Towards understanding the complementarities. Management Decision, 40(5), 456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunzler, D., Chen, T., Wu, P., & Zhang, H. (2013). Introduction to mediation analysis with structural equation modeling. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry, 25(6), 390–394.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, L. C., & Ogbonna, E. (2006). Initiating strategic planning. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.02.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isern, J., & Pung, C. (2007). Driving radical change. The McKinsey Quarterly, 4, 24–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, C., & Mauborgne, R. (2005). Blue ocean strategy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lengnick-Hall, C. A., & Beck, T. E. (2009). Resilience capacity and strategic agility: Prerequisites for thriving in a dynamic environment. In C. Nemeth, E. Hollnagel, & S. Dekker (Eds.), Resilience engineering perspectives (Vol. 2). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lengnick-Hall, C. A., Beck, T. E., & Lengnick-Hall, M. (2011). Developing a capacity for organizational resilience through strategic human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 21(3), 243–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liedtka, J. M. (1998a). Linking strategic thinking with strategic planning. Strategy & Leadership, 26(4), 30–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liedtka, J. M. (1998b). Strategic thinking: Can it be taught? Long Range Planning, 31(1), 120–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luthans, F. (2002a). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(6), 695–706. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luthans, F. (2002b). Positive organizational behavior: Developing and managing psychological strengths. Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.2002.6640181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2004). Human, social, and now positive psychological capital management: Investing in people for competitive advantage. Organizational Dynamics, 33(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2004.01.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Z., Xiao, L., & Yin, J. (2018). Toward a dynamic model of organizational resilience. Nankai Business Review Int, 9(3), 246–263. https://doi.org/10.1108/NBRI-07-2017-0041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manfield, R. C., & Newey, L. R. (2018). Resilience as an entrepreneurial capability: Integrating insights from a cross-disciplinary comparison. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 24(7), 1155–1180. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-11-2016-0368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClellan, J. L. (2007). Marrying positive psychology to mediation: Using appreciative inquiry and solution-focused counseling to improve the process. Dispute Resolution Journal, 62(4), 29–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, W. G. (2001). Creating wealth in organizations: The role of strategic leadership. The Academy of Management Executive, 15(1), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2001.4251395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. A. (1979). Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 137–163). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Positive psychology, positive prevention and positive therapy. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 3–9). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60(5), 410–421. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.5.410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sellberg, M. M., Ryan, P., Borgström, S. T., Norström, A. V., & Peterson, G. D. (2018). From resilience thinking to resilience planning: Lessons from practice. Journal of Environmental Management, 217, 906–918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sheffi, Y., & Rice, J. B., Jr. (2005). A supply chain view of the resilient enterprise. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47(1), 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon, K. M., & King, L. (2001). Why positive psychology is necessary. American Psychologist, 56(3), 216–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprangel, J., Stavros, J. M., & Cole, M. L. (2011). Creating sustainable relationships using the strengths, opportunities, aspirations and results framework, trust, and environmentalism: A research-based case study. International Journal of Training and Development, 15(1), 39–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2010.00367.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavros, J. M., & Cole, M. L. (2013). SOARing towards positive transformation and change. The ABAC ODI Visions. Action. Outcome., 1(1), 10–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavros, J. M., & Cole, M. L. (2015). Promoting diversity in teams through an inclusive approach that builds strategic thinking capacity. In L. M. Roberts, L. Wooten, & M. Davidson (Eds.), Positive organizing in a global society: Understanding and engaging differences for capacity-building and inclusion (pp. 202–207). London, UK: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavros, J. M., Cole, M. L., & Hitchcock, J. A. (2014). Basic and applied research on SOAR—taking SOAR beyond its original purpose of strategic thinking and planning applications. AI Practitioner: International Journal of Appreciative Inquiry, 16(3), 72–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavros, J. M., Cooperrider, D., & Kelley, D. L. (2003). Strategic inquiry appreciative intent: Inspiration to SOAR, a new framework for strategic planning. AI Practitioner, November, 10–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavros, J. M., Cooperrider, D. L., & Kelley, D. L. (2007). SOAR: A new approach to strategic planning. In P. Homan, T. Devane, & S. Cady (Eds.), The change handbook: The definitive resource on today’s best methods for engaging whole systems (pp. 375–380). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavros, J. M., & Hinrichs, G. (2009). Thinbook of SOAR: Creating strengths-based strategy. Bend, OR: Thin Book Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavros, J. M., & Saint, D. (2010). SOAR: Linking strategy and OD to sustainable performance. In W. Rothwell, J. Stavros, R. Sullivan, & A. Sullivan (Eds.), Practicing organization development: A guide for leading change (3rd ed., pp. 377–394). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavros, J. M., & Torres, C. (2018). Conversations worth having: Using appreciative inquiry to fuel productive and meaningful engagement. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Kohler Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavros, J. M., & Wooten, L. (2012). Positive strategy: Creating and sustaining strengths-based strategy that SOARs and performs. In K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 824–842). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, E. d. O., & Werther, W. B. (2013). Resilience: Continuous renewal of competitive advantages. Business Horizons, 56(3), 333–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2013.01.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toor, S., & Ofori, G. (2010). Positive psychological capital as a source of sustainable competitive advantage for organizations. Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 136(3), 341–352. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9(2). Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/26267673.

  • Whitney, D. D., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2015). Appreciative inquiry meets positive psychology. AI Practitioner, 17(3), 18–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitney, D. D., & Trosten-Bloom, A. (2003). The power of appreciative inquiry: A practical guide to positive change. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Business & Information Technology, Lawrence Technological University, Southfield, USA

    Matthew L. Cole & Jacqueline M. Stavros

Authors
  1. Matthew L. Cole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jacqueline M. Stavros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew L. Cole .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering and Innovation Sciences, Human Performance Management Group, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Noord-Brabant, The Netherlands

    Llewellyn Ellardus Van Zyl

  2. Optentia Research Focus Area, North-West University Vaal Triangle Campus, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa

    Sebastiaan Rothmann Sr.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cole, M.L., Stavros, J.M. (2019). SOAR: A Framework to Build Positive Psychological Capacity in Strategic Thinking, Planning, and Leading. In: Van Zyl, L., Rothmann Sr., S. (eds) Theoretical Approaches to Multi-Cultural Positive Psychological Interventions. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20583-6_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation