At its core, an Appreciative Inquiry worldview would stand in stark opposition to unethical practice, which could explain why scarcely little is available in print that discusses the need for ethical behavior in Appreciative Inquiry . One clear ethical concern that was raised during the lesson on competency for effective Appreciative Inquiry practice was the idea of practitioners who view Appreciative Inquiry simply as another tool for facilitating OD, but don't necessarily buy into its philosophy. "Appreciative Inquiry is used as a technique or methodology by individuals who do not live the concept, but the majority of the study participants find that usage to be something different than truly effective Appreciative Inquiry practice, something contrived and empty of life-giving energy" and thus, an ethical issue (Newhard, 2010, p. 232). Those who do not embody the philosophy of AI could be doing a major disservice to the integrity of the concept. Using a casual, anecdotal scenario, imagine an established skeptic participating in his/her for first AI event facilitated by a practitioner who follows a deficit-based worldview. The facilitator does not believe in the efficacy of the methodology and questions its results orientation. The participant overhears the practitioner making disparaging remarks about the approach to change to a colleague on the phone. What might the gaff do to the audience's overall perception of the concept as the participant inevitably shares his/her story in sidebar conversations throughout the day? It would likely tarnish the hard-fought reputation in one thoughtless moment. I would argue that the AI approach deserves to be facilitated only by believers of the philosophy. What do you think?