Abstract: This book, written for managers, specialists, and students of

A brief narrative description management, is based largely on the author's experience in

of the journal article, helping organization leaders with planned-change efforts, and on
document, or resource. related experience of colleagues in the field. Chapter 1 presents
the background and causes for the increased concern with
organization development and planned change. Chapter 2 defines
organization development, training, and operations research.
Chapter 3 reviews and describes the types of strategies, tactics,
and activities that are used in organization development efforts.
The next five chapters are case studies of organizationwide,
planned-change efforts. Each case represents a specific change-
target emphasis -- a change in the "culture" of the organization; in
managerial strategy; and in the way work is organized; creative
adaptation to a new environment; and changes in influence and
communication patterns. Chapter 9 analyzes the conditions and
characteristics of successful and unsuccessful organization
development efforts. Chapter 10 is concerned with different
strategies of managing. The last chapter looks briefly ahead to
what we might expect as major influences in the field of
organization improvement in the next decade. (Author/NL)
Abstractor:
Source of the abstract:
ERIC or Author; prior to
N/A
2005, abstractor initials
appeared at the end of the
abstract.

The field of organization development (OD) has emerged from efforts to improve the performance
of organizations, largely in the for-profit sector but more recently in the public and not-for-profit
sectors as well. This paper examines how OD concepts and tools can be used to solve problems
and foster constructive change at the societal level as well. It examines four areas in which OD
can make such contributions: (1) strengthening social change-focused organizations, (2) scaling
up the impacts of such agencies, (3) creating new inter-organizational systems, and (4) changing
contexts that shape the action of actors strategic to social change. It discusses examples and the
kinds of change agent roles and interventions that are important for each. Finally, it discusses
some implications for organization development intervention, practitioners, and the field at large.

Keywords: organization development, social change, nonprofit, nongovernmental organization

Accepted Paper Series

Date posted: November 24, 2004
Suggested Citation
Abstract

Medical students' preferences for residencies in internal medicine are in decline. To

attract outstanding students, departments of medicine must strive to improve the quality
of their training programs. In the setting of a university-affiliated residency program, the
authors employed a strategy based on organization development principles to identify
remediable educational problems and to facilitate the process of solving these problems.
Residents, attending physicians, and administrators used a consensus-building method,
the nominal group technique, to develop problem lists ranked by two criteria-relative
importance and potential for solution. Problems of high importance and high potential for
solution were identified and assigned to committees of housestaff and faculty for action.
Management plans consisting of short-term and long-term interventions were created to
solve each problem. These plans were widely accepted and short-term interventions were
successfully implemented. This strategy represents a pragmatic approach to improving
internal medicine residency programs because it focuses limited institutional resources on
problems that are both important and amenable to change

Organizational Development- A Basic Research Report

Understanding OD

As Cummings and Worley (1993) state on page 1,"Organization Development is a process by which
behavioral science knowledge and practices are used to help organizations to achieve greater effectiveness,
including improved quality of life, increased productivity, and improved product and service quality. Its focus
is on improving the organization's ability to assess and to solve its own problems. Moreover, OD is oriented
to improving the total system - the organization and its parts in the context of the larger environment that
impacts upon them."

Stoner points out that OD is not designed to solve a single or temporary problem in the organization. Its
intention is to move the organization to a higher level of functioning - that is, to improve the performance and
satisfaction of organization members. (Stoner, 1978:385)

As it is possible to see in the next section, OD has experienced major changes through time; for that reason
it is difficult to arrive at a clear and definitive definition of OD. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that
OD is a managerial theory whose focus is satisfaction of both people and organizations. In addition, OD
techniques are useful in any situation, but especially when a change occurs in the organization.

Evolution of OD
Over the past few decades, the theory of OD has grown larger and more diverse. The variety of new points
of view and applications has increased, making it harder to define OD. Today, OD is being heavily
influenced by other applied fields, such as human resource management, strategic management,
organization design, and organization theory.

During the 1950s and 1960s, OD principles were relatively coherent, and focused mainly on the social side
of organizations. Since OD was based on group dynamics, many human process interventions were
implemented. The best known are T-groups, process consultation, and team building. The emphasis was on
humanistic values promoting openness, trust, and collaboration.

In the 1970s, new concepts emerged, especially influenced by organization theory and the human side of
technology. Examples of this period are structural change, employee involvement, and work design. As a
result, the traditional OD values favouring humanism expanded to include concerns for organizational
effectiveness and bottom-line results.

In the 1980s, OD became a theory that many management consultants wanted to apply because it was
relatively new, and successful. Consequently, more new concepts and opinions were aggregated to the
current OD theory. Techniques for reward systems, career planning and development, and employee
assistance programs showed up. The tools of organization theory and strategic management contributed to
OD, along with organization design, corporate culture, strategy formulation and implementation, self-
designed organizations, and transorganizational development. Besides, production concepts were
incorporated, particularly process control and total quality management.

The 1990s was the decade when the applied disciplines were used broadly by OD practitioners. The
addition of new concepts and methods implies that OD is growing. However, the field has lost much of its
conceptual coherence and its identification with traditional values. Today, the field is known more by its
techniques than its value orientation. OD practitioners have increasingly become involved with action
learning.

Like action research, the new perspectives involve collaboration between OD practitioners and
organizational members in the process of changing. Thus, it is likely that OD continue to expand
conceptually in the future. (Cummings and Worley, 1993:675-681)

OD in Different Types of Organizations

Organization Development is practiced in a number of different types of organizations in both the private and
the public sectors; nonetheless, OD is more known to be applied in industries because the published
material on OD has focused on applications in industrial organizations.

Many efforts have been made to insert OD principles and techniques into organizations with no industrial
activity. The results are remarkable, especially if the humanist side of OD is kept. It is difficult to imagine that
OD techniques, once applied to solve problems of production effectiveness, now can also be practiced in
such organization' as schools, hospitals, government agencies, and the military. Yet, theaspiration for the
improvement of human relations does not know boundaries, although some adaptations have to be made to
accommodate OD practice to every particular situation.

Forms of Change
In chapter 6, Kanter et al establish three principal methods in which organizations change their form:

1. Organizations can change their relationship to their environments - the nature of their ties to their
markets and major stakeholders - by structuring or redefining their identity and boundaries through
mergers, acquisitions, divestitures, or alliances and partnerships.
2. Organizations can change the ways in which they operate, the ways people and units relate to
each other, corresponding to their organic development over time, through changes in internal
coordination - their culture and structure. This is generally considered the "planned change."
3. Organizations can change the nature of their control structures - the parties involved in the
dominant coalition of interests that govern the organization and determine how benefits are
distributed among them.

Understanding Organizational Learning

Argyris (1977) defines organizational learning as the process of "detection and correction of errors." In his
view organizations learn through individuals acting as agents for them: "The individuals' learning activities, in
turn, are facilitated or inhibited by an ecological system of factors that may be called an organizational
learning system" (p. 117).

Huber (1991) considers four constructs as integrally linked to organizational learning: knowledge acquisition,
information distribution, information interpretation, and organizational memory. He clarifies that learning
need not be conscious or intentional. Further, learning does not always increase the learner's effectiveness,
or even potential effectiveness. Moreover, learning need not result in observable changes in behavior.
Taking a behavioral perspective, Huber (1991) notes: An entity learns if, through its processing of
information, the range of its potential behaviors is changed.

Weick (1991) argues that the defining property of learning is the combination of same stimulus and different
responses, however it is rare in organizations meaning either organizations don't learn or that organizations
learn but in nontraditional ways. He further notes: "Perhaps organizations are not built to learn. Instead, they
are patterns of means-ends relations deliberately designed to make the same routine response to different
stimuli, a pattern which is antithetical to learning in the traditional sense" (p. 119). Or else, he argues,
Organizational Learning perhaps involves a different kind of learning than has been described in the past:
"the process within the organization by which knowledge about action-outcome relationships and the effect
of the environment on these relationships is developed" (Duncan & Weiss 1979). In his view, "a more radical
approach would take the position that individual learning occurs when people give a different response to
the same stimulus, but Organizational Learning occurs when groups of people give the same response to
different stimuli."

Understanding Learning Organization

Senge (1990) defines the Learning Organization as the organization "in which you cannot not learn because
learning is so insinuated into the fabric of life." Also, he defines Learning Organization as "a group of people
continually enhancing their capacity to create what they want to create." I would define Learning
Organization as an "Organization with an ingrained philosophy for anticipating, reacting and responding to
change, complexity and uncertainty." The concept of Learning Organization is increasingly relevant given
the increasing complexity and uncertainty of the organizational environment. As Senge (1990) remarks:
"The rate at which organizations learn may become the only sustainable source of competitive advantage."
McGill et al. (1992) define the Learning Organization as "a company that can respond to new information by
altering the very "programming" by which information is processed and evaluated."

Organizational Learning vs. Learning Organization

Ang & Joseph (1996) contrast Organizational Learning and Learning Organization in terms of process
versus structure.

McGill et al. (1992) do not distinguish between Learning Organization and Organizational Learning. They
define Organizational Learning as the ability of an organization to gain insight and understanding from
experience through experimentation, observation, analysis, and a willingness to examine both successes
and failures.

Adaptive Learning vs. Generative Learning

The current view of organizations is based on adaptive learning, which is about coping. Senge (1990) notes
that increasing adaptiveness is only the first stage; companies need to focus on Generative Learning or
"double-loop learning" (Argyris 1977). Generative learning emphasizes continuous experimentation and
feedback in an ongoing examination of the very way organizations go about defining and solving problems.
In Senge's (1990) view, Generative Learning is about creating - it requires "systemic thinking," "shared
vision," "personal mastery," "team learning," and "creative tension" [between the vision and the current
reality]. [Do Japanese companies accomplish the same thing with "strategic" and "interpretive"
equivocality"?] Generative learning, unlike adaptive learning, requires new ways of looking at the world.

In contrast, Adaptive Learning or single-loop learning focuses on solving problems in the present without
examining the appropriateness of current learning behaviors. Adaptive organizations focus on incremental
improvements, often based upon the past track record of success. Essentially, they don't question the
fundamental assumptions underlying the existing ways of doing work. The essential difference is between
being adaptive and having adaptability.

To maintain adaptability, organizations need to operate themselves as "experimenting" or "self-designing"

organizations, i.e., should maintain themselves in a state of frequent, nearly-continuous change in
structures, processes, domains, goals, etc., even in the face of apparently optimal adaption (Nystrom et al.
1976; Hedberg et al. 1976; Starbuck 1983). Hedberg et al. (1977) argue that operating in this mode is
efficacious, perhaps even required, for survival in fast changing and unpredictable environments. They
reason that probable and desirable consequences of an ongoing state of experimentation are that
organizations learn about a variety of design features and remain flexible.

Managers' Role in the Learning Organization

Senge (1990) argues that the leader's role in the Learning Organization is that of a designer, teacher, and
steward who can build shared vision and challenge prevailing mental models. He/she is responsible for
building organizations where people are continually expanding their capabilities to shape their future -- that
is, leaders are responsible for learning.

Relationship between Strategy and Organizational Learning

Or, as Mintzberg (1987) says: the key is not getting the right strategy but fostering strategic thinking. Or as
Shell has leveraged the concept of Learning Organization in its credo "planning as learning" (de Geus
1988). Faced with dramatic changes and unpredictability in the world oil markets, Shell's planners realized a
shift of their basic task: "We no longer saw our task as producing a documented view of the future business
environment five or ten years ahead. Our real target was the microcosm (the 'mental model') of our decision
makers." They reconceptualized their basic task as fostering learning rather than devising plans and
engaged the managers in ferreting out the implications of possible scenarios. This conditioned the managers
to be mentally prepared for the uncertainties in the task environment.

Thus, they institutionalized the learning process at Shell.

The key ingredient of the Learning Organization is in how organizations process their managerial
experiences. Learning Organizations/Managers learn from their experiences rather than being bound by
their past experiences. In Generative Learning Organizations, the ability of an organization/manager is not
measured by what it knows (that is the product of learning), bur rather by how it learns -- the process of
learning. Management practices encourage, recognize, and reward: openness, systemic thinking, creativity,
a sense of efficacy, and empathy.

Role of Information Systems in the Learning Organization

Although, Huber (1991) explicitly specifies the role of IS in the Learning Organization as primarily serving
Organizational Memory, in my view, IS can serve the other three processes (Knowledge Acquisition,
Information Distribution, and Information Interpretation) as well. One instance of use of IS in Knowledge
Acquisition is that of Market Research and Competitive Intelligence Systems. At the level of planning,
scenario planning tools can be used for generating the possible futures. Similarly, use of Groupware tools,
Intranets, E-mail, and Bulletin Boards can facilitate the processes of Information Distribution and Information
Interpretation. The archives of these communications can provide the elements of the Organizational
Memory. Organizational Memory needs to be continuously updated and refreshed. The IT basis of OM
suggested by Huber (1991) lies at the basis of organizational rigidity when it becomes "hi-tech hide bound"
(Kakola 1995) and is unable to continuously adapt its "theory of the business" (Drucker).

Analytical Approaches to Organizational Change

Wilson (1992) summarizes the major organizational change theories on page 22. He states that systematic
conflict frameworks include the following theories of organization:

1. Contextualism
2. Population ecology models
3. Organizational life cycles
4. General market and business sector approaches
5. Power in organizations and political models of change
6. Social action theories

The author also states that strategic choice frameworks include the following theories of organization:

1. Organizational Development
2. Planned incrementalism
 3. The enterprise culture as normative practice
4. Entrepreneuralism and intrapreneurialism
5. Learning from ëbest practice' (e.g. Americanization and Japanization)
6. The use of external consultants and change agents

The author continues his explanation on page 25 and subsequently defines voluntarism as the framework in
which human decisions can make a big difference, and determinism as the close relationship with the
economic structure of society. He alludes to a debate in the Academy of Management Review from Bettis
and Donalson (1990) who determine that "purely economic approaches can explain only some
organizational phenomena. This is because economic models of the firm make unwarranted assumptions
about individual human behaviour and organizational processes. Management theory on the other hand is
too behavioural in its approach, ignoring the 'realities' of the market such as transaction costs and agency
theory.

Economic views of the firm rely heavily on the concept of material self-interest among actors (firms and
individuals). This conflicts irresolvable with behavioural concepts such as the roles of intellect, ethics and
aesthetics in explaining "strategic change"

To summarize, it is important to make an appropriate balance between the internal factors of any
organization and the external ones. This is, incidentally, a key factor in the process of organizational
analysis in strategic planning, which is known by the acronyms of SWOT: the strengths, weaknesses, and
opportunities of, and threats to the business.

Performance Management

"Performance management is an integrated process of defining, assessing, and reinforcing employee work
behaviours and outcomes." (A. Mohrman et al, 1990:216) Performance management includes practices and
methods for goal setting, performance appraisal, and reward systems.

Goal setting specifies the kinds of performances that are desired. Based on the features of the goals setting
process, OD practitioners have developed specific approaches for implementing goal setting: (Cummings
and Worley, 1993:396)

1. Diagnosis. Includes business strategy, workplace technology, and level of employee involvement.
2. Preparing for goal setting. Some training is necessary for managers and employees to engage in
goal setting.
3. Setting goals. This step involves establishing challenging goals and clarifying goal measurement.
Employees have to have a high participation.
4. Review. This includes assessing the goal-setting process so that modifications can be made, if
necessary.

Values of O.D. Professionals

As an O.D. professional, I acknowledge the fundamental importance of the following values for
Organizational Development Profession and professional.

• Quality of life -- people being satisfied with their whole life experience;
 • Health, human potential, empowerment, growth and excellence -- people being healthy, aware of
the fullness of their potential, recognizing their power to bring that potential into being, growing into
it, living it, and, generally, doing the best they can with it, individually and collectively;
• Freedom and responsibility -- people being free and responsible in choosing how they will live their
lives;
• Justice -- people living lives whose results are fair and right for everyone;
• Dignity, integrity, worth and fundamental rights of individuals, organizations, communities,
societies, and other human systems;
• All-win attitudes and cooperation -- people caring about one another and about working together to
achieve results that work for everyone, individually and collectively;
• Authenticity and openness in relationship;
• Effectiveness, efficiency and alignment -- people achieving the maximum of desired results, at
minimum cost, in ways that coordinate their individual energies and purposes with those of the
system-as-a-whole, the subsystems of which they are parts, and the larger system of which their
system is a part;
• Holistic, systemic view and stakeholder orientation -- understanding human behavior from the
perspective of whole system(s) that influence and are influenced by that behavior; recognizing the
interests that different people have in the system's results and valuing those interests fairly and
justly;
• Wide participation in system affairs, confrontation of issues leading to effective problem solving,
and democratic decision-making.

Ethical Guidelines for O.D. Professionals

Responsibility to Self

• Act with integrity; be authentic and true to myself

• Strive continually for self-knowledge and personal growth
• Recognize personal needs and desires and, when they conflict with other responsibilities, seek all-
win resolutions of those conflicts.
• Assert your own economic and financial interests in ways that are fair and equitable to you as well
as to your clients and stakeholders.

Responsibility for Professional Development and Competence

• Accept responsibility for the consequences of your acts

• Strive to achieve and maintain a professional level
• Recognize your own personal needs and desires and deal with them responsibly in the
performance of your professional roles.
• Practice within the limits of your competence, culture, and experience in providing services and
using techniques.

Responsibility to Clients and Significant Others

• Serve the long-term well-being, interests and development of the client system and all its
stakeholders, even when the work being done has a short-term focus.
 • Conduct any professional activity, program or relationship in ways that are honest, responsible, and
appropriately open.
• Establish mutual agreement on a contract covering services and remuneration.
• Deal with conflicts constructively and avoid conflicts of interest as much as possible.
• Define and protect the confidentiality of client-professional relationships.
• Make public statements of all kinds accurately, including promotion and advertising, and give
service as advertised.

There are 6 phases in grid OD:

First phase is concerned with studying the grid as a theoretical knowledge to
understand the human behavior in the Organization.
Second phase is concerned with team work development. A seminar helps
the members in developing each member’s perception and the insight into
the problems faced by various members on the job.
Third phase is inter group development. This phase aims at developing the
relationships between different departments
Fourth phase is concerned with the creation of a strategic model for the
organization where Chief Executives and their immediate subordinates
participate in this activity.

Fifth phase is concerned with implementation of strategic model.. Planning

teams are formed for each department to know the available resources,
required resources, procuring them if required and implementing the model
Sixth Phase is concerned with the critical evaluation of the model and making
necessary adjustment for successful implementation.

Management by Objectives (MBO) is a successful philosophy of management.

It replaces the traditional philosophy of “Management by Domination”. MBO
led to a systematic Goal setting and Planning. Peter Drucker the eminent
management Guru in 1959 has first propagated the philosophy since then it
has become a movement.
MBO is a process by which managers at different levels and their
subordinates work together in identifying goals and establishing objectives
consistent with Organizational goals and attaining them.

Team building is an application of various techniques of Sensitivity training to

the actual work groups in various departments. These work groups consist of
peers and a supervisor.
Sensitivity training is called a laboratory as it is conducted by creating an
experimental laboratory situation in which employees are brought together.
The Team building technique and training is designed to improve the ability
of the employees to work together as teams.

Job enrichment is currently practiced all over the world. It is based on the
assumption in order to motivate workers, job itself must provide
opportunities for achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement and
growth. The basic idea is to restore to jobs the elements of interest that were
taken away. In a job enrichment program the worker decides how the job is
performed, planned and controlled and makes more decisions concerning the
entire process.