Dear Class,

Sorry for the late email. Here are the topics for reporting on October 16, 2010 Saturday

Please prepare 1 hard copy for my reference.

Thank you.

Topics:
1. Definition of OD (Angelica)
2. Kurt Lewins (Jose)
3. The 5 Major roots of OD & include its contributor or who hypothesized each stem
( Sherwin & Macbeth)
1. National Training Laboratory
2. Survey Feedback
3. Normative approach
4. Quality of work life
5/ Strategic Change
4. Evolution of OD : globalization and information technology (Garry & Edward)

Thank you.
National Training Laboratories
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Kurt Lewin founded the National Training Laboratories, known as NTL, an American
non-profit behavioral psychology center, in 1947. NTL became a major influence[1] in
modern corporate training programs, and in particular developed the T-Group
methodology that remains in place today. Lewin died early on in the project, which was
continued by co-founders Ron Lippitt, Lee Bradford, and Ken Benne, among others. The
NTL produced or influenced other notable and influential contributors to the human
relations movement in post-World War II management thought, notably Douglas
McGregor (who, like Lewin, also died young), Chris Argyris and Warren Bennis.[2]

The NTL continues to work in the field of organizational effectiveness. The original
center in Bethel, Maine continues to operate, but the organization has moved its
headquarters to Arlington, Virginia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Training_Laboratories

Organizational effectiveness
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may
be challenged and removed. (May 2008)

Organizational effectiveness is the concept of how effective an organization is in

achieving the outcomes the organization intends to produce. The idea of organizational
effectiveness is especially important for non-profit organizations as most people who
donate money to non-profit organizations and charities are interested in knowing whether
the organization is effective in accomplishing its goals.

According to Richard et al. (2009) organizational effectiveness captures organizational

performance plus the plethora of internal performance outcomes normally associated with
more efficient or effective operations and other external measures that relate to
considerations that are broader than those simply associated with economic valuation
(either by shareholders, managers, or customers), such as corporate social responsibility.
[1]
An organization's effectiveness is also dependent on its communicative competence and
ethics. The relationship between these three are simultaneous. Ethics is a foundation
found within organizational effectiveness. An organization must exemplify respect,
honesty, integrity and equity to allow communicative competence with the participating
members. Along with ethics and communicative competence, members in that particular
group can finally achieve their intended goals.

Foundations and other sources of grants and other types of funds are interested in
organizational effectiveness of those people who seek funds from the foundations.
Foundations always have more requests for funds or funding proposals and treat funding
as an investment using the same care as a venture capitalist would in picking a company
in which to invest.

Organizational effectiveness is an abstract concept and is basically impossible to

measure. Instead of measuring organizational effectiveness, the organization determines
proxy measures which will be used to represent effectiveness. Proxy measures used may
include such things as number of people served, types and sizes of population segments
served, and the demand within those segments for the services the organization supplies.

For instance, a non-profit organization which supplies meals to house bound people may
collect statistics such as the number of meals cooked and served, the number of
volunteers delivering meals, the turnover and retention rates of volunteers, the
demographics of the people served, the turnover and retention of consumers, the number
of requests for meals turned down due to lack of capacity (amount of food, capacity of
meal preparation facilities, and number of delivery volunteers), and amount of wastage.
Since the organization has as its goal the preparation of meals and the delivery of those
meals to house bound people, it measures its organizational effectiveness by trying to
determine what actual activities the people in the organization do in order to generate the
outcomes the organization wants to create.

Activities such as fundraising or volunteer training are important because they provide
the support needed for the organization to deliver its services but they are not the
outcomes per se. These other activities are overhead activities which assist the
organization in achieving its desired outcomes.

The term Organizational Effectiveness is often used interchangeably with Organization

Development, especially when used as the name of a department or a part of the Human
Resources function within an organization.
 Organizati
on
Developm
ent
T-Groups

History
In 1947, the National Training Laboratories Institute began in Bethel, ME. They pioneered the use of T-
groups (Laboratory Training) in which the learners use here and now experience in the group, feedback
among participants and theory on human behavior to explore group process and gain insights into
themselves and others. The goal is to offer people options for their behavior in groups. The T-group was a
great training innovation which provided the base for what we now know about team building. This was a
new method that would help leaders and managers create a more humanistic, people serving system and
allow leaders and managers to see how their behavior actually affected others. There was a strong value of
concern for people and a desire to create systems that took people's needs and feelings seriously.

Objectives of T-Group Learning

The T-Group is intended to provide you the opportunity to:

• Increase your understanding of group development and dynamics.

• Gaining a better understanding of the underlying social processes at work within a group (looking
under the tip of the iceberg)
• Increase your skill in facilitating group effectiveness.
• Increase interpersonal skills
• Experiment with changes in your behavior
• Increase your awareness of your own feelings in the moment; and offer you the opportunity to accept
responsibility for your feelings.
• Increase your understanding of the impact of your behavior on others.
• Increase your sensitivity to others' feelings.
• Increase your ability to give and receive feedback.
• Increase your ability to learn from your own and a group's experience.
• Increase your ability to manage and utilize conflict.

Success in these goals depends, to a large extent, on the implied contract that each participant is willing to
disclose feelings that she or he may have, in the moment, about others in the group, and to solicit feedback
from the others about herself or himself. The focus is upon individual learning; some participants may learn
a great deal in most of the above areas, others learn relatively little.
Method
One way of describing what may happen for a participant is --

1. Unfreezing habitual responses to situations -- this is facilitated by the participant's own desire to
explore new ways of behaving and the trainer staying non-directive, silent, and providing little
structure or task agenda
2. Self generated and chosen change by the participant
- Experiment with new behaviors -Practice description not evaluation
of
3. Reinforce new behavior by positive feedback, participants own assessment of whether what is
happening is closer to what she/he intends, supportive environment, trust development

Sources of Change in Groups

• Self-observation - participants give more attention to their own intentions, feelings, etc.
• Feedback - participants receive information on the impact they have on others
• Insight - participants expand self-knowledge
• Self-disclosure - participants exposes more of themselves to others
• Universality - participants experience that others share their difficulties, concerns or hopes
• Group Cohesion - participants experience trust, acceptance & understanding)
• Hope - participant see others learn, achieve their goals, improve, and cope more effectively
• Vicarious Learning - participants pick up skills and attitudes from others
• Catharsis - participants experience a sense of release or breakthrough

A Description

The T-group provides participants with an opportunity to learn about themselves, their impact on others and
how to function more effectively in group and interpersonal situations. It facilitates this learning by bringing
together a small group of people for the express purpose of studying their own behavior when they interact
within a small group.

A T-Group is not a group discussion or a problem solving group.

The group's work is primarily process rather than content oriented. The focus tends to be on the feelings and
the communication of feelings, rather than on the communication of information, opinions, or concepts. This
is accomplished by focusing on the 'here and now' behavior in the group. Attention is paid to particular
behaviors of participants not on the "whole person", feedback is non-evaluative and reports on the impact of
the behavior on others. The participant has the opportunity to become a more authentic self in relation to
others through self disclosure and receiving feedback from others. The Johari Window is a model that looks
at that process.

The training is not structured in the manner you might experience in an academic program or a meeting with
an agenda or a team with a task to accomplish. The lack of structure and limited involvement of the trainers
provides space for the participants to decide what they want to talk about. No one tells them what they ought
to talk about. The lack of direction results in certain characteristic responses; participants are silent or
aggressive or struggle to start discussions or attempt to structure the group.

In the beginning of a T-Group participants are usually focused on what they experience as a need for
structure, individual emotional safety, predictability, and something to do in common. These needs are what
amount to the tip of the iceberg in most groups in their back home situation. By not filling the group's time
with answers to these needs, the T-Group eventually begins to notice what is under the tip of the iceberg. It
is what is always there in any group but often unseen and not responsibly engaged . So, participants
experience anxiety about authority and power, being include and accepted in the group, and intimacy.

Depending on forces, such as, the dynamics of the group, the past experience and competence of
participants, and the skill of the trainers -- the group, to some extent, usually develops a sense of itself as a
group, with feelings of group loyalty. This can cause groups to resist learning opportunities if they are seen
as threatening to the group's self-image. It also provides some of the climate of trust, support and permission
needed for individuals to try new behavior.

As an individual participant begins to experience some degree of trust (in themselves, the group and the
trainers) several things become possible --

• The participant may notice that his/her feelings and judgments about the behavior of others is not
always shared by others. That what he/she found supportive or threatening was not experience in that
way by others in the group. That how one responded to authority, acceptance and affection issues
different from that of others (more related to ones family of origin than to what is happening in the
group). Individual differences emerge in how experiences are understood.
• The participant may begin to try on new behavior. For example, someone who has always felt a need
to fill silence with noise and activity tries being quieter and still.
• Participants begin to ask for feedback from the group about how their behavior is impacting others.
• Participants may find that they are really rather independent and have a relatively low level of
anxiety about what is happening in the group. They will exhibit a broader range of behavior and
emotions during the life of the group. In fact their leadership is part of what helps the group develop.

The role of the trainers

• To help the group and individuals analyze and learn from what is happening in the group. The trainer
may draw attention to events and behavior in the group and invite the group to look at its experience.
At times the trainer may offer tentative interpretations.
• To offer theory, a model or research that seems related to what the group is looking at.
• To encourage the group to follow norms that tend to serve the learning process, e.g., focusing on
"here & now" rather than the "then & there".
• To offer training and coaching in skills that tend to help the learning process, e.g., feedback skills,
EIAG, etc.
• To not offer structure or an agenda. To remain silent, allowing the group to experience its anxiety
about acceptance, influence, etc.
• To be willing to disclose oneself, to be open with the group. On occasion being willing to offer
feedback and challenge a participant
 • To avoid becoming too directive, clinical, or personally involved.

Possible Problems
• T-Group methods usually encourage self-disclosure and openness, which may be inappropriate or
even punished in organizations. This was an early learning. When managers thought they could take
the T-group method into the back home organization, they discovered that the methods and the
assumptions of a T-group did not fit. T-groups consisted of participants who were strangers. They
didn't have a history or a future together and could more easily focus on here and now behavior.
Another issue was that in the organization there were objectives, deadlines and schedules related to
accomplishing the work of the company or group. Groups with a task to accomplish could not take
the same time that would be used in a T-Group. These difficulties helped lead to the development of
Organization Development and team building. What had been learned in T-Groups was combined
with other knowledge and these new disciplines emerged as ways to address the values raised by the
T-Group experience.
• The T-Group experience can open up a web of questioning in a participant. Ways of behaving that
the person has used for many years may be called into question by others in the group and oneself.
This has in some cases brought the participant to question relationships in the family or at work.
While this can be a very constructive process that leads to the renewal of relationships, it has on
occasion lead to the breakdown of a relationship. While such a breakdown may have, in time, come
to the relationship without participation in a T-Group, it remains a painful and possibly damaging
experience.
• Participants being forced or pressured to attend, by an employer or other person with influence, are
on the whole less likely to have a positive learning experience. Employers or others who want to
require the participation of others may enhance the chance of having a productive outcome if -- they
attend a lab themselves before sending others; they speak with the lab coordinator before the event to
discuss what might realistically be expected and what the leader could do to assist in the learning
process when the participant returns home.
• Very rarely there have been situations in which a participant has a psychiatric problem. One report
said "The possibility of negative psychiatric effects of ST, and especially its role in inducing
psychiatric symptoms, is yet to be clarified." This reinforces the value of participation based on
intrinsic motivation; a norm that discourages people in therapy from attending without the approval
of their therapist; and trainers staying focused on the learning areas suited for T-Group experiences.

Copyright Robert A. Gallagher 2001

Agencies that offer T-Group training and other lab

training experience:
LTI - Leadership Training Institute

NTL - National Training Laboratories Institute

Additional background on T-Groups and related issues
Kurt Lewin: groups, experiential learning and action research

Working with T-Groups? - A section of "Working with Groups"

What is Kolb's model of experiential education, and where does it come from? - By Richard W.
Shields, Dorothy Aaron, and Shannon Wall

A Social History of the T-Group

National Society for Experiential Education

UA Experiential Learning Cycle model

Touchy-Feely to Organization T-Group By Theme (humor)

http://www.orgdct.com/more_on_t-groups.htm
The Survey Feedback Process for Organizational Development
and Change
By CMOE Development Team
2007-02-02

The Survey Feedback Process

THE PURPOSE OF SURVEY FEEDBACK:In globally competitive environments,

organizations are seeking information about obstacles to
productivity and satisfaction in the workplace. Survey feedback is a
tool that can provide this type of honest feedback to help leaders guide and direct
their teams.

Obstacles and gaps between the current status quo and the desired situations may or may
not be directly apparent. In either case, it is vital to have a clear understanding of
strategies for diagnosis and prevention of important organization problems. If all leaders
and members alike are clear about the organizational development and change, strengths,
weakness, strategies can be designed and implemented to support positive change.
Survey feedback provides a participative approach and enables all members to become
actively engaged in managing the work environment.

SURVEY PROCESS STEPS:

1. Identify project plan and objectives

2. Brief team leaders and employees about the process
3. Administer survey
4. Conduct interviews and focus groups
5. Train leaders on facilitating team discussions
6. Analyze the data and construct a report
7. Provide feedback to leaders
8. Team leaders conduct feedback action planning and meetings
9. Leaders present reports on progress and results to Senior Management
10. Follow-up by senior leadership to ensure progress and accountability

RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TEAM LEADER:

Once the data has been collected and observations have been clarified, it becomes the
leader’s responsibility to familiarize the team with the findings. Next the leader involves
the team in outlining appropriate solutions and strategies that members can “buy into”
and support over the long-haul. When leaders can facilitate collaborative teaming and
become an organizational development and change agent, people in the team will
contribute creative ideas to enhance their work environment.

It is important for leaders to not underestimate the time and facilitation skills needed to
pass on the information and foster an action-oriented environment. The initial meetings
and communication sessions are just the start of a development process, not a single
event. If the survey feedback is to be effective, it must be implemented into a
comprehensive strategy that includes goals, responsibilities, time frames, revisions, and
reviews.

Prior to the action meetings, leaders need to gain a full understanding of the survey data
and begin to structure a plan for the first meeting. Once the meeting begins, the leader
should guide the group's evaluation of the results and development of solutions.
Following the initial meeting, a summary should be documented and action plans
circulated. Follow-up meetings are necessary to coordinate and evaluate changes and
progress. Action plans are the means of fully utilizing the survey feedback, without it we
simply have a snap shot of where the organization is, with no plan for positive change.

If the team feedback meeting is poorly handled, there will be low front-end commitment
on the part of the team. Of course group dynamics will be unique in every situation, and
the leader will need to consider this as the survey data is disseminated. Tailoring sessions
to meet the group characteristics will provide for a more effective discussion. In any case,
consider a few of these ideas:

• Be optimistic and excited about the information and how it can be used to better
the organization.
• Verbally express positive points.
• Ask for participation by all members and reinforce their openness and
contributions.
• Invite them to explore with you the areas that need improvement.
• Be supportive and clear about action and follow-up plans.
• Establish a clear commitment to utilize the survey feedback long-term and seek
further feedback from the group.

Most importantly, help the group understand the purpose and mission of the survey
feedback As a leader, feast on the opportunity of having clear data and truly listen and
involve members in your organizational development and change endeavor.

Employee Feedback Survey Example

This is just an example of an employee feedback survey. You cannot respond to these employee feedback que
hope that this survey example helps illustrate the kind of questions that you can put in your own employee fee
Although you are welcome to use these questions, why not just join Survey Share for business survey templat
Employee Feedback survey templates. SurveyShare is the easiest way for you to put a survey like this on the

Click Here To Access Employee Feedback Survey

1) The employee deductible is reasonable and fair.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Undecided
Agree
Strongly Agree
2) Insurance claim forms are understandable and easy to file.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Undecided
Agree
Strongly Agree
3) A human resource (HR) representative is available to answer
questions about benefits.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Undecided
Agree
Strongly Agree
4) Employee life insurance coverage is adequate and affordable.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Undecided
Agree
Strongly Agree
5) Please tell us how satisfied you are with the employee long-
term disability plan.
Very Dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Undecided
 Satisfied
Very Satisfied
6) Please describe your position with the company.

7) How long have you worked for the company?

8) Management listens to employees.

Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
9) Employees have a voice in major decisions regarding changes
in the work environment.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
10) How satisfied are you with the training and development of
employees?
Very Satisfied
Satisfied
Dissatisfied
Very Dissatisfied
11) What changes, if any, do you feel need to made in your
department to improve working conditions?

12) What changes, if any, do you feel need to be made in the

 company to improve working conditions?

Click Here To Conduct An Employee Feedback Survey

http://www.surveyshare.com/info/employeefeedback.html
Organizational Development

1. Printable Version
2. Download PDF
3. Cite this Page
4. Tweet This

Organizational development is an ongoing, systematic process to implement effective

change in an organization. Organizational development is known as both a field of
applied behavioral science focused on understanding and managing organizational
change and as a field of scientific study and inquiry. It is interdisciplinary in nature and
draws on sociology, psychology, and theories of motivation, learning, and personality.

HISTORY OF ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

In the late 1960s organizational development was implemented in organizations via

consultants, but was relatively unknown as a theory of practice and had no common
definition among its practitioners. Richard Beckhard, an authority on organizational
development and change management, defined organizational development as "an effort,
planned, organization-wide, and managed from the top, to increase organization
effectiveness and health through planned interventions in the organization's processes,
using behavioral-science knowledge" (Beckhard 1969).

Throughout the 1970s and 1980s organizational development became a more established
field with courses and programs being offered in business, education, and administration
curricula. In the 1990s and 2000s organizational development continued to grow and
evolve and its influences could be seen in theories and strategies such as total quality
management (TQM), team building, job enrichment, and reengineering.

RATIONALE AND IMPLEMENTATION

Organizational development takes into consideration how the organization and its
constituents or employees function together. Does the organization meet the needs of its
employees? Do the employees work effectively to make the organization a success? How
can the symbiotic relationship between employee satisfaction and organizational success
be optimized? Organizational development places emphasis on the human factors and
data inherent in the organization-employee relationship. Organizational development
strategies can be used to help employees become more committed and more adaptable,
which ultimately improves the organization as a whole.

The organizational development process is initiated when there is a need, gap, or

dissatisfaction within the organization, either at the upper management level or within the
employee body. Ideally, the process involves the organization in its entirety, with
evidenced support from upper management and engagement in the effort by all members
from each level of the organization.
To launch the process, consultants with experience in organizational development and
change management are often utilized. These consultants may be internal to the company
or external, with the cautionary understanding that internal consultants might be too
entrenched in the existing company environment to effectively coordinate and enforce the
action plans and solutions required for successful change.

Data analysis through task forces, interviews, and questionnaires can illuminate likely
causes for disconnects throughout an organization. These gaps can then be analyzed, an
action plan formed, and solutions employed. This is by no means a linear process, nor is
it a brief one. Feedback from all constituents should be elicited throughout the process
and used to make adjustments to the action plan as necessary. Constant monitoring during
the entire implementation effort is important for its success and acceptance.

THE FUTURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

There are contradictory opinions about the status and future prospects of organizational
development. Is it a theory whose time has come and gone? Does its basis in behavioral
science, a "soft" science, make it unappealing? What are the challenges for the future?

An article by Bunker, Alban, and Lewicki proposes six areas that could revitalize the
field of organizational development in the future: virtual teams, conflict resolution, work
group effectiveness, social network analysis, trust, and intractable conflict. These authors
suggest that focusing on these areas will help bridge the gap between research theory
(i.e., academics) and practice (i.e., consultants). Getting these two groups to communicate
with each other will benefit both groups and promote organizational development efforts.

In a survey conducted by Church, Waclawski, and Berr, twenty individuals involved in

the study and practice of organizational development were questioned about their
perspectives and predictions on the future of the field. The most in-demand services,
according to those polled, are:

• executive coaching and development

• team building and team effectiveness
• facilitating strategic organizational change
• systemic integration
• diversity and multiculturalism.

They list the daily challenges in the field as the need for speed, resistance to change,
interpersonal skills and awareness, and differentiating organizational development, which
refers to the variety of definitions of organizational development among practitioners and
how this impacts consultants, clients, and the clients' needs.

The opinions on the future direction of the field vary among its practitioners.
Nevertheless, the continuing interest in and value of optimizing an organization's needs
and goals with the needs, wants, and personal satisfaction of its employees indicate that
organizational development will continue to be relevant to and vital for organizational
reform in the future, either in its present form or through evolution into other theories and
practices.

SEE ALSO: Organization Theory; Organizational Learning; Quality and Total Quality
Management; Teams and Teamwork

Monica C. Turner

FURTHER READING:

Beckhard, Richard. Organization Development: Strategies and Models. Reading, MA:

Addison-Wesley, 1969.

Brown, D.R., and D.F. Harvey. An Experiential Approach to Organization Development.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004.

Bunker, B.B., B.T. Alban, and R.J. Lewicki. "Ideas in Currency and OD Practice: Has the
Well Gone Dry?" Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 40, no. 4 (December 2004):
403–22.

Burke, W.W. "Internal Organization Development Practitioners: Where Do They

Belong?" Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 40, no. 4 (December 2004): 423–31.

Cummings, T.G., and C.G. Worley. Organization Development and Change. 8th ed.
Mason, OH: Thomson/South-Western, 2005.

French, W.L., C. Bell, and R.A. Zawacki. Organization Development and

Transformation: Managing Effective Change. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin,
2005.

Massarik, F., and M. Pei-Carpenter. Organization Development and Consulting:

Perspectives and Foundations. San Francisco: Pfeiffer, 2002.

Shifo, R. "OD in Ten Words or Less: Adding Lightness to the Definitions of

Organizational Development." Organizational Development Journal 22, no. 3 (Fall
2004): 74–85.

Waclawski, J., and A.H. Church. Organization Development: A Data-driven Approach to

Organizational Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002.

Wheatley, M., R. Tannenbaum, P.Y. Griffin, and K. Quade. Organization Development

at Work: Conversations on the Values, Applications, and Future of OD. San Francisco:
Pfeiffer, 2003.
Chapter 22 : Fundamentals of Organization Development

Definitions and Concepts of Organization Development

History of Organization Development

Laboratory Training
Survey Feedback
Action Research
Tavistock Sociotechnical and Socioclinical Approach

Nature of Organization Development

Foundations of Organization Development

The OD Process

Client-Consultant Relationship

Chapter Summary

Organization development (OD) is one of the most significant developments in the field
of organizational behavior in recent years. OD began to evolve as a distinct field of study
in the 1940s when behavioral scientists in the US and Britain made efforts to resolve
problems facing modern organizations. OD has been defined in different ways by
different behavioral scientists and applies the knowledge and practice of behavioral
science to improve the effectiveness of organizations. OD has four prominent
approaches: laboratory training, survey research and feedback, action research, and
Tavistock socioclinical and sociotechnical approaches.

According to French and Bell, the nature of OD can be explained on the basis of
foundations of OD and by understanding the OD process and its components. The various
characteristics of OD which comprise its foundations are that it is an ongoing process, a
form of applied behavioral science, and constitutes a normative-re-educative strategy for
change. It uses a systems approach towards understanding organizations, is a data-based
problem-solving model, and an experience-based learning model. Finally, it emphasizes
goal setting and planning and involves intact work teams.

The components of an OD process are the diagnostic component, action or intervention

component and the process-maintenance component. The diagnostic component tries to
find out about the original state of the system and how the remedial action plans could
affect them. The action or intervention component refers to the various OD interventions
which try to improve the effectiveness of the organizational functioning. The process-
maintenance component helps in keeping the process of OD relevant and manageable.

In order for an OD program to succeed, various issues in the client-consultant

relationship have to be addressed. These include establishing the initial contract,
identifying the actual client, establishing trust, clarifying the role of the consultant,
determining the appropriate depth of intervention, examining the effect of the consultant
being influenced by the client organization's culture, the ability of the consultant to act as
a model, viewing the consultant teams as a microcosm, applying action research to the
process of OD, reducing dependency on the consultant and terminating the relationship,
ethical dilemmas in OD practice, and implications of OD for the client.

Chapter 23 : Organization Development Interventions

Meaning of OD Interventions

Types of OD Interventions

Sensitivity Training
Survey Feedback
Process Consultation Interventions
Team Interventions
Force-field Analysis
Intergroup Team-Building Interventions
Third-Party Peacemaking Interventions
Structural Interventions

Chapter Summary

Organization Development (OD) is a unique organizational improvement strategy. The

sets of structured/planned activities adopted by groups or individuals in an organization
as a part of the organization development program, are known as OD techniques or OD
interventions. While change programs may involve either external or internal consultants,
OD interventions mostly involve external consultants.

Some OD interventions include sensitivity training, survey feedback, process

consultation, team interventions and intergroup interventions, third party peace making
interventions, and structural interventions. The most widely used structural interventions
are parallel learning structures, self-managed teams, Management by Objectives (MBO),
Quality Circles, Total Quality Management (TQM), Quality of work life (QWL) projects,
large-scale systems change, organizational transformation, and process reengineering.

Chapter 24 : Future of Organizational Development

Strengths of Organizational Development

The Future of OD

Leadership and Values

Knowledge about OD
OD Training
Interdisciplinary Nature of OD
Diffusion of OD Techniques
Integrative Practice
Rediscovering and Recording History

Possible Changes in OD Processes and Practice

Chapter Summary

The research and practice in the field of OD has led to the emergence of new concepts
and interventions. Therefore, OD is a continuously growing field. The factors that add to
the strength of OD include soundness of its processes, the emphasis of OD interventions
on democratic processes and on bringing about a simultaneous change in people as well
as technology. Though OD seems to have a promising future, there are certain factors that
have the potential to make the future of OD uncertain. These include nature of
organizational leadership and the values of top management, knowledge of management
about OD, the importance given by management to training employees in OD skills,
interdisciplinary nature of OD, dissemination of OD techniques, integration of techniques
in the field of OD with those in other fields and the recording and maintenance of the
history of OD.

The changes in global economy, technology and nature of workforce have significant
implications for the future of OD. In the future, OD will become a part of organizational
operations and OD skills will be acquired by employees at every level in the
organization. OD processes will use advanced technology and the duration of OD
interventions will be reduced. OD will focus on learning and innovation and its
interdisciplinary nature will increase. As OD practitioners have to work with diverse
client organizations and cross-cultural teams, they will need to develop the required
competence. Prior to solving the value dilemmas of modern organizations, OD
practitioners will be required to resolve the dilemma within themselves regarding the
focus of OD interventions.
An Historical Perspective
In the late 1970's I started receiving a number of strange telephone calls. There was one
telephone call from a person who introduced himself as being with a major U.S.
corporation. He had just been hired as their O.D. consultant. He had no training in O.D.
and no experience in O.D. His boss wanted him to do team building with the
corporation's top team. And, the caller wanted information on a weekend workshop he
could attend in order to learn how to do this. About the same time, I got another call from
a proffessor at a major Midwest university. His dean wanted him to start an O.D. program
at their university. He had no training in O.D. and no experience in O.D. and he wanted
the name of a good book he could read. A local O.D. academic program had used their
students to run a "touchy feelie" T-group in a local manufacturing division of a major
U.S. corporation. A member of their personnel department reported to me that almost this
entire group had returned from this program engaging in behaviors that company
management felt were inappropriate for their company. And, most had been fired or
transferred.

After a number of such experiences, it became increasingly obvious that there is a

Gresham's Law of O.D. in which "bad O.D." would eventually drive out "good O.D.". I
felt we should put some boundaries around this new field that we were calling O.D. Not
everyone who attended a weekend workshop on O.D. should be able to lay claim to doing
O.D. and being an O.D. person. I felt this new field needed to become a profession and in
order to become a profession a number of things were needed. The most important were:
1) a code of ethics, 2) a statement on the unique body of skill and knowledge which O.D.
people must possess in order to do O.D., and 3) some kind of visible boundary around the
field so that the public could tell who had some competence in O.D. and who might or
might not be competent.

I am a charter member of the OD Network and was a member of the OD Network Board
of Directors from 1979 to 1981. I tried to get them interested in developing an O.D. Code
of Ethics and building the field of O.D. into a profession. I was told, "We are not that
kind of an organization". So, I decided to do it myself with help from The O.D. Institute.

In 1981 I wrote the first O.D. Code of Ethics. It was published in the O.D. Institute's
monthly newsletter and people were asked for comments. A revised version was
published in the 1983 edition of The International Registry of O.D. Professionals and
O.D. Handbook. In the fall of 1981, Dr. William Gellermann, RODC agreed to take on
this task. He has done a tremendous job of writing and revising and rewriting The O.D.
Code of Ethics in order to develop a code that could be used worldwide by O.D. people
in all kinds of settings. I has now gone through some 22 revisions and has been translated
into at least four languages. In 1984 Bill was given The Outstanding O.D. Consultant of
the Year Award for his work in developing The O.D. Code of Ethics.

NTL had gotten itself sued by "certifying" that certain people would do good work. We
did not want to get into that kind of difficulty. So, we decided that instead of certying
people we would register people. We immediately had some very heated disucssions as to
who could be registered and who was competent to decide who was competent. I felt that
there should be some kind of objective criteria. Others were adamantly opposed. The
problem seemed unsolvable. So, in good O.D. fashion we found an integrative solution.
We did both. We established the initials RODP (Registered O.D. Professional) for those
who judged themselves to be competent. And, we established the initials RODC
(Registered O.D. Consultant) for those who met more stringent requirements. We are not
yet completely happy with either of these requirements and have a committee working to
improve them.

In looking at the requirements for qualifying to use the initials RODC, it seemed there
was obviously a need for a knowledge test of some kind. Dr. W. Warner Burke is a
member of The O.D. Institute's Advisory Board. We asked him if he would do this for us
and he said "Yes". In 1983 Warner completed work on "The Assessment Questionnaire
for Knowledge and Understanding of O.D.". (In 1990 Warner Burke was given The
Oustanding O.D. Consultant of the Year Award for this and his other important
contributions to the field of O.D.) The questionnaire he developed was based on
questions proposed by students and then sent to 100 highly qualified, currently practicing
U.S. O.D. people. Questions were not drawn from an explicitely defined O.D. knowledge
base because that had as yet not been done. There were no questions on ethics and no
input from the international O.D. community. Dr. Donald Van Eynde, ROCD has now
revised this test. (In 1996, Dr. Donald Van Eynde, RODC was given The Oustanding
O.D. Consultant of the Year Award for this and his other major contributions to the field
of O.D.)

We also became concerned over what students were learning, and ... more importantly ...
what they were not learning. Well over half the OD/OB academic programs in the USA
do not teach the O.D. Code of Ethics, and do not subscribe to current literature being
published in the field. It is our opinion that most students on graduation have never
written a published paper.

In developing a test on the knowledge and skill necessary for being competent in O.D.
and in trying to evaluate the knowledge and skill needed in order to be competent, it
became increasingly obvious that the field needed to define the knowledge and skill
necessary for competence in O.D. We in The O.D. Institute and we who are working in
O.D. are very grateful to Roland Sullivan, RODC, Dr. Gary McLean, RODC, and Dr.
William Rockwell, RODC, and their team for the tremendous amount of time and effort
they invested in developing a statement on the knowledge and skill necessary for
competence in O.D. (In 1997, Roland Sullivan, RODC was given The Outstanding O.D.
Consultant of the Year Award for this and his other important contributions to the field
O.D.)

A committee headed by Dr. Terry Armstrong, RODC has developed criteria for the
accreditation of OD/OB academic programs and we are now accrediting OD/OB
academic programs that meet these criteria. We are currently the only organization in the
world that accredits OD/OB academic programs. (In 1997, Dr. Terry Armstrong, RODC
was given The Outstanding O.D. Consultant of the Year Award for this and his other
important contributions to the field O.D.)

Dr. Donald W. Cole RODC

(Registered O.D. Consultant)
Management/Clinical Psychologist

Return to O.D. Institute Home Page

 Development of human resources -- Part 3

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT
the management of change

Robert H. Rouda & Mitchell E. Kusy, Jr.

(C) copyright 1995 by the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper
Industry.

This is the third in a series of articles which originally appeared in Tappi Journal in
1995-96, to introduce methods addressing the development of individuals and
organizations through the field of Human Resource Development. (The article has
been updated, and is reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.)

WHAT IS OD?

Beckhard (1) defines Organization Development (OD) as "an effort,

planned, organization-wide, and managed from the top, to
increase organization effectiveness and health through planned
interventions in the organization's processes, using behavioral-
science knowledge." In essence, OD is a planned system of
change.

Planned. OD takes a long-range approach to improving organizational

performance and efficiency. It avoids the (usual) "quick-fix".
Organization-wide. OD focuses on the total system.
Managed from the top. To be effective, OD must have the support of top-
management. They have to model it, not just espouse it. The OD
process also needs the buy-in and ownership of workers
throughout the organization.
Increase organization effectiveness and health. OD is tied to the bottom-
line. Its goal is to improve the organization, to make it more
efficient and more competitive by aligning the organization's
systems with its people.
Planned interventions. After proper preparation, OD uses activities
called interventions to make systemwide, permanent changes in
the organization.
Using behavioral-science knowledge. OD is a discipline that combines
research and experience to understanding people, business
systems, and their interactions.

We usually think of OD only in terms of the interventions themselves. This article

seeks to emphasize that these activities are only the most visible part of a complex
process, and to put some perspective and unity into the myriad of OD tools that are
used in business today. These activities include Total Quality Management (an
evolutionary approach to improving an organization) and Reengineering (a more
revolutionary approach). And there are dozens of other interventions, such as
strategic planning and team building. It is critical to select the correct
intervention(s), and this can only be done with proper preparation.

WHY DO OD?

• Human resources -- our people -- may be a large fraction of our costs of doing
business. They certainly can make the difference between organizational success
and failure. We better know how to manage them.
• Changing nature of the workplace. Our workers today want feedback on their
performance, a sense of accomplishment, feelings of value and worth, and
commitment to social responsibility. They need to be more efficient, to improve
their time management. And, of course, if we are to continue doing more work
with less people, we need to make our processes more efficient.
• Global markets. Our environments are changing, and our organizations must also
change to survive and prosper. We need to be more responsible to and develop
closer partnerships with our customers. We must change to survive, and we argue
that we should attack the problems, not the symptoms, in a systematic, planned,
humane manner.
• Accelerated rate of change. Taking an open-systems approach, we can easily
identify the competitions on an international scale for people, capital, physical
resources, and information.

WHO DOES OD?

To be successful, OD must have the buy-in, ownership, and involvement

of all stakeholders, not just of the employees throughout the
organization. OD is usually facilitated by change agents -- people
or teams that have the responsibility for initiating and managing
the change effort. These change agents may be either employees
of the organization (internal consultants) or people from outside
the organization (external consultants.)

Effective change requires leadership with knowledge, and experience in change

management. We strongly recommend that external or internal consultants be used,
preferably a combination of both. ("These people are professionals; don't try this at
home.")

Bennis (2) notes that "external consultants can manage to affect ... the power
structure in a way that most internal change agents cannot." Since experts from
outside are less subject to the politics and motivations found within the
organization, they can be more effective in facilitating significant and meaningful
changes.

WHEN IS AN ORGANIZATION READY FOR OD?

There is a formula, attributed to David Gleicher (3, 4), which we can use
to decide if an organization is ready for change:
Dissatisfaction x Vision x First Steps > Resistance to Change
This means that three components must all be present to overcome the
resistance to change in an organization: Dissatisfaction with the
present situation, a vision of what is possible in the future, and
achievable first steps towards reaching this vision. If any of the
three is zero or near zero, the product will also be zero or near
zero and the resistance to change will dominate.

We use this model as an easy, quick diagnostic aid to decide if change is possible.
OD can bring approaches to the organization that will enable these three
components to surface, so we can begin the process of change.

OD IS A PROCESS

Action Research is a process which serves as a model for most OD

interventions. French and Bell (5) describe Action Research as a
"process of systematically collecting research data about an
ongoing system relative to some objective, goal, or need of that
system; feeding these data back into the system; taking actions
by altering selected variables within the system based both on
the data and on hypotheses; and evaluating the results of actions
by collecting more data." The steps in Action Research are (6,
7):

Entry. This phase consists of marketing, i.e. finding needs for change
within an organization. It is also the time to quickly grasp the
nature of the organization, identify the appropriate decision
maker, and build a trusting relationship.
Start-up and contracting. In this step, we identify critical success factors
and the real issues, link into the organization's culture and
processes, and clarify roles for the consultant(s) and employees.
This is also the time to deal with resistance within the
organization. A formal or informal contract will define the
change process.
Assessment and diagnosis. Here we collect data in order to find the
opportunities and problems in the organization (refer to
DxVxF>R above.) For suggestions about what to look for, see the
previous article in this series, on needs assessment (8). This is
also the time for the consultant to make a diagnosis, in order to
recommend appropriate interventions.
Feedback. This two-way process serves to tell those what we found out,
based on an analysis of the data. Everyone who contributed
information should have an opportunity to learn about the
findings of the assessment process (provided there is no apparent
breach of anyone's confidentiality.) This provides an opportunity
for the organization's people to become involved in the change
process, to learn about how different parts of the organization
affect each other, and to participate in selecting appropriate
change interventions.
Action planning. In this step we will distill recommendations from the
assessment and feedback, consider alternative actions and focus
our intervention(s) on activities that have the most leverage to
effect positive change in the organization. An implementation
plan will be developed that is based on the assessment data, is
logically organized, results- oriented, measurable and rewarded.
We must plan for a participative decision-making process for the
intervention.
Intervention. Now, and only now, do we actually carry out the change
process. It is important to follow the action plan, yet remain
flexible enough to modify the process as the organization
changes and as new information emerges.
Evaluation. Successful OD must have made meaningful changes in the
performance and efficiency of the people and their organization.
We need to have an evaluation procedure to verify this success,
identify needs for new or continuing OD activities, and improve
the OD process itself to help make future interventions more
successful.
Adoption. After steps have been made to change the organization and
plans have been formulated, we follow-up by implementing
processes to insure that this remains an ongoing activity within
the organization, that commitments for action have been
obtained, and that they will be carried out.
Separation. We must recognize when it is more productive for the client
and consultant to undertake other activities, and when continued
consultation is counterproductive. We also should plan for
future contacts, to monitor the success of this change and
possibly to plan for future change activities.

It would be nice if real OD followed these steps sequentially. This rarely

happens. Instead, the consultants must be flexible and be ready
to change their strategy when necessary. Often they will have to
move back and repeat previous steps in light of new information,
new influences, or because of the changes that have already been
made.

But for successful OD to take place, all of these steps must be followed. It works best
if they are taken in the order described. And, since learning is really an iterative, not
a sequential process, we must be prepared to re-enter this process when and where
appropriate.

If you would like to know more about OD, we highly recommend the books by
Cummings and Worley (9), and by Rothwell, Sullivan and McLean (10).

WHAT'S NEXT?

In future articles in this series, we plan to discuss some of the major OD

interventions in common use today, and to classify these into
systematic categories.

WHERE YOU COME IN

TAPPI has a Training and Development Subcommittee (of the Board's

Education Committee.) Its current tasks include developing a
getting-started guide for people newly assigned to training
responsibilities in the pulp and paper industry. Join us -- contact
Clare Reagan at Tappi if you would like to get involved.
TAPPI in 1997. We are in the preliminary stages of planning for events
at future TAPPI conferences. These events will focus on
education and Human Resource Development, and may include
 a workshops on Organization Development. We invite your
participation.
Case studies. In future articles, we plan to include some case histories of
the successes (and failures) of applying OD practices in the
paper industry. If you are involved in OD and would like to join
us in this effort, please contact us.

LITERATURE CITED

1. Beckhard, R., Organization development: Strategies and models. Reading, MA:

Addison- Wesley, Reading, MA, 1969, p. 9.
2. Bennis, W., Organization development: Its nature, origin and prospects. Addison-
Wesley, Reading, MA, 1969, p. 12.
3. Beckhard, R. & Harris, R. Organizational Transitions. Addison-Wesley, Reading,
MA, 1987.
4. Jacobs, R., Real Time Strategic Change. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler
Publishers, Inc., San Francisco, 1994, p.122.
5. French, W., & Bell, C., Jr., Organization development: Behavioral science
interventions for organization improvement (4th ed), Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ, 1990, p. 99.
6. Burke, W., Organization development: Principles and practices. Boston: Little,
Brown & Co., Boston, 1982.
7. Rothwell, W., Sullivan, R., & McLean, G., "Models for Change and Steps in
Action Research", in Practicing OD: A Guide for Consultants, Pfeiffer, San
Diego, 1995, pp. 51-69.
8. Rouda, R. & Kusy, M., Jr., "Needs assessment - the first step", Tappi Journal 78
(6): 255 (1995).
9. Cummings, T.G., & Worley, C.G., Organization Development and Change, 5th
edition, West Publishing, St. Paul, 1993.
10. Rothwell, W., Sullivan, R., & McLean, G., Practicing OD: A Guide for
Consultants, Pfeiffer, San Diego, 1995.

Bob Rouda is a consultant on human resource development and process engineering,

and is a research associate and student of organization development and change
management at the University of St. Thomas. He has practiced education and training in
the paper industry for 20 years. Mitch Kusy is professor of organizational learning and
development at the University of St. Thomas, and is a practicing organization
development consultant.

other articles in this series:

1. Human Resource Development: Beyond training - a perspective on improving
organizations and people
2. Needs Assessment - the first step
3. Organization Development - the management of change (this article)
4. Career Development - personal career management and planning
5. Managing Change with Large-Scale, Real-Time Interventions
6. High Performance Training

This page is maintained by Robert Rouda.

CONTACT webmaster for information. Last update 5/4/96.