Srini : MBA/ Second Year/ organizational development and Management of change / Lessons:1-24

SLSM/1st Proof Dt 30-11-17/ F Proof Dt 03-01-18/ Pages-264+4 [Machine Proof]

347EN210
1 – 24

ANNAMALAI UNIVERSITY
DIRECTORATE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

M.B.A Human Resource Management

Second Year

ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND

MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE
LESSONS : 1 – 24

Copyright Reserved
(For Private Circulation Only)
 MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Second Year
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE

Editorial Board

Prof. Dr. E. Selvarajan

Dean
Faculty of Arts
Annamalai University
Annamalainagar.

Dr. C. Samudhra Rajakumar Dr. C. Madhavi

Professor and Head Professor and Co-ordinator
Dept. of Business Administration Business Admn. Wing. DDE
Annamalai University Annamalai University
Annamalainagar Annamalainagar

Internal
Dr. V. Velmurugan Dr. S. Arulkumar
Assistant Professor Assistant Professor
Business Admn. Wing, DDE Management Wing, DDE
Annamalai University Annamalai University
Annamalainagar Annamalainagar

External
Dr. C. Vethirajan Dr. S. Shanmugasundaram
Professor Associate Professor
School of Management Dept. of Business Administration
Alagappa University J.J. College of Engg. and Technology
Karaikudi Thanjavur

Lesson Writer
Units I - VI
Dr. M. Kamaraj
Assistant Professor
Dept. of Business Administration
Annamalai University
Annamalainagar
 i

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Second Year
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE
SYLLABUS
Unit–I
Organizational Development – History of Organizational Development – Values –
Assumptions – Beliefs in Organizational Development- Organizational Learning-
Statement of OD Ethics.
Unit–II
Theory and Management of Organizational Development – Foundations of
Organizational Development – Managing the Organizational Development Process –
Action Research and Organizational Development - OD Consulting Process - OD Action
Research.
Unit–III
Organizational Development Interventions – Team Interventions – Inter Group and
Third Party Peacemaking Interventions – Comprehensive Interventions – Structural
Interventions – Training Experiences – Ethical Issues With Interventions- Intervention
Techniques.
Unit–IV
Key Considerations and Issues in Consultancy – Client Relationships – System
Ramifications – Power, Politics and Organizational Development – Research in
Organizational Development – The Future Organizational Development- Current State of
OD (SWOT).
Unit–V
Organizational Change – Evolution, Concepts and Importance – Types of Change –
Individual, Group and Organizational Change- Reasons for Change- Origins - Beckhard
and Harris Changes formula.
Unit–VI
Dynamics of Resistance to Change – Implementation of Change – Methods and
Techniques of Overcoming Resistance to Change – Problems of Implementing Change –
Readiness of Change- Change Strategies and approaches- Change - Process.
Reference Books
1. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
2. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New Delhi., 2006.
3. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, Organisation Development: The process of Lead, University of
Denver, USA, 2013.
4. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International Edition, 2004.
Journals and Magazines
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
Web Resources
1. www.essentialtoolsseries.com/SpringboardWebApp/userfiles/file/chapter 2.pdf
2. www.apubb.ro/wp_content/uploads/2011/02/OD_suport_de_curs_masterat.pdf
3. jeritt.msu.edu/documents/TallmanWithoutAttachment.pdf
4. www.icsi.edu/does/portals/25/management of change and organizational development.pdf
5. www.cihm.leeds.ac.uk/document_downloads/perspective_on_change.pdftrs_new.jpl.nasa.g
ove/dspace/bitstream/2014/10570/1/02-2625.pdf
6. Www.Fpdl.Ro/Public/Training Manuals/OD En/En Organizational Development.Pdf
 ii

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Second Year
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE
CONDENTS
Unit Lesson Page
Name of the Title
No. No. No.
I. 1. Introduction to Organizational Development 1
2. History of Organizational Development 5
3. Values, Assumptions and beliefs in Organizational Development 11
4. Organizational Learning and OD Ethics 17
II. 5. Foundations of Organizational Development 23
6. Managing the Organizational Development Process 35
7. Action Research and Organizational Development 47
8. Organizational Development Consulting Process 53
III. 9. An Overview of OD Interventions 66
10. Team Interventions, Inter-Group and Third Party Peacemaking
79
Intervention
11. Comprehensive OD Interventions and Structural Interventions 100
12. Ethical Issues with Intervention 117
IV. 13. Key Considerations and Issues In Consultancy- Client Relationships 123
14. System Ramifications 139
15. Power, Politics and Organizational Development 151
16. Research in Organizational Development, the Future and Current
167
State of OD
V. 17. Organizational Change, Concepts, Evolution and Importance 182
18. Types of Change 200
19. Reasons for Change 211
20. Beckhard and Harris Changes Formula 217
VI. 21. Implementation of Change; Methods and Techniques of Overcoming
223
Resistance to Change
22. Readiness of Change 241
23. Change Strategies and Approaches 249
24. Change Process 259
 UNIT – I
LESSON – 1

INTRODUCTION TO ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

1.1 INTRODUCTION
Organizational Development (OD) is an organizational improvement strategy.
In the late 1950s and early 1960s, it emerged out of insights from group dynamics
and from the theory and practice of planned change. Today the field offers an
integrated framework capable of solving most of the important problems
confronting the human side of organizations.
Organizational development is about how people and organizations function
and how to get them to function better. The field is based on knowledge from
behavioural science disciplines such as psychology, social psychology, sociology,
anthropology, systems theory, organizational behaviour, organization theory and
management. OD Practitioners are consultants trained in the theory and practice of
organizational development, with knowledge from the underlying behavioural
sciences.
OD programs are long-germ, planned, sustained efforts. Such efforts begin
when a leader identifies an undesirable situation and seeks to change it. The leader
contacts an OD professional and together they explore whether organization
development suits the task at hand. If the answer is yes, they enlist others in the
organization to help design and implement the change program. The participants
develop an overall an outcome that moves the organization towards its goals. The
two major goals of OD programs are (1) to improve the functioning of individuals,
teams, and the total organization, and (2) to teach organization members how to
continuously improve their own functioning.
Organization development deals with the gamut of “people problems” and
“work system problems” in organizations: poor morale, low productivity, poor
quality, interpersonal conflict, intergroup conflict, unclear or inappropriate goals,
inappropriate leadership styles, poor team performance, inappropriate organization
structure, poorly designed tasks, inadequate response to environmental demands,
poor customer relations, inadequate alignment among the organization’s strategy,
structure, culture, and processes and the like. In short, where individuals, teams
and organizations are not realizing their potential, OD can improve the situation.
1.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About what is Organizational Development
 Meaning and various Definitions
1.3 CONTENT
1.3.1 Introduction
1.3.2 Definitions of Organizational Development
 2
1.3.3. Conclusion
1.3.1 Definitions of Organizational Development
Some early definitions of organizational development follow:
Organizational development is an effort (1) planned, (2) organization-wide, and
(3) managed from the top, to (4) increase organization effectiveness and health
through (5) planned interventions in the organization’s “processes”, using
behavioural-science knowledge (Beckhard, 1969).
Organizational development is a response to change, a complex educational
strategy intended to change the beliefs, attitudes, values, and structure of
organizations so that they can better adapt to new technologies, markets, and
challenges, and the dizzying rate of change itself (Bennis, 1969).
OD can be defined as a planned and sustained effort to apply behavioural
science for system improvement, using reflexive, self-analytic methods (Schmuck
and Miles, 1971).
Organization Development is a process of planned change – change of an
organization’s culture from one which avoids an examination of social processes
(especially decisions making, planning and communication) to one which
institutionalizes and legitimizes this examination (Burke and Hornstein, 1972).
More recent definitions of organization development are these, Organization
development is an organizational process for understanding and improving any and
all substantive processes an organization may develop for performing any task and
pursuing any objectives.... A “process for improving processes” – that is what OD
has basically sought to be for approximately 25 years (Vaill, 1989).
Organizational development is a set of behavioural science-based theories,
values, strategies and techniques aimed at the planned change of the organizational
work setting for the purpose of enhancing individual development and improving
organizational performance, through the alteration of organizational members’ on-
the-job behaviours (Porras and Robertson, 1992).
OD is “a systematic application of behavioural science knowledge to the
planned development and reinforcement of organizational strategies, structures,
and processes for improving an organisation’s effectiveness (Cummings and Worley,
1993).
Organisation development is a planned process of change in an organization’s
culture through the utilization of behavioural science technologies, research, and
theory (Burke, 1994).
The definition we have just analyzed contains the elements we believe are
important for OD. To summarize, here are the primary distinguishing
characteristics of organization development.
1. OD focuses on culture and processes.
 3
2. Specifically, OD encourages collaborating between organization leaders and
members in managing culture and processes.
3. Teams of all kinds are particularly important for accomplishing tasks and are
targets for OD activities.
4. OD focuses on the human and social side of the organization in so doing also
intervenes in the technological and structural sides.
5. Participation and involvement in problem solving and decision making by all
levels of the organization are hallmarks of OD.
6. OD focuses on total system change and views organizations as complex social
systems.
7. OD practitioners are facilitators, collaborators, and co-learners with the client
system.
8. An overarching goal is to make the client system able to solve its problems on
its own by teaching the skills and knowledge of continuous learning through
self-analytical methods. OD views organization improvement as an ongoing
process in the context of a constantly changing environment.
9. OD relies on an action research model with extensive participation by client
system members.
10. OD takes a developmental view that seeks the betterment of both individuals
and the organization. Attempting to create “win-win” solutions is standard
practice in OD programs.
1.4 REVISION POINTS
 Organizational development is about how people and organizations function
and how to get them to function better.
 OD Practitioners are consultants trained in the theory and practice of
organizational development, with knowledge from the underlying behavioural
sciences.
 The two major goals of OD programs are (1) to improve the functioning of
individuals, teams, and the total organization, and (2) to teach organization
members how to continuously improve their own functioning.
1.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Organizational Development?
2. What is a Planned Change?
3. What do you mean by System-wide change?
4. What are the major goals of OD program?
1.6 SUMMARY
Organization development deals with the gamut of “people problems” and
“work system problems” in organizations: poor morale, low productivity, poor
quality, interpersonal conflict, intergroup conflict, unclear or inappropriate goals,
inappropriate leadership styles, poor team performance, inappropriate organization
structure, poorly designed tasks, inadequate response to environmental demands,
poor customer relations, inadequate alignment among the organization’s strategy,
 4
structure, culture, and processes and the like. In short, where individuals, teams
and organizations are not realizing their potential, OD can improve the situation.
These definitions clarify the distinctive features of OD and suggest why it is
such a powerful change strategy. The participative, collaborative, problem-focused
nature of OD marshals the experience and expertise of organization members as
they work on their most important problems and opportunities in ways designed to
lead to successful outcomes.
1.7 TERMINAL EXERCISES
1. Write short note on the following
a) OD, Work Teams, OD Task Force
1.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
1.9 ASSIGNMENTS
1. Summarize and distinguishing characteristics of organization development
1.10 SUGGESTED READING
1. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
2. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
3. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
4. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
5. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
6. Journal on Organisational Development.
7. Organisational Development Journal.
8. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
1.11 LEARNING ACTIVITIES
1. Visit to different business organizations and understand the organization’s
present business conditions.
1.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, Planned Change, Win-win solutions.
H
 5
LESSON – 2

HISTORY OF ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

2.1. INTRODUCTION
The history of organizational development is rich with the contributions of
behavioural scientists and practitioners, many of whom are well known, as well as
the contributions of many people in client organizations. Even if we were aware of
all the significant contributors, which we are not, we could not do justice to the
richness of this history.
Systematic organizational development activities have a recent history and, to
see the analogy of a mangrove tree, have at least four important trunk stems. One
trunk stress consists of innovations in applying laboratory training insights to
complex organizations. A second major stem is survey research and feedback
methodology. Both stems are intertwined with a third, the emergence of action
research. Paralleling these stems, and to some extent linked, is a fourth stem – the
emergence of the Tavistock sociotechnical and socioclinical approaches. The key
actors in these stems interact with each other and are influenced by experiences
and concepts from many fields.
2.1 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About the history of Organizational Development
 The Laboratory Training
 The Survey Research and Feedback
 The Action Research
 The Socio-technical and Socio-clinical Research
2.2. CONTENT
2.2.1 History of Organizational Development
2.2.2 The Laboratory Training
2.2.3 The Survey Research and Feedback
2.2.4 The Action Research
2.2.5 The Socio-technical and Socio-clinical Research
2.2.1 History of Organizational Development
Organizational developed emerged largely from applied behavioural sciences
and has four major stems: (1) the invention of the T-group and innovations in the
application of laboratory training insights to complex organizations, (2) the
invention of survey feedback technology, (3) the emergence of action research, and
(4) the evolution of the Tavistock sociotechnical and socioclinical approaches.
2.2.2 The Laboratory Training
Laboratory training, essentially unstructured small-group situations in which
participants learn from their own actions and the group’s evolving dynamics, began
to develop about 1946 from various experiments in using discussion groups to
 6
achieve changes in behaviour in back-home situations. In particular, an Inter-
Group Relations workshop held at the State Teachers College in New Britain,
Connecticut, in the summer of 1946 influenced the emergence of laboratory
training.
Kurt Lewin had a strong background in group dynamics and influenced most
of the individuals that went on to develop the theory and practice of OD. Lewin and
his colleagues began to give feedback to group participants. Through a series of
events at the workshop of 1946, what was later to be called the “T-group” (“T”- for
training”) began to emerge. There three researchers served as leaders of “learning
groups”. Each group, in addition to group members and a leader, had an observer
who made notes about interactions among members. At the end of each day, the
observers met with the staff and reported what they had seen. At the second or
third evening session, three members of the workshop asked if they could sit in on
the reporting session, and were encouraged to do so. One woman disagreed with
the observer about the meaning of her behaviour during the day’s sessions, and a
lively discussion ensued. The three workshop members then asked to return to the
next reporting session, and, because of the lively and rich discussion. Lewin and
the staff enthusiastically agreed. By the next evening, about half of the 50-60
members of the workshop attended the feedback session. These sessions soon
became the most significant learning experiences of the conference.
In a sense, the T-group emerged from an awareness that had been growing for
a decade or more, awareness of the importance of helping groups and group leaders
focus on group and leadership processes. This growing awareness was particularly
evident in adult education and group therapy. As the use of the laboratory method
evolved stated goals of T-group experiences tended to include such statements as
(1) self insight.... (2) understanding the conditions which inhibit or facilitate group
functioning, (3) understanding interpersonal operations in groups, and (4)
developing sills for diagnosing individual, group and organizational Behaviour.
2.2.3 The Survey Research and Feedback
Survey research and feedback, a specialized form of action research
constitutes the second major step in the history of organizational development. The
history of this stem revolves around the techniques and approach developed over a
period of years by staff members at the Survey Research Center (SRC) of the
University of Michigan.
Survey research is the process of discovering the needs, feelings, and attitudes
of employees within the organization. Results of the survey research study lend
support to the idea that an intensive, group discussion procedure for utilizing the
results of an employee questionnaire survey can be an effective tool for introducing
positive change in a business organization. It may be that the effectiveness of this
method, in comparison to traditional training courses, is that it deals with the
system of human relationships as a whole (superior and subordinate can change
together) and it deals with each manager, supervisor, and employee in the context
 7
of his own job, his own problems, and his own work relationships. Once,
discovered, the information is analyzed and pulled together into a report that is
“Feedback” to management and employees. Any serious areas of employee concerns
or attitudes become areas for OD problem solving and solutions.
2.2.4 The Action Research
The natures of organizational development and of action research are quite
similar. They are both variants of applied behavioural science; they are both action
oriented; they are both data based; they both call for close collaboration between
insider and outsider; and they are both problem-solving social interventions.
Because of these characteristics, we believe a sound organizational development
program rests on an action research model.
Several examples show how action research can be used in organizational
development. Gavin conducted a comprehensive survey feedback program in a
mining company of approximately 400 employees in the south-western United
States. In several respects the OD program was a success—it was well received by
the hourly employees and many key managers; it solved many immediate problems;
and it led to numerous long-term organizational changes that increased the
effectiveness of the mine. And in several respects it was a failure—some managers
grew to distrust the consultants, which led to increasingly strained relations
between higher management and the consultant team, which led to the premature
termination of the program. But Gavin and his doctoral students had
conceptualized the project from the beginning as an action research project, not
just an OD effort using survey feedback methodology. Therefore, they
simultaneously studied the effects of the OD program, their own intervention’s
processes and dynamics, and the changing client-consultant relations over time.
The result was a rich case study fielding vital information about both research and
practice.
Shani and Eberhardt conducted an action research project designed to
improve the effectiveness of health care teams at a medical rehabilitation hospital.
Patients care was provided by teams comprised of professionals from many different
medical specialities. Some teams were more effective than others. What caused the
differences? How could less-effective teams be made more effective? As one can
imagine, the causes and conditions of health care team effectiveness are complex
and multifaceted. The expertise and cooperation of organization members were
needed to discover the causal mechanisms and to implement changes. The authors
established a “parallel organization” consisting of a steering committee to guide the
project and a study group to do the work. Shani and Eberhardt argue that such
vehicles are particularly valuable for conducting action research programs. The
parallel organization defined the data needs, conducted several iterations of
collecting data and making sense of the information, formulated hypotheses, and
suggested changes to hospital management. The action research approach
concluded Shani and Eberhardt, yields better, richer information than the usual
methods of social science research, and greater willingness to make changes.
 8
Another example of action research provided by Santalainen and Hunt, who
used a massive OD program in a Finnish banking group to gain knowledge about
how the program was used differently by high-and low performing banks. A
comprehensive, multidimensional OD program was implemented in the 80 largest
banks of the 270-bank system. The program was results management (ReMa) and
focused on teaching the banks’ top teams better strategic planning and operational
planning methods, better ways to define desired results, consensus decision
making, and better ways to meet the needs and values of employees. Although all
banks received the same training, they had wide latitude in implementing the
program. What makes this action research is that Santalainen and Hunt
researched the results of the OD program itself and at the same time gained
knowledge on organizational dynamics in general, specifically, high and low
performance.
The 18 highest-performing and 18 lowest-performing banks out of the total of
80 were examined to see how they had used the learning from the OD program. At
the end of three years the high-performing banks had made more operational
changes and fewer strategic changes. At the end of six years, the high-performing
banks had made more “deep-seated” (fundamental and significant) changes than
the low –performing banks. This action research had high payoff—knowledge about
the results of the OD intervention, and knowledge about the ingredients of high and
low performance. This particular program was an excellent of blend of action and
research.
2.2.5 The Socio-technical and Socio-clinical Research
The term socio-technical systems is largely associated with experiments that
emerged under the auspices of the Tavistock Institute in Great Britain or have
stemmed from the Tavistock approach. In recent years, additional institutions,
such as the University of Southern California, have been associated with socio-
technical systems innovations. These efforts have generally attempted to create a
better “fit” among the technology, structure and social interaction of a particular
production unit in a mine, factory, or office.
As described by Cummings and Worley, Socio-technical systems theory has
two basic premises. One is that “effective work systems must jointly optimize the
relationship between their social and technical parts”. The second premise is that
“such systems must effectively manage the boundary separating and relating them
to the environment” in such a way that effective exchanges occur with the
environment along with protection from external disruptions. Furthermore, the
implementation of Socio-Technical is seen as “high participative” involving all of the
relevant stakeholders, including employees, engineers, staff experts, and managers.
The socio-technical area of OD focuses on restructuring the work within the
organization. We refer to this as “redesign” of work systems, “total quality”, “self-
directed work teams,” and “reengineering”.
 9
2.3 CONCLUSION
Organizational developed emerged largely from applied behavioural sciences
and has four major stems: (1) the invention of the T-group and innovations in the
application of laboratory training insights to complex organizations, (2) the
invention of survey feedback technology, (3) the emergence of action research, and
(4) the evolution of the Tavistock socio-technical and socio-clinical approaches.
2.4 REVISION POINTS
Organizational developed emerged largely from applied behavioural sciences and has four
major stems:
1. The invention of the T-group and innovations in the application of laboratory
training insights to complex organizations. The laboratory method evolved
stated goals of T-group experiences tended to include such statements as (1)
self insight.... (2) understanding the conditions which inhibit or facilitate
group functioning, (3) understanding interpersonal operations in groups, and
(4) developing sills for diagnosing individual, group and organizational
Behaviour.
2. The invention of survey feedback technology. Survey research is the process of
discovering the needs, feelings, and attitudes of employees within the
organization. Results of the survey research study lend support to the idea
that an intensive, group discussion procedure for utilizing the results of an
employee questionnaire survey can be an effective tool for introducing positive
change in a business organization.
3. The emergence of action research. The natures of organizational development
and of action research are quite similar. They are both variants of applied
behavioural science; they are both action oriented; they are both data based;
they both call for close collaboration between insider and outsider; and they
are both problem-solving social interventions.
4. The evolution of the Tavistock sociotechnical and socioclinical approaches.
The socio-technical area of OD focuses on restructuring the work within the
organization. We refer to this as “redesign” of work systems, “total quality”,
“self-directed work teams,” and “reengineering”.
2.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by The Laboratory Training?
2. What is the Survey Research and Feedback?
3. What is the Action Research?
4. Explain with an example about the socio-technical research?
2.6 SUMMARY
The field of OD is emergent in that a rapidly increasing number of behavioural
scientists and practitioners are building on the research and insights of the past as
well as rediscovering the utility of some of the earlier insights. These efforts, often
under different terminology, are now expanding and include a wide range of
organizations, types of institutions, occupational categories, and geographical
locations.
 10

2.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE

1. Write short note on the following
 Group Dynamics,
 Laboratory Training,
 Survey Research,
 Feedback,
 Action Research,
 Reengineering,
 Redesign,
 Socio-clinical Research.
2.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
2.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss in detail on the emerging of major lines in History of Organizational
Development.
2.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi., 2006.
7. Dr. Donald, L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
2.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify a traditional business organization and understand the organization’s
restructuring policies.
2.12 KEY WORDS
1. History of OD, Laboratory Training, Survey Research, Feedback on OD, Client
Collaboration, System Redesign, Reengineering.
H
 11
LESSON – 3

VALUES, ASSUMPTIONS AND BELIEFS IN ORGANIZATIONAL

DEVELOPMENT
3.1. INTRODUCTION
A set of values, assumptions, and beliefs constitutes an integral part of
organizational development, shaping the goals and methods of the field and
distinguishing OD from other improvement strategies. Most of these beliefs were
formulated early in the development of the field, and they continue to evolve as the
field itself evolves. These values and assumptions developed from research and
theory by behavioural scientists and from the experiences and observations of
practicing managers.
Definitions
A belief is a proposition about how the world works that the individual accepts
as true; it is a cognitive fact for the person.
Values are also beliefs and are defined as: “Beliefs about what is a desirable or
a good (e.g., free speech) and what is an undesirable or a bad (e.g. dishonesty).
Assumptions are beliefs that are regarded as so valuable and obviously correct
that they are taken for granted and rarely examined or questioned.
3.1 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About Values, Assumptions and Beliefs in Organizational Development
 Implications for dealing with Individuals
 Implications for dealing with Groups
 Implications for designing and Running Organizations
3.2 CONTENT
3.2.1 Values, Assumptions and Beliefs in OD
3.2.2. Implications for Dealing With Groups
3.2.3. Implications for Designing and Running Organizations
3.2.4 Conclusion
3.2.1 Values, Assumptions and Beliefs in OD
Thus, values, assumptions and beliefs are all cognitive facts or propositions,
with values being beliefs about good and bad, and assumptions being strongly held,
relatively unexamined beliefs accepted as the truth. Values, assumptions, and
beliefs provide structure and stability for people as they attempt to understand the
world around them.
OD values tend to be humanistic, optimistic, and democratic. Humanistic
values proclaim the importance of the individual: respect the whole person, treat
people with respect and dignity, assume that everyone has intrinsic worth, view all
people as having the potential for growth and development. Optimistic values posit
 12
that people are basically good, that progress is possible and desirable in human
affairs, and that rationality, reason, and goodwill are the tools for making progress.
Democratic values assert the sanctity of the individual, the right of people to be free
from arbitrary misuse of power, the importance of fair and equitable treatment for
all, and the need for justice through the rule of law and due process.
Evidence for the validity of these values and their supporting assumptions
comes from many sources—the Hawthorne studies, the human relations
movement, the laboratory training movement, the clash between fascism and
democracy in World War II, increasing awareness of the dysfunctions of
bureaucracies, research on the effects of different leadership styles, greater
understanding of individual motivation and group dynamics, and the like.
Values and assumptions do not spring full grown from individuals or societies;
they are formed from the collective beliefs of an era—the zeitgeist, or spirit of the
time. Major ingredients of the zeitgeist that influenced OD values and assumptions
are presented here in a brief chronology. As these ingredients accumulated, they
were fashioned into a coherent value foundation for the theory and practice of
organizational development.
Several assumptions about the nature and functioning of organizations held
by OD practitioners. These are:
1. The basic building blocks of an organization are groups (teams). Therefore, the
basic units of change are groups, not individuals.
2. An always relevant change goal is the reduction of inappropriate competition
between parts of the organization and the development of a more collaborative
condition.
3. Decision making in a healthy organization is located where the information
sources are, rather than in a particular role or level of hierarchy.
4. Organizations, subunits of organizations, and individuals continuously
manage their affairs against goals. Controls are interim measurements, not
the basis of managerial strategy.
5. One goal of a healthy organization is to develop generally open
communication, mutual trust and confidence between and across levels.
6. People support what they help create. People affected by a change must be
allowed active participation and a sense of ownership in the planning and
conduct of the change.
3.2.1. Implications for Dealing with Individuals
Two basic assumptions about individuals in organizations pervade
organizational development. The first assumption is that most individuals have
drives toward personal growth and development if provided an environment that is
both supportive and challenging. Most people want to develop their potential. The
second assumption is that most people desire to make and are capable of making a
greater contribution to attaining organization goals than most organizational
environments permit. A tremendous amount of constructive energy can be tapped if
 13
organizations realize and act on these assumptions. The people doing the work are
generally experts on how to do it—and how to do it better. The implications of these
two assumptions are straightforward: ask, listen, support, challenge, encourage
risk taking, permit failure, remove obstacles and barriers, give autonomy, give
responsibility, set high standards, and reward success.
3.2.2. Implications for Dealing with Groups
Several assumptions relate to the importance of work teams and the
collaborative management of team culture. First, one of the most psychologically
relevant reference groups for most people is the work group, including peers and
boss. What occurs in the work group, at both the formal and informal levels, greatly
influences feelings of satisfaction and competence. Second, most people wish to be
accepted and to interact cooperatively with at least one small reference group, and
usually with more than one group, such as a work group, the family, a church or
club group, and so on. Third, most people are capable of making greater
contributions to a group’s effectiveness and development. Implications of these
assumptions are several.
Let teams flourish because they are often the best way to get work done, and
in addition, are the best way to satisfy social and emotional needs at work. Also,
leaders should invest in groups: Invest the time required for group development,
invest training time and money to increase group members’ skills, invest energy
and intelligence in creating a positive climate. It is especially important that leaders
adopt a team leadership style, not a one-on-one leadership style. To do this, leaders
need to give important work to teams, not individuals.
Another assumption is that the formal leader cannot perform all the leadership
and maintenance functions required for a group to optimize its effectiveness.
Hence, group members should assist the leader with the multiple roles required for
group effectiveness. One implication is that group members should receive training
group effectiveness skills such as group problem solving and decision making,
conflict management, facilitation, and interpersonal communication. And because
suppressed feelings and attitudes adversely affect problem solving, personal
growth, and job satisfaction, group members should be encouraged to learn to deal
effectively with positive and negative feelings. This skill is a trainable one. Dealing
appropriately with feelings and attitudes increases the level of interpersonal trust,
support, and cooperation within the group.
Finally, the assumption is that many attitudinal and motivational problems in
organizations require interactive and transactional solutions. Such problems have
the greatest chance of constructive solution if all parties in the system alter their
mutual relationships. By implication, this group perspective requires a shift from
viewing problems as “within the problem person” to viewing problems and solutions
as transactional and as embedded in a system.
 14
3.2.3. Implications for Designing and Running Organizations
Clearly, traditional hierarchical forms of organization—fairly steep pyramid,
emphasis on top-down directives, grouping by specialized function, adherence to
the chain of command, formalized cross-functional communication, and so on—are
obsolete. The cannot meet the demands of the marketplace. Therefore,
experimenting with new organization structures and new forms of authority is
imperative. In addition, a growing awareness that “win-lose” organizational
situations, in which one side wins and the other side loses, are dysfunctional over
the long run and highlight the need for a “win-win” attitude. Creating cooperative
rather than competitive organizational dynamics is a primary task of the
organization’s leaders.
A key assumption in organization development is that the needs and
aspirations of human beings are the reasons for organized effort in society. This
notion suggests it is good to have a developmental outlook and seek opportunities
in which people can experience personal and professional growth. Such an
orientation creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. The belief that people are important
tends to result in their being important. The belief that people can grow and
develop in terms of personal and organizational competency tends to produce that
result. By implication, an optimistic, developmental set of assumptions about
people is likely to reap rewards beneficial to both the organization and its members.
Finally, it is possible to create organizations that on the one hand are humane,
developmental, and empowering, and on the other hand are high performing in
terms of productivity, quality of output, and profitability. Evidence for this
assumption comes from numerous examples where “putting people first” paid off
handsomely in profits and performance. The implication is that people are an
organization’s most important resource; they are the source of productivity and
profits and should be treated with care.
3.2.4 Conclusion
The field of organizational development rests on a foundation of values and
assumptions about people and organizations. These beliefs help to define what OD
is and guide its implementation. This discussion was intended to articulate an
appreciation of OD values and explain where they came from. These OD values
were considered revolutionary when they emerged in the 1950s, but are widely
accepted today.
3.4. REVISION POINTS
1. Values and assumptions do not spring full grown from individuals or societies;
they are formed from the collective beliefs of an era—the zeitgeist, or spirit of
the time. Major ingredients of the zeitgeist that influenced OD values and
assumptions are presented here in a brief chronology. As these ingredients
accumulated, they were fashioned into a coherent value foundation for the
theory and practice of organizational development.
 15
2. The implications of the two assumptions are straightforward: ask, listen,
support, challenge, encourage risk taking, permit failure, remove obstacles
and barriers, give autonomy, give responsibility, set high standards, and
reward success.
3. The assumption is that many attitudinal and motivational problems in
organizations require interactive and transactional solutions. Such problems
have the greatest chance of constructive solution if all parties in the system
alter their mutual relationships. By implication, this group perspective
requires a shift from viewing problems as “within the problem person” to
viewing problems and solutions as transactional and as embedded in a
system.
4. It is possible to create organizations that on the one hand are humane,
developmental, and empowering, and on the other hand are high performing
in terms of productivity, quality of output, and profitability. Evidence for this
assumption comes from numerous examples where “putting people first” paid
off handsomely in profits and performance. The implication is that people are
an organization’s most important resource; they are the source of productivity
and profits and should be treated with care.
3.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. Define Values of an Organization?
2. What are general assumptions in the field of OD?
3. What do you mean by Beliefs in OD?
4. What are the major implications for designing and running organizations?
3.6 SUMMARY
Values, assumptions, and beliefs are all cognitive facts or propositions, with
values being beliefs about good and bad, and assumptions being strongly held,
relatively unexamined beliefs accepted as the truth. Values, assumptions and
beliefs provide structure and stability for people as they attempt to understand the
world around them.
3.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:
i) Values, ii) Assumptions, iii) Beliefs
3.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
3.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss the major implications for dealing with Groups and Individuals in an
Organization.
3.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
 16
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
3.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify the Values Assumptions and Beliefs in Organizational Development in
the field of Business Administration.
3.12 KEY WORDS
1. Values, Assumptions, Beliefs, OD
H
 17
LESSON – 4

ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING AND OD ETHICS

4.1 INTRODUCTION
A study on organizational development will remain incomplete without
studying learning. If a manager wants to explain and predict human behaviour,
he/she needs to understand how learning occurs or how people learn. Therefore the
purpose of this lesson is to discuss the organizational learning and OD ethics.
Meaning and Definition:
Learning is a change in behaviour as a result of experience. Different
psychologists and behavioural scientists have defined learning differently. Given
below are a few important definitions of learning.
According to Stephen P. Robbins, “Learning is any relatively permanent
change in behaviour that occurs as a result of experience”.
Munn et al. Have defined learning as “The process of having one’s behaviour
modified, more or less permanently, by what he does and the consequences of his
action, or by what he observes”.
In the opinion of Steers and Porter, “Learning can be defined as relatively
permanent change in behaviour potentiality that results from reinforced practice or
experience.”
Now, on an overall basis, learning can be defined as a change in behaviour
acquired through experience.
4.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About what is Organizational Learning
 Determinants of Learning
 OD Ethics
4.3 CONTENT
4.3.1 Determinants of Learning
4.3.2 Learning and Organizational Development
4.3.3 Organizational Development Ethics
4.3.4 Conclusion
4.3.1 Determinants of Learning
Now, let us understand what determines change in behaviour i.e., learning.
The important factors that determine learning are motive, stimuli, response,
reinforcement, and retention. A brief description of these follows:
Motive: Motives also called drives prompt people to action. They are the
primary energisers of behaviour. They are the ways of behaviour and mainsprings
of active. They are largely subjective and represent the mental feelings of human
 18
beings. They are cognitive variables. They arise continuously and determine the
general direction of an individual’s behaviour.
Stimuli: Stimuli are objects that exist in the environment in which a person
lives. Stimuli increase the probability of eliciting a specific response from a person.
Viewed from this angle, stimuli may be of two types: generalization and
discrimination.
Generalisation: The principle of generalisation has important implications for
human learning. Generalization takes place when the similar new stimuli repeat in
the environment. When two stimuli are exactly alike, they will have probability to
elicit a specific response. It makes possible for a manager to predict human
behaviour when stimuli are exactly alike. However, the negative implication of
generalization is that the manager may make false inferences and conclusions
based on the principle of generalization.
Discrimination: What is not generalization is discrimination. In case of
discrimination, responses vary to different stimuli. For example, an MBA student
may learn to respond to video teaching but not to the oral lecturing by his
professor. Discrimination has wide applications in organizational behaviour in view
of individual differences in various aspects. For example, a supervisor may respond
to a high producing worker in a positive manner, but in a different manner to one
producing very less.
Responses: The stimulus results in responses-be these in the physical form or
in terms of attitudes or perception or in the other phenomena. However, the
responses need to be operationally defined and preferably physically observable.
Reinforcement: Reinforcement is a fundamental conditioning of learning.
Reinforcement can be defined as anything that both increases the strength of
response and tends to induce repetitions of the behaviour that preceded the
reinforcement. No measurable modification of behaviour can take place without
reinforcement.
Retention: Retention means remembrance of learned behaviour over time.
Converse is forgetting. Learning which is forgotten over time is called ‘extinction’.
When the response strength returns after extinction without any intervening
reinforcement, it is called ‘spontaneous recovery’.
4.3.2 Learning and Organizational Development
Learning is therefore, considered vital for understanding human behaviour at
working in organizations. Let us try to understand in a more orderly manner how
learning helps managers change human behaviour in different organizational
situations, such as reducing, absenteeism, substituting well-pay for sick-pay,
improving employees’ discipline and developing training programme for the
employees. These are discussed one by one.
Reducing Absenteeism through Learning: Learning can help managers
evolve programmes to reduce absenteeism. An example of such a programme may
 19
be rewarding employees for their satisfactory attendance. The management of a
private software enterprise introduced lottery system to reward its employees with
attractive prizes. Only employees with perfect attendance were eligible to contest for
prizes. This lottery programme has a rousing success as it resulted in lower
absence rates (about 30 per cent) among the employees.
Substituting Well-pay for Sick-pay: Paid sick leave is one of the fringe
benefits provided to salaried employees by most of the organizations including
universities. However, research studies indicate that paid sick leave programmes
reinforce the undesirable behaviour, i.e., absence from work. The reality is that
employees use sick leaves all up, regardless of whether they are sick. As a
consequence, organizations that provide paid sick leave experience quite more the
absenteeism than organizations that do not provide paid sick leave. As a matter of
fact, organizations should reward attendance not absence. This calls for
substituting well-pay for sick-pay. Hence, organisations should reward an employee
in the form of bonus for remaining no absent from work for a definite period of
time. There are researches that report that well-pay produced reduced absenteeism,
increased productivity, and improved employee satisfaction.
Improving Employee Discipline: Managers, at times, have to deal with
employees’ undesirable behaviour, such as drinking at work place, insubordination,
stealing company property, arriving continuously late, etc. Usually managers
respond to these with punishment like oral reprimands, written warnings, and even
suspension. As mentioned earlier, punishment, however, provides only a short-term
solution and has ill-effects on employee punished. Evidences suggest that discipline
produces results in short-run. In this lies the importance of fostering discipline in
organizations. Learning helps the managers how to more effectively implement
disciplinary actions so as to promote employee discipline. The managerial
behaviours such as to respond immediately, provide time, state the problem
specifically, allow the employee to explain his/her position, keep discussion
impersonal, be consistent, take progressive action and obtain consensus agreement
on change, if any, help the managers to more effectively implement disciplinary
actions.
Developing Training Programmes: Learning also helps managers develop
effective training programmes. Particularly, social-learning theory serves as a guide
for this purpose. It suggests the organizer-managers that the training programme
should offer a model to grab the trainee’s attention, provide required motivational
properties, provide adequate opportunities to practice the new behaviours, and also
offer due rewards to the employees for accomplishment of tasks. In case of off-the-
job training, the model should also allow the trainee some opportunity to transfer
what he/she has learned to the job.
4.3.3 Organizational Development Ethics
Louis White and Kevin Wooten see five categories of ethical dilemmas in
organizational development practice stemming from the actions of either the
 20
consultant or client or both. The types of ethical dilemmas they see are: (1)
misrepresentation and collusion, (2) misuse of data, (3) manipulation and coercion,
(4) value and goal conflicts, and (5) technical ineptness. Some of these areas apply
not only to OD consulting, but to management consulting in general.
Misrepresentation of the Consultant’s Skills: An obvious area for unethical
behaviour would be to distort or misrepresent one’s background, training,
competencies, or experience in vita sheets, advertising, or conversation. A subtle
form of misrepresentation would be to let the client assume one has certain skills
when one does not.
Misuse of Data: The possibilities of unethical behaviour in the form of data
misuse on the part of either the client or the consultant are abundant. This is why
confidentiality is so important in OD efforts. Data can be used to punish or
otherwise harm persons or groups. An obvious example would be a consultant’s
disclosure to the boss the names of those who provided information about the
boss’s dysfunctional behaviour. Another example would be showing climate survey
results from Department A to the head of Department B without Department A’s
authorization.
Serious distortions of the data would also be unethical. Let’s imagine a
scenario in which the consultant interviews the top 20 members of management
and finds several department heads are angry about the behaviours of the fellow
department head Z and the practices in Z’s department. Further, Z is hostile and
uncooperative with the consultant in the data-gathering interview. The consultant
is now angry but is not conscious of the extent of the angry. When the consultant
feeds back the themes from the interviews to the group, his or her anger takes the
form of overstating and overemphasizing the dysfunctional aspects of Z’s unit.
Manipulation and Coercion: It is unethical to force organizational members
into settings where they are, in effect, required to disclose information about
themselves or their units which they prefer to keep private. The creation of a T-
group with unwilling participants would be an example.

A troublesome dilemma occurs in the case of a manager and most of his

or her subordinates who want to go off-site for a problem-solving
workshop but one or two members are strongly resisting. If friendly
persuasion and addressing the concerns of the individual(s) – not painful
arm-twisting—do not solve the matter, perhaps a reasonable option is for
the manager to indicate that nonparticipation is acceptable and that no
one will be subject to recriminations, but those individuals should
understand that the group will go ahead and try to reach consensus on
action plans for unit improvement without their input.
Deception and Conflict of Values: Deception in any form is unethical and
will destroy trust. If an organization that embarked on a major reengineering effort
after giving assurances of job security, and they proceeded to lay—off a huge part of
 21
the workforce, the layoffs came after the company had promoted team-work and
empowerment and secured employee cooperation in streamlining operations. For
OD professional on the scene under such circumstances, the ethical course of
action would be to press top management to look at the probable consequences of
re-engineering, to look at possible options, and to be completely open with employee
about the implications of whatever change strategy was selected. And the ethical
responsibilities of the OD professional and company management extend, of course,
to mitigating the impact of any change effort on the lives of individual employees.
4.3.4 Conclusion
Learning is a relatively permanent change acquired through experience.
Different processes are involved in learning. Learning theories help managers
modify employee behaviour by applying these two different situations such as
reducing absenteeism, substituting well-pay for sick-pay, improving employee
discipline, developing training programmes, and others. The values underlying
ethical OD practice are honesty, openness, voluntarism, integrity, confidentiality,
the development of people, and the development of consultant expertise, high
standards, and self-awareness.
4.4 REVISION POINTS
1. Learning is a change in behaviour as a result of experience.
2. The important factors that determine learning are motive, stimuli, response,
reinforcement, and retention.
3. Learning helps managers change human behaviour in different organizational
situations, such as reducing, absenteeism, substituting well-pay for sick-pay,
improving employees’ discipline and developing training programme for the
employees.
4. Louis White and Kevin Wooten see five categories of ethical dilemmas in
organizational development practice stemming from the actions of either the
consultant or client or both. The types of ethical dilemmas they see are: (1)
misrepresentation and collusion, (2) misuse of data, (3) manipulation and
coercion, (4) value and goal conflicts, and (5) technical ineptness. Some of
these areas apply not only to OD consulting, but to management consulting in
general.
4.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Organizational Learning?
2. What are the determinants of OD?
3. What do you mean by Ethics in OD?
4. What are the ethical dilemmas?
4.6 SUMMARY
Learning is a change in behaviour as a result of experience. Different
psychologists and behavioural scientists have defined learning differently. In this
lesson we understand what determines change in behaviour learning. Learning is
 22
also considered vital for understanding human behaviour at working in
organizations.
4.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:
i) Determinants of Learning,
ii) Relationship between Learning and OD,
iii) Ethics in OD
4.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization
Development & Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
4.9 ASSIGNMENT QUESTIONS
1. Discuss in detail on the various determinants of Organizational Learning.
4.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi., 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co.,
International Edition, 2004.
4.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Understand about how Organizational Learning helps in Organizational
Development in different business organizations.
4.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Learning, Ethics in OD, Determinants of Learning.
H
 23
UNIT – II
LESSON – 5

FOUNDATIONS OF ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

5.1 INTRODUCTION
This lesson describes the foundations of organizational development theory
and practice which form the knowledge base upon which OD is constructed.
Leaders and OD practitioners use this knowledge base to plan and implement
effective change programs.
In this lesson you will learn what OD practitioners think and how they think
as they engage in the complicated task of improving organizational functioning. The
knowledge base of OD is extensive and is constantly growing. Here we discuss what
we believe are the most important underpinnings for the field.
The following concepts we will discuss in this lesson:
 Models and theories of planned changed
 Systems Theory
 Participation and Empowerment
 Teams and Teamwork
 Parallel Learning Structures
 A normative-reeducative Strategy of Changing
 Applied Behavioural Science
 Action Research
5.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About what are Foundations of Organizational
 Models and theories of Planned Change
 Parallel Learning Structures
5.3 CONTENT
5.3.1 Models and Theories of Planned Change
5.3.2 Systems Theory
5.3.3 Participation and Empowerment
5.3.4 Teams and Teamwork
5.3.5 Parallel Learning Structures
5.3.6 A normative-Reeducative Strategy of Changing
5.3.7 Applied Behavioural Science
5.3.8 Action Research
5.3.9 Conclusion
5.3.1 Models and theories of Planned Change
Organizational development is planned change in an organizational context.
The development of models of planned change facilitated the development of OD.
Models and theories depict, in words or pictures, the important features of some
phenomenon, describe those features as variables, and specify the relationships
 24
among the variables. Planned change theories are rudimentary as far as explaining
relationships among variables, but pretty good for identifying the important
variables involved. Several recent theories show great promise for increasing our
understanding of what happens and how it happens in planned change. In this
lesson, a framework for thinking about planned change by exploring Kurt Lewin for
our understanding.
Kurt Lewin’s Model
Kurt Lewin introduced two ideas about change that have been influential since
the 1940s’. The first idea states that what is occurring at any point in time is a
resultant in a field of opposing forces. That is the status quo—whatever is
happening right now—is the result of forces pushing in opposing directions. For
example, we can think of the production level of a manufacturing plant as a
resultant equilibrium point in a field of forces, with come forces pushing toward
higher levels of production and some forces pushing toward lower levels of
production. The production level tends to remain fairly constant because the field of
forces remain fairly constant. Likewise, we can think of the level of morale in that
plant as a resultant equilibrium point. Although morale may get a little better or a
little worse on occasion, it generally hovers around some equilibrium point that is
the resultant in a field of forces, some forces pushing toward higher morale, and
some pushing toward lower morale. “With a technique called the force-field
analysis, we can identify the major forces that make up the field of forces and then
develop action plans for moving the equilibrium point in one direction or the other.
This concept is useful for thinking about the dynamics of change situations.
Lewin’s second idea was a model of the change process itself. He suggested
that change is a three-stage process: Unfreezing the old behaviour (or situation),
moving to a new level of behaviour, and refreezing the behaviour at the new level.
Change entails moving from one equilibrium point to another. Take the example of
a man who smokes cigarettes and wants to quit. The three-state model says he
must first unfreeze the old behaviour of smoking, that is believe that cigarette
smoking is bad for him and that he should stop smoking. Next, he must move, that
is, change his behaviour from being a smoker to being a non-smoker. Finally, the
non-smoking behaviour must become permanent—not smoking becomes the new
equilibrium point. Refreezing the desired behaviour requires establishing a new
field of forces to support the new behaviour.
Lewin’s three-stage model is a powerful tool for understanding change
situations. Edgar Schein took this excellent idea and improved it by specifying the
psychological mechanisms involved in each stage, as shown in Table 5.1.
In Stage-1, unfreezing, disconfirmation creates pain and discomfort, which
cause guilt and anxiety, which motivate the person to change. But unless the
person feels comfortable with dropping the old behaviours and acquiring new ones,
change will not occur. That is, the person must develop a sense of psychological
safety in order to replace the old behaviours with new behaviours.
 25
Table 5-1: A Three-State Model of the Change Process
Stage – 1 Unfreezing: Creating motivation and readiness to change through
a. Disconfirmation or lack of confirmation
b. Creation of guilt or anxiety
c. Provision of psychological safety
Stage – 2 Changing through Cognitive Restructuring: Helping the client to see
things, judge things, feel things, and react to things differently based on
a new point of view obtained through
a. Identifying with a new role model, mentor, etc.
b. Scanning the environment for new relevant information
Stage – 3 Refreezing: Helping the client to integrate the new point of view into
a. The total personality and self-concept
b. Significant relationships
In stage – 2, Moving / Change, the person undergoes cognitive restructuring.
The person acquires information and evidence showing that the change is desirable
and possible. This motivating evidence is gained by, for example, identifying with
ex-smokers and learning about the health risks of smoking.
The primary task in state 3, refreezing, is to integrate the new behaviours into
the person’s personality and attitudes. That is, stabilizing the change requires
testing to see if they fit-fit with the individual, and fit with the individual’s social
environment – do these significant others approve of the changes.
Another modification of Lewin’s model was proposed by Ronald Lippitt, Jeanne
Watson, and Bruce Westley. They expanded the three-state model into a seven-
stage model representing the consulting process. Their seven stages are as follows:
A Three-State Model of the Change Process
Phase – 1 Developing a need for change. This phase corresponds to Lewin’s
unfreezing phase.
Phase – 2 Establishing a change relationship. In this phase a client system in need
of help and a change agent from outside the system establish a working
relationship.
Phase – 3 Clarifying or diagnosing the client system’s problem.
Phase – 4 Examining alternative routes and goals; establishing goals and
intentions of action.
Phase – 5 Transforming intentions into actual change efforts. Phases 3, 4 and 5
correspond to Lewin’s moving phase.
Phase – 6 Generalizing and stabilizing change. This phase corresponds to Lewin’s
refreezing phase.
Phase – 7 Achieving a terminal relationship, that is terminating the client-
consultant relationship.
This seven-stage model lays out the logical steps involved in OD consulting.
Similar models have been developed by Kolb and Frohman and by Burke. These
road maps are useful for thinking about change.
 26
5.3.2 Systems Theory
A second foundation of organizational development is a systems theory, which
views organizations as open systems in active exchange with their environments.
This section explains systems theory, describes the characteristics of systems.
Ludwig von Bertalanffy first articulated the principles of general systems
theory in 1950s, and Katz and Kahn were the first to apply open systems theory to
organizations in 1966. Systems theory is one of the most powerful conceptual tools
available for understanding the dynamics of organizations and organizational
change. To summarize, system denotes interdependency, interconnectedness, and
interrelatedness among elements in a set that constitutes an identifiable whole or
gestalt.
The Nature of Systems
The nature, dynamics, and characteristics of open systems are well known.
Organizations are open systems. Therefore, studying open systems leads to a good
understanding of organizations. All open systems are input-throughout-output
mechanisms. Systems take inputs from the environment in the form of energy,
information, money, people, raw materials and so on. They do something to the
inputs via throughout, conversion, or transformation processes that changer the
inputs; and they export products to the environment in the form of outputs. Each
of these three system processes must work well if the system to be effective and
survive.
Every system delineated by a boundary. What is inside the boundary is the
system, and what is outside the boundary is the environment. A good rule of thumb
for drawing the boundary is that more energy exchange occurs within the boundary
than across the boundary than across the boundary. Boundaries of open systems
are permeable, in that they permit exchange of information, resources, and energy
between system and environment.
Open systems have purposes and goals, the reasons for their existence. These
purposes must align with purposes or needs in the environment. For example, the
organization’s purposes will be reflected in its outputs, and if the environment does
not want these outputs, the organization will cease to exist. Information is the
important to systems in several ways. Feedback is information from negative and
positive. Hanna writes, Negative feedback measures whether or not the output is
one course with the purpose and goals. It is also known as deviation-correcting
feedback.... Positive feedback measures whether or not the purpose and goals are
aligned with environmental needs.
Congruence among System Elements
Davis Nadler and associates at Delta consulting group developed the
congruence model for understanding organizational dynamic and change.
According to this model, there are three major input factors are (1) the environment,
which imposes constraints and opportunities about what the organization can and
cannot do; (2) resources available to the organization, such as capital, people,
 27
knowledge and technology; and (3) history, which consists of memories of past
successes, failures, important events, and critical decisions that still influence
behaviour today. Outputs are performance at the total organization level,
unit/group level, and individual level. Elements of the organization are labelled
strategy, what the organization is trying to accomplish and how it plans to do it;
work, the tasks people perform to create products and service markets, people,
which includes skills, knowledge, perceptions, and the workforce’s expectations,
formal organization, which includes formal structures, processes, and systems for
performing the work; and informal organization, which includes the organization’s
culture, informal rules and understandings, and how things really work

Figure 5.1: Congruence Model showing the Organization as a System

The congruence model’s value is as an analytical tool for (1) assessing the
characteristics and functioning of each of the elements, and (2) evaluating the
“goodness of fit” or how well the elements “go together”. The premise is that
alignment must be present among the system’s components for the organization to
produce satisfactory outputs. For example, if people don’t have the skills and
knowledge required to do the work, performance will suffer. If the strategy calls for
entrepreneurial quickness and risk-taking and the formal organization is
bureaucratic and highly centralized, performance will suffer. If the organization’s
culture (informal organization) praises individual accomplishments and the work
requires teamwork and collaboration, performance will suffer.
Sociotechnical Systems Theory and Open Systems Planning
Two major variations of open systems theory – sociotechnical systems theory
and open systems planning – play an especially important role in organizational
development. To achieve high productivity and employee satisfaction, organizations
must optimize both systems. Sociotechnical systems is the principal conceptual
foundation for efforts in work redesign and organization restructuring, two active
segments of OD today.
 28
A number of design principles have been developed to implement
sociotechnical systems theory. Principles such as optimizing the social and
technical systems, forming autonomous work groups, training group members in
multiple skills, giving information and feedback to the people doing the work, and
identifying core tasks help sociotechnical systems consultants structure
organizations and tasks for maximum effectiveness and efficiency. High-
performance organizations almost always use principles fro sociotechnical systems
theory, especially autonomous work groups (self-regulated teams or self-directed
teams), multiskilled teams, controlling variance at the source, and information to
the point of action, that is to the workers doing the job.
Open systems planning entails (1) scanning the environment to determine the
expectations of external organizations and stakeholders; (2) developing scenarios of
possible futures, both realistic (likely to happen if the organization continues on its
current course) and ideal (what the organization would like to see happen); and (3)
developing action plans to ensure that a desirable future occurs. Most OD
practitioners engage in redesign projects use a combination of sociotechnical
systems theory and open systems planning. For example, this combination is often
used in designing high-performance organizations.
To sum-up, systems theory pervades the theory and practice of organizational
development, from diagnosis to intervention to evaluation. Viewing organizations
from this perspective has several consequences. Issues, events, forces, and
incidents are not viewed as isolated phenomena, but seen in relation to other
issues, events, and forces; Most phenomena have more than once cause, a system
approach encourages analysis of events in terms of multiple causation rather than
single causation; Changing one part of a system influences other parts; therefore,
OD practitioners expect multiple effects, not single effects from their activities.
According to field theory (Kurt Lewin), the forces in the field at the time of the event
are the relevant forces for analysis. This idea moves the practitioner away from
analyzing historical events, and toward examining contemporary events and forces.
5.3.3 Participation and Empowerment
One of the most important foundations of organizational development is a
participation / empowerment model. Participation in OD programs is not restricted
to elites or the top people; it is extended broadly throughout the organization.
Increased participation and empowerment have always been central goals and
fundamental values of the field. These pillars of OD practice are validated by both
research and practice.
Research on group dynamics began in the 1940s and achieved exponential
growth in the 1950s and 1960s. This research demonstrated that most people
desire increased involvement and participation. Further, involvement and
participation energize greater performance, produce better solutions to problems,
and greatly enhance acceptance of decisions. Researchers found that group
dynamics work to overcome resistance to change, increase commitment to the
 29
organization, reduce stress levels, and generally make people feel better about
themselves and their worlds. Participation is a powerful elixir—it is good for people
and performance.
To empower is to give someone power, which is done by giving individuals the
authority to make decisions, to contribute their ideas, to exert influence, and to be
responsible. Participation is an especially effective form of empowerment.
Participation enhances empowerment, and empowerment in turn enhances
performance and individual well-being.
OD interventions are deliberately designed to increase involvement and
participation by organization leaders and members. For example, autonomous work
groups, quality circles, team building, survey feedback, quality of work life
programs, search conferences, and the culture audit are all predicated on the belief
that increased participation will lead to better solutions. Rules of thumb such as
involve all those who are part of the problem, direct leaders to push decision
making lower in the organization, treat those closest to the problem as the relevant
experts, and give more power to more people. OD interventions are basically
methods for increasing participation. The entire field of OD is about empowerment.
5.3.4 Teams and Teamwork
A fundamental belief in organizational development is that work teams are the
building blocks of organizations. A second fundamental belief is that teams must
manage their culture, processes, systems, and relationships if they are to be
effective. Theory, research, and practice attest to the central role tams play in
organizational success. Teams and teamwork are part of the foundation of
organizational development.
Teams are important for a number of reasons. First, much individual
behaviour is rooted in the sociocultural norms and values of the work team. If the
team, as a team changes those norms and values, the effects on individual
behaviour are immediate and lasting. Second, many tasks are so complex they
cannot be performed by individuals; people must work together to accomplish
them. Third, teams create synergy, that is the sum of the efforts of team members
is far greater than the sum of the individual efforts of people working alone.
Synergy is a principal reason teams are so important. Fourth, teams satisfy
people’s needs for social interaction, status, recognition, and respect – teams
nurture human nature. In this section, we examine the potential of teams and
teamwork, and explore ways to realize that potential.
A number of OD interventions are specifically designed to improve team
performance. Examples are team building, intergroup team building, process
consultation, quality circles, parallel learning structures, sociotechnical systems
programs, Grid OD, and techniques such as role analysis technique, role
negotiation technique, and responsibility charting. These interventions apply to
formal work teams as well as start-up teams, cross-functional teams, temporary
teams, and the like.
 30
Team-building activities are now a way of life for many organizations. Teams
periodically hold team-building meetings, people are trained in group dynamics and
group problem-solving skills, and individuals are trained as group leaders and
group facilitators. Organizations using autonomous work groups or self-directed
teams devote considerable time and effort to ensure that team members possess the
skills to be effective in groups. The net effect is that teams perform at increasingly
higher levels, that they achieve synergy, and that teamwork becomes more
satisfying for team members.
Investigators are discovering why some teams are successful while others are
not. Larson and LaFasto studied a number of high-performance teams, including
collegiate football national champions, heart transplant surgical teams, the crew of
the USS Kitty Hawk, and others, to determine the characteristics that make them
successful. Larson and LaFasto found eight characteristics always present: (1) a
clear, elevating goals; (2) a results-driven structure; (3) competent team members;
(4) unified commitment; (5) a collaborative climate; (6) standards of excellence; (7)
external support and recognition; and (8) principled leadership. All these
characteristics are required for superior team performance; when any one feature is
lost, team performance declines. High-performance teams regulate the behaviour of
team members, help each other, find innovative ways around barriers, and set ever-
higher goals.
Teams have always been an important foundation of OD, but there is a
growing awareness of the teams’ unique ability to create synergy, respond quickly
and flexibly to problems, find new ways to get the job done, and satisfy social needs
in the work place.
5.3.5 Parallel Learning Structures
Parallel learning structures, specially created organizational structures for
planning and guiding change programs, constitute another important foundation of
organization development. Dale Zand introduced this concept in 1974 under the
label collateral organization and defined it as “a supplemental organization
coexisting with the usual formal organization”. The purpose of the collateral
organization is to deal with “ill-structured” problems the formal organization is
unable to resolve. Considerable experimentation with collateral organizations
occurred in the 1970s and 1980s.
A parallel learning structure as a generic label to cover interventions where: (a)
a structure (that is a specific division and coordination of labour) is created that (b)
operates ‘parallel’ (that is, tandem or side-by-side) with the formal hierarchy and
structure and (c) has the purpose of increasing an organization’s learning (that is
the creation and/or implementation of new thoughts and behaviours by employees).
In its most basic form, a parallel learning structure consists of a steering committee
and a number of working groups that study what changes are needed, make
recommendations for improvement, and monitor the change efforts. Additional
refinements include having a steering committee plus idea groups, action groups,
 31
work groups, or implementation groups, with the groups serving specific functions
designated by the steering committee. The parallel structure should be a microcosm
of the larger organization, that is, it should have representatives from all parts of
the organization. One or more top executives should be members of the steering
committee to give the parallel structure authority, legitimacy, and clout.
The charge to members of the parallel learning structure is to think and
behave in ways that are different from the normal roles and rules of the
organization. Parallel structures help people break free of the normal constraints
imposed by the organization, engage in genuine inquiry and experimentation, and
initiate needed changes.
5.3.6 A Normative-Reductive Strategy of Changing
Organizational development involves change, and it rests on a particular
strategy for change that has implications for practitioners and organization
members alike. Chin ad Benne describe three types of strategies for changing. The
first type is empirical rational strategies, based on the assumptions that people are
rational, will follow their rational self-interest, and will change if and when they
come to realize change is advantageous to them. The second group of strategies is
normative-reeducative strategies based on the assumptions that normal form the
basis for behaviour, and change come through re-education in which old norms are
discarded and supplanted by new ones. The third set of strategies is the power-
coercive strategies, based on the assumption that change is compliance of those
who have less power with the desires of those who have more power. Evaluated
against these three change strategies, OD clearly falls within the normative-
reeducative category, although often OD represents a combination of the normative-
reeducative and the empirical-rational strategies.
Chin and Benne indicate the nature of the normative-reeducative strategy as
follows:
A second group of strategies we call normative-reeducative. These strategies
build upon assumptions about human motivation different from those underlying
the first. The rationality and intelligence of men are no denied. Patterns of action
and practice are supported by sociocultural norms and by commitments on the
part of the individuals to these norms. Sociocultural norms are supported by the
attitude and value systems of individuals—normative outlooks which undergird
their commitments. Change in a pattern of practice or action, according to this
view, will occur only as the persons involved are brought to change their normative
orientation to old patterns and develop commitments to new ones. And changes in
normative orientations involve changes in attitudes, values, skills, and significant
relationships, not just changes in knowledge, information, or intellectual rationales
for action and practice.
5.3.7 Applied Behavioural Science
This foundation of OD relates to the primary knowledge base of the field,
behavioural science knowledge. OD is the application of behavioural science
 32
knowledge, practices, and skills in ongoing systems in collaboration with system
members. Although human behaviour in organizations is far from an exact science,
lawful patterns of events produce effectiveness and ineffectiveness. OD practitioners
know about these patterns through research and theory. The aim of this discussion
is to look briefly at how behavioural science knowledge becomes applied
behavioural science knowledge.
A conventional distinction is made between (1) pure or basic science, the
object of which is knowledge for its own sake, and (2) technology, applied science,
or practice, the object of which is knowledge to solve practical, pressing problems.
OD emphasizes the latter, applied science or practice. Greenwood discusses the
activities of the practitioner as follows: The problem that confronts a practitioner is
customarily a state of disequilibrium that requires rectification. The practitioner
examines the problem situation, on the basis of which he or she prescribes a
solution that, hopefully, re-establishes the equilibrium, thereby solving the
problem. This process is customarily referred to as diagnosis and treatment. Both
diagnosis and treatment consists of observing a situation and, on the basis of
selected variables, placing it in a classification scheme or typology. The diagnostic
typology allows the practitioner to know what category of situation he or she has
examined: the treatment typology allows the practitioner to know what remedial
efforts to apply to correct the problem. On this point, Greenwood states: The
diagnostic and treatment typologies are employed together. Each type description of
the diagnostic typology contains implications for a certain type of treatment. The
practitioner uses treatment as the empirical test of his diagnosis, success
corroborating the diagnosis, failure negating it and thus requiring rediagnosis. The
principles of diagnosis and of treatment constitute the principles of practice, i.e.,
with their elaborations and implications constitute practice theory.
From this, “practice theory”, the OD practitioner works: first diagnosing the
situation, then selecting and implementing treatments based on the diagnosis, and
finally evaluating the effects of the treatments.
5.3.8 Action Research
The action research model—a data-based, problem-solving method that
replicates the steps involved in the scientific method of inquiry underlies most OD
activities. Action research involves three processes: data collection, feedback of the
data to the client system members, and action planning based on the data. Action
research is especially well suited for planned change programs.
Action research is a method that combines learning and doing—learning about
the dynamics of organizational change, and doing or implementing change efforts.
Kurt Lewin, who developed the concept of action research, had this to say about it:
The research needed for social practice can best be characterized as research for
social management or social engineering. It is a type of action-research, a
comparative search on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action,
and research leading to social action... This by no means implies that the research
 33
needed is any respect less scientific, or lower than what would be required for pure
science in the field of social events.
5.3.9 Conclusion
These foundations of organizational development form the theoretical and
practice underpinnings of the field. Taken separately, each is a powerful conceptual
tool for thinking about and implementing change. Taken collectively, they
constitute the beginning of a theory of organization development and change that
has enormous potential for improving organizational performance and individual
development.
5.4 REVISION POINTS
The most important underpinnings for the field are:
 Models and theories of planned changed;
 Systems Theory;
 Participation and Empowerment;
 Teams and Teamwork;
 Parallel Learning Structures;
 A normative-reeducative Strategy of Changing;
 Applied Behavioural Science and
 Action Research.
5.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What is a planned change model?
2. What is meant by Participation in OD?
3. What is called as Empowerment?
4. What are the parallel learning structures
5. Define: Action Research?
5.6 SUMMARY
Leaders and OD practitioners use this knowledge base to plan and implement
effective change programs. In this lesson you learnt what OD practitioners think
and how they think as they engage in the complicated task of improving
organizational functioning. The knowledge base of OD is extensive and is constantly
growing. The most important underpinnings for the field are: Models and theories of
planned changed; Systems Theory; Participation and Empowerment; Teams and
Teamwork; Parallel Learning Structures; A normative-reeducative Strategy of
Changing; Applied Behavioural Science and Action Research.
5.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. What are the models of planned change?
2. What is meant by planned change?
3. Write a short note on systems theory.
4. What is a Team work?
5. What do you mean by parallel learning structure?
6. What is Applied Behavioural Science
 34
7. What is an action research?
5.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
5.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss elaborately on Models and Theories of Planned Change
5.10. SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
5.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify how business organizations apply the planned change process and
discuss.
5.12 KEY WORDS
1. Models and theories of Planned Change, Systems theory, Participation and
Empowerment, Teams, Teamwork, Parallel learning structures, Normative-
Reductive strategy of change, Applied Behavioural Science, Action Research,
OD.
H
 35
LESSON – 6

MANAGING THE ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

6.1 INTRODUCTION
In this lesson we examine what leaders, organization members, and OD
practitioners do as they implement and manage organization development
programs. By now we know that diagnosis forms a foundation for intervening, and
that intervening involves implementing various change-inducing action programs.
Thinking about how to manage this process is the focussed in this lesson. First we
are to take an in-depth looking at diagnosis, then the considerations that go into
selecting and implementing interventions. Finally, we will discuss about the overall
management of OD programs. All OD programs have three basic components:
diagnosis, action, and program management. The diagnostic component represents
a continuous collection of data about the total system, its subunits, its processes,
and its culture. The action component consists of all the activities and
interventions designed to improve the organization’s functioning. The program
management component encompasses all activities designed to ensure success of
the program.
6.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About different patterns of Diagnosis
 Various OD Interventions
 The OD Intervention program management components
6.3 CONTENT
6.3.1 Diagnosis
6.3.2 The Action Component: OD Interventions
6.3.3 The Program Management Component
6.3.4 Conclusion
6.3.1 DIAGNOSIS
The first step is to diagnose the state of the system, focusing on the client’s
major concerns. What are its strengths? What are its problem areas? What are its
unrealized opportunities? Is there a discrepancy between the vision of the desired
future and the current situation? The diagnosis identifies strengths, opportunities,
and problem areas. Action plans are developed in step 2 to correct problems, seize
opportunities, and maintain areas of strength. These action plans are OD
interventions specifically tailored to address issues at the individual, group,
intergroup, or organizational levels, as well as issues related to selected processes.
Step 3 consists of fact-finding about the results of the actions. Did the actions have
the desired effects? Is the problem solved or the opportunity achieved? If the
answer is yes, organization members move on to new and different problems and
opportunities: if the answer is no, the members initiate new action plans and
interventions to resolve the issue (step 4). When problems remain unsolved after an
initial attack, steps 3 and 4 usually entail redefining the problems areas. Step 5, 6,
 36
7 and so on may be required for some problems and opportunities, but further
steps are just iterations of the basic sequence of diagnosis-action-evaluation-action.
Again, this process looks logical and linear in Figure 6.1, but in practice is more
complicated.
During the entire sequence, managing the OD process itself requires attention.
Energy and efforts are directed to ensuring that the program is supported by the
organization members, that the program is relevant to the organization’s priorities,
and that the program is making discernible progress. Managing the OD program is
a continuous activity.

Diagnosing the System, Its Subunits and Processes

Organizational development is at heart an action program based on valid
information about the status quo, current problems and opportunities, and effects
of actions as they relate to achieving goals. An OD program thus starts with
diagnosis and employs data collecting and data analyzing throughout. Diagnostic
activities – activities designed to provide an accurate account of things as they
really are—are needed for two reasons: the first is to know the state of things or
“what is”; the second is to know the effects or consequences of actions.
Table 6.1: Diagnosing organizational subsystem
Diagnostic Targets Explanation and Identifying Examples Common Methods of Diagnosis
The total organization The total system is the entity analyzed. Questionnaire surveys are most popular
(having a common Diagnosis also includes extra-system with large organizations. Interviews both
“character” or mission (environmental) organizations, groups, or group and individual, are useful for getting
and a common forces, such as a customers, suppliers, and detailed information. Panels of
authority structure) governmental regulations. Examples: a representative members surveyed
manufacturing firm, a hospital, a school periodically are useful to chart changes
system, a department store chain, a church over time. Examination of organizational
denomination records – rules, regulations, policies,
symbols of office and/or status etc. yields
insight into the organization’s culture and
 37

Diagnostic Targets Explanation and Identifying Examples Common Methods of Diagnosis

functioning. Diagnostic meetings held at
various levels yield a great amount of
information in a short time period. Focus
groups give valuable information.
Large complex and This target group refers to major units within a If the subsystems are large or widely
heterogeneous larger organization – division, subsidiary dispersed, questionnaire survey
subsystem companies, “European operations”, and techniques are recommended.
functional departments such as marketing, Interviews, observations, and
manufacturing, and human resources. organization records are good sources
of information about performance and
problems. Interviews of “liaisons”
between “part” and “whole” are
valuable.
Small, simple, and These are typically formal work groups or Typical methods include the following:
relatively teams. They may be permanent groups, individual interviews, followed by a group
homogeneous temporary task forces, or newly constituted meeting to review the interview data;
subsystems groups (e.g., the group charged with the “start- questionnaires; observation of staff
up” of a new operation, or the group formed by meetings and other day-to-day
an acquisition or merger). Examples are the operations; and formal group meeting for
top-management team, managers and key self diagnosis.
subordinates, task force teams, the workforce
in an office, the teachers in a single school.
Interface or intergroup These consist of subsets of the total system Confrontation meetings between both
subsystems that contain members of two sub-systems, groups are often the method for data
such as matrix organizational structure gathering and planning corrective
requiring an individual or a group to have two actions. Organization mirroring meetings
reporting lines. But more often this target are used when three or more groups are
consists of members of one subsystem having involved. Interviews of each subsystem
common problems and responsibilities with followed by a “sharing the data” meeting
members of another subsystem such as or observation of interactions can be
production and maintenance overlaps. used. Flowcharting critical processes is
useful.
Dyads and/or triads Superior / subordinate pairs, interdependent Separate interviews followed by a
peers linking pins—i.e. person who have meeting of parties to view any
multiple group memberships all these are discrepancies in the interview data are
subsystem worthy of analysis. often used. Checking their perceptions
of each other through confrontation
situations may be useful. Observation is
an important way to assess the dynamic
quality of the interaction.
Individuals All individuals within the organization. Interviews, information from diagnostic
meetings, or problems identified by the
human resource department are sources
of information. Self-assessment is
another source.
Roles A role is a set of behaviours enacted by a Usually information comes from
person as a result of occupying a certain observations, interviews, role analysis
position within the organization. All persons in techniques, a team approach to
the organizations have roles requiring certain “management by objectives”, Career
behaviours administrative assistants, planning activities yield this information
supervisors, accountants, scientists, as an output.
custodians, executives, sales representatives.
Communications Who talks to whom about what? Who initiates? Observation, especially in meetings:
patterns, styles and Is it top-down, down-up, lateral? Does questionnaires for large organizations:
flows information get to the right places in a timely interviews and discussions with group
manner? members—all these methods may be
used. Analysis of videotaped sessions is
 38

Diagnostic Targets Explanation and Identifying Examples Common Methods of Diagnosis

especially useful.
Goal setting Setting task objectives and determining criteria Questionnaires, interviews, and
to measure accomplishment of the objective observation are ways to asses goal-
should take place at all organizational levels. setting ability of individuals and groups
within the organization.
Decision-making, Evaluating alternatives and choosing a plan of Observation of problem-solving
Problem-solving, and action are integral and central functions for meetings at various organizational
action planning organizations. They include getting the levels is particularly valuable in
necessary information, establishing priorities, diagnosing this process. Analysis of
evaluating alternatives, and implementing an videotaped sessions is useful.
alternative. Organizational records are valuable
sources.
Managing interface Interfaces represent these situations where two Interviews, third-party observations of
relations or more groups (subsystems) face common group meetings are common method for
problems or overlapping responsibility. This is diagnosing these process.
most often seen when two separate groups are
interdependently related in achieving an
objective but have separate accountability.
Technological and All organizations rely on multiple Generally this area is not within the
engineering system technologies—for production and operations, expertise of the OD consultant. He or
for information processing, for planning, for she must then seek help from experts
marketing etc. to produce goods and services. either inside the organization or outside.
Interviews and group discussions
focused on technology are among the
best ways to determine the adequacy of
technological systems Sometimes
outside experts conduct an audit and
make recommendations; sometimes
inside experts do.
Organizational Learning from past success and failures, Interviews, questionnaires, group
learning present blind spots and from all organizational methods of diagnosis, examination of
members is essential to remain competitive assumptions and culture, games and
vital, and to develop new paradigms. exercises to create awareness of
organizational learning disabilities,
examination of defensive routines,
visioning, including environment
analysis.
Table 6.1: shows how one would proceed to diagnose the total organization
and its subsystems (the whole and its subunits). For each of the major targets in an
organization, the typical information desired and common methods of obtaining the
information are given. The OD practitioner may be interested in all these target
groups or in only one or two of them; he or she may work with one subsystem
during one phase of the program and other subsystems during subsequent phases.
Frequently, the improvement strategy (the overall OD intervention strategy) calls for
concentrating on different organizational targets in a planned sequence. For
example, the program may start at an important subsystem, move to another
subsystem, and then extend to the total organization; or the initial focus could be
one the total organization and then move to selected subsystems.
Organizational processes are the what and the how of the organization, that is,
what is going on? and How is it being accomplished? To know about the
organization’s processes is to know about the organization in its dynamic and
complex reality. Organizational development practitioners typically pay special
 39
attention to the processes, because they are central for effective organization
functioning and because significant organizational problems often stem from them.
Continual diagnosis is thus necessary in any planned change effort. Such
diverse activities as getting rich, managing our time, and losing weight, for example,
all begin with an audit of what is—the status quo—and then require continual
monitoring of the changing status quo over time. Comparing “what is” with “what
should be” reveals the gap between actual and desired conditions. Action plans are
then developed to close the gap: and the effects (consequences) of these actions are
continuously monitored to measure progress toward the goal. Diagnosis is therefore
basic to all goal seeking activities.
Organizational development continuously generates system data. The
Consultant (interventionist) has three primary intervention tasks: (1) to help the
client system generate valid data; (2) to enable the client system to have free,
informed choice; and (3) to help the client system generate internal commitment to
the choices made. Without valid information it would be difficult for the client to
learn and for the interventionist to help ... Valid information is that which describes
the factors, plus their interrelationships, that create the problem for the client
system.
Diagnosis is a sine qua non of effective organization development, two issues
remain. First, is the diagnosis systematically planned and structured in advance so
that it follows a category system and structured question format, or is the diagnosis
more emergent—following the data wherever they may lead? Second, what
diagnostic categories will be used? Practice varies widely on these two dimensions.
We tend to be in the middle of the structured in advance—emergent continuum. We
have some structured questions but follow up on leads as they develop in the
course of the diagnosis.
Furthermore, in an OD program, although the results of diagnostic activities
are important, how the information is collected and what is done with the
information are also important. The OD practitioner and the organization members
actively collaborate about such issues what target groups to diagnose, how the
diagnosis is best accomplished, what processes to analyze, what to do with the
information, and how to use the information to aid action planning. Usually
information is collected through a variety of methods---interviews, observations,
questionnaires, and organization records. Information is treated as the property of
those persons who generated it, and the data serve as the foundation for planning
actions. This format is basically an action research model. Therefore, the diagnostic
and action components are intimately related in organizational development.
6.3.2 The Action Component: OD Interventions
OD interventions are sets of structured activities in which selected
organizational units engage in a sequence of tasks that will lead to organizational
improvement. Interventions are actions taken to produce desired changes.
 40
Typically, one of four conditions gives rise to the need for OD interventions.
First, the organization has a problem: something is “broken”. Corrective actions—
interventions—are implemented to “fix” the problem. Second, the organizations see
an unrealized opportunity; something it wants it beyond its reach. Enabling
actions—interventions—are developed to seize the opportunity. Third, features of
the organization are out of alignment; parts of the organization are working at
cross-purposes. Alignment activities—interventions—are developed to get things
back “in sync.” Fourth, the vision guiding the organization changes; yesterday’s
vision is no longer good enough. Actions to build the necessary structures,
processes, and culture to support the new vision—interventions—are developed to
make the new vision a reality.
In summary, interventions are planned sets of actions to change situations the
organization members want to change. The range of OD interventions is quite
extensive. Interventions have been developed to solve most problems related to the
human side of organizations.
The Nature of OD Interventions
To intervene in the client system is to interpose activities so that the
intervention activities are done in addition to the normal activities or are done
instead of the normal activities. For example, an “in addition to” intervention would
be a staff group including a “process critique” at the end of each staff meeting. This
activity simply means that a few minutes are set aside to look at “how we worked”—
the process—during the meeting. Critiquing “how we worked” can enable the group
to correct deficient processes and become more effective in its deliberations. An
example of an “instead of” intervention would be getting a key service department to
hold an “organization mirroring” workshop with its user-clients to determine how
clients view the services provided and how they want services improved. In this
case, instead of the normal activities of begging, cajoling, or coercing the user-
clients to use the staff services, a problem-solving workshop called the organization
mirror is convened in which the clients give feedback to the service group. This
option establishes a dialogue between service providers and service users. Such a
meeting would probably not be a normal activity in the organization.
A well-designed OD program unfolds according to a game plan, called the
overall OD strategy. This strategy may be planned in advance or may emerge as
events dictate. The strategy is based on answers to such questions as: What are the
overall change/improvement goals of the program? What parts of the organization
are most ready and receptive to the OD program? What are the key leverage points
(individuals and groups) in the organization? What are the most pressing problems
of the client organization? What resources are available for the program in terms of
client time and energy and internal and external facilitators? Answers to these
questions lead the practitioner to develop a game plan for where to intervene in the
system, what to do, how to sequence interventions, and so forth.
 41
Planning actions, executing actions, and evaluating the consequences of
actions are integral to organization development. This emphasis on action planning
and action taking is a powerful features of OD and, in some respects, is a
distinguishing one. In many traditional educational and training activities, learning
and action taking are separated. Knowledge and skills are learned in one setting,
say, in a classroom, and are then taken back to the organization with the learner
being admonished to practice what he or she has learned, that is, to take actions.
Most OD interventions minimize this artificial separation in several ways. First,
many intervention activities have two goals: an educational goal and an
accomplishing-a-task goal. Second, OD problem-solving interventions tend to focus
on real problems central to the organization’s needs rather than on hypothetical
problems that may or may not fit the members’ needs. Third, OD interventions use
several learning models, not just one. Let us examine these three points in greater
detail.
The dual aspects of OD interventions can be clarified with an illustration. Let
us say that the top executives of an organization spend three days in a workshop in
which they do the following things: (1) explore the need for a long-range strategic
plan for the organization; (2) learn how to formulate such a strategy by analyzing
other strategies, determining the strategic variables, being shown a sequence of
steps for preparing a comprehensive plan, and so forth; and (3) actually make a
three-year strategic plan for the organization. This intervention combines the dual
features of learning and action; the executives learned about strategic planning,
and they then generated a strategy. In some OD interventions, the learning aspect
predominates, and in others, the “action aspect” predominates; but both aspects
are present in most interventions.
Organizational development interventions tend to focus on real problems
rather than hypothetical problems. Developing the skills and knowledge to solve
real problems as they arise in their “nature state” minimizes the educational
problem of “transfer of learning” from one situation to another (although the
problem of generalization, that is, knowing the appropriate times and places to
apply this particular set of skills and knowledge, is still present).
An additional features of working on real problems in OD interventions is that
the real set of individuals involved in the problem is the group the problem solvers
with work. For example, in a human relations class, if a manager were having
trouble, understanding and working with minority employees, he or she would
perhaps “role play” the situation with the instructor or fellow students. In OD, the
manager would probably interact with the minority employees with whom he or she
was having difficulties—but would do so in carefully structured activities that have
a high probability of learning for both parties and a high probability of being a
“success experience” for both parties.
Organizational development programs rely on several learning models. For
example, if “learning how to” do something precedes “doing” it, then we have a
 42
traditional approach to learning familiar to most people. If the “doing” precedes the
“learning how to”, then we have a “deficiency” model of learning in which the
learning comes primarily from critiquing the actions after the fact to see how they
could have been done differently and, presumably, better. Both models are viable
learning modes, and both are used extensively in organizational development.
Action program in OD are closely linked with explicit goals and objectives.
Careful attention is given to translating goals into observable, explicit, and
measurable actions, and equal care is given to ensuring that actions are relevant to
and instrumental for attaining goals. Questions such as the following thus become
an integral part of organizational life: How does this action relate to the goal we
established? What are the action implications of that goal for me and my group?
When we say we want to achieve a certain goal, what do we really mean by that, in
measurable terms? Given several alternative forms of action, which one seems most
appropriate to achieve the goal we have set?
Diagnosis, action taking, and goal setting are all linked in OR programs.
Diagnostic activities precede action programs; that is, fact finding provides a
foundation for action. Actions are continuously evaluated for their contribution to
goal accomplishment. Goals are continuously evaluated for whether they are
attainable and whether they can be translated into action programs. Organizational
development is a continuous process of setting goals, collecting data about the
status quo, planning and taking actions based on hypotheses and on the data, and
evaluating the effects of action through additional data collection.
6.3.3 The Program Management Component
Just as OD practitioners apply behavioural science principles and practices to
improve organizational functioning and individual development, they apply these
same principles and practices as they manage OD programs. They attend equally to
task and process. They consider system ramifications of the program, involve
organization members in planning and execution, use an action research model,
create feedback loops to ensure relevance and timeliness, and so forth. Managing
the OD program effectively means the difference between success and failure. The
aim of this section is to provide guidelines to help ensure success in managing OD
programs. Specifically, we examine the phases in OD programs, several change
management models, and a procedure for creating parallel learning structures.

Phases of OD Programs
OD programs follow a logical progression of events—a series of phases that
unfolds over time. An important part of managing an OD program well is to execute
each phase well. Warner Burke describe the following phases of OD programs:
1. Entry
2. Contracting
 43
3. Diagnosis
4. Feedback
5. Planning Change
6. Intervention
7. Evaluation
Entry: represents the initial contact between consultant and client; exploring
the situation that led the client to seek a consultant; and determining whether the
problem or opportunity, the client, and the consultant constitute a good match.
Contracting: involves establishing mutual expectations; reaching agreement
on expenditures of time, money, resources, and energy; and generally clarifying
what each party expects to get from the other and give to the other.
Diagnosis: is the fact-finding phase, which produces a picture of the situation
through interviews, observations, questionnaires, examination of organization
documents and information, and the like. Burke observes that the diagnostic phase
has two steps—gathering information and analyzing it.
Feedback: represents returning the analyzed information to the client system;
the clients owning the data, their picture of the situation and their problems and
opportunities.
Planning Change: involves the clients deciding what action steps to take
based on the information they have just learned. Alternative possibilities are
explored and critiques; plans for action are selected and developed.
Intervention: implements sets of actions designed to correct the problems or
seize the opportunities.
Evaluation: represents assessing the effects of the program: Was it
successful? What changes occurred? What were the causal mechanisms? Are we
satisfied with the results?
These phases are straightforward and logical in description, but in practice
they often overlap a great deal and look more like an evolving process than a linear
progression. The most important point is that each phase builds the foundation for
subsequent phases; therefore, each phase must be executed with care and
precision. For example, if expectations are not clear in the contracting phase, this
mismatch will surface later in unmet expectations and dissatisfaction. Or, if the
analysis of the data during the diagnosis phase is incorrect, interventions may not
be appropriate.
A Model for Managing Change
Another way to think about managing OD programs is to ask the question:
What are the key ingredients in successful change efforts? Cummings and Worley
identify five sets of activities required for effective change management:
(1) motivating change, (2) creating a vision, (3) developing political support,
 44
(4) managing the transition, and (5) sustaining momentum. These activities are
shown in Figure 6.2.

Figure 6.2: Activities contributing to Effective Change Management

The first step is getting people to want to change, to believe change is
necessary and to commit to abandoning the status quo for an uncertain future.
Cummings and Worley suggest three methods for creating readiness to change:
sensitize people about the pressures for change, that is, why change must occur;
show discrepancies between the current (undesirable) state of affairs and the future
(more desirable) state of affairs; and communicate positive, realistic expectations for
the advantages of the change. One of the greatest motivators for change is pain—
things are not working, profits and market share are dropping, survival is in
doubt—these conditions increase readiness for change.
The next set of activities, overcoming resistance to change, is achieved through
three methods: dealing empathetically with feelings of loss and anxiety, providing
extensive communication about the change effort and how it is proceeding, and
encouraging participation by organization members in planning and executing the
change. As Cummings and Worley write: “One of the oldest and most effective
 45
strategies for overcoming resistance is to involve organizational members directly in
planning and implementing change.”
Creating a vision provides a picture of the future and shows how individuals
and groups will fit into that future. Well-defined visions reduce uncertainty, serve
as goals to energize behaviour, show that the future will be beneficial, and
demonstrate that the future is attainable. The mission, values and conditions
provide tangible goals to which organization members can direct their energies.
Developing political support is critical in successful change efforts. Powerful
individuals and groups must be convinced that the change is good for them or at least
will not significantly harm them, or else they will resist and even sabotage the effort.
Cummings and Worley suggest that the practitioner assess his or her own power in the
situation, identify the key players whose support is required for success, and persuade
those key players that the change will have benefits for them.
Activities related to managing the transition are also extremely important
Richard Beckhard and Reuben Harris address this topic in their book,
Organizational Transitions: Managing Complex Change. Beckhard and Harris
proposes that change efforts move through three states: the current state, the
transition state, and the desired future state, and they suggest three set of activities
for managing the transition state. “Activity planning” involves specifying the
sequence of activities, events, and milestones that must occur during the
transition. This plan serves as a road map for the organization members and as a
checklist for measuring progress, “Commitment planning” involves getting the
support and commitment from key players in the organization whose leadership,
resources, and energy are needed to make the transition succeed, “Management
Structures” involve setting up parallel learning structures to initiate, lead, monitor,
and facilitate the change.
6.3.4 CONCLUSION
These ideas about managing OD programs describe some of the important
factors OD practitioners take into account as they implement change efforts.
Program management is complex, dynamic, difficult, and great fun. The challenges
are many, but the sense of accomplishment is great for practitioners, leaders, and
organization members alike as successes build upon successes and the
organization realizes its goals.
6.4 REVISION POINTS
1. Researchers identified five sets of activities required for effective change
management: (1) motivating change, (2) creating a vision, (3) developing
political support, (4) managing the transition, and (5) sustaining momentum.
6.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Diagnosis in OD?
2. What is OD intervention?
3. What are the components of the OD?
4. What are program management components?
6.6 SUMMARY
 46
Three components—diagnosis, intervention, and program management—
critical to all organization development programs have been explored in this lesson.
Each is important in its own right; all are vital to success.
The more people learn about these three components, the more effective they
will become in their organizational improvement efforts. Organization development
is a complex blend of art, science, and craft gained through the study and mastery
of these three components.
6.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:
 Diagnosis,
 Intervention,
 Program Management,
 Program Management Components
6.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
6.9. ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss in detail about eight steps for successful organizational
Transformation.
6.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
6.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Find out and prepare the current Parallel Learning Structure Intervention
Process practiced in business organizations.
6.12 KEY WORDS
1. Motivating Change, Vision, Political Support, OD Interventions, Diagnosis,
Change Management, Contracting, Evaluation.
H
 47
LESSON – 7

ACTION RESEARCH AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

7.1 INTRODUCTION
Action research attempts to meet the dual goals of making action more
effective and building a body of scientific knowledge around that action. Action in
this context refers to programs and interventions designed to solve problems and
improve conditions. Kurt Lewin, as a consummate applied social scientists and
motivated by an interest in eradicating the problems of society, proposed action
research as a new methodology for behavioural science. Lewin believed that
research on action programs, especially social change programs, was imperative if
progress were to be made in solving social problems. Action research, he thought,
would address several needs simultaneously, the pressing need for greater
knowledge about the causes and dynamics of social ills; the need to understand the
laws of social change; the need for greater collaboration and joint inquiry between
scientists and practitioners; the need for richer data about real-world problems; the
need to discover workable, practical solutions to problems and the need to discover
general laws explaining complex social phenomena.
7.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About the Process of Action Research and its Approach
 Examples of Action Research
7.3 CONTENT
7.3.1 Introduction
7.3.2 Action Research: A Process and An Approach
7.3.3 Examples of Action Research in OD
7.3.4 Conclusion
7.3.1 Action Research: A Process and an Approach
Action research may be described as a process, that is, as an ongoing series of
events and actions. It may be defined as follows:
Action research is the process of systematically collecting research data about
an on-going system relative to some objective, goals, or need of that system; feeding
these data back into the system; taking action by altering selected variables within
the system based on the data and on hypotheses, and evaluating the results of
actions by collecting more data.
This definition characterizes action research in terms of the activities
comprising the process. First, the researcher takes a static picture of an
organization. On the basis of what exists, hunches and hypotheses suggest actions;
these actions typically entail manipulating variables in the system that are under
the action researcher’s control, which often means doing something differently from
the way it has always been done. Later, the researcher takes a second static picture
 48
of the system to examine the effects of the action. These steps are similar to the
steps OD practitioners use when they execute OD programs.
Several authors have noted the importance of viewing action research as a
process. In a study of the Tremont Hotel in Chicago, William F. Whyte and Edith L.
Hamilton described their work as follows:
What was the project? It was an action-research program for management. We
developed a process for applying human relations research findings to the changing
of organizational behaviour. The word process is important, for this was not a one-
shot affair. This project involved a continuous gathering and analysis of human
relations research data and the feeding of the findings into the organization in such
a way as to change behaviour?
This study is a cogent example of the relation of action research to OD.
Although the study itself was conducted in 1945 and 1946—before the term
organizational development was introduced—and was based solely on an action
research model, today it would be considered an OD program.
French shows how action research can be used a generic process in
organizational development (Figure 7.1). This process is iterative and cyclical. He
clarifies the model as follows:

Joint action Planning

(objectives of OD program and
etc.
means of attaining goals, e.g.,
'Inam building')

Action (New behaviour)

Feedback to key client or client

Actions
group

Action planning (determenation

fo objects and how to get them)

Futher data gathering Action planning

Discussion and work on data

feedback and data client group

Data gathering and diagnosis Discussion and work on

by consultant feedback and emerging data
Feedback to client group (e.g.
in term building sessions
summary feedback by
consultant elaboration)
Consultation with behavioral
Feedback
Scientist consultant

Data gathering

Key executive perception of Data gathering (reassessment

problem of status of the system)

Figure 7.1. Action Research Model for Organizational Development

 49
The key aspects of the model are diagnosis, data gathering, feedback to the
client group, data discussion and work by the client group, action planning, and
action. The sequence tends to be cyclical, with the focus on new or advanced
problems as the client group learns to work more effectively together.
Action research is a process in two different ways. It is a sequence of events
and activities within each iteration (data collection, feedback, and taking action
based on the data); and it is a cycle of iterations of these activities, something
treating the same problem several times and then moving to different problems.
Action research may also be described as an approach to problem solving,
thus suggesting its usefulness as a model, guide, or paradigm. Used in this way,
action research may be defined as follows:
Action research is the application of the scientific method of fact-finding and
experimentation to practical problems requiring action solutions and involving the
collaboration and cooperation of scientists, practitioners, and laypersons.
The desired outcomes of the action research approach are solution to
immediate problems and a contribution to scientific knowledge and theory. Viewing
action research from this perspective reveals additional important features. Action
research was the conceptual model for an early organization improvement program
in a group of oil refineries. Herbert Sheppard, one of the behavioural scientists
involved in that program, defines the nature of action research as follows:
The action-research model is a normative model for learning, or a model for
planned change. Its main features are these. In front of intelligent human action
there should be an objective, but it ever so fuzzy or distorted. And in advance of
human action there should be planning, although knowledge of paths to the
objective is always inadequate.
Action itself should be taken a step at a time, and after each step it is well to
do some fact-finding may disclose whether the objective is realistic, whether it is
nearer or more distant than before, whether it needs alteration. Through the fact
finding, the present situation can be assessed, and this information, together with
information about the objective, can be used in planning the second step.
Movement toward an objective consists of a series of such cycles of planning-acting-
fact-finding-planning.
7.3.2 Examples of action Research in Organization Development
The natures of organization development and of action research are quite
similar. They are both variants of applied behavioural science; they are both action
oriented; they are both data based; they are both call for close collaboration
between insider and outsider; and they are both problem-solving social
interventions. Because of these characteristics, we believe a sound organization
development program rests on an action research model.
Several examples show how action research can be used in organization
development. Gavin conducted a comprehensive survey feedback program in a
 50
mining company of approximately 400 employees in the south-western United
States. In several respects the OD program was a success—it was well received by
the hourly employees and many key managers; it solved many immediate problems;
and it led to numerous long-term organizational changes that increased the
effectiveness of the mine. And in several respects it was failure—some managers
grew to distrust the consultants, which led to increasingly strained relations
between higher management and the consultant team, which led to the premature
termination of the program. But Gavin and his doctoral students had
conceptualized the project from the beginning as an action research project, not
just an OD effort using survey feedback methodology. Therefore, they
simultaneously studied the effects of the OD program, their own intervention’s
processes and dynamics, and the changing client-consultant relations over time.
The result was a rich case study yielding vital information about both research
practices.
Shani and Eberhardt conducted an action research project designed to
improve the effectiveness of health care teams at a medical rehabilitation hospital.
Patient care was provided by teams comprised of professionals from many different
medical specialities. Some teams were more effective than others. What caused the
differences? How could less-effective teams be made more effective? As one can
imagine, the causes and conditions of health care team effectiveness are complex
and multifaceted. The expertise and cooperation of organization members were
needed to discover the causal mechanisms and to implement changes. The authors
established a “parallel organization” consisting of a steering committee to guide the
project and a study group to do the work. Shani and Eberhardt argue that such
vehicles are particularly valuable for conducting action research programs. The
parallel organization defined the data needs, conducted several iterations of
collecting data and making sense of the information, formulated hypotheses, and
suggested changes to hospital management. The action research approach,
concluded Shani and Eberhardt, yields better, richer information that the usual
methods of social science research, and greater willingness to make changes.
Another example of action research is provided by Santalainen and Hunt, who
used a massive OD program in a Finnish banking group to gain knowledge about
how the program was used differentially high-and low-performing banks. A
comprehensive multidimensional OD program was implemented in the 80 largest
banks of the 270-bank system. The program was called results management and
focused on teaching the bank’s top teams better strategic planning and operational
planning methods, better ways to define desired results, consensus decision
making, and better ways to meet the needs and values of employees. Although all
banks received the same training, they had wide latitude in implementing the
program. What makes this action research is that Santalainen and Hunt
researched the results of the OD program itself and at the same time gained
knowledge on organizational dynamics in general, specifically, high and low
performance.
 51
The 18 highest-performing and 18 lowest-performing banks out of the total of
80 were examined to see how they had used the learning from the OD program. At
the end of three years the high-performing banks had made more strategic changes
and fewer operational changes; the low-performing banks had made more
operational changes and fewer strategic changes. At the end of six years, the high-
performing banks had made more “deep-seated” (fundamental and significant)
changes than the low-performing banks. This action research had high payoff—
knowledge about the results of the OD intervention, and knowledge about the
ingredients of high and low performance. This particular program was an excellent
blend of action and research.
In Productive Workplaces, Marvin Weisbord takes the reader through a
number of action research projects, explains and critiques them, and shows how
his thinking about such projects evolved. Overtime he became disenchanted with
the terms diagnosis and action, and started using the terms snapshooting and
moviemaking to refer to those activities instead. He stopped focusing on problems
and sickness, and began focusing on wellness, potential, and desired futures. He
came to realize that the most successful action research projects were not expert-
centred (what the organizational members wanted to do), but stakeholder-centerd
(what the organizational members wanted to do).
Action research is also found in sociotechnical systems programs. Most socio-
technical systems theory change projects are conceptualized as action research—
research precedes action, and research follows action as OD practitioners and
organizational members collaborate to discover what should be done and how. The
same is true for open systems planning efforts and parallel learning structure
interventions.
7.3.3 Conclusion
Thus actions to solve real-world problems offer a unique opportunity for both
the scientist-researcher and the administrator-layperson if they approach the
problems from the standpoint of the action research model: the administrator’s
problems will be solved, and the scientist’s quest for theory and empirical validation
of theory will be furthered. The applied behavioural science discipline of
organization development is fertile ground for action research projects.
7.4 REVISION POINTS
1. Action research is a cornerstone of organizational development, underlying
both the theory and practice of the field.
2. In this lesson, we examined action research from two perspectives, as a
process and as a process and as a problem-solving approach.
7.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Action Planning?
2. Explain the action research process?
 52
7.6 SUMMARY
Two philosophical and pragmatic values underlie action research. The first is
that programs designed to solve real problems should be based on valid public data
generated collaboratively by clients and consultants. This belief calls for actions to
be based on diagnostic research – an action should follow research mode of
thinking. Or, to state it another way, diagnose the problem situation and base
actions on that diagnosis. The second value is that action in the real world should
be accompanied by research on that action in order to build a cumulative body of
knowledge and theory of the effects of various actions directed to solving real-world
problems—a research should follow-action mode of thinking. Only if we
systematically evaluate (do research on) actions can we know the real effects of
these actions. And only if we systematically build a body of knowledge can we build
better social science theories.
7.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
Write short note on the following:
i) Action Research, ii) Action Planning, iii) Action Research Model
7.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
7.9 ASSIGNMENTS
1. Discuss the Action Research Process.
2. Elaborately discuss on examples of Action Research
7.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
7.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. How organizations design the action research models? Explain with examples
of an organization you are more familiar.
7.12 KEY WORDS
1. Action Research Process, Action Planning, Action Research Model.
H
 53
LESSON – 8

ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CONSULTING PROCESS

8.1. INTRODUCTION
In this lesson, we explore how OD professionals consult (both internally and
externally), and determining the readiness of the client to change, and establishing
collaborative networks. Obviously, before organization development work can begin,
there must be a place in which to begin this work. This requires the OD professional to
interact with potential clients, whether as an internal or as an external OD professional,
and reach agreement on the work to be done, the processes to be followed, and the
allocation of work responsibilities among all parties.
8.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About Organizational Development Consultation Process
 Working together with clients
8.3 CONTENT
8.3.1 Organizational Development Consultation Process
8.3.2 The First Meeting with a Prospective Client
8.3.3 Contracts
8.3.4 Conclusion
8.3.1 Organizational Development Consultation Process
Identification of OD Professionals
Innumerable books, chapters, and articles have been written on consultation
process and how and when to utilize different strategies. This lesson provides the basics
of a few aspects of identifying and building a client list, as well as attaining new
projects, both internally and externally. Most OD professionals must constantly prove
their skills and services to ensure that work is always available. Not surprisingly, there-
fore, one of the main challenges for every OD professional is to find a balance between
the work itself and consulting so that there is always close to the desired level of work
available, without having either too much work or too little work.
Identifying Potential Projects or Clients Externally
External OD consultants have many ways to identify and build a client portfolio or
start new projects. Suggestions are described here, with their possible strengths and
weaknesses.
Word of Mouth: Recommendations from clients is, by far, the most frequently used
and most successful approach to getting new clients. People trust the unsolicited
recommendations of their business colleagues and, naturally, will want to replicate the
success of the consultant present or former clients. Thus, outstanding work as an OD
professional can often lead to establishing new clients through word-of-mouth. When
an OD professional identifies a clients niche based on industry, geography, level,
function, type of work, or some other characteristic, word of mouth can become even
more effective because the scope of work is much more focused. This approach can be
low-cost and effective, leading to projects with known processes.
 54
However, word of mouth also has the potential to negatively impact the consultant
business when news begins to circulate that a project the client managed failed. Once
this happens, the client may experience difficulty in obtaining referrals. In addition to
the negative effect this approach may have when a project fails (which may have
occurred because the organization was not ready to commit to an OD effort), the word-
of-mouth approach is serendipitous and random and, thus, outside the consultant
control. For this reason, many consultants have a guarantee built into their contract. If
the client is unhappy with the process, the fee can be negotiated down or even waived
to avoid bad word of mouth. Furthermore, such an approach is unlikely to push the
client into developing new competencies in different areas.
Networking: In most cultures, business is conducted at least in part through existing
relationships. In some cultures, preference is given to people who come from the same
places, who graduated from the same school, or who belong to the same religious
community. In other cultures, benefits are given to those who are personally known. This
might be because of former connections, but steps can be taken to increase one's present
and future opportunities for connections. Networks can be developed through participating
in professional organizations (at both national and local levels, such as the OD Network,
The OD Institute, or the ODC Division of the Academy of Management), in community
organizations (e.g., boards, religious groups, volunteer work), or community professional
organizations (e.g. Rotary Club, Chamber of Commerce). This approach also allows the
client not only to contribute to the consultant community or professional organization but
also to create relationships that can lead to future business. Furthermore, participating in
professional organizations facilitates the development of new skills that could be useful in
the consultant OD work.
On the negative side, some people may see this approach as manipulative and
insincere. For this reason, it is particularly important to be sincere, honest, and
committed to the group with which the client are networking. Networking also provides
no sure business outcome.
Prior Employers: When an individual decides to become an external consultant,
that person's previous employer often becomes the first client. Clearly, there are
advantages to both parties in this situation. When a person leaves an employer, undone
work often remains, and, occasionally, there is also a gap between the time a person
leaves until the time he or she is replaced. The employer knows the quality of work that
the person does, and, if that former employee was competent enough to become an
external OD professional, the quality of that work was presumably high. This can also
be a bridging experience for the OD professional, allowing the professional to begin
earning a fee immediately, without having to wait until the effects of other marketing
approaches fall into place.
Because most people have worked for a limited number of employers, this
approach is also limited and cannot usually be counted on for an extended period of
time. Other disadvantages include the professional developing an overreliance on this
single client and not creating enough of a mix of clients, and the continuing dependence
of the client on the OD professional, continuing to treat the professional as an employee
rather than as an external professional.
 55
Web Sites: In today’s technological era, it is almost impossible to be an external OD
professional without having a Web site. The challenge, however, is to get potential
clients to go to the site. Because Web sites are rather passive, the client need to take
action to attract potential clients to the consultant Web site. Inviting people in the
networks to visit the consultant site (perhaps through list serves) may increase the
consultant hit rate. Many of the other approaches suggested here, such as writing a
book, can increase the number of visitors to the Web site.
It should also go without saying that the Web site needs to be informative,
effective, and professional, providing the needed information for interested and potential
clients. If the Web site does not tell people what they want to know, visitors might
conclude that an unprofessional site is a reflection of the work. It is worth investing in
creating a Web site that will do what the client need it to do; do not try to cut expenses
by not investing in a high-quality site. Web sites also need to be kept up-to-date,
requiring time and costs for ongoing maintenance. Information that the client might
want to have on their Web site includes:
 the organization's mission, vision, and values;
 key personnel within the organization—names, qualifications, photos;
 the kind of work that the client do;
 a list of previous clients (but only with their permission);
 a brief description of cases on which the organization has worked;
 publications that personnel in the consultant organization have authored— this
can be a list with links, if available, or there might even be the full publication in
pdf format (using Adobe Acrobat to post a generally unchangeable copy);
 an opinion piece (often called a white paper) that lends a dynamic character to the
Web site and will give people a reason to return;
 any products that the client have for sale;
 information on how the client can be reached—e-mail, phone numbers, fax
numbers, address;
 testimonies from previous clients.
Printed Materials: With increasing reliance on the computer for advertising,
archiving and conveying information, communicating and billing, the importance of
printed materials has diminished. The business card and the stationery must
communicate professionally and contain all of the necessary contact information. They
can communicate who the clients are and be a means of proactively inviting people to
the consultant Web site. Expensive published brochures, however, in most market-
places, may no longer be cost-effective. It is difficult and costly to determine who
potential clients might be and then to get the brochures in the right hands. It is also
difficult and costly to make changes in them. Something that is simpler and less
expensive may be more cost-effective in today's world.
Requests for Proposals (RFPs): Sometimes organizations, especially government
agencies, will issue a call for proposals or a request for proposals (RFP). In these
situations, the organization has already determined the work it wants done and
perhaps even the processes that it wishes to follow. An RFP is an attempt to find the
 56
best-qualified individual, often at the lowest cost or at least within a predetermined
cost, to do the desired work. RFPs may be distributed to list serves, posted on Web
sites, or printed as official notices in newspapers or listed in government publications.
The client's goal is usually to distribute the RFP widely to get many responses and
proposals from which to choose.
OD professionals who write a proposal in response to an RFP must pay close
attention to the requirements listed in the RFP. Failure to follow an RFP's specifications
will usually lead to a proposal's immediate disqualification. The advantage of
responding to an RFP is that the OD professional knows that work is available and that
a contract will be issued. On the downside, there is no way of knowing how many
responses the RFP will generate, and the OD professional may invest many, many
hours in writing proposals that are never selected. While unethical, it is not unknown
for a receiving organization to use the ideas included in a proposal without ever hiring
or paying the individual who presented the ideas. Furthermore, the amount of money
that is available for the project may not be sufficient to do a quality job.
Referrals from or Work with Associates: Many OD professionals who are working as
independent consultants will ask colleagues or professional friends to work with them
on projects that are too large for them to handle alone. Such associates are then in an
ideal position to know the quality of the work done by these associates. When a
consultant has too much work, and another project presents itself, it is often the case
that the consultant name will be recommended to the organization looking for a
consultant.
Likewise, if the clients have included an associate in a project that is too large for
the client, it is expected that that person will include the client when he or she has a
project too large for that person. One potential problem with such an approach is that
the quality of the work done by the colleague may be associated with the client. If that
quality is not as high as the consultant own work, it can have a detrimental effect. On
the other hand, if the work quality is better than the consultants, the client also have
the opportunity to learn from the experience, and the reputation of that associate may
rub off on the client.
Previous Clients: Sometimes, as the client move on, the client tend to forget about
clients with whom the client have worked in the past, and they may forget about the
client as well. Create a tickler file of all of the consultant clients to remind the client,
periodically, to make contact with them, even if it is just a phone call to stay in touch or
to have lunch together. Not only might this approach generate new business with the
previous client, but it will also create goodwill that might result in a referral to other
potential clients. A potential downside of continuing to work with previous clients is
that the client both may create unhealthy dependencies.
Teaching is another way of creating potential clients, especially if the students are
already employed (e.g., those in an executive MBA program). Over a longer term,
teaching students who are not yet employed can still be effective, as they move into
positions in which they will be making decisions about hiring consultants.
 57
Contract Agencies: Some agencies work specifically to place people with
organizations that are looking for temporary employment. A consultant might want to
use this approach when a tight market has made it difficult to get a sufficient number
of clients. One can work for a company for 3 to 4 months while developing new
competencies and continuing to market in order to begin work with new clients once
the short-term assignment has been completed.
Doing Pro Bono Work: Most ethical OD consultants will do occasional pro bono
(free), or at least reduced-fee, work for organizations with which the consultant shares a
common value. Over the years, I have worked with a number of such organizations,
and, given my value system, these have been churches, organizations focusing on
immigration issues, international organizations, grassroots charitable groups, and
many others. While the intent is to return a service to the community, it can also serve
as a marketing tool. Many members of these organizations are also individuals who
work in organizations that need OD consulting. Having observed the consultant work,
they see the consultant expertise as well as possibilities for applying that expertise in
their organizations.
Identifying Potential Projects or Clients Internally
Just as an external OD professional needs to identify potential projects or clients,
so, too, does an internal OD professional. The emphasis for the internal professional is,
of course, not on finding the organization but, rather, on finding the points of focus
within the employing organization. In this situation, all of the following approaches can
be useful.
Know the Business Well, and Speak the Organization's Language
an internal OD professional need to know the business in which he or she is
working and its personnel well. He or she needs to know where process improvements
are possible and where the potential for growth exists, the corporate culture, the
organization's history and potential, and anything else that would help identify where
and how the OD professional can help contribute to the success of the organization. To
do this effectively, the OD professional must be able to speak the language of the
organization, understand what its processes and functions are, know the mission and
vision of the organization, and align her or his efforts with the strategic direction of the
organization. All of this will help the organization see how the OD professional can add
value.
Share what the client Are Working On
Many (probably most) people within the organization will not understand what an
OD professional does and how they can use such expertise in helping them do their
jobs better. When people begin to see what the consultant is doing and how the
consultant are helping others in the organization, they will begin to trust the expertise
and see how consultant might be able to work with them. This exposure will then often
result in their contacting the consultant to do work with them.
Sharing of the Successes
This recommendation is similar to the preceding point: success breeds success.
Take advantage of opportunities to provide information about the consultant’s
 58
successes in employee meetings, annual meetings, newsletters, Web sites, and other
sources of information.
Be Visible, Especially at Decision-Making Tables
Too often, OD professionals feel ignored because they are not consulted or involved
when strategic decisions are being made. Knowing the business and making concrete,
value-added contributions to the organization will increase the visibility and encourage
others to invite the consultant to participate in their part of the organization. The
details of how this is done may vary across cultures.
Have a Mentor or Sponsor Who is Well Respected in the Organization
Having a champion from within the organization, especially someone near or at the
top of the organization who is well respected, can help position the client to make
concrete contributions to the organization. This assistance might come by way of advice
(e.g., from a mentor or coach), or it might come through the sharing of the consultant
expertise or recommendations to specific parts of the organization to take advantage of
the consultant know-how.
Foster Word of Mouth
As with external OD professionals, internal OD professionals also benefit (or suffer
from) word of mouth. Managers and executives talk with each other about what is going
on in their part of the organization. When the client have been particularly successful in
one part of the organization, others are likely to talk about the consultant successes
with their colleagues, generating more opportunities for the client to contribute to the
organization. Conversely, colleagues will also talk if things do not go well.
Walk Around
To enhance the consultant knowledge of the business and its processes, walk
around the organization. Talk with people about how things are going, and observe the
processes that are in place. During this process, the client will learn where potential
work is and make connections with those who will make the decision to invite the client
into their business.
8.3.2 The First Meeting with a Prospective Client
Once the client have identified a potential project or client, whether as an internal
or an external OD professional, the next step in the Entry process is to meet with the
prospective client to determine whether there is, in fact, work to be done in that
organization or in a subpart of the organization, whether the client are the right person
to take on the project, and what resources the client might need to complete the project
successfully.
Once the client have identified a potential project or client, a number of things still
need to be done before either party decides that the client are the right person to handle
the task. Before the consultant first meeting with the client, the client need to do the
consultant homework. The client should review as much information as the client can
prior to the first meeting. If the client are an external professional, the client can review
the background of most organizations on the Web. If the organization is a public
corporation, the client can also, usually, find its annual report in the business section
of most public or university libraries, as well as online resources. If the client are an
 59
internal professional, the client can usually find internal documents that would give the
client a good background and insight into the specific part of the organization the client
are targeting.
The steps outlined in this section might well be made in an on-site meeting, during
a breakfast or lunch, or over a series of meetings. It is often helpful to meet in the
client's place of business because this setting may provide the OD professional with
additional information on the client's culture (e.g., interactions with customers, noise
and activity levels, conservative or modern furnishings, employee interactions, etc.). The
Entry phase is not completed until a contract is developed and agreed on, or the
decision is made not to work together.
Determine whether the client can work together
Whether internal or external, if the client and the potential client have never met,
this first meeting is an opportunity for the client to meet each other, with the ultimate
goal of determining whether the client are a good match to work together. Such
decisions are often made within the first few minutes of meeting each other. The
opening conversation will often consist of small talk—information not necessarily
relevant to the potential contract. Such conversation, however, can be very insightful in
helping determine whether a working relationship is possible by revealing the following:
 What is the other person's general demeanor—serious or relaxed, open or closed,
positive or negative, and so on? And what might this mean in working together?
 The client will be asking him- or herself, What impact is this person likely to make
in my organization?
 The client will also be wondering, What do I think the chances are that this person
will be able to accomplish what we need to have accomplished?
 The client might be asking himself of the client, Does this person have the power
base to support me in the work that I need to do in this organization?
 The client might also be thinking, How committed does this person seem to be
about making change in the organization?
 How comfortable are the client with each other's choice of dress style? (This might
seem to be a minor point, but I know of an external consultant who lost a job
because he was wearing Hush Puppy shoes. The CEO of this Fortune 50 company
did not believe that Hush Puppies were sufficiently professional.)
These are, obviously, not questions that are asked directly, at least in the opening
stages, of the other person. And the answers will invariably be based on imperfect and
limited information. Nevertheless, this is the process that does go on, and the client
may want to try to limit and, more important, be aware of the consultant judgments
until the client have more information. However, as first impressions do count and
occur frequently, the clients are not in a position to keep the client from making rash
judgments.
Determine Presenting Problems
There is a reason why the client is willing to meet with the client. On the most
optimistic side, the client may simply want to know how well they are doing as an
organization so they can continue to build on their strengths. Truly progressive
organizations will recognize the need for continuous improvement. Unfortunately,
 60
however, organizations are most likely to call the client in to assist when they think
they have a problem that needs fixing. And it is not unusual for the client to think that
the organization knows not only what the problem is but also what it will take to fix it.
This is called the presenting problem. As an example, I was contacted and asked to conduct
a workshop on conflict management because a potential client had determined that department
managers were not working well together and were constantly disagreeing. The potential client
had determined that the presenting problem was conflict and that the solution to this problem
was to conduct a workshop.
Conduct a Mini-assessment
Once the presenting problem is on the table, the client need to ask questions and
trust the consultant intuition and previous experience to help the client determine the
accuracy of the client's diagnosis. In my experience, it is seldom the case that the
presenting problem is the actual problem.
In the situation just described regarding perceived conflict, I began to ask questions about
what the department managers disagreed on and how it was manifest in the organization. It
became apparent, rather quickly, that major problems existed with the systems that were in place
that caused the managers to disagree with each other. They were forced to compete for resources,
which put them in a position where they had to compete with each other, causing the conflict to
exist. To conduct a workshop and leave the systems unchanged had no chance of positively
changing anything and, in fact, would likely increase the extent of tension and conflict within the
group.
Determine the Organization's Readiness to Change
The next step is to attempt to determine how ready the organization is to do what
is necessary for the changes to occur. From an ethical perspective, the client do not
want to use the organization's resources if there is little chance of success, nor do the
client want to put the consultant reputation in jeopardy when the intervention does not
succeed. I find the following questions useful in helping determine the chances that the
organization is ready to change:
 Have the client worked with an OD professional before? How successful was it?
What were the outcomes?
 How do people within the organization feel about the situation that is the
presenting problem?
 How ready are people to change?
 Where does the organization fit in its market?
 How well is the organization doing?
 What resources (financial and personnel) have been dedicated to this project?
 How accurately do the mission and vision of the organization reflect what is
actually done in the organization?
 How long has the problem existed?
 What is motivating the change now? What is different? What has changed?
 Many years ago, Pfeiffer and Jones (1978) created a questionnaire to determine,
mathematically, how ready an organization is to change. The intent of the
instrument is to provide an objective measure, based on 15 variables weighted
according to their importance. Some people feel more comfortable with a measure
that they believe to be objective, even if the numbers are determined subjectively.
 61
While the concept of readiness for change is important, reaching a numerical
measure may be misleading and consume too much time to get an accurate
measure.
In the case previously described, I asked whether the organization was prepared to change
its processes if it was determined that the source of the conflict was not the individuals but the
system that was in place. The representatives of the organization responded that this shift was
not in their plans and that they were not open to it. This reply demonstrated, quite quickly, that
they were not ready for change, and I subsequently decided to decline the contract.
Establish the consultant Credibility
Once the client have a sense of where the project might go and are certain that the
organization is ready for change, the next step is to establish the consultant credibility
for doing the project with the client. The client has probably already reviewed the
consultant Web site and knows a considerable amount about the client and the work
that the client do. Word of mouth may also have informed him or her about how the
client work and what the consultant areas of expertise are.
The client may want to bring with the client a copy of the consultant Web site
materials, a brochure that the client have published for this purpose, or a resume that
contains this information. The client may also want to share with the client the
consultant experiences working in similar industries or on similar projects and what
the outcomes of those experiences have been. Copies of publications might also be
useful, if the client have them. The client will certainly have some questions as well. The
client should be prepared to provide the client with references, but only with the
approval of the previous clients. If the client are an internal OD professional, the client
can share names of others within the organization with whom the client have worked. If
the client are an external consultant, with the permission of previous clients, the client
can share names of clients with whom the client have worked on similar projects.
Almost always, the client will want an estimate of how long the client think the project
will take and an estimate of the costs. These figures are not something that the client
need to provide in detail at the first meeting, but they are likely to be something that
the client will want to provide in the consultant follow-up contact with the client.
Before ending the meeting, the client and the client need to decide what the next
steps are, what additional information the client both might need, and when a decision
will be made by both parties about moving forward. Once both parties have decided to
work together, the next step is to establish a contract.
8.3.3 CONTRACTS
Once the client and the OD professional, whether internal or external, decide that
they want to work together, an agreement about the conditions, either oral or written,
should be articulated. It is usually wise for external professionals to use a written
contract (also referred to as a letter of agreement or a memorandum of
understanding). It may be useful to think of the contracting process in phases. One
contract might apply for the analysis phase, with a subsequent contract for the imple-
mentation phase. A sample of a written contract is shown in the appendix of this
chapter. Some of the items that the client will want to include in the agreement (or
contract) follow, with explanations.
Who will do What?
 62
Both parties—the client and the OD professional—will have roles to play during
the project. Although it will not necessarily be clear in the beginning exactly who will do
what, it is helpful to articulate these roles in the agreement or contract as clearly as
possible. As additional information regarding roles becomes available, the contract can
be amended, either formally in writing or orally, though, of course, there are huge risks
in any oral contract.
What are the Desired Outcomes?
This aspect of the agreement is intended to let both parties confirm their
understanding of what outcomes will be deemed as acceptable, often indicating, too,
when the project will be completed. Including this item in the contract enforces the
inclusion of an evaluation component right from the beginning. The first outcome may
be an analysis of the organization (if the ODP model is being followed). A second con-
tract (known as scope of the project, which might include deliverables, focus,
boundaries, etc.) may need to be developed once the analysis is completed if there is
additional work for the OD professional following this phase.
What is the Desired Time Line?
This aspect of the agreement answers the question of when the project is to be
completed. The client need to be careful in including this information, especially if there
is a penalty clause for nonperformance. Because the work of the OD professional
relies on the cooperation of personnel from within the client organization, control over
the time line is not solely in the hands of the OD professional. Further information
about when the OD professional will work, when he or she can be contacted, and other
factors are related to timely completion of the project.
What Aspects of the Project are Confidential and for How Long?
This is a particularly tricky question for an internal OD professional. Can the
client share with others in the consultant organization what the client determine with
the client? With whom can the client share it? For the external OD professional, the
details of any project will almost always be confidential, but for how long? Usually, two
years is a sufficient period, as anything the client learn during this time will have
changed within two years, given the dynamic nature of business. This is also an
appropriate time to ask whether the client can list the client on the consultant Web site
or resume.
What Personnel Resources will be needed?
The client will want to know how many personnel from the consultant
organizations will be needed; who they are, along with their qualifications; and the
percentage of time they will allocate to the project. The client will also want to know how
many of the client organization's personnel will be needed.
Fees
The contract will specify the fees to be paid, as well as what expenses will be
reimbursed, the process to be used for billing and reimbursement, and when payments
are due. Determining the fees to charge is a very difficult process. First, the client need
to decide whether the client are going to charge an hourly rate or on a project basis.
Charging an hourly rate requires a level of trust that the client will not take advantage
of this billing arrangement. On the other hand, charging on a project basis requires a
 63
near-perfect prediction of the amount of time that a project will take— an almost
impossible task given the nature of OD work. If the client overestimate the time it will
take, the client will pay more than necessary for the project. If the client underestimate
the time, then the client will not be reimbursed for the hours the client have worked.
Furthermore, almost every case entails additional steps to be done that were not
anticipated in the beginning of the project. This situation often leads to conflict over
whether the extra time should be included in the project fee or if it should be added to
the project fee. A supplementary contract, also referred to as a change order, can be
used to ensure that there is no misunderstanding. Another option is to be employed on
a retainer. The client organization makes a regular payment throughout the year, and,
for that payment, the client organization may call on the consultant as work is needed.
This approach has advantages to both parties, but it does make it difficult for the
consultant to plan his or her work.
The second question is how much to charge. Clearly, part of this decision should
be based on the consultant experience and level of expertise. Talking with others in the
consultant community about their charges and researching online is almost essential
so the client can decide where the client want to position himself relative to the market.
The client may also want to use a sliding scale, charging one rate for for-profit
businesses and a different rate for nonprofits. The client might also give a discounted
rate to long-term clients. However, it is important to be consistent in the consultant fee
structure. Client organizations usually know who is charging what for each type of
service.
Another approach to determining the consultant charges is to develop a personal
budget worksheet to determine what income the client need to cover the consultant
income and benefits needs, as well as the consultant expenses. A shorthand approach
that is sometimes used to determine annual income needs is known as the 3X
approach, in which the client simply multiple the consultant annual salary by 3.
Although this is a good approach for the individual consultant, it is not necessarily
going to make the client competitive in the marketplace.
Internal consultants have an even more difficult time in determining charges. In
some organizations, it may not be necessary to charge a client part of the organization.
In other organizations, OD might be a profit center, with the expectation that the OD
service will at minimum recover its costs. But then there is the question about what
costs to include that must be recovered. The financial function of the organization will
often be helpful in determining internal budget allocations for the provision of OD
services internally.
Deliverables
Another item to be included in the contract is what will be delivered by the
consultant to the client organization. When will reports be delivered? To whom will they
be delivered? Will the reports be oral or written? Will there be a public presentation?
Will results of analyses be presented in aggregated form (combined so no individual
respondent can be identified)? What level of anonymity or confidentiality will apply?
While detail is probably not possible or necessary in the contract, responses to these
questions should be addressed.
What Recourse do the Parties have for Non-performance?
 64
For an external OD professional, it is helpful to have a clause indicating agreement
of both parties to use mediation rather than the courts if disagreement arises about any
aspect of the contract. However, the popularity of including this phrase in a contract
seems to be diminishing, recognizing that it is always an option to use mediation if both
parties agree, even if not stipulated in the contract.
Internal professionals usually work under more pressure than external
professionals. They may well have their jobs on the line, not only if they do not perform
according to the contract, but also if they refuse to take on a project.
8.3.4 CONCLUSION
During the opening dialogue that takes place between the OD professional and the
representative of the client organization, both parties will be assessing the other person
(or persons) to determine compatibility in a working environment. The client
organization will also present the reason why it wishes to work with the OD
professional. If the client wants to address a specific matter, this is called the
presenting problem. The difficulty for the OD professional, however, is that this problem
might be a symptom of the real or root cause. Thus, the OD professional will want to do
a mini assessment to determine the likelihood that the presenting problem is the real
problem. Then the OD professional can make a quick judgment about his or her
competence to do the OD work that is being requested.
8.4 REVISION POINTS
The OD Professionals should do the following in the Consultation Process:
 Identification of OD Professionals
 Identification of Potential Projects
 Identification of Contract Agencies
 Identifying potential projects or clients internally
 Determine whether the client can work together or not
 Determine Presenting problems
 Conduct a mini-assessment
 Establish the consultant credibility
 Dealing with Contracts and Deliverables.
8.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. With which of the marketing methods do the client feel most comfortable? Why?
2. With which of the marketing methods do the client feel the least comfortable?
Why?
3. What do the clients think the client could do to overcome the consultant lack of
comfort with the methods identified in question?
4. Why is it important for an internal OD professional to market him- or herself?
5. Why do the clients think it is important to determine the client's readiness for
change before entering into a contract?
6. What are some of the factors that the client think would discourage a client from
entering into a contract with a potential OD professional?
 65
7. What are some of the factors that the client think would discourage an OD
professional from entering into a contract with a potential client?
8. Is it important for an internal OD professional to have an agreement with the
internal client? Why?
8.6 SUMMARY
The Entry phase is extremely important for the OD professional because it begins
the organization development process model. It is through the Entry phase, with its
focus on marketing, that work is identified (whether internally or externally). Many
approaches can be used for marketing one's expertise; there is no single best approach,
though word of mouth is clearly of great importance in the field. And, with increasing
reliance on technology, every OD professional will probably want to have a Web site.
8.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
Write short note on the following:.
a) Identification of Potential Projects
b) Identification of Contract Agencies
c) Identifying potential projects or clients internally
d) Determine Presenting problems
e) Establish the consultant credibility
f) Dealing with Contracts and Deliverables.
8.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
8.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Summarize and explain the various key activities in OD consultation process.
8.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi., 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
8.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Meet an OD consultant and understand the various key activities in OD
Consultation Process for organizations.
8.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, Potential Projects, Contracts, Deliverables.
H
 66
UNIT - III
LESSON – 9

AN OVERVIEW OF OD INTERVENTIONS
9.1. INTRODUCTION
Work gets done in organization development when organization leaders and
members systematically address problems and opportunities, usually guided by an
OD practitioner. Practitioners have created an array of interventions to help
organization members address specific problems effectively. Interventions such as
team building, survey feedback, role analysis, and intergroup conflict resolution
were developed during the early years of organization development. Interventions
such as quality of work like (QWL), work redesign using sociotechnical systems
theory (STS), collateral organization (also known as parallel learning structures),
and strategic planning methods were developed as the field continued to evolve.
Today we have interventions aimed at developing self-directed teams, high-
performance work systems, and self-designing organizations, as well as large-scale
systems change models to help organizations adapt and survive. OD interventions
address a wide range of specific problems and opportunities. But OD is much more
than just reaching into the “kit bag” and executing an intervention. OD is a
complete strategy for change that encompasses theory, practice methods, and
values. Interventions are just one component of the OD formula.
9.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About various Intervention Activities
 Different types of Interventions for different target groups such as,
Individuals, Dyads/ Triads, Teams and Groups, Intergroup Relations and
Total Organization
8.3 CONTENT
9.3.1 OD Intervention Practice Methods
9.3.2 Structured Activities to Promote Learning and Change
9.3.3 Intervention Activities
9.3.4 Classification of OD Interventions
9.3.5 Conclusion
9.3.1 Organisation Development Intervention Practice Methods
Practice methods refer to how practitioners play their craft to cause
organizational change. Principles, rules of thumb, and practical knowledge have
accumulated so that a practice theory exists to tell practitioners what to do and
how to do it to effect change in human systems. For example, people often resist
change and lapse back into old habits after a change. Practice theory tells how to
deal with these situations. The secrets to success in OD programs lie in the practice
theory. Advances in behavioural science theory, practice theory, and the range and
 67
scope of interventions have significantly increased the power of OD as a strategy for
change.
Organisation Development interventions are sets of structured activities in which
selected organizational units (target groups or individuals) engage in a task or a
sequence of tasks with the goals of organizational improvement and individual
development. Interventions constitute the action thrust of organization development.
The OD practitioner, a professional versed in the theory and practice of OD, brings four
sets of attributes to the organizational setting; a set of values; a set of assumptions
about people, organization, and interpersonal relationships; asset of goals for the
practitioner and the organization and its members; and a set of structured activities
that are the means for achieving the values, assumptions, and goals. These activities
are what we mean by the word interventions.
OD is more than reaching into the “kit-bag” and pulling out an intervention or
two. Let’s explore some of the factors that leaders and practitioners consider as
they plan and implement OD.
First, behind every program is an overall game plan or intervention strategy.
This plan integrates the problem or opportunity to be addressed, the desired
outcomes of the program, and the sequencing and timing of the various
interventions. Intervention strategies are based on diagnosis and the goals desired
by the client system. Let’s say the clients want to redesign the way work is done at
a production facility, changing from an assembly-line arrangement of individualized
simple tasks to complex tasks performed by self-managed teams. This desired
redesign requires diagnosis to determine whether the work is amenable to such a
system, to test the employees’ willingness to undertake such a change, to calculate
the time and effort required to make the change and to assess the probable
benefits. Socio-technical systems theory would likely be the guiding model for the
program, which would entail dozens of significant changes and different
interventions—training, education, parallel structures, employees involvement,
modified reward systems and management philosophy, and so forth. A series of
activities designed to move the system in step-wise fashion from the current state to
a new state would be laid out against a time line of several years. This overall
strategy would be the road map for the change program. The key questions are:
what are we trying to accomplish? What activities / interventions will help us get
there? What is the proper timing and sequencing of the interventions? What have
we learned from the diagnosis about readiness to change, barriers and obstacles,
key stakeholders; and sources of energy and leadership?
9.3.2 Structured Activities to Promote Learning and Change
Second, some ways to structure activities to promote learning and change are
“better”; and some are “worse”. The following points help practitioners structure
activities in “better” ways.
1. Structure the activity to include the relevant people, the people affected by the
problem or the opportunity. For example, if the goal is improved team
 68
effectiveness, have the whole team engage in the activities. If the goal is
improved relations between two separate work groups, have both work groups
present. If the goal is to a build linkages with some special group, say, the
industrial relations people, have them there along with the people from the
home group. If the goal is better customer service, include customers in the
activity. Pre-planning the group composition is necessary for properly
structuring the activity.
2. Structure the activity so that it is (a) problem oriented or opportunity oriented
and (b) oriented to the problems and opportunities generated by the clients
themselves. Solving problems and capitalizing on opportunities are involving,
interesting, and enjoyable tasks for most people, whether due to a desire for
competence or mastery or a desire to achieve, especially when the issues have
been defined by the client. When clients are solving issues that they have stated
have highest priority, the activity has built-in support and a high payoff.
3. Structure the activity so that the goal is clear and the way to reach the goal is
clear. Few things are as demotivating as not knowing what one is working
toward and not knowing how what one is doing contributes to goal attainment.
Both these points are part of structuring the activity properly. (Parenthetically,
the goals will be important for the individuals is point 2 is followed.)
4. Structure the activity to ensure a high probability of success. Implicit in this
point is the warning that the practitioners’ and clients’ expectations should be
realistic. But more than that manageable, attainable objectivities once achieved
produce feelings of self-and group-worth. The task can still be hard,
complicated, taxing—but it should be attainable. And if participants fail to
accomplish the goal, the reasons should be examined so this can be avoided in
the future.
5. Structure the activity so that is contains both experience-based learning and
conceptual learning. New learning’s gained through experience become a
permanent part of the individual’s repertoire when augmented with conceptual
material that puts the experience into a broader framework of theory and
behaviour. Relating the experience to conceptual models and other experiences
helps the learning become integrated for the individual.
6. Structure the climate of the activity so that individuals are “freed-up” rather
than anxious or defensive. This is, set the climate of interventions so that
people expected “to learn together” and “to look at practices in an experimenting
way so that we can build better procedures”.
7. Structure the activity so that the participants learn both how to solve a
particular problem and “learn how to learn”. Such structure often means
scheduling time for reflecting on the activity and teasing out learning; it may
means devoting as much as half the activity to one focus and half to the other.
8. Structure the activity so that individuals learn about both task and process. The
task is what the group is working on, that is, the stated agenda items. The term
 69
process refers to how the group is working and what else is going on a
participants work on the task, including group’s processes and dynamics,
individual styles of interacting and behaving, and so on. Learning to be skilful
in both of these areas is a powerful asset.
9. Structure the activity so that individual are engaged as a whole persons, not
segmented persons. It means calling into play role demands, thoughts, beliefs,
feelings, and strivings. Integrating disparate parts of individuals in an
organizational world that commonly divides roles, feelings, and thoughts
enhances the individual’s ability to learn and grow.
These points developed from practice theory, and implementing these points
causes interventions to be more effective.
9.3.3 Intervention Activities
A third set of considerations concerns choosing and sequencing intervention
activities. Michael Beer suggests the following guidelines:
1. Maximize diagnostic data: In general, interventions that will provide data
needed to make subsequent intervention decisions should come first. This is
particularly true when change agents do not know much about the situation.
Violation of this rule can lead to choosing inappropriate interventions.
2. Maximize effectiveness: Interventions should be sequenced so that early
interventions enhance the effectiveness of subsequent interventions. For
example, interventions that develop readiness, motivation, knowledge, or skills
required by other interventions should come first. Violation of this rule
(leapfrogging) can result in interventions that do not achieve that objectives,
regression, and the need to start a new sequence of interventions.
3. Maximize efficiency: Interventions should be sequenced to conserve
organizational resources such as time, energy, and money. Violation of this rule
will result in overlapping interventions or in interventions that are not needed
by certain people or part of the organizations.
4. Maximize speed: Interventions should be sequenced to maximize the speed with
which ultimate organizational improvement is attained. Violation of this rule
occurs when progress is slower than is necessary to conform to all the other
rules.
5. Maximize relevance: Interventions that management sees as most relevant to
immediate problems should come first. In general, this means interventions that
will have an impact on the organization’s performance or task come before
interventions that will have an impact on individuals or culture. Violation of this
rule will result in loss of motivation to continue with organization development.
6. Minimize psychological and organizational strain: A sequence of interventions
should be chosen that is least likely to create dysfunctional effects such as
anxiety, insecurity, distrust, dashed expectations, psychological damage to
people, and unanticipated and unwanted effects on organizational performance.
 70
Violating this rule will lower people’s sense of competence and confidence and
their commitment in organizational improvement.
Paying attention to these guidelines helps ensure success: Disregard of these
rules has caused many an OD program to flounder.
Fourth, different interventions have different dynamics; they do different
things because they are based on different causal mechanisms. It’s important to
know the underlying causal mechanisms of interventions to ensure the
intervention fits the desired outcomes.
Robert Blake and Jane Mouton identified the following types of interventions based on the
underlying causal mechanisms:
1. Discrepancy intervention, which calls attention to a contradiction in action or
attitudes that then leads to exploration.
2. Theory intervention, where behavioural science knowledge and theory are used
to explain present behaviour and assumptions underlying the behaviour.
3. Procedural intervention, which represents a critiquing of how something is being
done to determine whether the best methods are being used.
4. Relationship intervention, which focuses attention on interpersonal relationships
(particularly those where there are strong negative feelings) and surfaces the
issues for exploration and possible resolution.
5. Experimentation intervention, in which two different action plans are tested for
their consequences before a final decision on one is made.
6. Dilemma intervention, in which an imposed or emergent dilemma is used to
force close examination of the possible choices involved and the assumptions
underlying them.
7. Perspective intervention, which draws attention away from immediate actions
and demands and allows a look at historical background, context, and future
objectives in order to assess whether or not the actions are “still on target”.
8. Organization structure intervention, which calls for examination and evaluation
of structural causes for organizational ineffectiveness.
9. Cultural intervention, which examines traditions, precedents, and practices—the
fabric of the organization’s culture—in a direct, focused approach.
These different kinds of interventions provide a range of ways for the OD
practitioner to intervene in the client system. They also explain the underling
dynamics of interventions.
As we said, interventions do different things; they cause different things to
happen. One intervention’s major result may be increasing interaction and
communication between parties. Another intervention’s major result may be
increasing feedback, or increasing accountability. These differential results are
often exactly what is needed to produce change in the particular situation. For
example, a situation requiring increased accountability will benefit more from
 71
an intervention that directly increases accountability than an intervention that
increase interaction and communication. The following list shows some of the
results one can expect from OD interventions.
1. Feedback: It refers to learning new data about oneself, others, group processes,
or organizational dynamics—data that one did not previously take active
account of and that reflects an objective picture of the real world. Awareness of
this new information may lead to change if the feedback is not too threatening.
Feedback is prominent in interventions such as process consultation,
organization mirroring, sensitivity training, coaching and counselling, and
survey feedback.
2. Awareness of Changing Socio-cultural Norms or Dyfunctional Current
Norms: Often people modify their behaviour, attitudes, and values when they
become aware of changes in the norms influencing their behaviour. This
awareness has change potential because the individual will adjust his or her
behaviour to bring it in line with the new norms. One’s awareness that “this is a
new ball game” or that “we’re now playing with a new set of rules” causes
changes in individual behaviour. Also, awareness of dysfunctional current
norms serves as an incentive to change. When people sense a discrepancy
between the outcomes their present norms are causing and outcomes they
want, they are led to change. This casual mechanism probably operates in team
building, intergroup team-building activities, culture analysis, Grid OD, and
sociotechnical system programs.
3. Increased Interaction and Communication: Increasing interaction and
communication between individuals and groups causes changes in attitudes
and behaviour. Homans, for example, suggests that increased interaction leads
to increased positive sentiments. Individuals and groups in isolation tend to
develop “tunnel vision” or “autism”, according to Murphy. Increasing
communication counteracts this tendency. Increased communication allows one
to check one’s perceptions to see if they are socially validated and shared. This
mechanism underlies almost all OD interventions. The rule of thumb is: Get
people talking and interacting in new, constructive was and good things will
result.
4. Confrontation: This terms refers to surfacing and examining differences in
beliefs, feelings, attitudes, values, or norms to remove obstacles to effective
interaction. Confrontation is a process that seeks to discern real differences that
are “getting in the way”, to uncover those issues, and to work on them in a
constructive way. Many obstacles to growth and learning exist, and they
continue to exist when they are not actively examined. Confrontation underlies
conflict resolution interventions such as intergroup team building, third-party
peacemaking, and role negotiation.
5. Education: Education activities upgrade (a) knowledge and concepts, (b) beliefs
and attitudes, and (c) skills. In organization development education activities
 72
increase these three components in several content areas: task achievement,
social relationships, organizational dynamics and processes, and processes for
managing change. Education is the primary mechanism operating in behaviour
modelling, force-field analysis, life and career-planning self-directed teams and
T-groups.
6. Participation: Increasing the number of people in problem solving, goal setting
and generating new ideas increases the quality and acceptance of decisions,
increases job satisfaction, and promotes employees well-being. Participation
activities are found is quality circles, collateral organizations, quality of work life
(QWL) programs, team building search conferences, survey feedback, and
Beckhard’s Confrontation Meeting. Participation plays a role in most OD
interventions.
7. Increased Accountability: Activities that clarify people’s responsibilities and
that monitor performance related to those responsibilities increase
accountability. Both features must be present for accountability to enhance
performance. OD interventions that increase accountability are the role analysis
technique, responsibility charting, Gestalt OD, life-and career-planning, quality
circles, MBO, self-managed teams, and partnering.
8. Increased Energy and Optimism: Activities that energize and motivate people
through visions of new possibilities contribute towards a future that is
desirable, worthwhile, and attainable. Increased energy and optimism are direct
results of interventions such as appreciative inquiry, visioning, “getting the
whole system in the room”, quality of work life programs, search conferences,
total quality programs, self-managed teams, and so forth.
These ideas are only some aspects to consider when planning OD programs and
choosing and implementing OD interventions. One learns this practice theory
through experience, reading, workshops, mentors, and reflecting on successes
and failures.
9.3.4 Classification of Organisation Development Interventions
The inventory of OD interventions is quite extensive. We will explore several
classification schemes here to help you to understand how interventions “clump”
together in terms of (1) the objectives of the interventions, and (2) the targets of the
interventions. Becoming familiar with how interventions relate to one another is
useful for planning the overall OD strategy.
As we see it, the following are the major “families” of OD interventions.
1. Diagnostic Activities: Fact-finding activities designed to ascertain the state of
the system, the status of a problem, the way things are. Available methods
range from projective devices such as build a collage that represents your place
in this organization to the more traditional data collection methods of
interviews, questionnaires, surveys, meetings, and examining organizational
records.
 73
2. Team-Building Activities: Activities designed to enhance the effective operation
of system teams. These activities focus on task issues, such as the way things
are done, the skills and resources needed to accomplish tasks, the quality of
relationship among the team members or between members and the leader, and
how well the team gets its job done. In addition, one must consider different
kinds of teams, such as formal work teams, temporary task force teams, newly
constituted teams, and cross-functional teams.
3. Intergroup Activities: Activities designed to improve the effectiveness of
interdependent groups—groups that must work together to produce a common
output. They focus on joint activities and the output of the groups considered as
a single system rather than as two subsystems. When two groups are involved,
the activities are designated intergroup or interface activities; when more than
two groups are involved, the activities are called organizational mirroring.
4. Intergroup Activities: Activities that rely on questionnaire surveys to generate
information that is then used to identify problems and opportunities. Groups
analyze the data regarding their performance and design action plans to correct
problems.
5. Education and Training Activities: Activities designed to improve individuals’
skills, abilities, and knowledge. Several activities are available and several
approach possible. For example, the individual can be educated in isolation
from his or her own work group (say in a T-group comprised of strangers), or
one can be educated in relation to the work group (say when a work team learns
how better to manage interpersonal conflict). The activities may be directed
toward technical skills required for performing tasks or may be directed toward
improving interpersonal competence. The activities may be directed toward
leadership issues, responsibilities and functions of group members, decision-
making, problem solving, goal setting and planning, and so forth.
6. Techno-structural or Structural Activities: Activities designed to improve the
effectiveness of organizational structures and job designs. The activities may
take the form of (a) experimenting with new organization structures and
evaluating their effectiveness in terms of specific goals or (b) devising new ways
to bring technical resources to bear on problems. Structural interventions,
defined as the broad class of interventions or change efforts aimed at improving
organization effectiveness through changes in the task, structural, and
technological subsystems. Included in these activities are job enrichment,
management by objectives, socio-technical systems, collateral organizations,
and physical settings interventions.
7. Process Consultation Activities: Activities that help the client to perceive,
understand, and act upon process events which occur in the client’s
environment. These activities perhaps more accurately describe an approach, a
consulting mode in which the client gains insight into the human processes in
organizations and learns skills in diagnosing and managing them. Primary
 74
emphasis is on processes such as communications, leaders and member roles
in groups, problem solving and decision making, group norms, and group
growth, leadership and authority, and intergroup cooperation and competition.
8. Grid Organizational Development Activities: Activities developed by Robert
Blake and Jane Mouton, which constitute a six-phase change model involving
the total organization. Internal resources are developed to conduct most of the
programs, which may take from three to five years to complete. The model starts
with upgrading individual managers’ skills and leadership abilities, moves to
team improvement activities, then to intergroup relations activities. Later
phases include corporate planning for improvement, developing implementation
tactics, and finally, an evaluation phase assessing change in the organization
culture and looking toward further directions.
9. Third-Party Peacemaking Activities: Activities conducted by a skilled
consultant (the third party), designed to help two members of an organization
manage their interpersonal conflict. These activities are based on confrontation
tactics and an understanding of the processes involved in conflict and conflict
resolution.
10. Coaching and Counseling Activities: Activities that entail the consultant or
other organization members working with individuals to help (a) define learning
goals, (b) learn how others see their behaviour, and (c) learn new behaviours to
help them better achieve their goals. A central feature of this activity is
nonevaluative feedback others give to an individual. A second feature is the
joint exploration of alternative behaviours.
11. Life-and Career-Planning Activities: Activities that enable individuals to focus
on their life and career objectives and how to go about achieving them.
Structured activities include producing life and career inventories, discussing
goals and objectives, and assessing capabilities, needed additional training, and
areas of strength and deficiency.
12. Planning and Goal-setting activities: Activities that include theory and
experience in planning and goal setting, problem-solving models, planning
paradigms, ideal organization versus real organization “discrepancy” models,
and the like. The goal is to improve these skills at the levels of the individual,
group, and total organization.
13. Strategic Management Activities: Activities that help key policymakers to
reflect systematically on the organization’s back mission and goals and
environmental demands, threats, and opportunities, and to engage in long-
range action planning of both a reactive and pro-active nature. These activities
direct attention in two important directions: outside the organization to a
consideration of the environment, and a away from the present to the future.
14. Organizational Transformation Activities: Activities that involve large-scale
system changes; activities designed to fundamentally change the nature of the
organization. Almost everything about the organization is changed—structure,
 75
management philosophy, reward systems, the design of work, mission, values,
and culture. Total quality programs are transformational; so are programs to
create high-performance organizations or high-performance work systems.
Socio-technical system theory and open systems planning provide the basic for
such activities.
Each of these families of interventions includes many activities. They involve
both conceptual material and actual experience with the phenomenon being
studied. Some families are directed toward specific targets, problems, or processes.
For example, team building activities are specific to work team, while life-planning
activities are directed to individuals, although these latter activities take place in
group settings. Some interventions are problem specific: examples are the third-
party peacemaking activities and the goal-setting activities. Some activities are
process specific: an example is intergroup activities that explore the processes
involved in managing interfaces.
Another way to classify OD interventions is by the primary target of the
intervention, for example, individuals, dyads and triads, teams and groups,
intergroup relations, and the total organization. Table 9.1. shows this classification
scheme. Some interventions have multiple targets and multiple uses, and thus
appear in several places in the Table.
Table 9.1: Types of OD Interventions based on Target Groups
Target Group Interventions Designed to Improve Effectiveness
Life-and Career-planning activities
Coaching and counselling
T-group (sensitivity training)
Education and training to increase skills, knowledge in the areas of technical task
needs, relationship skills, process skills, decision making, problem solving, planning,
Individuals
goal-setting skills
Grid OD phase 1
Work redesign
Gestalt OD
Behaviour modelling
Process Consultation
Third-Party Peacemaking
Dyads / Triads
Role negotiation technique
Gestalt OD
Team Building – Task Directed
Team Building – Process directed
Gestalt OD
Grid OD phase 2
Teams and Interdependency exercise
Groups Appreciative inquiry
Responsibility charting
Process consultation
Role negotiation
Role analysis technique
 76
Target Group Interventions Designed to Improve Effectiveness
“Start up” team-building activities
Education in decision making, problem solving, planning, goal setting in group settings
Team MBO
Appreciations and concerns exercise
Sociotechnical Systems (STS)
Visioning
Quality of Work Life (QWL) programs
Quality Circles
Force-field Analysis
Self-managed teams
Intergroup activities – Process directed
Intergroup activities – Task directed
Organizational mirroring
Intergroup Partnering
Relations Process consultation
Third-party peacemaking at group level
Grid OD Phase 3
Survey Feedback
Total Socio Technical Systems (STS)
Organization Parallel learning structures
MBO (participation forms)
Cultural analysis
Confrontation meetings
Visioning
Strategic planning/ strategic management activities
Real-time strategic change
Grid OD phases 4,5,6
Interdependency exercise
Survey Feedback
Appreciative inquiry
Search conferences
Quality of Work Life (QWL) programs
Total Quality Management (TQM)
Physical settings
Large-scale systems change
9.3.5 Conclusion
This overview of OD interventions—the action component of organization
development – presents some of the thinking that goes into planning and
implementing OD interventions. Leaders and practitioners are encouraged to learn
the full range of interventions so that change efforts will be relevant, timely,
properly structured and ultimately successful.

9.4. REVISION POINTS

1. The secrets to success in OD programs lie in the practice theory. Advances in
behavioural science theory, practice theory, and the range and scope of
 77
interventions have significantly increased the power of OD as a strategy for
change.
 OD interventions are sets of structured activities in which selected
organizational units (target groups or individuals) engage in a task or a
sequence of tasks with the goals of organizational improvement and individual
development.
 some ways to structure activities to promote learning and change are “better”;
and some are “worse”.
 A third set of considerations concerns choosing and sequencing intervention
activities. Michael Beer suggests the following guidelines: Maximize diagnostic
data; Maximize effectiveness; Maximize efficiency; Maximize speed; Maximize
relevance; Minimize psychological and organizational strain.
2. The following list shows some of the results one can expect from OD
interventions: Feedback; Awareness of Changing Socio cultural Norms or
Dyfunctional Current Norms; Increased Interaction and Communication;
Confrontation; Education; Participation; Increased Accountability and Increased
Energy and Optimism.
 The following are the major “families” of OD interventions: Diagnostic
Activities; Team-Building Activities; Intergroup Activities; Education and
Training Activities: Techno-structural or Structural Activities: Process
Consultation Activities; Grid Organizational Development Activities; Third-
Party Peacemaking Activities; Coaching and Counseling Activities: Life-and
Career-Planning Activities; Planning and Goal-setting activities; Strategic
Management Activities; Organizational Transformation Activities etc.
9.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What is an Intervention?
2. Define Socio-cultural norms.
3. What do you mean by Confrontation?
4. Define Third-Party Peacemaking activities.
5. What is meant by Life and Career Planning?
6. Define Organizational Transformation Activities?
7. Explain Goal-Setting.
9.6 SUMMARY
OD interventions are classified by the primary target of the intervention, for
example, individuals, dyads and triads, teams and groups, intergroup relations,
and the total organization. These classification schemes are intended to help you
understand the range and uses of OD interventions.
9.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
Write short note on the following:.
 Interventions
 Feedback
 Awareness of Changing Sociocultural Norms
 Communication
 Confrontation
 78

 Diagnostic Activities
 Team-Building Activities
 Intergroup Activities
 Education and Training Activities
 Techno-structural
 Structural Activities
 Process Consultation Activities
 Grid Organizational Development Activities
 Third-Party Peacemaking Activities;
 Coaching and Counseling Activities:
 Life-and Career-Planning Activities;
 Planning and Goal-setting activities;
 Strategic Management Activities;
 Organizational Transformation Activities etc
9.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
9.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Classify intervention activities for different target groups and explain the
process step by step.
9.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
9.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Prepare a list of intervention activities and understand the step-by-step
process of each activity to the different target organizations.
9.12 KEY WORDS
1. Intervention Activities, Third-Party Peacemaking, Family Group Teambuilding,
Diagnostic Team Building, Dyads/Triads, Organizational Mirror,
Confrontation Meeting.
h
 79
LESSON – 10

TEAM INTERVENTIONS, INTER-GROUP AND THIRD PARTY

PEACEMAKING INTERVENTION
10.1 INTRODUCTION
In this lesson we will examine in detail many of the interventions that are used
in contemporary OD efforts. These interventions are techniques and methods
designed to change the culture of the organization, move it from “where it is” to
where organizational members want it to be, and generally enable them to improve
their practices so that they may better accomplish individual, team, and
organizational goals. The broad natures of these interventions and a preliminary
look at the different types of methods have already been presented. In this lesson
we present descriptions, goals, and mechanics of the various technical tools
directed toward improving the performance of ongoing work teams—from office or
plant floor to board rooms—as well as team configurations.
When tension, conflict, or competition exist among groups, some predictable
things happen: each group sees the other as an “enemy” rather than as a neutral
object; each group describes the other in terms of negative stereotypes; inter-action
and communication between the two groups decrease, cutting off feedback and
data input between them; what intergroup communication and interaction does
take place is typically distorted and inaccurate; each group begins to prize itself
and its products more positively and to denigrate the other group and its products;
each group believes and acts as though it can do no wrong and the other group can
do no right; under certain circumstances the groups may commit acts of sabotage
(of various kinds) against the other groups. Most people are aware of existence of
considerable intergroup conflict in organizations, and most people are aware of the
patterns of behaviour of groups in conflict. But few people know ways to alleviate
the conflict to avoid the consequences of the conflict.
Several strategies for reducing intergroup conflict have been identified in the
literature. They include a “common enemy” (an outside object or group that both
groups dislike, which brings the groups closer together); increasing the interaction and
communication among the groups (increased interaction under favourable conditions
tends to be associated with increased positive feelings and sentiments); findings a
supraordinate goal (a goal that both groups desire to achieve but that neither can
achieve without the help of the other); rotating the members of the groups; and
instituting some forms of training. Even knowing these strategies for reducing
intergroup conflict may not be especially helpful—the questions still remain. How can
we implement conflict-reducing mechanisms? And How do we begin?
The dynamics of conflict and its resolution between two persons in
organizations are similar to between-group conflict and, therefore, in this lesson we
will examine he technology to reduce interpersonal conflict as well as intergroup
conflict. These interventions are important because of the serious impact
intergroup and interpersonal conflict has on team and organizational functioning
and on human satisfaction. In addition, the development of techniques to improve
 80
systems larger than single teams has marked a significant step toward being able to
improve total systems.
10.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About Teams and Work Groups: Strategic Units of Organisation
 Broad Team-Building Interventions
 Process Consultation Interventions
 Techniques and Exercise used in Team Building Interventions
 Third-Party Peacemaking Interventions;
 Organizational Mirror and Partnering.
10.3 CONTENT
10.3.1 Teams and Work Groups: Strategic Units of Organization
10.3.2 Broad Team-Building Interventions
10.3.3 The Formal Group Diagnostic Meeting
10.3.4 The Formal Group Team-Building Meeting
10.3.5 Process Consultation Interventions
10.3.6 A Gestalt Approach to Team Building
10.3.7 Techniques and Exercise used in Team Building: Selected Example
10.3.8 Inter-Group Teambuilding Interventions
10.3.9 Third-Party Peacemaking Interventions
10.3.10 Organizational Mirror Interventions
10.3.11 Partnering
10.3.12 Conclusion
10.3.1 Teams and Work Groups: Strategic Units of Organization
Collaborative management of the work team culture is a fundamental
emphasis of organization development programs. The reality is that much of
organization’s work is accomplished directly or indirectly through teams; work team
culture exerts a significant influence on individual behaviour. In large part, the
techniques and the theory for understanding and improving team processes come
from the laboratory training movement coupled with research in the area of group
dynamics. An appreciation of the importance of the work teams as a determinant of
individual behaviour has come from cultural anthropology, sociology, organization
theory and social psychology.
Although we will use the terms somewhat synonymously, it is important to
make a distinction between groups and teams. “A work group is a number of
persons, usually reporting to a common superior and have some face-to-face
interaction, who have some degree of interdependence in carrying out tasks for the
purpose of achieving organizational goals. A team is a form of group, but has some
characteristics in greater degree than ordinary groups, including a higher
commitment to common goals and a define team as follows: “A team is a small
number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common
purpose, set of performance goals and approach for which they hold themselves
 81
mutually accountable. This distinction is particularly relevant in conceptualizing
the kids of teams desired in organization development efforts, in the creation of self-
managed teams, and in the development of high-performance teams, including
cross-functional teams.
Cross-Functional Teams
Even though a high proportion of OD team interventions involve working with
what we call “intact work teams” (or “formal work groups,” or “natural teams”), OD
interventions are also applicable to other team configurations. In particular, cross-
functional (or multifunctional) teams are widely used in organizations, and OD
approaches have great utility in the formation and ongoing functioning of these teams.
Cross-functional teams are typically comprised of individuals who have a
functional home base—e.g. Manufacturing, design, engineering, or marketing,
etc.—but who meet regularly to solve ongoing challenges requiring input from a
number of functional areas. Such cross-functional teams might be permanent, but
temporary teams can be created to solve short-term problems. Temporary teams
might tackle problems such as planning a product changeover or solving a key
customer problem.
Effective Teams
Likert and McGregor identified some of the characteristics of well-functioning,
effective groups (teams), McGregor’s list of characteristics is as follows:
 The atmosphere tends to be relaxed, comfortable, and informal.
 The group’s task is well understood and accepted by the members.
 The members listen well to each other; there is a lot of task-relevant discussion
in which most members participate.
 People express both their feelings and ideas.
 Conflict and disagreement are present but are centred around ideas and
methods, not personalities and people.
 The group is self-conscious about its own operation.
 Decisions are usually based on consensus, not majority vote.
 When actions are decided upon, clear assignments are made and accepted by
the members.
According to McGregor, when, these conditions are met, the team is likely to
be successful in accomplishing its mission and simultaneously satisfying the
personal and interpersonal needs of its members.
High-Performance Teams
High-performance teams have the same characteristics but to a higher degree.
Katzenbach and Smith say that strong personal commitment to each other—
commitment to the others’ growth and success-distinguishes high-performance
teams from effective teams.
Energized by this extra sense of commitment, high-performance teams
typically reflect strong extensions of their basic characteristics of teams: deeper
sense of purpose more ambitious performance goals, more complete approaches,
fuller mutual accountability, interchangeable as well as complementary skills.
 82
Team interventions in OD tend to be congruent with the characteristics
identified in the preceding lists and are designed to bring about these conditions.
Parenthetically, when groups are asked to describe what their groups would be like
if they were operating at a highly effective level, they generate lists similar to the
preceding lists.
Again, teams and work groups are considered to be the fundamental units of
organizations as well as key leverage points for improving the functioning of the
organization. The following are among the interventions that have been developed to
help teams become more effective while simultaneously addressing organizational
problems and challenges.
10.3.2 Broad Team-Building Interventions
Probably the most important single group of interventions in OD are team-
building activities, the goals of which are the improvement and increased
effectiveness of various teams within the organizations. Some interventions focus
on the intact work team composed of a boss and subordinates, which we call the
formal group. Other interventions focus on special teams such as start-up teams,
newly constituted teams due to mergers, organization structure changes, or plant
start-ups; task forces; cross-functional project teams; and committees.
Team-building interventions are typically directed toward four main areas:
diagnosis, task accomplishments, team relationships, and team and organization
processes. These separate thrusts are diagrammed in Figure 10.1.

Figure 10.1. Varieties of Team-Building Interventions

 83
Let us examine several of these interventions as they might be conducted with
a formal group. The major actors are a consultant, who is not a member of the
group (the third party), the group leader, and the group members.
10.3.3 The Formal Group Diagnostic Meeting
The purpose of the formal group diagnostic meeting is to conduct a general
critique of the performance of the group, that is, to take stock of “where we are
going” and “how we are doing”, and to uncover and identify problems so that they
may be worked on. Typically the leader and the consultant discuss the idea first,
and if a genuine need for a diagnostic meeting exists, the idea is put to the group
for their reactions. The leader may structure his or her testing for the group’s
reaction in the form of the following questions: what are our strengths? What
problems do we have that we should work on? How are we doing in regard to our
assigned tasks? How are our relationships with each other? What opportunities
should we be taking advantage of?
If the group decides to conduct the formal group of diagnostic meeting, after
some thinking about their own performance, the group assembles for a half-day or
a day meeting. Several ways are available for getting the diagnostic data out, that
is, making the information public:
 A total-group discussion involves everyone making individual contributions to
the total assemblage.
 Sub grouping involves breaking down into smaller groups where a more
intensive discussion takes place, then the subgroups report back to the total
group. (This method is particularly effective because people have more “air
time” and feel a higher degree of safety in the anonymity of a subgroup report).
 A pairing of two individuals interview each other or simply discuss their ideas
with each other, each pair then reports back to the total group.
After the data are shared throughout the group, the next steps consists of
discussing the issues, grouping the issues in terms of themes (say, planning
problems, interface problems, goal ambiguity problems), and getting a preliminary
look at the next action steps. The next action steps may call for a team-building
meeting, may assign different persons to task groups to work on the problems, or
may include a number of other strategies that involve moving from the diagnostic
data to corrective action taking. It should be noted however that the primary focus
of the group diagnostic meeting is to surface issues and problems that should be
worked on and to decide how to take action steps. Taking action is generally a post
meeting activity or an activity for subsequent team meetings.
The formal group diagnostic meeting permits a group to critique itself and to
identify its strengths and problems areas, and it allows everyone to participate in
generating the necessary data. The data then form the basis for planning future
actions. Such a meeting requires only a minimal expenditure of time. Semi-annual
diagnostic meetings afford an excellent method for staying on top of problems. A
key secret to the success of a short diagnostic meeting is the realization by all
 84
participants that the meeting is for the purpose of identifying problems, not solving
problems.
Diagnostic meetings for newly constituted groups, say, task forces or new
teams resulting from mergers or acquisitions, are similar in form and function to
the group diagnostic meeting. These meetings may have to be held more frequently
to stay ahead of the problems. Furthermore, linking diagnostic meetings with
problem-solving sessions or team-building sessions may be indicated for newly
constituted teams.
10.3.4 The Formal Group Team-Building Meeting
The formal group team-building meeting has the goal of improving the team’s
effectiveness through better management of task demands, relationship demands,
and group process. It is an inward look by the team at its own performance,
behaviour, and culture for the purposes of eliminating dysfunctional behaviours
and strengthening functional ones. The group critiques its performance, analyzes
its way of doing things, and attempts to develop strategies to improve its operation.
Sometimes the purpose of the meeting is a special agenda item, such as developing
the group’s performance goals for the coming year. Often the purpose of the
meeting is for the more general charge expressed in the questions: How can we
build ourselves into a better functioning team? And How can we do the job better?
The team-building session is usually initiated by the manager in consultation
with the third party. The idea is then tested for reactions within the group.
(Conversely, the group may initiate the idea and take it to the boss if they sense
pressing problems that need examination and solution.) A good length of time for
the meeting is anywhere from one to three days. The session should be held away
from the work place.
The usual practice for these sessions is to have the consultant interview each
of the group members and the leader prior to the meeting, asking them what the
strengths of the group are, what their problems are, how they think the group
functions, and what obstacles are in the way of the group performing better. These
interview data are categorized into themes by the consultant, who presents the
themes to the group at the beginning of the meeting. The group examines and
discusses the issues, ranks them in order of their importance, examines the
underlying dynamics of the problems, begins to work on solutions to the problems,
and establishes some action steps to bring about the changes deemed desirable. It
is imperative to have follow-up meetings to determine whether the action steps that
were outlined were taken and to determine whether those steps had the desired
effects. This flow of events constitutes the team-building meeting. But let us look
closer at the components.
The meetings may be called for a special purpose, such as a new member
coming into the group, an organization structure change, or planning for the next
year, or it may primarily be devoted to maintaining and managing the group’s
 85
culture and processes. If it is a special-purpose meeting, time should still be
allocated to an examination and critique of the group’s dynamics.
As mentioned previously, it is often desirable for the consultants to interview
the entire group, using an open-ended approach, such as “What things do you see
getting in the way of this group being a better one?” This procedure introduce the
consultant to the group members and allows the consultant to assess commitment
to the team-building session. The consultant decides in advance and informs the
interviewees whether the information each gives will be considered public or
confidential. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages. For example, if the
information in the interviews is confidential, the interviewees may be more candid
and open than if the information is to be public. On the other hand, treating the
information as public data helps to set a climate of openness, trust, and
constructive problem solving. If the information is considered confidential, the
consultant is careful to report the findings in a general way that does not reveal the
sources of information. Other ways the agenda items for the meeting are developed
are through such devices as the formal group diagnostic meeting or through a
survey.
The consultant presents the interview results in terms of themes. When
everyone understands the themes, these themes are ranked by the group in terms
of their importance; the most important ones form the agenda for the meeting. In
the course of the meeting, much interpersonal and group process information will
be generated, which may also be examined. The group thus works on two sets of
items; the agenda items and the items that emerge from the interactions of the
participants.
As important problems are discussed, alternatives for action are developed.
Generally, the team-building meeting involves deciding on action steps for
remedying problems and setting target dates for “who will do what when”.
Significant variations of the team-building session entail devoting time to
problem-solving methods, planning and goal-setting methods, conflict resolution
techniques, and the like. These special activities are usually initiated in response to
the needs demonstrated or stated by the group. The consultant often makes
conceptual inputs (mini-lectures) or structures the situation so that a particular
problem or process becomes the focus. A wide variety of exercises may be
interspersed into the three-day meeting, depending upon the problems identified
and the group phenomena that emerge.
Purposes of Team Building
Figure 10.1 suggests that team-building sessions may be directed toward
problem solving for task accomplishment, examining and improving interpersonal
relationships, or managing the group’s culture and processes. In fact, one of these
issues may be the principle reason for holding the team-building meeting. For
example, suppose that the meeting is designed as a team problem-solving session
to examine the impact on the team of a new function or task being added to the
 86
group’s work requirements. Even in this case a portion of the session will probably
be reserved for reflecting on how the team is solving its problems, that is, critiquing
the group’s processes. In this way the team becomes more effective at both the task
level and the process level.
Richard Beckhard lists, in order of importance, the four major reasons or
purposes involved in having teams meet other than for the sharing of information:
(1) to set goals and/or priorities.... (2) to analyze or allocate the way work is
performed .... (3) to examine the way a group is working, its processes (such as
norms, decision making, communications).... and (4) to examine relationships
among the people doing the work. He notes that often all four items will be covered
in a single team-building session, but it is imperative that the primary goal be clear
and accepted by all. It is especially important that the leader and the consultant
agree on the primary goal. Often the consultant will have a priority list of items that
are inverse to those just given—from relationships among people as most
important, to the way the group works together as next most important, to the work
itself next, and to goals and priorities as least important. Lack of agreement on the
primary goal can lead to wasted energy and a generally unproductive and
frustrating team-building session. We agree with Beckhard when he states that the
consultant should help to implement the group leader’s goals for the session, not
the consultant’s goals.
Bell and Resenzweig relied heavily upon team-building workshops in an
OD program in a municipal government organization and came to the
following assessment: Our experience leads us to the tentative conclusion that
some relatively simple notions underlie success, namely:
1. Get the right people together for
2. A large block of uninterrupted time
3. To work on high-priority problems or opportunity that
4. They have identified and that are worked on
5. In ways that are structured to enhance the likelihood of
6. Realistic solutions and action plans that are
7. Implemented enthusiastically and
8. Followed up to assess actual versus expected results.
10.3.5 Process Consultation Interventions
The process consultation model is similar to team building interventions expect
that process consultation places greater emphasis on diagnosing and understanding
process events. Furthermore, the consultant’s role is more nondirective and
questioning as he or she gets the groups to solve their own problems.
Process Consultation represents an approach or a method for intervening in
an ongoing system. The crux of this approach is that a skilled third party
(consultant) works with individuals and groups to help them learn about human
and social processes and learn to solve problems that stem from process events.
This approach has been around a long time; many practitioners operate from this
 87
stance. Edgar Schein pulled together the disparate practices and principles of
process consultation in a comprehensive exposition. Schein also describes the role
of PC in organization development.
Process consultation consists of many different interventions; it is not any
single thing the consultant does. The paramount goal of process consultation is
stated by Schein as follows: The job of the process consultant is to help the
organization solve its own problem by making it aware of organizational processes,
the consequences of these processes, and the mechanisms by which they can be
changed. The process consultant helps the organization to learn from self-diagnosis
and self-intervention. The ultimate concern of the process consultant is the
organization’s capacity to do for itself what he has done for it. Where the standard
consultant is more concerned about passing on his knowledge, the process
consultant is concerned about passing on his skills and values.
Some particularly important organizational processes are communications, the
roles and functions of group members, group problem solving and decision-making,
group norms and group growth, leadership and authority, and intergroup
cooperation and competition. The process consultation works with the organization,
typically in work teams, and helps them to develop the skills necessary to diagnose
and solve the process problems that arise.
Schein describes the kinds of interventions he believes the process consultant
should make:
1. Agenda-setting interventions, consisting of:
 Questions which direct attention to interpersonal issues.
 Process-analysis periods
 Agenda review and testing procedures
 Meeting devoted to interpersonal process
 Conceptual input on interpersonal-process topics
2. Feedback of observations or other data, consisting of:
 Feedback to groups during process analysis or regular work time
 Feedback to individuals after meetings or after data-gathering
3. Coaching or counselling of individuals
4. Structural suggestions:
 Pertaining to group membership
 Pertaining to communication or interaction patterns
 Pertaining to allocation of work, assignment of responsibility, and lines of
authority.
In Schein’s view, the process consultant would most often make interventions
in that same order: agenda setting, feedback of observations or other data,
counselling and coaching, and least like, structural suggestions. Specific
recommendations for the solution of substantive problems are not listed because to
Schein such interventions violate the underlying values of the process consultation
model in that the consultant is acting as an expert rather than as a resource.
 88
In coaching and counselling interventions, which may be considered either as
a part of process consultation as a set of interventions in their own right, the
consultant is placed in the role of responding to such questions from groups or
individuals as “What do you think I should do in this instance to improve my
performance?” “Now that I can see some areas for improvement, how do I go about
changing my behaviour?”
Schein sees the consultant’s role in coaching and counselling situations to be
following: “The consultant’s role then becomes one of adding alternatives to those
already brought up by the client, and helping the client to analyze the costs and
benefits of the various alternatives which have been mentioned. Thus the
consultant, when counselling either individuals or groups, continues to maintain
the posture that real improvements and changes in behaviour should those decided
upon by the client. The consultant serves to reflect or mirror accurate feedback, to
listen to alternatives and suggest new ones (often through questions designed to
expand the client’s horizons), and to assist the client in evaluating alternatives for
feasibility, relevance, and appropriateness.
The basic congruence between theories of counselling and the theory of
process consultation is pointed out by Schein: “In both cases it is essential to help
the client improve his ability to observe and process data about him accept and
learn from feedback and to help him become an active participant with the
counsellor/ consultant in identifying and solving his own problems.
10.3.6 A Gestalt Approach to Team Building
A form of tam building that focuses more on the individual than the group is
the Gestalt approach to OD. The major advocate of this orientation is Stanley M.
Herman, a management and OD consultant. The approach rests on a form of
psychotherapy developed by Frederick S. “Fritz” Pearls called Gestalt therapy.
Gestalt therapy is based on the belief that persons function as whole, total
organisms. And each person possesses positive and negative characteristics that
must be “owned upto” and permitted expression. People get into trouble when they
get fragmented, when they do not accepted their total selves, and when they are
trying to live upto the demands (“should”) of other rather than being themselves.
Robert Harman lists the goals of Gestalt therapy as awareness, integration,
maturation, authenticity, self-regulation, and behaviour change. Basically, one
must come to terms with oneself, must accept responsibility for one’s actions, must
experience and live in the “here and now,” and must stop blocking off awareness,
authenticity, and the like by dysfunctional behaviours.
Stanley Herman applies a Gestalt orientation to organization development,
especially in working with leader-subordinate relations and team building. The
primary thrust is to make the individual stronger, more authentic, and more in
touch with the individual’s own feelings; building a better team may result, but it is
not the primary desired outcome.
To do this people must be able to express their feelings fully, both positive and
negative. They must “get in touch” with “Where they are” on issues, relations with
others, and relations with selves. They must learn to “stay with” transactions with
 89
others and work them through to resolution rather than suppressing negative feelings
or cutting off the transactions prematurely. They must learn to accept the polarities
within themselves—weakness-strength, autocratic-democratic urges and so forth.
The Gestalt OD practitioner fosters the expression of positive and negative
feelings, encourages people to stay with transactions, structures exercises that
cause individuals to become more aware of what they want from others, and
pushes toward greater authenticity for everyone. The gestalt OD practitioner often
works within a group setting, but the focus is usually on individuals.
We are somewhat ambivalent about the Gestalt orientation to OD. On the one
hand, better individual functioning is a laudable goal and deserves support. On the
other hand, it is an intervention of considerable “depth” and one that people might
not choose to expose themselves to—they may believe they are being coerced into a
therapeutic situation that they would prefer to avoid. One thing is certain: the
Gestalt orientation to team building should not be used except by practitioners
trained in this method.
10.3.8 Techniques and Exercises Used in Team Building: Selected Example
A number of techniques and exercises are used in team building to facilitate team
performance and to address specific problematic issues. They are useful and powerful
ways to structure the team’s activities and energies in order to achieve understanding
of the issues and to take corrective actions. Before using these techniques, a careful
diagnosis should be made to ensure that the technique is appropriate. Team-building
sessions often include many of these techniques and exercises.
Role Analysis Technique (Example)
The role analysis technique intervention is designed to clarify role expectations
and obligations of team members to improve team effectiveness. In organizations
individuals fill different specialized roles in which they manifest certain behaviours.
This division of labour and function facilitates organization performance. Often
however, the role incumbent may not have a clear idea of the behaviours expected
of him or her by others and, equally often, what others can do to help the
incumbent fulfil the role is not understood. Ishwar Dayal and John M. Thomas
developed a technique for clarifying the roles of the top management of a new
organization in India. This technique is particularly applicable for new teams, but it
may also be helpful in established teams where role ambiguity or confusion exists.
The intervention is predicated on the belief that consensual determination of role
requirements for team members, consisting of a joint building of the requirements
by all concerned, leads to more mutually satisfactory and productive behaviour.
Dayal and Thomas call the activity the role analysis technique.
In a structured series of steps, role incumbents, in conjunction with team
members, define and delineate role requirements. The role being defined is called
the focal role. In a new organization, it may be desirable to conduct a role analysis
for each of the major roles.
 90
The first step consists of an analysis of the focal role initiated by the focal role
individual. The role, its place in the organization, the rationale for its existence, and its
place in achieving overall organization goals are examined along with the specific
duties of the office. The specific duties and behaviours are listed on a chalkboard and
are discussed by the entire team. Behaviours are added and deleted until the group
and the role incumbent are satisfied that they have defined the role completely.
The second step examines the focal role incumbent’s expectations of others.
The incumbent lists his or her expectations of the other roles in the group that
most affected the incumbent’s own role performance, and these expectations are
discussed, modified added to, and agreed upon by the entire group.
The third step consists of explicating others’ expectations and desired behaviours
of the focal role, that is, the members of the group describe what they want from and
expect from the incumbent in the focal role. These expectations of others are
discussed, modified, and agreed upon by the group and the focal role person.
Upon conclusion of this step, the focal role person assumes responsibility for
making a written summary of the role as it has been defined; this summary is
called a role profile and is derived from the results of the discussions in steps 1
through 3. Dayal and Thomas describe the role profile as ... (a) a set of activities
classified as the prescribed and discretionary elements of the role, (b) the obligation
of the role to each role in its set, and (c) the expectations of this role from others in
its set. Viewed in Toto, this provides a comprehensive understanding of each
individual’s role space.
The written role profile is briefly reviewed at the following meeting before
another focal rile is analyzed. The accepted role profile constitutes the role activities
for the focal role person.
This intervention can be nonthreatening activity with high payoff. Often the
mutual demands, expectations and obligations of interdependent team members
have never been publicly examined. Each role incumbent wonder why “those other
people” are “not doing what they are supposed to do,” while in reality all the
incumbents are performing as they think they are supposed to. Collaborative role
analysis and definition by the entire work group not only clarifies who is to do what
but ensures commitment to the role once it has been clarified.
From our experience, this procedure can be shortened if there is already high
visibility and understanding of the current activities of various role incumbents. For
example, if one of the problems facing an organization is confusion over the duties
of the board of directors and the president or the executive director, the following
sequence can be high productive.
1. With the board listening, the president and his/her staff members discuss this
question: “If the board were operating in an optimally effective way, what
would they be doing?”
2. During this discussion, responses are made visible on a chalkboard or on
large newsprint and disagreements are recorded.
 91
3. After 45 minutes or so, the list is modified on the basis of general consensus
of the total group.
4. The procedure is repeated, but this time the president listens while staff and
board members discuss the question, “If the president were operating in an
optimally effective way, what would he/she be doing?” Again, responses are
made visible during the discussion. The president responds, and then the
group attempts consensus.
As with the longer technique, this procedure helps to clarify role expectations
and obligations and frequently leads to some significant shifts in the whole network
of activities of the management group, including the board. For example, we have
seen this procedure results in boards shifting their activities almost exclusively to
policy determination, pulling away from previously dysfunctional tinkers with day-
to-day operating problems, and delegating operations to the president and the staff.
10.3.8 Intergroup Team-Building Interventions
The focus of this team-building group of OD interventions is on improving
intergroup relations. The goals of these activities are to increase communications
and interactions between work-related groups, to reduce to reduce the amount of
dysfunctional competition, and to replace a parochial independent point of view
with an awareness of the necessity for interdependence of action calling on the best
efforts of both groups. A significant amount of dysfunctional energy spent in
competition, misunderstanding, miscommunication, and misperception is not
uncommon between groups. Organizational reward contrasted with total-
organization gaol attainment. Organization development methods provide ways of
increasing intergroup cooperation and communication, as we will see in the
following series of interventions.
One set of activities developed by Blake, Shepard, and Mouton is widely
applicable to situations where relations between groups are strained or overtly
hostile. The steps are these:
Step-1: The leaders of the two groups (or the total membership) meet with the
consultant and are asked if they think the relations between the two groups
can be better and are asked if they are willing to search for mechanisms or
procedures that may improve intergroup relations. Their concurrence that
they are willing to search for ameliorative mechanisms is all that they are
asked to commit themselves to at that time. If they agree, with some prior
planning as to time and place, the following activities take place.
Step-2: The intergroup intervention per se begins now. The two groups met in
separate rooms and build two lists. In one list they give their thoughts,
attitudes, feelings, and perceptions of the other group—what the other group
is like, what it does that gets in their way, and so on. In the second list the
group tries to predict what the other group is saying about them in its list—
that is, they try to anticipate what the other group dislikes about them, how
the other group sees them and so on. Both groups build these two lists.
 92
Step-3: The two groups come together to share with each other the information on
the lists. Group A reads its list of how it sees Group B and what it dislikes
about it. The consultant imposes a rule of no discussion of the items on the
lists and limits questions to clarifying the meaning of the lists only. Next,
Group A reads its list of what it expected Group B would say about it, and
Group B reads its list of what it thought Group A would say about it.
Step-4: The two groups return to their separate meeting places and are given two
tasks. First they react to and discuss what they have learned about
themselves and the other group. It typically happens that many areas of
disagreement and friction are discovered to rest on misperceptions and
miscommunication; these issues are readily resolved through the information
sharing of the lists. The differences between the two groups are seen not to be
as great as was imagined, and the problems between them are seen to be
fewer than imagined. After this discussion, the group is given a second task;
to make a list of the priority issues that still need to be resolved between the
two groups. The list is generally much smaller than the original list. Each
group builds such a list.
Step-5: The two groups come back together and share lists with each other. After
comparing their lists, they then make one list containing the issues and
problems that should be resolved. They set priorities on the items in terms of
importance and immediacy. Together they generate action steps for resolving
the issues and assign responsibilities for the actions “who will do what when”
is agreed upon for the most important items. That concludes the intervention.
Step-6: As a follow-up to the intergroup team-building activity, a meeting of the two
groups or their leader is desirable to determine whether the action steps have
in fact occurred and to assess how the groups are doing on their action plans.
This step ensures that the momentum of the intergroup intervention is not
lost.
This procedure can also be used with large groups drawn from two large
populations. For example, after an expression of interest by parole officers and
police officers in improving mutual understanding and relationships, we spent an
evening with the two groups in an exercise called Project Understanding. By
coincidence, members of the two groups happened to be attending workshops the
same week at the same conference centre. We simply divided the two large
populations into small groups and paired off these small groups and conducted an
exercise almost identical to the sequence given. Tentative action recommendations
were posted in the large general session room for informal perusal during a social
activity that followed.
A slightly modified version of this procedure is presented by Fordyce and Weil
based on their experiences at TRW systems. In this version, two groups that have
decided to work on improving their intergroup relations come together for the
 93
intergroup team-building meeting and are separated into two meeting rooms. Each
group is assigned the task of building three listed as follows:
1. A “positive feedback” list containing the things the group values and likes
about the other group;
2. A “bug” list containing the things the group does not like about the other
group;
3. An “empathy” list containing a prediction of what the other group is saying in
its list.
The two groups come together, and spokespeople for the groups read their
lists. Questions are limited to issues of clarification only; discussion of the items is
disallowed.
At this point, instead of breaking into separate groups again, the total group
together builds an agenda or a master list of the major problems and unresolved
issues between the two groups. The issues are ranked in terms of importance.
Subgroups are formed containing members from each group are given the task
of discussing and working on each item. The subgroups, all report back to the total
group.
On the basis of the information from the subgroups, the work on the issues
that has being going on, and the total information shared by the two groups, the
participants now build a list of action steps for improving intergroup relations and
commit themselves to carrying out the actions. For each of the action steps, people
are assigned specific responsibilities and an overall schedule of completion for the
action steps is recorded.
We have found simultaneous work with three groups is possible in these kinds
of intergroup activities, without the participants (or the consultants) findings the
procedure too confusing. For example, in working with the key people in one Native
American tribal organization, we requested each of three groups to develop lists
about the other two groups plus themselves and to share the results in the total
group. More specifically, the tribal council (one of the three groups) was requested
to develop the following lists:
i) How the tribal council sees the tribal staff
a) Things we like about the tribal staff
b) Concerns we have about the tribal staff
ii) What we (the tribal council) predict the tribal staff will say about us
iii) How the tribal council sees the Community Action Program (CAP) staff
a) Things we like about the CAP staff
b) Concerns we have about the CAP staff
iv) What we (the tribal council) predict the CAP staff will say about us.
Concurrently, the tribal staff and the CAP staff developed comparable lists
reflecting their perceptions of the other two groups and their predictions of what
would be said about them.
 94
Time and again, these kinds of structured intergroup activities have been
found, empirically, to bring about better intergroup relations, in diverse situations,
and in a relatively short time period (say, a day). The intergroup problems and
frictions are decreased or resolved, and intergroup communication and interactions
are increased.
10.3.9 Third-Party Peacemaking Interventions
Conflict management can be a major component in the professional life of the
OD practitioner. As Fisher, Ury, and Patton say in their book Getting to Yea, “More
and more occasions require negotiations; conflicts is a growth industry”. In this
section we will discuss OD interventions that can be used when two persons are in
conflict and some of the theory underlying these interventions.
Walton’s Approach to Third-Party Peacemaking
Third-party interventions into conflict situations have the potential to control
(contain) the conflict or resolve it. R.E. Walton has presented a statement of theory
and practice for third-party peacemaking interventions that is both important in its
own right and important for its role in organization development. His book is
directed toward interpersonal conflict—understanding it and intervening in ways to
control or resolve the conflict. This intervention technique is somewhat related to
intergroup relations described previously, but many aspects are unique to conflict
situations involving only two people. In this section, rather than describe specific
interventions, we explicate some of the features of the theory presented by Walton.
A basic feature of third-party intervention is confrontation: the two principals
must be willing to confront the fact that conflict exists and that it has
consequences for the effectiveness of the two parties involved. The third party must
know how, when and where to utilize confrontation tactics that expose the conflict
for examination.
The third party must be able to diagnose conflict situations, and Walton
presents a diagnostic model of interpersonal conflict based on four basic elements:
the conflict issues, the precipitating circumstances, the conflict-relevant acts of the
principals, and the consequences of the conflict. In addition, conflict is a cyclical
process, and cycles may be benevolent, malevolent, or self-maintaining. For
accurate diagnosis it is particularly important to know the source of the conflict.
Walton speaks to this issue:
A major distinction is drawn between substantive and emotional conflict.
Substantive issues involve disagreements over policies and practices, competitive
bids for the same resources, and differing conceptions of role and role relationships.
Emotional issues involve negative feelings between the parties (e.g., anger, distrust,
scorn, resentment, fear, rejection).
This distinction is important for the third-party consultant in that substantive
issues require problem-solving and bargaining behaviours between the principals,
while emotional issues require restructuring perceptions and working through
negative feelings.
 95
Intervention tactics for the third part consists of structuring confrontation and
dialogue between the principals. Many choice points exist for the consultant.
Walton lists the ingredients of productive confrontation (interpretation is shown in
brackets).
1. Mutual positive motion (both parties are disposed to attempts to resolve the
conflict).
2. Balance in the situational power of the two principals (power party is most
conductive to success).
3. Synchronization of their confrontation efforts (initiatives and readiness to
confront should occur in concert between the two parties).
4. Appropriate pacing of the differentiation and integration phases of a dialogue
(time must be allowed for working through of negative feelings and
clarification of ambivalent or positive feelings)
5. Conditions favouring openness in dialogue (norms supporting openness and
reassurances for openness should be structured for the parties)
6. Reliable communicative signs (making certain each can understand the
other)
7. Optimum tension in the situation (there should be moderate stress on the
parties).
Most of these ingredients are self-explanatory, but some elaboration may be
helpful on the differentiation and integration phases. In the differentiation phase of
conflict, the principals clarify the differences that divide them and sort out the
negative feelings they have; in the integration phase, the principals seek to clarify
their commonalities, the positive feelings or ambivalence that may exist, and the
commonality of their goals.
The third party will intervene directly and indirectly in facilitating dialogue
between the principals. Examples of direct interventions would be interviewing the
principals before a confrontation meeting, helping to set the agenda, attending to
the pace of the third party would be setting the meeting on neutral turf, setting
time boundaries on the interaction and the like.
10.3.10 Organization Mirror Interventions
The organization mirror is a set of activities in which a particular
organizational group, the host group, gets feedback from representatives from
several other organizational groups about how it is perceived and regarded. This
intervention is designed to improve the relationships between groups and increase
the intergroup work effectiveness. It is different from the intergroup team-building
intervention in that three or more groups are involved, representatives of other
work-related groups typically participate rather than the full membership, and the
focus is to assist the host unit that requested the meeting.
The flow of events is as follows: an organizational unit that is experiencing
difficulties with units to which its work is related may ask key people from those
other units to come to a meeting to provide feedback on how they see the host unit.
 96
The consultant often interviews the people attending the meeting before the meeting
takes place in order to get a sense of the problem and their magnitude, to prepare
the participants, and to answer any questions that the participants may have.
After opening remarks by the manager of the host group, in which he or she
sets the climate by stating that the host group genuinely wants to hear how the
unit is perceived, the consultant feeds back to the total group information from the
interviews. The outsiders “fishbowl” to discuss and explore the data presented by
the consultant. (A fishbowl is a group seating and talking configuration in which
there is an inner circle of chairs for people who talk and an outside circle of
observers and non-interactions.) The fishbowl allows the invited participants to talk
about the host unit in a natural, uninterrupted way while the host group members
listen and learn. Following this, the host group members fishbowl and talk about
what they have heard, ask for any clarification, and generally seek to understand
the information they have heard. At this point, a general discussion can ensure that
everyone understands what is being said, but at this time the participants do not
start to work on the problems that have been uncovered.
For actually working on the problems, subgroups composed of both host group
members and invited participants are formed. The subgroups are asked to identify
the most important changes that need to be made to improve the host unit’s
effectiveness. After the small groups have identified the key problems, the total
group convenes to make a master list to work out specific action plans for bringing
about the changes deemed most important. The total group hears a summary
report from each subgroup. Action plans are firmed up, people are assigned to
tasks, and target dates for completion are agreed upon. This last group of activities
concludes the organisation mirror intervention, but a follow-up meeting to assess
progress and to review action steps in strongly recommended.
In a short period of time an organizational unit can get the feedback it needs to
improve its relations with significant work-related groups. The organization mirror
intervention provides this feedback effectively. It is imperative that following the
meeting the host group in fact implement the action plans that were developed in
the meeting.
10.3.11 Partnering
In situations in which two or more organizations are likely to incur unnecessary
conflict and cost overruns such as in the owner-contractor relationships in a large
construction project, an intervention called partnering can be productive for both
parties. Partnering is a variation of team building, intergroup team building, and
strategic planning having the objective of forming “an effective problem-finding/
problem-solving management team composed of personnel from both parties, thus
creating a single culture with one set of goals and objectives for the project.
Partnering has been used in the private sector—for example, Flour Daniel and Du
Pont—and n military and government construction.
 97
The people from both parties who should be involved are identified by Donald
Mosely and colleagues: “Ideally, partnering involves all the functions in the
construction project, including engineering and design, site management, and
home office support. In a typical partnering project involving the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers and a contractor, interventions included these steps or events:
1. The Corps of Engineers selected the consultants.
2. A retreat at a neutral site lasting from two and one-half to four and one-half
days was scheduled prior to the beginning of construction. Participants
included key managers from home offices, site managers from both the Corps
and the contractor, and the consultants.
3. The workshop focused on “Team-building, action research, and planning—
including advanced conflict resolution methods, developing a shared vision,
and strategic planning with a common set of goals and objectives.” Several
exercises were used at the beginning to “break the ice” and to demonstrate the
utility of group decision making. Lists were developed and shared showing
both the “strengths” and “problems” of the Corps and the contractor. Mixed
groups comprised of members from both parties selected one or more of the
problems to diagnose further, identified and evaluated possible courses of
action, and made recommendations to the total group.
4. At the workshop, mutual commitment to teamwork, equitable problem solving,
and open communications was made.
5. A follow-up workshop-this one two days in length—was held three months
after construction began.
6. At six months, “on-site data-gathering visits were conducted with follow-up
two-day workshops involving all key players.”
While partnering did not solve all of the problems that surfaced during the life
of the various projects, high success rates have been reported, and participants
tended to report “better results than on previous non-partnered projects”. As a
result, partnering has been used on several other large government projects
involving the Air Force, Navy, and NASA, and their contractors.
10.3.12 CONCLUSION
Intergroup team building, third-party peacemaking, the organizational mirror,
and partnering are four major interventions that have been developed to improve
intergroup and interpersonal relations. They all work; that is, they actually reduce
intergroup and interpersonal conflict and improve relationships. Of all the
dynamics of the intergroup and interpersonal interventions, those just listed
indicate some of the reasons why such interventions usually work. The intergroup
and interpersonal interventions are an important part of the OD practitioner’s
repertoire. They require some skills in their execution, but the process itself carries
the brunt of the work in making them effective interventions.
10.4 REVISION POINTS
The interventions important to organizational development to influence the
serious impact intergroup and interpersonal conflict has on team and
 98
organizational functioning and on human satisfaction. These practices make the
target groups in making them very effective through interventions.
10.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Strategic Units of Organization?
2. Define Team-Building Intervention?
3. What do you mean by Diagnostic meeting?
4. What is Process Consultation?
5. Write a short note on Gestalt Approach to team building.
6. Explain with an example on Team-Building techniques.
7. What is Organizational Mirror Intervention
8. Define: Partnering.
10.6 SUMMARY
Team building produces such powerful positive results because it is an
intervention in harmony with the nature of organizations as social systems.
Further, under a system of division of labour parts of the total organizational task
are assigned to teams; and then that teams assignment is subdivided and assigned
to individuals. In most cases individual members of the team are interdependently
related to each other and must coordinate and integrate individual efforts in order
to achieve successful task accomplishment. Conceptualizing the team as the
relevant system rather than individuals was the profound insight developed by
early OD pioneers. Discussing the nature of effective teams, in this lesson we have
examined the major sets of activities that constitute team-building interventions
and their directed to improving intergroup relations.
10.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:.
a) Teams and Work Groups
b) Process Consultation Intervention
c) A Gestalt Approach to Team Building
d) Inter-group Team Building
e) Third-Party Peacemaking Intervention
f) Organizational Mirror
10.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
10.9 ASSIGNMENTS
1. Explain the techniques and exercise used in Team-Building with examples.
2. Explain in detail about Process Consultation Interventions.
10.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
 99
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
10.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify various problems prevailed in Corporations especially from Teams and
Work groups. Formulate a suitable intervention strategy to develop the
corporations.
10.12 KEY WORDS
1. Team-Building Interventions, Formal Group, Diagnostic Meeting, Process
Consultation, Inter-Group Team-Building, Partnering.
H
 100
LESSON – 11

COMPREHENSIVE OD INTERVENTIONS AND STRUCTURAL

INTERVENTIONS
11.1 INTRODUCTION
In this lesson we examine OD interventions that are comprehensive in terms of
the extent to which the total organization is involved and/or the depth of cultural
change addressed. This lesson “getting the whole system in the room”, search and
future search conferences, Beckhard’s confrontation meeting, strategic
management activities, real time strategic change, stream analysis, survey
feedback, appreciative inquiry, Grid OD, and Schein’s cultural analysis are
discussed. We will also discuss large-scale change and high performance systems
and trans-organizational development, a variation of OD that involves several
organizations.
11.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About various comprehensive Organizational Development Interventions
 Different Structural Interventions
11.3 CONTENT
11.3.1 Getting the whole system in the room
11.3.2 Search Conferences and Future Search Conferences
11.3.3 Beckhard’s Confrontation Meeting
11.3.4 Strategic Management Activities
11.3.5 Real-time Strategic Change
11.3.6 Stream Analysis
11.3.7 Survey Feedback
11.3.8 Appreciative Inquiry
11.3.9 Grid Organization Development
11.3.10 Schein’s Cultural Analysis
11.3.11 Conclusion
11.3.1 Getting the Whole System in the Room
Phrases like “getting the whole system in the room” are appearing with
increasing frequency in OD practice. What OD professionals are talking about is the
usefulness of getting all of the key actors of a complex organization or system
together in a team-building, future-planning kind of session. Future search
conferences comprise one version of “getting whole system in the room,” and
Beckhard’s confrontation meeting is another version.
The rationale for inviting all of the key actors of a complex system to meet
together is congruent with systems theory and an extension of the assumptions
underlying team building. If you get all of the people with crucial interdependencies
together to work on matters of mutual concern, good things can happen. In this
 101
case, the system is conceptualized as a total organization or as several
organizations in interaction.
“Getting the whole system in one room” has a long and venerable history,
including the art and science of conference planning and running large meetings.
For example, Burke and Beckhard’s book, Conference Planning, has essays that go
back to the 1940s and that are relevant to today’s OD practice. Examples of the
“whole system” might be
 Managers of all of the functional areas in a business
 Representatives of top management, a cross section of employees from all
levels, and simpler and customer representatives.
 All of the librarians in a state or region plus the director and staff of the state
library system.
 Directors of all of the social service agencies in a community.
The latter is an example of the overlap between OD and community development,
an overlap that has been apparent since scholar/ practitioners like Eva Schindler-
Rainman were working with community agencies in the 1950s and 1960s.
11.3.2 Search Conferences and Future Search Conferences
“Search conferences” and “future search conferences” are similar, but have
slightly different geographical and theoretical foundations. “Search” conferences
largely emerged with consulting practice in Great Britain, Europe, and Australia,
while “future search” conferencing has been largely an American phenomenon,
although both have had extensive applications in the United States.
The basic design of the search conference has the three following phases as quoted from
Emery and Purser’s The Search Conference:
Phase One: Environmental Appreciation changes in the world around us desirable
and probable future.
Phase Two: System Analysis: History of the system; Analysis of the present
system; Desirable future for the search.
Phase Three: Integration of system and environment, Dealing with constraints,
Strategies and action plans.
According to Emery and Purser, “The Search Conference is normally a two-
and-a-half day event, usually held off-site in a retreat like setting. Ideally twenty to
thirty-five people are selected to participate ... based on such criteria as their
knowledge of the system and their potential for taking responsibility for
implementation... The idea is to get the right system in the room. Extensive use is
made of both small-group discussions and plenary sessions, “using flip-chart paper
to record everyone’s ideas for all to see. Everything is out in the open, above board,
and shared in the public domain.”
In the United States, Marving Weisbord has written extensively about future
search conferences that integrate ideas from Ronald Lippitt, Edward Lindaman,
Eric Trist, Fred and Merrelyn Emery, and others. Of particular use were Lippitt’s
 102
and Lindaman’s findings that “when people plan present actions by working
backward from what is really desired, they develop energy, enthusiasm, optimism
and high commitment.
Also of particular relevance in the evolution of future search conferences was
the experience of Trist and the Emerys in conceptualizing and running conferences
for European managers, which included a participative environmental scan and the
development of a common vision. In the environmental scan, conference
participants described “the network of outside pressures on the organization”.
One version of Weisbord’s future search conference model consists of the
following steps:
1. Consultants (or conference managers) meet with a voluntary committee of four
to six potential participants. Many aspects are planned, including the overall
focus, who should attend, dates and times, location and meals group tasks,
and so on. The conferences are usually planned to start on Wednesday evening
(with dinner followed by the first working session) and to end on Friday
afternoon.
2. Upto 50 or 60 people are invited. Depending on the nature of the focus, the
whole system is represented in the conference. Such representation might
mean people from all of the functional areas and levels of the organization;
persons from all racial, ethnic, sex, and age, backgrounds; and might include
customers, suppliers, and union leaders. People are asked to bring newspaper
and magazine clippings that describe events they believe are influencing and
shaping the organization’s future.
3. Participants sit at tables of six to eight, with an easel, marking pens, and tape.
Depending on the focus and assigned tasks, groupings may vary during the
conference, with group membership assigned or based on self-selection. All
group output is recorded on easel paper, all ideas are valid, and agreement is
not required. The conference is not to solve problems, but to generate
awareness, understanding, and mutual support. (Conference members,
however, make action recommendations at the end of the workshop).
4. The conference has four or five segments, each lasting upto a half day. As
weibord describes it, “Each one requires that people (a) build a database, (b)
look at it together, (c) interpret what they find, and (d) draw conclusions for
action.
5. The first major activity focuses on the past. Although sitting at a table with
others, each person individually is asked to make notes on significant events,
milestones, and so on, that they can recall relative to each of the past three
decades and from three perspective, self company (or town or industry) and
society. These individual notes are transferred to sheets on the wall that are
organized by topic and by decade. The group at each table is asked to analyze
one theme—self, company, or society—across the three past decades and to
extract patterns and meanings. Each table then reports to the total group, and
a consultant notes trends. The conference then interprets—good and bad
trends and the direction of movement of each”.
 103
6. The second major activity focuses on present factors—both external and
internal—that are shaping the future of the organization. Relative to the
external environment, participants are asked to share their newspaper and
magazine clippings with their table group and indicate why they think the
article is important. Each group selects priorities from lists that a list of
“prouds” and “sorries” relative to what is currently going on within the
organization. People vote for the “proudest prouds” and the “sorriest sorries”,
and the results are displayed and discussed. The conference managers probe,
note key statements, and summarize flip charts.
7. Third major activity focuses on the future. New groups are formed and are given
one to two hours to develop a draft on a preferred future five years out. Variants
of media are used like coloured paper, crayon, scissors, tape, and so on. The
groups then report to the total conference.
8. The fourth major activity focuses on next-action steps. Group are then asked to
reflect on what has been surfaced and discussed, and, depending on the nature
of the groupings, to make three lists of suggested action steps for (a)
themselves, (b) their function, and (c) the total organization. Action proposals
for functional areas are shared by grouping members of the same department
together, ad next-action steps are decided. In the meantime, members of top
management or the steering committee discuss proposals for the total
organization, prioritise themselves, and develop action plans. Departmental
groups and the top management (or steering committee) then present their
action plans to the total conference.
9. Before the conference ends, volunteers agree to document the meeting-
communicate with others, and to carry forward the next-action steps.
11.3.3 Beckhard’s Confrontation Meeting
The confrontation meeting, developed by Richard Beckhard, is a one-day
meeting of the entire management of an organization in which they take a reading
of their own organizational health. In a series of activities, the management group
generates information about its major problems, analyzes the underlying causes,
develops action plans to correct the problems, and sets a schedule for completed
remedial work. The intervention is an important one in organization development; it
is a quick, simple, and reliable way in which to generate data about an organization
and to set action plans for organizational improvement. Beckhard says of the
confrontation meeting:
Experience shows that it is appropriate where
 There is a need for the total management group to examine its own workings.
 Very limited time is available for the activity.
 Top management wishes to improve the conditions quickly.
 There is enough cohesion in the top team to ensure follow-up
 There is real commitment to resolving the issue on the part of top management.
 The organization is experiencing, or has recently experienced, some major
change.
 104
The steps involved in the confrontation meeting are as follows:
Step–1: Climatic Setting (45 to 60 minutes). The top manager introduces the session
by stating his or her goals for the meeting, citing the necessary for free and open
discussion of issues and problems, and making it clear that individuals will not be
punished for what they say. This introduction is generally followed by a statement
from consultant regarding the importance of communication within organizations,
the practicability of organization problem solving, and the desirability of
addressing and solving organizational problems.
Step–2 : Information Collecting (1 hour). Small groups of seven or eight members are
formed on the basis of heterogeneity of composition; that is, a maximum mixture
of people from different functional areas working situations compose each team.
The only rule is that bosses and subordinates not be put together on the same
team. The top management group meets as a separate group during this time. The
charge to all the groups is as follows: Think of yourself as an individual with needs
and goals. Also think as a person concerned about the total organization. What
are the obstacles, “demotivators”, poor procedures or policies, unclear goals, or
poor attitudes that exist today? What different conditions, if any, would make the
organization more effective and make life in the organization better?
The groups work on this task for an hour and recorder/ reporters list the
results of the discussion.
Step-3: Information Sharing (1 hour) Reporters from each small group report the
group’s complete findings to the total group, which are placed on newsprint on
the walls. The total list of items is categorized, usually by the meeting leader,
into a few major categories that may be based on type of problem (e.g.
communication problems), type of relationship (e.g. troubles with top
management), or type of area (e.g. problems with the accounting department).
Step–4: Priority Setting and Group Action Planning (1 hour and 15 minutes).
This step typically follows a break during which time the items from the lists are
duplicated for distribution to everyone. In a 15-minute general session, the
meting leader goes through the list of items and puts a category assignment on
each one so that everyone has his or her own copy of the categorized items. Next
the participants form into functional, natural work teams reflecting the way
they are organized in the organization. Each group is headed by the top
manager in the group. The groups are asked to respond to a three-part charge,
that is, to do three tasks. First, they are to identify and discuss the issues and
problems related to their area, decide on the priorities of these problems, and
determine early action steps to remedy the problems that they are prepared to
commit themselves (in the total group) to work on. Second, they are asked to
identify the problems they think should be the priority issues for top
management. Third, they are to determine how they will communicate the
results of the confrontation meeting to their subordinates. This activity
 105
completes the confrontation meeting for all the managers except for the top
management group.
Step–5: Immediate Follow-up by Top Team (1 to 3 hours). The top management
team meets after the rest of the participants have left to plan first follow-up
action steps and to determine what actions should be taken on the basis of
what they have learned during the day. These follow-up action plans are
communicated to the rest of the management group within several days.
Step–6 : Progress Review (2 hours). A follow-up meeting with the total management
group is held four to six weeks later to report progress and to review the actions
resulting from the confrontation meeting.
These steps represent the flow of activities for the confrontation meeting. It is
an excellent way to get fast results leading toward organization improvement.
Beckhard believes that the confrontation meeting provides a quick and accurate
means for diagnosing organizational health, promotes constructive problem
identification and problem solving, enhances upward communication within the
organization, and increases involvement and commitment to action on the part of
the entire managerial group.
11.3.4 Strategic Management Activities
Many OD programs and interventions are directed toward the internal
workings of the organization. Interventions such as team building, managing
intergroup relations, survey feedback, and conflict resolution are intended to fine
tune the organization to make it function better. This internal focus must be
complemented with an external focus if OD is truly to serve the best interests of the
organization. In other words, OD must develop outward-looking interventions
directed toward environmental analysis and strategic planning to ensure that the
organization is in synchrony with its environment.
The field of business policy developed the concept of strategic management,
which is defined as the development and implementation of the organization’s
grand design or overall strategy for relating to its current and future environmental
demands. The concept is described by Schendel and Hofer as follows:” There are six
major tasks that comprise the strategic management process: (1) goal formulation;
(2) environmental analysis; (3) strategy formulation; (4) strategy evaluation; (5)
strategy implementation; and (6) strategic control”.
Developing organizational goals is the first step, which means defining the
mission and purpose of the organization. Next an assessment is made of the
constraints and opportunities afforded by the environment. Two environments
relevant: the present environment and the future environment. The present
environment can be monitored directly; constraints and opportunities of the future
environment must be predicted. Strategic plans, derived from goals and
environmental analysis, are then developed, implemented and monitored for
results. Generally, some dominant coalition of key decision makers in the
organization is responsible for the strategic management process.
 106
Several OD interventions directed toward strategic planning have been around
for a long time. They include goal-setting activities, Beckhard’s Confrontation
Meeting, future search conferences, and phases 4, 5, and 6 of Blake and Mouton’s
Grid OD. In phase 4 of a Grid program, for example, organization members build an
ideal strategic corporate model, and in later stages they develop action plans to
achieve that model.
Additional OD strategic planning techniques will be described here. One
technique, used by Charles E.Summer who conducts strategic planning activities
with organizations, is based on four questions.
1. What is your present strategy?
2. What are the opportunities and threats to that strategy?
3. What are your strengths and weaknesses to meet those threats and
opportunities?
4. What kind of future policies must you adopt to avoid the threats and
maximize your strengths?
A top management team will work for six months to a year answering these
four questions. Meetings are held very one or two months; extensive data collection
and analysis take place between meetings. It can be seen that the first question
requires an in-depth analysis of what the organization is currently doing or what it
thinks it is doing. The second question directs attention to the external
environment and to forces that may affect the organization’s ability to compete and
remain viable. The third question starts to mesh organizational capabilities with
environmental demands. The fourth question addresses the action and changes
needed to allow the organization to operate as desired in future.
11.3.5 Real Time Strategic Change
A process congruent with search conferences and strategic management
activities is Robert Jacob’s real time strategic change intervention. Some aspects of
this intervention are derived from the work of Ronald Lippitt. Real time is the
simultaneous planning and implementation of individual, group, and organization
wide changes.
As part of this unfolding intervention, a critical mass of organizational
members—sometimes hundreds—come together for a three-day meeting to discuss
organization-wide issues. The assumptions underlying this event are:
 A leadership team has decided that its organization needs a new strategic
direction based on drivers for change either from inside or outside their own
organization.
 A draft strategy has been developed by a leadership team prior to the event;
 The leadership group is open to feedback on the strategy by participants, and
to revising it based on this feedback; and
 The participants in this event comprise the entire organization, or a critical
mass of people from a larger organization.
 107
A strategy for the change effort is crucial. Jacobs describes six key steps for developing
strategy:
1. Identifying and clarifying the basic, important issues facing the organization
as a whole.
2. Agreeing on an overall purpose for the change effort.
3. Deciding which people need to be involved in the change effort and how.
4. Determining how much influence these people need to have over the
development of this strategy.
5. Clarifying the information people will need to do quality work and make wise
decisions regarding their collective future.
6. Exploring the methods, processes, and approaches that will best support
people in making real time strategic changes.
11.3.6 Stream Analysis
As developed by Jerry Porras, stream analysis, although complicated and
somewhat difficult to use, is a valuable model for thinking about change and for
managing change. Stream analysis is a system for graphically displaying the
problems of an organization, examining the interconnections between the problems,
identifying core problems (those will many interconnections), and graphically
tracking the corrective actions taken to solve the problems.
Porras categorized the important features of the organizational work setting
(the environment in which people work) into four classes of variables labelled
“organizing arrangements”, social factors, technology and physical setting.
Organizing arrangements include such things as goals, strategies, structure,
administrative policies and procedures, administrative systems, reward systems,
and ownership. Social factors include culture, management style, interaction
processes, informal patterns and networks, and individual attributes. Technology
includes tools, equipment, and machinery, information technology, job design, work
flow design, technical expertise, technical procedures, and technical systems.
Physical setting includes space configuration, physical ambiance, interior design,
and architectural design. These four classes of variables constitute the four streams
of stream analysis.
Next a thorough diagnosis of the organization’s problems and barriers to
effectiveness is performed, via brainstorming sessions, interviews, questionnaires,
and other methods. A task force of representatives from all parts of the organization
reviews the problems and barriers, discusses them until reaching agreement on
what they mean, and categorizes each problem into one of the streams. Four
columns are drawn on paper; the column headings are labelled, organizing
arrangements, social factors, technology and physical setting. Porras writes: As the
problems are categorized, they are placed on Stream Charts in their appropriate
columns. After all identified problems have been classified, an analysis of the entire
set usually reveals much overlap among the various problem statements. What is
usually required then is a grouping of problems and a condensation of the larger
set of problems into a much smaller collection of relatively unique issues.
 108
Next the interconnections between the problems are noted; problems that have
many interconnections are identified as core problems. Action plans are developed
to correct the core problems. The action plans and their results are tracked on
stream charts.
The action plans are OD interventions directed toward solving the core
problems. The OD program systematically addresses and resolves the issues
identified, and by so doing corrects dysfunctional aspects of the four classes of
variables that make up the organizational work setting. OD programs modify
organizing arrangements, social factors, technology, and physical setting, which in
turn precipitate changes in individuals’ on-the-job behaviours. Thus, in stream
analysis, OD programs change the work setting, which leads to changes in
behaviour, which leads to organizational improvement. Porras and Robertson say:
since the work setting is the environment in which people work, and since the
environment plays a key role in determining the behaviour of people, these factors
define the characteristics that if changed, will induce change in on-the-job
behaviours of individual employees. We believe stream analysis is a valuable model
for understanding planned change processes.
11.3.7 Survey Feedback
An important and widely used intervention for organization development rest
on the process of systematically collecting data about the system and feeding back
the data for individuals and groups at all levels of the organization to analyze,
interpret meanings, and design corrective action steps. These activities—which
have two manor components the use of a climate or attitude survey and the use of
feedback workshops—are called survey feedback. This approach is based on the
system 1—4T management system.
An attitude survey, if properly used, can be a powerful tool in organization
improvement. Most surveys are not used in an optimal way—at maximum, most
give top management some data for changing practices or provide an index against
which to compare trends. At minimum, they are filed away with little of
consequence resulting.
Research at the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan
indicates that if the survey is to be optimally useful, the following steps must occur.
Step-1: Organization members at the top of the hierarchy are involved in the
preliminary planning.
Step-2: Data are collected from all organization members.
Step-3: Data are feedback to the top executive team and then down through the
hierarchy in functional teams. Mann refers to this as an “interlocking chain of
conferences”.
Step-4: Each superior presides at a meeting with his or her subordinates in which
the data are discussed in which (a) subordinates are asked to help interpret the
data, (b) plans are made for making constructive changes, and (c) plans are
made for the introduction of the data at the next lower level.
 109
Step–5: Most feedback meetings include a consultant who has helped prepare the
superior for the meeting and who serve as a resource person.
Survey feedback has been shown to be an effective change technique in OD. In
a longitudinal study evaluating the effects of different change techniques in 23
different organizations, survey feedback was found to be the most effective change
strategy when compared with interpersonal process consultation, task process
consultation and laboratory training. These results may be somewhat misleading,
however, in that the survey feedback programs may have been more comprehensive
than the other programs compared with less comprehensive ones. On the other
hand, survey feedback is a cost-effective means of implementing a comprehensive
program, thus making it a highly desirable change technique.
11.3.8 Appreciative Inquiry
An intervention broader than the appreciation and concerns exercise is
appreciative inquiry (AI) developed by Frank Barrett and David Cooper rider, and
refined by Gervase Bushe. This major intervention is based on the assertion that
the organization is a miracle to be embraced rather than a problem to be solved.
While interventions have evolved as consultant/ researchers have experimented
with the approach, basically the central interventions are interviews and then
discussions in small groups or organization wide meetings centring on such core
questions as:
1. What have been the peak moments in the life of this organization – when
people felt most alive, most energized, most committed, and most fulfilled in
their involvements?
2. What do staff members value most about themselves, their tasks, and
organization as a whole?
3. Where excellence has been demonstrated, what have been the organizational
factors (structures, leadership approaches, systems, values, and so on) that
most fostered realization of excellence?
4. What are the most significant embryonic possibilities, perhaps latent with the
system, that indicate realistic possibilities for an even better organization?
A fairly detailed case of the use of appreciative inquiry merging with a survey-
guided intervention was reported in the OD practitioner. The organization, a $11
billion commercial banking organization, conducted operations in several states. A
hostile takeover attempt, large losses from a foreign loan portfolio, and a major drop
in profits led to a layoff of more than 850 employees of its 8,000 member workforce.
Outplacement assistance for laid-off employees and a comprehensive
communication program assisted in managing the crisis, but top management
recognized that more was needed to stabilize the organization, to retain a high-
quality staff, and to move the organization forward. Led by the vice president who
had been the project manager for the cost cutting, the corporate human resources
staff, and external consultants, the following sequence of interventions emerged:
 110
1. A vision statement and statement of values was developed by the top
management and reviewed with bank managers, followed by a decision to
proceed with a more aggressive intervention involving all employees.
2. An appreciative inquiry process was launched as a pilot project.
(a) An affirmative topic-the identification of the best of “what is” – was chosen.
(b) Two hundred and fifty employees representing a cross section of staff at all
levels were selected at random to take part in one-on-one interviews.
(c) Interviews with the employees were conducted by 20 of the bank’s senior
human resources staff members over a three-week period.
(d) Themes that bridged the best of what is with the understanding of what
might be were extracted. The values were reported in the present tense
because of a sense that people were reporting their present ideal experiences
when the organization was as its best.
(e) A summary was reported to the CEO and to the president. These executives
found to be information so compelling that they decided the entire
management team should be involved in reviewing it.
(f) The findings were presented to the management team at a two-day off-site
conference, and plans were made to move the process forward.
3. The process then shifted to a survey-guided mode involving all employees,
which included the administration of a questionnaire to all employees over a
period of a month.
a. The survey reflected the themes that had emerged in the interviews and
allowed employees to have a voice in identifying what is important to the
company and to them as individuals; evaluate how well they practice those
ideals today; and indicate how much they have experienced their values in
their career. They were also asked to think about the times they were really
excited about their organization and what they were doing at that time to
make their jobs exciting.
b. Approximately 6,500 employees participated in the survey, of which 4000
provided extensive answers to the survey’s open-ended questions.
c. A team of HR professionals analyzed the data and prepared reports for the
entire organization. The values and strengths that emerged were Rock Solid
Business Practices, Exceptional Customer Service, and Honesty. Team work
emerged as a strength in the open-ended comments.
4. A preferred future was then constructed involving employees throughout the
organization.
a. Team leaders were trained to conduct and facilitate brainstorming sessions
with groups of employees.
b. The purpose of these sessions was to build on the identified strengths and to
take action within work groups to improve performance and productivity.
c. The brainstorming sessions provided an opportunity for ongoing dialogue
and action.
5. The overall results of AI and the survey guided development were highly
positive, according to the author.
 111
The Appreciative Inquiry process powerfully affected the nature of
conversations in the organization, causing a fundamental shift in the daily
dialogue. Employees began to view problems as opportunities and the optimism
inherent in the conversations led to feelings of empowerment; employees were ready
to take action in the face of possibility rather than staying frozen in the face of
problems and circumstances.
Researchers, while generally enthusiastic about the contribution that
appreciative inquiry can make in conditions of intergroup and interpersonal
defensiveness, express the caution that the intervention could become an unwilling
accomplice in the dynamic of group flight. Obviously, one of the important aspects
that the approach seems to generate is more attention by the consultant and the
client organization to the strengths of the organization and its members. Another
important aspect, as evident in the case, is that appreciative inquiry can be
productively combined with other OD approaches, in this application survey
feedback.
11.3.9 Grid Organization Development
A thoroughing and systematic organization development program, designed by
Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton, is Grid Organization Development. In a six
phase program lasting about three to five years, an organization can move
systematically from the stage of examining managerial behaviour and style to the
development and implementation of an “ideal strategic corporate mode”. The
program utilizes a considerable number of instruments, enabling individuals and
groups to assess their own strengths and weaknesses; it focuses on skills,
knowledge, and processes necessary for effectiveness at the individual, group,
intergroup, and total-organization levels. The organizational program is conducted
by internal members who have been pertained in Grid concepts.
Basic to the Grid OD program are the concepts and method of Managerial
Grid, also developed by Blake and Mouton, a two-dimensional schematic for
examining and improving the managerial practices of individual managers. One
dimension underlying this diagnostic questionnaire is concern for people; the other
dimension is concern for production. The most effective managers are those who
score high on both of these dimensions—a 9,9 position, A 9,9 management style is
described as follows: “Work accomplishment is from committed people;
interdependence through a common stake in organization purpose leads to
relationships of trust and respect.
The relation between the Managerial Grid diagnostic questionnaire and Grid
OD is explained by Blake and Mouton: The single most significant premise on
which Grid Organization Development rests is that the 9,9 way of doing business
acknowledged universally by managers as the soundest way to manage to achieve
excellence. As used in the Grid OD process, the Managerial Grid questionnaire
becomes one vehicle for individuals and groups to examine and explore their styles
and modify prevailing practices.
 112
Behavioural science concepts and rigorous business logic are combined in the
Grid OD program’s six phases. These phases are as follows:
Prephase-1: Before an organization (usually a business corporation) begins a
Grid organization development programs, selected key managers who will later be
instructors in the organization attend a Grid Seminar. In this week-long experience-
based laboratory, managers learn about Grid concepts, assess their own styles
using the Managerial Grid questionnaire and the two-dimensional schematic,
develop team action skills learn problem-solving and critiquing skills, work at
improved communication skills, and learn to analyze the culture of a team and of
an organization. Learning take place through the use of instruments, study team
projects that are judged for adequacy, critiquing of individual and team
performance and conceptual inputs.
After several managers have gone to a Grid Seminar, some might go on to
advanced Grid courses or for further exposure to the Grid OD approach. At a Grid
OD Seminar, participants are taught the material involved in phases 2 to 6. They
learn both what the Grid OD program is all about and how to conduct it in their
own company.
Another advanced course is the Instructor Development Seminar, in which
participants actually learn to conduct an in-company phase I Grid Seminar.
Training these managers in the various seminars accomplishes two things: the
managers learn how to conduct a Grid OD program in their own organization, and
they can also evaluate the Grid approach to determine whether they think it is a
good idea for their organization to embark on such a course of action.
If, at this point, the company decides to implement a Grid organization
development program, it might conduct a pilot phase I program for volunteer
managers. If the result of this pilot is a go, then phase I begins.
Phase-1: The Managerial Grid: In this phase, a Grid Seminar, conducted by
in company managers, is given to all the managers of the organization. The focus of
the training is similar to that just described; attention is given to assessing an
individual’s managerial styles; problem-solving, critiquing, and communication
skills are practiced; the skills of synergistic teamwork are learned and practiced. In
this phase, managers learn to become 9,9 managers.
Phase-2: Teamwork Development: The focus of this phase is work teams in
the organization. The goal is perfecting teamwork in the organization through
analysis of team culture, traditions, and the like and also developing skills in
planning, setting objectives and problem solving. Additional aspects of this phase
include feedback given to each manager about his or her individual and team
behaviour; this critique allows the manager to understand how others see his or
her strengths and weaknesses in the team’s working.
Working on team work is done in the context of actual work problems. The
problems and issues dealt with are the real ones of the team. In this process of
phase 2, individuals learn how to study and manage the culture of their work teams.
 113
Phase-3: Intergroup Development: The focus of this phase is intergroup
relations and the goal of this phase is to move groups from their ineffective, often
win-lose actual ways of relating between groups toward an ideal model of
intergroup relations. The dynamics of intergroup cooperation and competition are
explored. Each group separately analyzes what an ideal relationship would be like;
these analyses are shared between groups. Action steps to move toward the ideal
are developed and assigned to individuals. The phase thus includes building
operational plans for moving the two groups from their actual state to an ideal state
of intergroup relations.
The phase consists of teams convening, in twos, to work on the previously
stated issues. Not all teams would pair with all others; only teams that have
particularly important interface relationships do so. Often only selected members of
the teams—people who have close working relations with the other team-take part
in the exercise and activities.
Phase-4: Developing and Ideal Strategic Corporate Model: In this phase the
focus shifts to corporate strategic planning, with the goal being to learn the
concepts and the skills of corporate logic necessary to achieve corporate excellence.
The top management group engages in the strategy planning activities of this
phase, although their plans and ideas are tested, evaluated, and critiqued in
conjunction with other corporate members. The charge to the top management
group is to design an ideal strategic corporate model that would define what the
corporation would be like if it were truly excellent. Fact-finding, technical inputs,
and so on may be contributed from all persons in the organization.
Using the comparisons of ideal corporate logic versus real corporate logic, the
top management team is better able to recognize what aspects of the culture must
be changed to achieve excellence.
In a process that may take upto a year, the top executives build the ideal
strategic corporate model for their particular organization. This model is then used
in the next phase.
Phase-5: Implementing the Ideal Strategic Model: In several different steps,
the organisation seeks to implement the model of corporate excellence developed in
phase 4. To execute the conversion to the ideal strategic model, the organization
must be reorganized. Logical components of the corporation are designated (profit
centers, geographical locations, product lines etc.). Each component appoints a
planning team whose job is to examine every phase of the component’s operation to
see how the business may be move more in line with the ideal model. Every concept
of the ideal strategic corporate model is studied by the planning is appointed to act
as a resource to the planning teams.
The planning teams thus conduct “conversion studies” to see how the
components must change to fit the ideal strategic corporate model. An additional
planning team is formed and is given the charge of designing a headquarters that
would operate effectively and jet keep overhead to a minimum. After the planning
and assessment steps are completed, conversion of the organization to the ideal
condition is implemented.
 114
Phase-6: Systematic Critique: In this phase the results of the Grid OD program,
from prophase 1 to post phase 5, are measured. Systematic critiquing, measuring, and
evaluating lead to knowledge of what progress has been made, what barriers still exist
and must be overcome, and what new opportunities have developed that may be
exploited. This phase is begun after phase 5 is going well and is beginning to convert
the organization to the ideal model. Taking stock of where the corporation has been,
how far it has come, and where it currently is thus represents a new beginning from
which to continue striving toward corporate excellence.
Grid organization development is an approach to organization improvement
that is complete, systematic, and difficult. Does it work? The 800 managers and
staff personnel of the 4000 person workforce at the plant were all given training in
the Managerial Grid and Grid OD concepts. Significant organizational
improvements showed upon such bottom-line measures as greater profits, lower
costs, and less waste. Managers themselves, when asked about their own
effectiveness and that of their corporation, likewise declared that changes for the
better had results from the program.
11.3.10 Schein’s Cultural Analysis
A particularly deep and difficult intervention is Edgar Schein’s cultural
analysis. This intervention is complex, probes deeply into the organization, and is
not for every OD consultant nor for every client organization. Indeed, as Schein
says, If someone says “We want to do a cultural analysis,” I spend quite a bit of
time probing why, what for, and where are going with it .... Sometimes it will in fact
lead to a work shop dealing with culture, but that same set of questions may lead
to some other form of consultation or counselling.
Basically, when Schein and clients agree that the intervention is appropriate,
the flow is as follows, we will use Schein’s words to describe the process.
Once the purpose is established, I would suggest to the immediate clients that
they consider bringing together groupings of managers and/or employee to discuss the
culture concept and to begin to identify some of their own assumptions. When such a
group is assembled, I give a short lecture on the distinction between artifacts,
espoused values, and underlying assumptions, followed by an invitation to the group
to start brainstorming on what they see the artifacts of their organization. If there are
newcomers in the organization they are often a good group to begin with.
As various artifacts such as the architecture, the office layout, the mode of
dress, the perquisites and status symbol, etc. are identified, I write them down on
flip charts and fill the walls with them. Within an hour or less the group
participants will begin to see some of the values that lie behind the artifacts and
these are now also written down for common observation. As this process proceeds,
the outside should begin to push for some of the underlying assumptions by noting
areas of consistency and areas of inconsistency. Sometimes the best way to get an
underlying assumption is to note where exposed values are out of line with
observed artifacts. The outsider can also offer by hypotheses at this point to further
simulate the group’s efforts to identify assumptions and begin to help the group
classify them if they fall into clusters or form a pattern.
 115
The next step in the intervention is typically to send the participants off in smaller
groups with the task of further identifying assumptions and then classifying them into
two groups: (1) those cultural assumptions that will aid us in getting to our goal; and
(2) those cultural assumptions that will hinder us in getting to our goals. This self-
diagnosis is then reported back to the total group and analyzed with the help of the
outside consultant to determine what steps might be appropriate.
In this discussion, it is crucial that the consultant help the group to focus on
the helpful parts of the culture, and help the group to recognize what the
consequences are of saying that they want to change those parts of the culture that
they may view as non-helpful. But all of this only makes sense in the context of
some strategic or tactical goals that the group is pursing, doing a cultural analysis
for its own sake at best boring and at worst dangerous.
11.3.11 Conclusion
Comprehensive OD interventions are very much alive and visible in
contemporary OD practice. Some like Beckhard’s confrontation meeting and
strategic management activities, involve all of top management or, in the case of
smaller organizations, the entire management group. (The confrontation meeting is
also applicable to all employees of very small organizations). Others like, future
search conferences, tend to involve a wide spectrum of organizational members and
can involve others beyond the immediate organization. Some, like survey feedback,
based on Systems 1-4T theory, are designed to involve all members of an
organization or of a relatively autonomous sub-division of an organization. One
intervention, Schein’s cultural analysis, is a fairly deep intervention in the
organization’s basic culture. Appreciative inquiry focuses on the strengths of the
organization and what is most valued by its members, and has an important future
component when deliberations move on to what might be.
11.4 REVISION POINTS
Some comprehensive interventions involve getting the whole system in the
room, a feature that a number of interventions have in common, including search
conferences, trans-organizational development, partnering, and the confrontation
meeting. Search conferences and future search conferences have been visible in the
United States and abroad during the last two decades, and have been utilized by
many different types of organizations.
11.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Future Search Conference?
2. Write about Beckhard’s Confrontation Meeting?
3. What is Real Time Strategic Change?
4. Write a short note on Stream Analysis.
5. What is Survey Feedback?
6. Give the importance of Appreciative Inquiry.
7. What is meant by Grid Organization Development?
8. Write about Schein’s Cultural Analysis?
 116
11.6 SUMMARY
Like all OD interventions, these comprehensive interventions must involve a
collaborative effort between the client organizations and the consultants in both
diagnosis and intervention. To be successful, they must fit the realities being
experienced by the client system and must engage the cooperation and goodwill of
client system members.
11.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
Write short note on the following:
a) Search Conferences
b) Beckhard’s Confrontation meeting
c) Strategic Management Activities
d) Real Time Strategic Change
e) Stream Analysis
f) Survey Feedback
g) Appreciative Inquiry
h) Grid Organization Development
i) Schein’s Cultural Analysis
11.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
11.9 ASSIGNMENTS
1. Write an essay about the various Comprehensive OD interventions.
2. Discuss in Detail about Grid Organization Development.
11.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi. 2006.
7. Dr. Donald L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
11.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify an OD consultant and share his experiences about the different
comprehensive and Structural OD interventions.
11.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, Search Conferences, Confrontation Meeting, Real
Time Strategic Change, Stream Analysis, Survey Feedback, Appreciative
Inquiry (AI), Grid Organization Development, Cultural Analysis.
H
 117

LESSON – 12

ETHICAL ISSUES WITH INTERVENTION

12.1 INTRODUCTION
Ethical issues in OD are concerned with how practitioners perform their
helping relationship with organization members. Inherent in any helping
relationship is the potential for misconduct and client abuse. OD practitioners can
let personal values stand in the way of good practice or use the power inherent in
their professional role to abuse (often unintentionally) organization members.
12.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About what are Ethical Issues with Intervention
 Ethical Guidelines, Ethical Dilemmas, Misrepresentation, Misuse of Data,
Coercion, Value and Goal Conflict and Technical Ineptness.
12.3 CONTENT
12.3.1 Ethical Guidelines
12.3.2 Ethical Dilemmas
12.3.3 Misrepresentation
12.3.4 Misuse of Data
12.3.5 Coercion
12.3.6 Value and Goal Conflict
12.3.7 Technical Ineptness
12.3.8 Conclusion
12.3.1 Ethical Guidelines
To its credit, the field of OD always has shown concern for the ethical conduct
of its practitioners. There have been several articles and symposia about ethics in
OD. In addition, statements of ethics governing OD practice have been sponsored
by the Organization Development Institute and a consortium of professional
associations in OD. The consortium has sponsored an ethical code derived from a
large-scale project conducted at the Center for the Study of Ethics in the
Professions at the Illinois Institute of Technology. The project’s purposes included
preparing critical incidents describing ethical dilemmas and using that material for
pre-professional and continuing education in OD, providing an empirical basis for a
statement of values and ethics for OD professionals, and initiating a process for
making the ethics of OD practice explicit on a continuing basis.
12.3.2 Ethical Dilemmas
Although adherence to statements of ethics helps prevent the occurrence of
ethical problems, OD practitioners still encounter ethical dilemmas. Figure 12.1 is
a process model that explains how ethical dilemmas can occur in OD. The
antecedent conditions include an OD practitioner and a client system with different
goals, values, needs, skills, and abilities. The entry and contracting phase of
planned change is intended to address and clarify these differences. As a practical
 118
matter, however, it is unreasonable to assume that all of the differences will be
identified and resolved. Under such circumstances, the subsequent intervention
process or role episode is almost certainly subject to role conflict and role
ambiguity. Neither the client nor the OD practitioner is clear about respective
responsibilities. Each party is pursuing different goals, and each is using different
skills and values to achieve those goals. The role conflict and ambiguity may
produce five types of ethical dilemmas: misrepresentation, misuse of data, coercion,
value and goal conflict, and technical ineptness.
12.3.3 Misrepresentation
Misrepresentation occurs when OD practitioners claim that an intervention
will produce results that are unreasonable for the change program or the situation.
The client can contribute to the problem by portraying inaccurate goals and needs.
In either case, one or both parties are operating under false pretences and an
ethical dilemma exists. For example, in an infamous case called “The Undercover
Change Agent,” an attempt was made to use sensitivity training in an organization
whose top management did not understand it and was not ready for it. The OD
consultant sold this interpersonally intense intervention as the activity that would
solve the problems facing the organization. After the president of the firm made a
surprise visit to the site where the training was being held, the consultant was fired
because the nature and style of the sensitivity training was in direct contradiction
to the president’s concepts about leadership.40 Misrepresentation is likely to occur
in the entering and contracting phases of planned change when the initial
consulting relationship is being established. To prevent misrepresentation, OD
practitioners need to gain clarity about the goals of the change effort, and to explore
openly with the client its expected effects, its relevance to the client system, and the
practitioner’s competence in executing the intervention.
12.3.4 Misuse of Data
Misuse of data occurs when information gathered during the OD process is
used punitively. Large amounts of information are invariably obtained during the
entry and diagnostic phases of OD. Although most OD practitioners value openness
and trust, it is important that they be aware of how such data are going to be used.
It is a human tendency to use data to enhance a power position. Openness is one
thing, but leaking inappropriate information can be harmful to individuals and to
the organization. It is easy for a consultant, under the guise of obtaining
information, to gather data about whether a particular manager is good or bad.
When, how, or if this information can be used is an ethical dilemma not easily
resolved. To minimize misuse of data, practitioners should reach agreement up
front with organization members about how data collected during the change
process will be used. This agreement should be reviewed periodically in light of
changing circumstances.
 119

Figure 12.1: A Role Episodic Model of Ethical Dilemmas

12.3.5 Coercion
Coercion occurs when organization members are forced to participate in an OD
intervention. People should have the freedom to choose whether to participate in a
change program if they are to gain self-reliance to solve their own problems. In
team building, for example, team members should have the option of deciding not
to become involved in the intervention. Management should not decide unilaterally
that team building is good for members. However, freedom to make a choice
requires knowledge about OD. Many organization members have little information
about OD interventions, what they involve, and the nature and consequences of
becoming involved with them. This makes it imperative for OD practitioners to
educate clients about interventions before choices are made for implementing them.
Coercion also can pose ethical dilemmas for the helping relationship between OD
practitioners and organization members. Inherent in any helping relationship are
possibilities for excessive manipulation and dependency, two facets of coercion.
Kelman pointed out that behaviour change “inevitably involves some degree of
manipulation and control, and at least an implicit imposition of the change agent’s
values on the client or the person he [or she] is influencing.” This places the
practitioner on two horns of a dilemma: (1) Any attempt to change is in itself a
change and thereby a manipulation, no matter how slight, and (2) there exists no
formula or method to structure a change situation so that such manipulation can
be totally avoided. To attack the first aspect of the dilemma, Kelman stressed
freedom of choice, seeing any action that limits freedom of choice as being ethically
ambiguous or worse. To address the second aspect, Kelman argued that the OD
practitioner must remain keenly aware of her or his own value system and alert to
the possibility that those values are being imposed on a client. In other words, an
effective way to resolve this dilemma is to make the change effort as open as
possible, with the free consent and knowledge of the individuals involved.
The second facet of coercion that can pose ethical dilemmas for the helping
relationship involves dependency. Helping relationships invariably create
dependency between those who need help and those who provide it. A major goal in
OD is to lessen clients’ dependency on consultants by helping clients gain the
 120
knowledge and skills to address organizational problems and manage change
themselves. In some cases, however, achieving independence from OD practitioners
can result in clients being either counter dependent or over dependent, especially in
the early stages of the relationship. To resolve dependency issues, consultants can
openly and explicitly discuss with the client how to handle the dependency
problem, especially what the client and consultant expect of one another. Another
approach is to focus on problem finding. Usually, the client is looking for a solution
to a perceived problem. The consultant can redirect the energy to improved joint
diagnosis so that both are working on problem identification and problem solving.
Such action moves the energy of the client away from dependency. Finally,
dependency can be reduced by changing the client’s expectation from being helped
or controlled by the practitioner to a greater focus on the need to manage the
problem. Such a refocusing can reinforce the understanding that the consultant is
working for the client and offering assistance that is at the client’s discretion.
12.3.6 Value and Goal Conflict
This ethical conflict occurs when the purpose of the change effort is not clear
or when the client and the practitioner disagree over how to achieve the goals. The
important practical issue for OD consultants is whether it is justifiable to withhold
services unilaterally from an organization that does not agree with their values or
methods. OD pioneer Gordon Lippitt suggested that the real question is the
following: Assuming that some kind of change is going to occur anyway, doesn’t the
consultant have a responsibility to try to guide the change in the most constructive
fashion possible? That question may be of greater importance and relevance to an
internal consultant or to a consultant who already has an ongoing relationship with
the client. Argyris takes an even stronger stand, maintaining that the
responsibilities of professional OD practitioners to clients are comparable to those
of lawyers or physicians, who, in principle, may not refuse to perform their services.
He suggests that the very least the consultant can do is to provide “first aid” to the
organization, as long as the assistance does not compromise the consultant’s
values. Argyris suggests that if the Ku Klux Klan asked for assistance and the
consultant could at least determine whether the KKK was genuinely interested in
assessing itself and willing to commit itself to all that a valid assessment would
entail concerning both itself and other groups, the consultant should be willing to
help. If later the Klan’s objectives proved to be less than honestly stated, the
consultant would be free to withdraw without being compromised.
12.3.7 Technical Ineptness
This final ethical dilemma occurs when OD practitioners try to implement
interventions for which they are not skilled or when the client attempts a change for
which it is not ready. Critical to the success of any OD program is the selection of
an appropriate intervention, which depends, in turn, on careful diagnosis of the
organization. Selecting an intervention is closely related to the practitioner’s own
values, skills, and abilities. In solving organizational problems, many OD
consultants emphasize a favourite intervention or technique, such as team
 121
building, total quality management, or self-managed teams. They let their own
values and beliefs dictate the change method. Technical ineptness dilemmas also
can occur when interventions do not align with the ability of the organization to
implement them. Again, careful diagnosis can reveal the extent to which the
organization is ready to make a change and possesses the skills and knowledge to
implement it.
12.3.8 Conclusion
Ethical issues in OD involve how practitioners perform their helping role with
clients. As a profession, OD always has shown a concern for the ethical conduct of
its practitioners, and several ethical codes for OD practice have been developed by
various professional associations. Ethical dilemmas in OD arise around
misrepresentation, misuse of data, coercion, value and goal conflict, and technical
ineptness.
12.4 REVISION POINTS
The role of the organization development practitioner and the prevailing ethical
issues with intervention practices are discussed in this lesson.
The major conceptions namely, Ethical Guidelines, Ethical Dilemmas,
Misrepresentation, Misuse of Data, Coercion, Value and Goal Conflict, Technical
Ineptness are discussed.
12.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Ethical Issues in Organizational Development?
2. What is Ethical Dilemmas
3. What do you mean by Coercion?
4. What are value and Goal Conflicts?
5. What do you mean by Technical Ineptness?
12.6 SUMMARY
This lesson has examined the role of the organization development
practitioner. The term OD practitioner applies to three sets of people: individuals
specializing in OD as a profession, people from related fields who have gained some
competence in OD, and managers having the OD skills necessary to change and
develop their organizations or departments.
12.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:.
a) Ethical Guidelines
b) Ethical Dilemmas
c) Coercion
d) Technical Ineptness
 122
12.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
12.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss in detail on different Ethical Issues with OD Interventions.
12.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi., 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
12.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify, how data and information of organizations are misused in unethical
manner by some of the consultants during intervention.
12.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, Ethical Guidelines, Ethical Dilemmas, Coercion,
Value and Goal Conflict, Technical Ineptness
H
 123

UNIT – IV
LESSON – 13

KEY CONSIDERATIONS AND ISSUES IN CONSULTANCY –

CLIENT RELATIONSHIPS
13.1 INTRODUCTION
A number of interrelated issues can arise in consultant-client relationships in
OD activities, and they need to be managed appropriately if adverse effects are to be
avoided. These issues tend to center on the following important areas: Entry and
Contracting; Defining the Client System. No simple prescriptions will resolve all
dilemmas or problems in these aspects of OD, but we do have some notions about
managing these areas.
13.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About what are key considerations and issues in Consultancy
 The Dependency Issues and Terminating the Relationship
 Ethical Standards in OD
13.3 CONTENT
13.3.1 Entry and Contracting
13.3.2 Refining the Client System
13.3.3 The Trust Issue
13.3.4 The Nature of Consultant’s Expertise
13.3.5 Diagnosis and Appropriate Interventions
13.3.6 Depth of Intervention
13.3.7 On being Observed by the Culture
13.3.8 The Consultant as a model
13.3.9 The Consultant as a Microcosm
13.3.10 Action Research and the OD Process
13.3.11 The Dependency Issue and Terminating the Relationship
13.3.12 Ethical Standards in OD
13.3.13 Conclusion
13.3.1 Entry and Contracting
An initial discussion that can lead to an OD consulting contract can occur in
various ways, but typically events evolve something like this example. The
telephone rings; An executive has some concerns about his or her organization and
the consultant has been recommended as someone who could help. After a brief
description of some of the problems and a discussion of the extent to which the
consultant's expertise is a reasonable fit for the situation, an agreement is made to
pursue the matter over a meal or through an appointment at the executive's office.
During the face-to-face meeting, the consultant explores with the potential
client some of the deeper aspects of the presenting problem. If "communications
between managers aren't as thorough and as cordial as they ought to be," the
 124
consultant asks for examples to get a better fix on the nature of the problem and its
dynamics. Almost inevitably several interrelated problems surface. Or if the
potential client says, "I want to move to self-managed teams in Plant B," the
rationale and objectives for such a program are explored.
Furthermore, in the first meeting, the consultant and the client probably begin
to sort out what group would be the logical starting point for an OD intervention.
For example, in a particular manufacturing organization it might be important to
focus on the top management team of eight people; or, in a city government it might
appear prudent to include 20 key people, which would involve the city manager,
assistant city managers, and all of the department heads. Considerable thought
must be given to exactly who is to be included—and thus who is to be excluded—in
the first interventions. The exclusion of key people, in particular, can be a serious
mistake.
If the problems appear to lend themselves to OD interventions, the consultant
describes how he or she usually proceeds in such circumstances. For example, the
consultant might say: "If I were to undertake this assignment, here's how I would
probably want to proceed. First, I would like to get the cooperation of the top
management group to set aside, say, two and one-half days for an off-site workshop
and to participate in interviews in preparation for that workshop. I would then like
to have individual interviews with the entire group, ask each what's going well with
the top management team, what the problems are, and what they would like things
to be like. I would then extract the themes from the interviews. These themes would
be reported to the group at the workshop and the problem areas would become the
agenda for our work together."
All kinds of nuances can arise in this discussion. In addition to problems of
who can and who should attend a workshop, other matters concern when and
where it could be held, whether members of the management group can be away
from their offices for the desired period, whether the top person is to be briefed
about interview themes prior to the workshop, the extent of confidentiality of the
interviews, and so on. An overriding dimension in this preliminary discussion is the
extent of mutual confidence and trust that begins to develop between consultant
and client.
Among the ground rules Marvin Weisbord has for his consulting relationships are the
following:
 Any information I collect and present will be anonymous. I will never attach
names to anything people tell me. However, in certain situations (e.g., team
building) I don't want confidential information, meaning anything which you
are unwilling for other team members to know, even anonymously...,
 All data belongs to the people who supply it. I will never give or show it to any-
one without their permission.
 If both parties agree, these conditions become part of the overall psychological
contract between consultant and client.
 125

 The more formal compensation aspects of the initial contract are also important
and need to be clarified for the peace of mind of both client and consultant.
One course of action is to have an oral agreement for an hourly or daily fee,
with no charge for a brief telephone discussion, and usually no charge for a
longer first exploration. Thereafter, a bill might be sent for time spent, or a bill
might be submitted for the total agreed-upon price for the particular project.
 Contracting, in both a psychological and financial sense, occurs over and over
in OD consulting. Again, drawing on Weisbord and focusing on the
psychological contract:
 Contracting, like the seasons, is repetitive and continually renewable. If 1 have
a long-term contract (e.g., four days a month for a year) I also have a separate
contract for each meeting, which I present on a flip sheet and discuss at the
outset. If I have a contract with a boss to help him build his team, I need to
extend it to the team before we go to work....
In short, I'm never finished contracting. Each client meeting requires that I re-
examine the contract. Does it cover everybody I'm working with? Is it clear what
we're doing now? And why?
13.3.2 Refining The Client System
The question of who the client is quickly becomes an important issue in
consultant-client relationships. (We usually refer to the consultant in the singular,
but the points we want to make also tend to apply to consultant teams. Similarly,
the initial client may be an individual or a management team.) We think a viable
model is one in which, in the initial contact, a single manager is the client, but as
trust and confidence develop between the key client and the consultant, both begin
to view the manager and his or her subordinate team as the client, and then the
manager's total organization as the client. Ideally, this progression begins to occur
in the first interview. Thus the health and vitality of the various organizational
subsystems, as well as the effectiveness and growth of all individual members of the
client system, clearly become the consultant's concern.
Another viable model is one in which a small, top management team (for ex-
ample, the CEO, vice president of human resources, and another vice president)
comprises the initial client group. Still another model of who the client might be is a
steering committee comprised of representatives from different levels and functional
areas. In this case, if the CEO is not a member, the consultant will need to be
sensitive to who represents the CEO, or, in short, who represents the power
structure. The whole process will be impotent if a steering committee is not free to
act in the absence of the CEO.
Warner Burke presents a provocative, perhaps even more useful view of who
the client is:"... I have come to think of my client as the relationship and/or
interface between individuals and units within and related to the system.... This in-
between-ness is the main subject of my consulting. He then goes on to remind us
that Chris Argyris, in his book Intervention Theory and Method, favoured terms such
as intervenor and interventionist over the terms consultant or change agent. Further,
 126
Argyris defined intervention as follows: "To intervene is to enter into an ongoing
system of relationships, to come between or among persons, groups, or objects for
the purpose of helping them.
Thus, to Burke and Argyris, who the client is has more to do with interactions,
interrelationships, and interfaces than to specific persons or units. This concept is
tremendously useful.
13.3.3. The Trust Issue
A good deal of the interaction in early contacts between client and consultant
is implicitly related to developing a relationship of mutual trust. For example, the
key client may be fearful that things will get out of hand with an outsider
intervening in the system—that the organization will be overwhelmed with petty
complaints or that people will be encouraged to criticize their superiors.
Subordinates may be concerned that they will be manipulated toward their
superiors' goals with little attention given to their own. These kinds of concerns
mean that the consultant will need to earn trust in these and other areas and that
high trust will not be immediate.
Similarly, the consultant's trust of the client may be starting at neutral. The
consultant will be trying to understand the client's motives and will want to surface
any that are partly hidden. For example, if the client has hopes that a team-building
session will punish an inadequately performing subordinate, the consultant and the
client will need to reassess the purposes of team building and examine whether that
activity is the appropriate context for confronting the matter. On a positive note, the
client may see OD as a means of increasing both the client's and the subordinates'
effectiveness, plus having hopes that a successful OD effort may bring considerable
recognition from superiors. Surfacing such motives and examining their implications
for effective behaviour will enhance trust between the consultant and the client and
will help to assure the eventual success of OD activities.
Trust and resistance problems also center on what we call the "good guy-bad
guy syndrome." Internal or external OD consultants, through their enthusiasm for
an exciting technology, may signal that they perceive themselves as the carriers of
the message, that is, that they are "good guys," and implicitly that others are not, or
at least are backward. This attitude obviously creates all sorts of trust and
resistance problems. People usually want to work collaboratively with others in the
pursuit of common ends—but people tend to resist being pushed around, or put
down, under whatever banner. No one likes being put in the "bad guy" role, and we
mistrust and resent those who seem to be doing that to us. This trap can ensnare
not only the consultant but also the overly enthusiastic line manager.
Confidentiality must be maintained if trust is to be maintained, as implied in
Weisbord's ground rules for contracting. Even unintentional errors can be
disastrous to the consultant-client relationship. Gavin gives an illustration in which
notes made by consultants on the leadership and communication styles of
managers were inadvertently duplicated and circulated to participants along with
 127
notes on workshop themes and action steps. The consultants had been asked to do
the latter; the notes on the managers' styles had been intended to be used by the
facilitators in private counseling sessions with individual managers. As Gavin
reports it, "By the time these notes had been circulated, any semblance of trust in
the consultants had been destroyed." 5 We will have more to say about trust later.
13.3.4 The Nature of Consultant’s Expertise
Partly because of the unfamiliarity with organization development methods,
clients frequently try to put the consultant in the role of the expert on substantive
content, such as on personnel policy or business strategy. We believe it is possible,
and desirable, the OD consultant to be an expert in the sense of being competent to
present a range of options open to the client, but any extensive reliance on the
traditional mode of consulting, that is, giving substantive advice, will tend to negate
the OD consultant's effectiveness. The OD consultant needs to resist the temptation
of playing the content expert and will need to clarify his or her role with the client
when it becomes an issue. However, we think the OD consultant should be
prepared to describe in broad outline what the organization might look like if it
were to go very far with an OD effort. Further, as we will discuss later, central to his
or her role, the OD consultant must be an expert on process.
Moving into the expert or advocate role—or as Schein says, the "purchase of
expertise role" or the "doctor-patient model"6 frequently stems from an overriding
desire to please the client. The consultant wishes to maintain the relationship for a
variety of reasons—professional, financial, or self-esteem—and naturally wants to
be perceived as competent. The consultant, therefore, gets trapped into preparing
reports or giving substantive advice, which if more than minimal, will reduce his or
her effectiveness
At least four good reasons should encourage the OD consultant to avoid for
the most part the expert role. The first is that a major objective of an OD effort is to
help the client system to develop its own resources. The expert role creates a kind
of dependency that typically does not lead to internal skill development.
The second reason is that the expert role almost inevitably requires the
consultant to defend his or her recommendations. With reference to an initial
exploratory meeting, Schein mentions the danger of being "seduced into a selling
role" and states that under such conditions "we are no longer exploring the
problem." In short, finding oneself in the expert role and defending one's advice
tends to negate a collaborative, developmental approach to improving
organizational processes.
A third reason for largely avoiding the expert role has to do with trust. one
criterion for resolving whether to provide confidential reports or advice to top
management is how such an intervention would affect various client groups in the
organization and the consultant's relationship with them. The OD consultant's role
is a tenuous one at best. Any impression that the consultant is making recommen-
dations inimical to members of client groups puts the consultant in the role of an
 128
adversary. For example, the disclosure that the consultant has made a secret
recommendation that the number of divisions and vice presidents be reduced from
16 to 8 is likely to be met with widespread alarm and immediate distrust of the
consultant. The question will also immediately arise, What else is the consultant up
to that we don't know about? Thus, making recommendations to the top is quite
different from confronting the top management group with the data that three-
fourths of the members of the top team believe that the organization has serious
problems, partly stemming from too many divisions, In the one instance, the
consultant is the expert; in the other instance, the consultant is helping the top
team to be more expert in surfacing data and diagnosing the state of the system.
 For example, it is usually desirable and necessary to give advisee on the design
of a workshop or the design of a questionnaire. Such advice is usually quite
facilitating, providing that the consultant is open to modifications of his or her
suggestions by members of the client system. As Schein states it,
 The process consultant should not withhold his expertise on matters of the
learning process itself; but he should be very careful not to confuse being an
expert on how to help an organization to learn with being an expert on the
actual management problems which the organization is trying to solve.''
In other words, the OD consultant should act in the expert role on the process
used but not on the task.
Another exception consists of providing a range of options open to the client.
For example, if issues include how a unit or organization should be structured in
terms of which functions should be grouped together or who should report to
whom, the OD consultant can be helpful by presenting some optional forms and
discussing the possible implications of each. However, such an intervention should
ordinarily be presented in a team situation so as not to be misinterpreted, must be
timely in terms of its relevance and acceptability, and should be essentially
perspective-enlarging in contrast to prescriptive. We believe that the more extensive
the OD consultant's knowledge of management and organization, the more effective
the OD consultant can be. But beware of the difference between being essentially a
facilitator-educator and being essentially an advice-giver. Even the presenting of
options can be overdone. If the consultant's ideas become the focal point for
prolonged discussion and debate, the consultant has clearly shifted away from the
facilitator role. Obviously, the situation is not an either/or matter; it is a matter of
degree and emphasis.
13.3.5 Diagnosis and Appropriate Interventions
Another pitfall for the consultant is the temptation to apply an intervention
technique he or she particularly likes and that has produced good results in the
past, but may not square with a careful diagnosis of the immediate situation. For
example, giving subgroups an assignment to describe "what is going well in our
weekly department head meetings" and "what is preventing the meetings from being
as effective as we'd like" might be more on target and more timely than launching
into the role analysis technique with the boss's role as the focus of discussion. It
 129
might be too soon; that is, too much defensiveness on the part of the boss or too
much apprehension on the part of subordinates might be the case and prevent any
productive discussion from taking place. As Herbert Shepard has said, the
consultant should "start where the system is."
We think a consultant should do what he or she can do, but the intervention
should be appropriate to the diagnosis, which requires an intensive look at the
data, for example, the themes from interviews. The wider the range of interventions
with which the consultant is familiar, of course, the more options the consultant
can consider. The more the consultant's expertise and experience, the less
agonizing is likely to be required in selecting or designing appropriate interventions.
13.3.6 Depth of Intervention
A major aspect of selecting appropriate interventions is the matter of depth of
intervention. In Roger Harrison's terms, depth of intervention can be assessed using
the concepts of accessibility and individuality. By accessibility Harrison means the
degree to which the data are more or less public versus being hidden or private and
the ease with which the intervention skills can be learned. Individuality means the
closeness to the person's perceptions of self and the degree to which the effects of
an intervention are in the individual in contrast to the organization. 11 We assume
that the closer one moves on this continuum to the sense of self, the more the
inherent processes have to do with emotions, values, and hidden matters and,
consequently, the more potent they are to do either good or harm. It requires a
careful diagnosis to determine whether these interventions are appropriate and
relevant. If they are inappropriate, they may be destructive or, at a minimum,
unacceptable to the client or the client system.
To minimize these risks, Harrison suggests two criteria for determining the appropriate
depth of intervention:
 First to intervene at a level no deeper than that required to produce enduring
solutions to the problems at hand; and, second, to intervene at a level no
deeper than that at which the energy and resources of the client can be
committed to problem solving and to changed
 To Harrison, these criteria require that the consultant proceed no faster or
deeper than the legitimation obtained from the client system culture and that
he or she stay at the level of consciously felt needs. 13 We believe these are
sound guidelines.
 Harrison does recognize, however, and we agree, that the change agent is
continuously confronted by the dilemma of whether to "lead and push, or to
collaborate and follow.1'14 Harrison's orientation is to the latter, but we are
inclined to be slightly less conservative. We think that, to be effective, the
consultant needs occasionally but prudently to take minor risks in the
direction of leading and pushing, but these risks should not be quantum
jumps. As the consultant develops expertise in diagnosis and in making
interventions, the risks that are run are mainly the risks of a rejected
 130
suggestion. We do, however, agree with the essence of what Harrison is
suggesting and agree with his criteria.
 Another way of viewing depth of intervention might be to think about the
performance of units by descending order of systems and subsystems. Data
about the behaviour and performance of the total organization are perhaps the
most accessible and the least personal and perhaps create the least personal
anxiety and defensiveness. Performance and behaviour data about me in an
organization are perhaps the least accessible and the most personal. The
consultant, then, needs to have the skills to intervene effectively down through
these progressively smaller systems—frequently simultaneously-according to
whether the issue is
 How well are we performing as a total organization?
 How well arc we doing as a large unit?
 How well are we doing as a team?
 How well are you and I working together?
 How well are you doing?
 How well am I doing?
The concept of depth of intervention, viewed either in this way or in terms of a
continuum of the formal system, informal system, and self, suggests that the
consultant needs an extensive repertoire of conceptual models, intervention
techniques, and sensitivities to be able to be helpful at various levels. The
consultant's awareness of his or her own capabilities and limitations, of course, is
extremely important.
13.3.7 On Being Observed by the Culture
One of the many mistakes one can make in the change-agent role is to let
oneself be seduced into joining the culture of the client organization. Even though
one needs to join the culture enough to participate in and enjoy the functional
aspects of the prevailing culture—an example would be good-natured bantering
when everyone is clear that such bantering is in fun and means inclusion and
liking-—participating in the organization's pathology will neutralize the consultant's
effectiveness.
One of us recalls an experience in which the most critical issue to surface in
preliminary interviews with members of a professional staff group—we'll call it an
engineering organization—was who would be the new manager. The current
manager's promotion was to take effect in a few weeks, and he was anxious that the
group members provide some input on the selection of his successor as well as that
they tidy up a number of unresolved communications and administrative matters.
One obvious candidate for the promotion was a senior engineer who was highly
respected for his professional competency—clearly an engineer's engineer. However,
younger members of the staff privately expressed fears to the consultant that the
senior engineer would be too authoritarian if he assumed the manager's role, and
they did not want to lose his accessibility as professional mentor. On the other
 131
hand they had strong concerns that they would seriously hurt the man's feelings by
openly confronting the issue of his style and that he might resign if the matter were
confronted. As a result, the consultant team acquiesced in not feeding back to the
group the issue most troubling them. In effect, everyone but the senior engineer
conspired to protect him, to pretend that he was a strong candidate for promotion,
and to postpone the decision. As a result, the group was partly paralyzed for weeks.
The immediate effect of the team-building session was one of frustration for all of
the participants. In retrospect, the consultant's view is that the client system could
probably have worked through the matter and that the senior engineer would have
proved to be the strongest and most adaptable there that day, including the
consultants.
The dilemma created when a client subgroup describes an issue to the consul-
tant but says, "We won't deal with it and we won't let you surface it in the total
group," is a troublesome one. One way out of the dilemma may be to discuss the
likely consequences of not dealing with the issue. One consequence may be that the
recipient of unclear communication develops a kind of paranoia from the confusing
or distorted signals he or she is receiving. Another consequence is that a norm may
be implicitly created that says all negative interpersonal feedback is off limits,
which has the deeper consequence that the entire group is denied data about
problem areas that could be constructively worked on. Another consequence might
be that the group is denied the capability of sharing much positive feedback for fear
that such sharing could spill over into qualifying statements that begin to get into
negative areas. Confronting the subgroup with the dilemma and outlining the
consequences of inaction, then, may be much more constructive than succumbing
to the pressures of the culture.
Reddin provides us with a delightful account of another instance of the consul-
tant's being absorbed by the culture. The chairman of a 10,000 employee
subsidiary of a British industrial giant invited me to dinner with his board at their
country house training centre. It was an epic meal and the vintage port flowed. The
conversation was witty and I had to lean on my limited classical education to keep
up with the literary allusions. In preparation for an MBO conference I had in fact
recently re-read Thucydides' History of the Peioponnesian War and this gave me
some good lines. My first error was accepting the first invitation and then my next
was visiting in similar circumstances yet again. It was a superb, if unconscious,
seduction job by the client. My relationship to this client became intellectual witty
companion. My attempts to change it were met with incredulity.
Although Reddin did not elaborate, the implication is that once the consultant
became the "intellectual witty companion," the chairman resisted any efforts to be
guided, along with the board members, toward examining the functional and
dysfunctional aspects of the culture of the organization. Perhaps the only course of
action open to the consultant, once he realized he had been absorbed by the
culture, would have been to express openly his feelings and concerns about the
situation to the chairman. Such an intervention might or might not have shifted the
 132
relationship more toward an OD consultant-key client mode. Again, in this
illustration, being absorbed by the culture of the client organization immobilized
the change agent.
Internal change agents may be even more susceptible to absorption by the
prevailing organizational culture than are external change agents. As long as they
work with people and units that have considerable "political distance" from their
own unit, their objectivity may not be any more vulnerable than that of a
consultant from the outside. On the other hand, if their own unit (whether they are
specialists who are part of a human resources or an OD unit or have a home base
in some line department) is somehow engaged in manoeuvrings for resources or
power in competition with their client, they may inadvertently be drawn into the
politics of the situation. Rather than helping to surface the dynamics of
dysfunctional rivalry under appropriate circumstances, the change agents may
become part of the problem, thus helping to submerge an issue or contributing to
tactics incompatible with the helping role and thereby alienating the client or
potential clients.
13.3.9 The Consultant as A Model
Another important issue is whether change agents are willing and able to
practice what they preach. In the area of feelings, for example, the consultant may
be advocating a more open system in which feelings are considered legitimate and
their expression important to effective problem solving and at the same time
suppressing his or her own feelings about what is happening in the client system.
In particular, this problem can be a frequent one for the less-experienced
practitioner, and it usually has an impact on this person's feeling of competency: "If
only I had said...." The more one learns to be in touch with one's own feelings, the
more spontaneous one can be and the greater the options open for interventions.
(For this reason, we recommend extensive T-group experience for OD consultants.)
However, the client system is not the appropriate ground for working out any
problems the consultant may be currently experiencing. On the other hand, being
too aloof emotionally will tend to minimize the possibilities of helping the client.
As another example of modeling behaviour, the OD consultant needs to give
out clear messages—that is, the consultant's words and apparent feelings need to
be congruent. The consultant also needs to check on meanings, to suggest optional
methods of solving problems, to encourage and support, to give feedback in
constructive ways and to accept feedback, to help formulate issues, and to provide
a spirit of inquiry. We are not suggesting that the OD consultant must be a paragon
of virtue; rather, we are suggesting that to maximize one's effectiveness, one must
continuously practice and develop the effective behaviours one wishes to instill in
the client system.
13.3.10 The Consultant as A Microcosm
The consultant-key client viewed as a team, or consultants working as a team,
can profitably be viewed as a microcosm of the organization they are trying to create. In
 133
the first place, the consultant team must set an example of an effective unit if the team
is to enhance its credibility. Second, practitioners need the effectiveness that comes
from continuous growth and renewal processes. And third, the quality of the
interrelationships within the consulting team carries over directly into the quality of
their diagnosis, their intervention designs, and their interventions. To be more explicit
about the last point, unresolved and growing conflict between two consultants can
paralyze an intervention. Or simple lack of attention to team maintenance matters can
produce morale problems that reduce spontaneity and creativity in planning sessions
or in interacting with the client system.
13.3.10 Action Research and the OD Process
A related issue is whether the OD process itself will be subject to the ongoing
action research being experienced by the client system. The issue of congruency is,
of course, important, but the viability of the OD effort and the effectiveness of the
consultants may be at stake. Unless feedback loops relate to various interventions
and stages in the OD process, the change agents and the organization will not learn
how to make the future OD interventions more effective.
Feedback loops do not necessarily have to be complicated. Simple
questionnaires or interviews can be very helpful. As an illustration, we recall having
lunch with the key people who had been involved in a problem-solving workshop,
and upon asking several questions about how things were going "back at the shop,"
we found that problems had emerged centering on who had been invited to attend
the workshop and who had not. This feedback, at a minimum, has caused us to
pay even more attention to prework and to helping workshop participants plan how
to share effectively what has occurred with those not attending.
13.3.11 The Dependency Issue and Terminating the Relationship
If the consultant is in the business of enhancing the client system's abilities in
problem solving and renewal, then the consultant is in the business of assisting the
client to internalize skills and insights rather than to create a prolonged
dependency relationship. This issue tends to be minor, however, if the consultant
and the client work out the expert versus facilitator issue described earlier and if
the consultant subscribes to the notion that OD should be a shared technology.
The facilitator role, we believe, creates less dependency and more client growth than
the traditional consulting modes, and the notion of a shared technology leads to
rapid learning on the part of the client.
The latter notion is congruent with Argyris's admonition that if the consultant
intervention is to be helpful in an ongoing sense, it is imperative for the client to
have "free, informed choice." And to have this free choice, the client requires a
cognitive map of the overall process. Thus the consultant will have to be quite open
about such matters as the objectives of the various interventions that are made and
about the sequence of planned events. The OD consultant should continuously be
part educator as he or she intervenes in the system.
 134
An issue of personal importance to the consultant is the dilemma of working to
increase the resourcefulness of the client versus wanting to remain involved, to feel
needed, and to feel competent. A satisfactory solution to this dilemma, we believe, is
a gradual reduction in external consultant use as an OD effort reaches maturity. In a
large organization, one or more key consultants may be retained in an ongoing
relationship, but with less frequent use. If the consultants are constantly developing
their skills, they can continue to make innovative contributions. Furthermore, they
can serve as a link with outside resources such as universities and research
programs, and more important, they can serve to help keep the OD effort at the
highest possible professional and ethical level. Their skills and insights should serve
as a standard against which to compare the activities of internal change agents.
Some of the most innovative and successful OD efforts on the world scene, in our
judgment, have maintained some planned level of external consultant use.
Another dimension of the issue arises, however, when the consultant senses
that his or her assistance is no longer needed or could be greatly reduced. For the
client s good, to avoid wasting the consultant's own professional resources, and to
be congruent, the consultant should confront the issue.
A particularly troublesome dilemma occurs when the use of the consultant, in
the judgment of the consultant, is declining more rapidly than progress on the OD
effort seems to warrant. It would be easy to say that here, too, the consultant
should raise the matter with the client, even if the consultant risks appearing self-
serving. In such situations we wish more were known about the dynamics of OD
efforts' losing their momentum. Such additional knowledge would help consultants
and clients to assess more objectively the extent of need for consultant assistance,
how to improve the skills of the consultant and the client in managing the OD
effort, and how to rejuvenate the OD effort if rejuvenation is warranted.
Tannenbaum believes that many OD programs taper off because not enough
attention has been given to helping people and units let go of matters that need to
be laid to rest, to die. He believes that in a real sense, facilitators should be able to
assist in a mourning process, but to be of help, facilitators must be able to confront
their own tendencies to want to hang on and their own vulnerability.
My hunch is that after we get beyond those attitudes and behaviours most
individuals and groups are relatively willing to alter, we then begin challenging [he
more central fixities that define individuals and organizational units at their cores.
Holding on at this level becomes crucial. Yet we keep working on processes that
focus on change, and do not do very much about facilitating mourning and the
dying process—helping units let go.!
We also suspect that OD efforts frequently flounder because of internal power
struggles that have not been sensed early enough by the consultant or understood
well enough for anyone to intervene constructively. For example, some relatively
powerful person or group may be fearful of losing status or influence and may be
mobilizing support for the status quo through such tactics as distorting information
or discrediting whoever is seen as the threat. The threat may be the practitioner or
the OD effort or the threat may be wholly unrelated to the OD process. But if people
 135
in the organization get caught up in the political power maneuvering, the OD effort
may be immobilized. This interference appears to be what happened to the highly
successful STS and self-managed team approach that had flourished at the General
Foods pet food plant in Topeka for several years. While much more needs to be
known about these occurrences as they relate to OD efforts, it would seem that
these situations, if sensed, need to be surfaced and confronted head on. Such
shadowy struggles are usually dysfunctional whether or not an OD effort is under
way, and the remedy may need to be a prompt description of reality by the chief
executive officer. While a long-term OD effort should replace most such covert
maneuvering with an open, working through of issues, these situations can and do
occur while an OD effort is under way.
Sometimes the organization may simply be temporarily overloaded by
externally imposed crises occupying the attention of key people. Under such
conditions, the best strategy may be one of reducing or suspending the more
formalized OD interventions and letting people carry on with their enhanced skills
and then returning to the more formalized aspects at a later date. Dynamics of
these and the other circumstances We have described were more defined, the
resolution of the problem of what to do when the OD effort seems to be running out
of steam might take directions other than reducing or terminating the involvement
of the change agent.
13.3.12. Ethical Standards in OD
Much of this lesson and, indeed, much of what has preceded in other
chapters, can be viewed in terms of ethical issues in OD practice, that is, in terms
of enhancement versus violation of basic values and/or in terms of help versus
harm to persons. Louis White and Kevin Wooten see five categories of ethical
dilemmas in organization development practice stemming from the actions of either
the consultant or client or both. The types of ethical dilemmas they see are: (1)
misrepresentation and collusion, (2) misuse of data, (3) manipulation and coercion,
and (4) value and goal conflicts
We will draw on and modify their categories to suggest what we sec as some of
the more serious areas for potential ethics violations in OD consulting. Some of
these areas apply not only to OD consulting, but to management consulting in
general. The illustrations are ours and are only hypothetical.
Misrepresentation of the Consultant's Skills An obvious area for unethical
behaviour would be to distort or misrepresent one's background, training,
competencies, or experience in vita sheets, advertising, or conversation. A subtle
form of misrepresentation would be to let the client assume one has certain skills
when one does not.
Professional/Technical Ineptness The potential for unethical behaviour
stemming from lack of expertise is pervasive in OD. To give one example using
Harrison's concept of depth of intervention, it would seem to be unethical to ask
people in a team-building session to provide mutual feedback about leadership
style when neither preliminary interviews nor the client group has indicated a
readiness or a willingness to do so. Another example would be as follows: A
 136
preliminary diagnosis suggests the appropriateness of a feedback intervention, but
the consultant has no experience from which to draw in order to design a
constructive feedback exercise. The consultant goes ahead anyway. It would be
unethical for the consultant to plow ahead without some coaching by a more
experienced colleague. Thus, we have hypothesized two violations of ethical
standards: (1) using an intervention that has a low probability of being helpful (and
may be harmful in this circumstance), and (2) using an intervention that exceeds
one's expertise.
Misuse of Data Again, the possibilities for unethical behaviour in the form of
data misuse on the part of either the client or the consultant are abundant. This is
why confidentiality is so important in OD efforts. Data can be used to punish or
otherwise harm persons or groups. An obvious example would be a consultant's
disclosure to the boss the names of those who provided information about the
boss's dysfunctional behaviour. Another example would be showing climate survey
results from Department A to the head of Department B without Department A's
authorization.
Serious distortions of the data would also be unethical. Let's imagine a
scenario in which the consultant interviews the top 20 members of management
and finds several department heads are angry about the behaviours of fellow
department head Z and the practices in Z's department. Further, Z is hostile and
uncooperative with the consultant in the data-gathering interview. The consultant
is now angry but is not conscious of the extent of the anger. When the consultant
feeds back the themes from the interviews to the group, his or her anger takes the
form of overstating and overemphasizing the dysfunctional aspects of Z's unit.
Collusion An example of collusion would be the consultant agreeing with the
key client to schedule a team-building workshop when department head Z is
scheduled to be on vacation. (This manuever is hardly the way to deal with the
problems created by Z, is likely to create reduced trust in the consultant and the
key client, Z's boss, and is likely to intensify Z's dysfunctional behaviour.) Another
example illustrating the power that a consultant with expertise in group dynamics
can wield for good or harm is the consultant colluding with other members of the
group to set up a feedback situation in which Z's deficiencies will be all too
apparent, particularly to Z's boss. Instead of creating a situation in which everyone,
including Z, has a chance of improving performance, this collusion is aimed at Z's
undoing. (We've picked on Z enough; if he or she is this much of a problem, Z's
performance should be confronted head on by the boss, outside of the team-
building setting, and preferably well in advance. If OD interventions are perceived
as methods for "getting" anyone, the OD process is doomed to failure.)
Coercion It is unethical to force organizational members into settings where
they are, in effect, required to disclose information about themselves or their units
which they prefer to keep private. The creation of a T-group with unwilling
participants would be an example.
A troublesome dilemma occurs in the case of a manager and most of his or her
subordinates who want It) go off-site for a problem-solving workshop but one or two
 137
members are strongly resisting. If friendly persuasion and addressing the concerns
of the individual(s)—not painful arm-twisting—do not solve the matter, perhaps a
reasonable option is for the manager to indicate that nonparticipation is acceptable
and that no one will be subject to recriminations, but those individuals should
understand that the group will go ahead and try to reach consensus on action
plans for unit improvement without their input.
Promising Unrealistic Outcomes Obviously, this is unethical and
counterproductive. The temptation to make promises in order to gain a client
contract can be great, but the consequences can be reduced credibility of the
consultant and the OD field, and the reduced credibility of the key client within his
or her organization.
Deception and Conflict of Values Deception in any form is unethical and will
destroy trust. The layoffs came after the company had promoted teamwork and
empowerment and secured employee cooperation in streamlining operations. For an
OD professional on the scene under such circumstances, the ethical course action
would be to press top management to .look at the probable consequences of re-
engineering, to look at possible options, and to be completely open with employees
about the implications of whatever change strategy was selected. And the ethical
responsibilities of the OD professional and company management extend, of course,
to mitigating the impact of any change effort on the lives of individual employees.
Thus, the values underlying ethical OD practice are honesty, openness, volun-
tarism, integrity, confidentiality, the development of people, and the development of
consultant expertise, high standards, and self-awareness.
13.3.13 Conclusion
Numerous issues regarding the client-consultant relationship need to be
addressed and managed in a successful OD effort. These issues have to do with
establishing the initial contract, identifying who is the client, establishing trust,
clarifying the role of the consultant, determining the appropriate depth of
intervention, examining the consequences of being absorbed by the organization's
culture, viewing the consultant and consulting teams as models, applying action
research to OD, terminating the relationship, and ethical standards. These issues
have important implications for practitioners, top management, and the
organization.
13.4 REVISION POINTS
1. The major issues pertinent to the client-consultant relationship are discussed
in this lesson.
2. Entry and Contracting, Refining the Client System, major trust issues in OD
system, appropriate diagnosis, observation of the culture in the organization,
the dependency issues, which terminate the relationship between client and
consultant are discussed.
3. Ethical standards in organizational development are also presented with
examples.
13.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Entry and Contracting?
 138
2. What are the major trust issues in consultancy?
3. Define – Depth of Intervention.
4. Explain about Action Research and the OD process.
5. What are the Ethical Standards in OD
13.6 SUMMARY
The major issues tend to center on the following important areas: Entry and
Contracting; Defining the Client System. No simple prescriptions will resolve all
dilemmas or problems in these aspects of OD.
13.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:
a) Entry and Contracting
b) Refining the Client System
c) The Nature of Consultant’s Expertise
d) How to observe by the organizational culture
e) Dependency issues
13.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
13.9 ASSIGNMENTS
1. Discuss elaborately on the Dependency Issues and the Client Relationship.
2. The Consultant as a model as well as a Microcosm - Justify.
13.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi., 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
13.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify the key considerations and Issues in Consultancy and how the
Consultant and Client Relationships to be developed. Collect information from
different sources and explore it.
13.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, Issues in Consultancy, Client Relationships
H
 139
LESSON – 14

SYSTEM RAMIFICATIONS
14.1 INTRODUCTION
Systems theory and a great deal of accumulated experience by OD
practitioners tell us that an extensive ripple effect occurs as OD interventions begin
to occur in an organization. This assessment may be an understatement because
some of the ramifications in the total organizational system can be far-reaching.
The ramifications we will mention can be major challenges; all must be attended to
if an OD effort is to succeed for the long term.
14.1 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About system ramifications in OD process
 HR Relationships and its involvement, Resistance to Change Efforts,
Leadership Styles, Staffing issues, Organizational Justice, Labour Relations in
OD, Skill Demands
14.3 CONTENT
14.3.1 Human Resource Relationships and Involvement
14.3.2 Resistance to Change Efforts
14.3.3 Leadership and Leadership Styles
14.3.4 Rewards
14.3.5 Staffing and Career Development
14.3.6 Organizational Justice
14.3.7 Labour Relations
14.3.8 Monetary Costs and Skill Demands
14.3.9 Conclusion
14.3.1 Human Resource Relationships and Involvement
Because OD efforts and human resources policies and practices inevitably are
interdependent, we will first comment on the role of the human resources (HR) or
personnel department. Most, if not all, of the areas of system ramifications we will
touch on in this chapter are areas of concern for the senior HR executive and for
HR departments. OD efforts have implications for staffing, rewards, training and
development, labour relations, and other broad HR processes.
It should be noted that OD directors and practitioners typically report to the
senior HR executive. Furthermore, in some organizations, many HR professionals
are expected to have or develop expertise as OD practitioners.
14.3.2 Resistance to Change Efforts
The reasons for resistance to change efforts are many and vary with the
circumstances. However, whenever employees perceive possibility of loss of position
or status, of inequitable treatment, or the loss of use of present competencies, or they
have experienced duplicity or futile extra work in past change efforts, resistance is
likely to emerge. An obvious implication is that management should reassure people
 140
as clearly as possible about those areas that present no need for concern and those
areas likely to see benefits, along with establishing realistic expectations about the
pains and challenges that will occur. Of course, no substitute is available for
experiential discovery by organizational members that they can successfully
accommodate to change processes and that things are getting better.
We, believe that most OD efforts result in enhanced morale, improved
communications, more mutual influence, and improved organizational
effectiveness. However, if decisions have already been made that major
restructuring will occur, which entails extensive sacrifice and pain associated with
the change effort, management should make clear that the sacrifice and pain will
be shared across the organization and at all levels. Conversely, if extensive positive
outcomes are expected, policies for sharing in the gains should be clearly
articulated. In general, OD practitioners have a major role in recommending
participative/influence processes that will minimize unneeded resistance, and in
urging top management to pay attention to matters of fairness and full
communications.
14.3.3 Leadership and Leadership Style
To be optimally successful, OD efforts require a kind of leadership that John
Kotter distinguishes from management. Both are necessary. Management, to Kotter,
involves "organizing and staffing," "planning and budgeting," and "controlling and
problem solving." In contrast, leadership involves "establishing direction," including
developing a vision and strategies for getting there; "aligning people," including the
communication of the desired direction and securing cooperation; and "motivating and
inspiring," which Kotter asserts often requires "appealing to very basic, but often
untapped, human needs, values, and emotions." Both effective leadership and
management are essential, according to Kotter, if organizations are to be successful for
the long term. The leadership behaviours that Kotter describes would seem to be
particularly crucial to maintaining the momentum of a continuous improvement effort
such as OD or a combination of OD with TQM.
This raises the matter of management succession and continuity. Most long-
time OD practitioners can cite illustrations of OD efforts that appeared to be highly
successful under one CEO, division head, or plant manager, only to wither away
under the neglect or misdirection of a successor. For continuity of effort and to
avoid the loss of what has been invested in an OD effort, boards of directors and
top management teams must understand and support the OD process and be
prepared to select replacement executives who can carry the process forward. This
imperative holds true, of course, for other major improvement efforts, including
TQM and QWL programs.
The dominant leadership style in organizations undergoing a large-scale OD ef-
fort must feature or move toward extensive use of employee involvement at all
levels. Furthermore, leadership must be of a team and team-process variety. That
 141
is, leadership must be conceptualized as a highly interactive, shared process, with
members of all teams developing skills in this shared process.
Real, substantive delegation is critical for individual empowerment, and is
particularly important as organizations move toward self-managed teams. Skills in
consensus decision making are needed, and individuals and teams need to see that
they are influencing the course of events. Training is extremely important for
organizational members to develop competencies for the new assignments
precipitated by major organizational training department and managers throughout
the organization must anticipate and change. Therefore, the training department
and managers throughout the organization must anticipate and be on top of
emerging training needs. It probably also means an increased budgetary allocation.
As implied earlier, the OD process itself suggests the need for some additional
kinds of training. For example, managers, supervisors, and teams at all levels will
need training in group problem solving, in effective group participation, and in the
management of team meetings.
Ideally, selected human resources staff members and line managers are
trained to do some OD facilitation work in collaboration with external and internal
OD consultants. In larger organizations in particular, cost factors plus the
attractiveness that the development of consultation skills holds for some managers
and professionals will suggest the desirability of selecting and training additional
consultants. The training of internal consultants might include T-group experience,
university courses in OD and related subjects, NTL training in consultation skills,
an extensive apprenticeship with an experienced professional, and supervised
consultation.
In addition, the widespread development of facilitator and consultation skills
by organizational members across specialties and hierarchical lines can be a
valuable adjunct to the OD process and to the organization's functioning. The more
that organizational members in general are helpful to peers, subordinates, and
superiors and to customers and suppliers in listening, in examining options, and in
running meetings, the more successful both the OD effort and the organization are
likely to be.
14.3.4 Rewards
As Edward Lawler says, effective organizational change efforts must pay
attention to the reward system:
When the pay system is not changed in a timely fashion, it can prevent the
institutionalization of the other changes in several ways. It may not reward the
behaviour which is needed to make the changed systems work. Worse yet, it may
even reward behaviour that is the antithesis of what is needed to make the changes
work.
Both theory and experience suggest that organization improvement processes
that depend upon the cooperation, teamwork, creativity, and intensified effort of
organizational members must pay attention to the allocation of rewards if the
 142
process is to be sustained and if dysfunctional consequences are to be minimized.
More specifically, if management, including owners of an enterprise, exhort and
empower employees toward higher performance and then reward only themselves,
organizational members will respond with cynicism, lowered trust, and decreased
loyalty. We are referring, of course, to both financial rewards and recognition.
On the positive side, when OD efforts are supported by ongoing, frequent
recognition of individual and team efforts, and by financial rewards consistent with
improved organizational goal attainment, the OD effort and organization
improvement are likely to be sustained. Various kinds of plant wide productivity
gain sharing plans, such as lmproshate and the Scanlon Plan, and profit sharing
are consistent with the collaborative, team approach inherent in OD. Gain sharing
plans such as the Scanlon Plan, in particular, are congruent with OD because the
plans themselves feature extensive employee involvement. On the other hand,
individual incentive plans, unless accompanied by broader team and organizational
rewards, may interfere with the OD process by reinforcing lack of cooperation or
dysfunctional competition among individuals and groups.
At a minimum, managing the movement of wage and salary scales in a manner
consistent with the success of the organization and informing employees accordingly
are necessary. The possibility of temporarily reducing wage and salary levels as one
option in a financial crisis produced by external events would also seem more likely
in an organization that has been involved in an OD effort for some time.
If an organization moves toward self-managed teams, management and
employees will probably want to move in the direction of skills-based or knowledge-
based pay for team members. Under this concept, team members are paid in
accordance with the number of skills they have mastered. At some of Volvo's plants
in Sweden, a bonus scheme is utilized to reward individual skill development as
well as the extent of responsibility assumed by teams in such areas as quality
control, maintenance, and personnel administration.
Because more extensive data gathering, including making legitimate the
expression of feelings and attitudes, is an integral part of an OD effort, people will
have to learn how to give and manage feedback in such a way that it is helpful and
not destructive. Encouraging more constructive feedback means training in giving
and receiving feedback, and it means paying attention to the gamut of feedback
systems—all the way from interpersonal kinds of exchanges to subunit production
or cost data and to the results of organization wide attitude surveys.
For example, at the interpersonal level, feedback tends to be the most
constructive when such conditions as the following are met:
 It is solicited.
 It is fairly immediate after the event.
 It is specific.
 143
It is reported in terms of the impact on the person who is providing the
feedback. It is nonjudgmental in that it does not label the recipient "stupid,"
"worthless," and the like. It is given when the basic motive is to improve the
relationship (in contrast to a desire to punish, belittle, etc.). It is given in private or
in a supportive group atmosphere. It is given in the spirit of mutual give-and-take.
It is given in the context of sharing appreciations as well as concerns. At the level of
subunit production or cost data, feedback is most helpful if it is reported. Directly
to the manager or team who can take remedial action, in contrast to top manage-
ment or a staff department.
Frequently enough so the manager or team can plan remedial action
Specifically, so that the manager or team can easily identify the problem area
(which usually means the using manager or team will need to be involved in
designing the reporting system)
In terms of attitude and climate surveys, feedback tends to be the most
constructive
 When it is sought by the leader and the unit involved
 When unit data and aggregate organizational data are reported to the respective
manager, but not data specific to other units (direct comparisons with peers
tend to be highly threatening at first)
 When managers plus their subordinates discuss the dynamics underlying the
data with the help of a third party and make action plans
David Nadler emphasizes the importance of how feedback is carried out: the
way in which the data collection and feedback activities are conducted, the process
of feedback, is of major importance. Where there has been an effective and active
process for using the data, such as frequent meetings, intensive training, or specific
structures for using feedback, then positive changes tend to occur. Similarly, the
greater the participation by members of the organization in the entire collection-
feedback process the more change comes from the data.
14.3.5 Staffing and Career Development
Many aspects of the staffing and career development processes, broadly
conceived, can be affected by an evolving OD effort, and vice versa. An OD process
carries implications for selection, orientation and assimilation, transfer and
promotion, training and development, and separation.
Selection
In the selection process, for example, an increasing degree of participation by
peers in the nomination, evaluation, and selection of candidates is likely.
Participation here would be congruent with a broadened level of participation in the
organization and with more emphasis on the ability of employees to work
interdependently and in team configurations. Training of present employees in
effective interviewing of candidates would be important in this evolution. Team
 144
member involvement in the selection of both team leaders and new team members
is a feature of a number of contemporary work restructuring projects.
Orientation and Assimilation
Substantial attention needs to be paid to the process of introducing new
people into the system (sometimes called the "joining up process") if the staffing
process is to be congruent with assumptions and values underlying OD efforts.
Group methods in orientation and assimilation seem to be particularly useful. Such
sessions, under the guidance of a facilitator or a supervisor having skills in group
processes, can do much to alleviate dysfunctional anxiety on the part of present
members and to help them make plans for quickly incorporating the new person
into the team. A group session with the new member—for example, involving
introductions, descriptions of what each person is currently working on, concerns
of the new person—can also be useful.
Career Development and Progression
If a major thrust of the OD process is to shift organization culture toward more
honesty, more openness, more mutual support, and improved personal
development, the career and growth aspirations of all organization members must
be an area of concern. These matters interest employees at all levels considerably
and will tend to be talked about more openly. This heightened interest will probably
mean paying more attention to advancement and transfer opportunities and will
require more of a commitment of resources to training and management
development. Some resources might also be committed to "life-planning" or "career
planning" workshops; many organizations have experimented with such learning
laboratories. Technical courses might not be directly related to the OD process but
could be important in a systematic program of career development. These
experiences, however, will tend to be more highly specific to individual and system
needs than is the usual case; that is, more attention will be given to the diagnosis
of training and development needs, with less reliance on packaged programs.
Another shift will probably occur. The climate could well move away from sup-
pressing dialogue about the merits of leaving the organization toward openly facing
the issue of internal versus external career opportunities. A likely outcome, as
indicated earlier, will be more effort to increase opportunities for internal mobility.
Ideally, new departments, divisions, or subsidiaries could be spawned through
paying attention to the entrepreneurial and career aspirations of organizational
members. The removal of arbitrary ceilings on responsibility will probably release a
good deal of energy for constructive contributions within the system.
To use terminology sometimes found in labour contracts, "job posting" (i.e.,
notifying present employees of job vacancies) and "bidding" (i.e., permitting people
to apply for these vacancies) are possible outcomes of an OD effort. Internal job
posting would be congruent with the open developmental thrust of OD. Another
outcome might be more attention to the development of "career ladders," which are
diagrams of routes of promotion and transfer within and across various job
 145
specialities. These devices are used to advise employees about career opportunities
and to assist management in planning the training required for progression from
one job to another. As a result of such devices as job posting, bidding, and career
ladders, more time and effort is likely to be spent in processing internal requests for
transfer and promotion and in developing training opportunities. The net effect on
employees, however, is likely to be one of higher morale, better placement, better
diagnosis of training needs, and improved skills.
The developmental philosophy inherent in the OD process creates a major
dilemma relative to the use of psychological tests for selection purposes, especially
in the promotion system. On the one hand, some tests, such as intelligence tests,
can have sufficient validity in specific circumstances to warrant their use as one
additional source of relevant data. On the other hand, tests can leave the candidate
feeling subject to mysterious or arbitrary criteria or locked into his or her own
personal characteristics, which are not subject to modification.
The "assessment center" concept may provide some leads toward solving the
testing dilemma. Briefly, companies using assessment centers typically give the
candidate, usually a nonsupervisory person interested in promotion, an extensive
battery of tests and involve the candidate in an interview and group discussions
and other group situations. Trained line managers, who have been observing, then
make rankings of the relative performance of the candidates. In general, it has been
found that assessment centers increase the proportion of successful to
unsuccessful supervisors and higher managers and are useful in identifying
management potential among minority and women employees."
The ingredients that can shift the assessment center process from being
strictly a matter of selection to one that is developmental are the dialogue that
communicates the results to the candidate, and the developmental opportunities
that are subsequently provided. For example, if the assessment center highlights
some deficiencies in group discussion, a center staff member can provide some
feedback (ideally, requested by the candidate), and the organization may provide
opportunities for developing additional skill. Then, too, the whole process
permitting candidates to apply for the assessment center experience and selecting
some candidates for promotion tends to create an element of openness and mobility
in the system, which might not otherwise be there. The use of an assessment
center, however, is not always constructive, The lack of an effective feedback and
discussion process can produce suspicion and hostility. Further, great resentment
will arise if the process is perceived as forever cutting someone off from promotional
opportunities. Some experimentation has occurred—apparently successful—in
dispensing with the selection aspects of assessment centers and focusing solely on
using the process as a developmental tool. In this case, no report is given to higher
management.
 146
Group input in the selection of formal leaders would also be congruent with
the thrust of an OD effort. Although such an approach, like a number of others we
have mentioned, can and does occur outside of OD efforts, it would be inconsistent
with the OD process not to consider the feelings and perceptions of group members
in these important decisions. In some instances it would be appropriate to delegate
to a group the selection of a new leader.
Layoffs and Other Crises
In an era of downsizing and employee layoffs, failure to explore every possible
avenue for minimizing the trauma on individuals and for assisting them in coping
with what is frequently both an individual and a family crisis would be incongruous
with OD approaches. Indeed, OD has played a major role in tempering the impact
of layoffs for many years. For example, during an aerospace industry downturn, one
high-tech firm, having had an OD effort for a number of years, used facilitators and
group methods in assisting those being laid off to enable them to overcome their
disappointment and anxiety and to make plans for a job search. Although the firm
had no legal requirement to do so at that time, it notified those being laid off weeks
ahead of the layoff date, and overall the performance of those affected did not
deteriorate. The company also made great efforts to place those employees with
other organizations. (Most laid-off employees subsequently returned when business
picked up again.) OD techniques were also used to help groups face up to the
realities of the situation, to decrease distortions in perception, and to make plans to
cope with the cutback. Ideally, the OD process assists top management in
examining a wide range of options to consider in a budgetary crisis.
OD interventions can also assist organization members, and thus the
organization, in other crises as well. Hurricane, flood, or earthquake disasters, the
death of a top executive, a serious fire or explosion, or a potential plant closure are
all examples of crises in which OD facilitators along with counsellors and medical
personnel, can assist in helping individuals deal with shock and in avoiding the
kind of organizational paralysis that can otherwise occur.
14.3.6 Organizational Justices
A shift in team and organizational culture toward more openness and toward
more mutual concern should, in large part, facilitate the airing of felt injustices.
From our experience, it does occur—and in a more natural and less threatening
way. Grievances tend to be raised when they occur and are worked out quickly.
(This phenomenon plus others that tend to stem from OD efforts, from our
observations, seemingly improve mental health. We see OD as a way of improving
mental health in an organization; many of its practices and underlying concepts are
congruent with theory and clinical experience in counseling psychology, family
therapy, some aspects of psychiatry, and community mental health programs)
We are not recommending doing away with formalized appeal procedures,
however, or what we call organizational due process. We have defined the latter as
 147
consisting of "established procedures for handling complaints and grievances,
protection against punitive action for using such established procedures, and
careful, systematic, and thorough review of the substance of complaints and
grievance." We believe a formalized appeal system may be needed to protect
individuals from gross anomalies in an organization's culture. For example, what if
a norm begins to develop that says it is taboo ever to question the usefulness of any
part of the OD effort? Or that subordinates should always be "open" no matter what
the consequences might be, but that superiors may have hidden agendas'? Or that
talking about seniority is off limits even though employees feel deeply that length of
service is a significant investment to be taken into account in job retention? Such
an environment needs a formal appeal system. It is clearly consistent for a system
that values openness to retain mechanisms that tend to protect openness.
14.3.7 Labour Relations
In unionized settings, joint efforts on the part of management and union
leadership to move toward a problem-solving, mutual-reward kind of bargaining
relationship would be congruent with the general philosophy and thrust of OD.
Richard Walton and Robert McKersie's description of "integrative bargaining" and
the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service's "relations by objectives (RBO)"
encompass this approach. Productivity bargaining and agreements under quality of
work life (QWL) programs are two forms of integrative bargaining National Labour
Relations Board decisions have created some confusion as to the status of employee
involvement programs and the use of problem-solving teams, but it is unlikely that
OD efforts will be affected, providing certain guidelines arc followed. Some
background: In the 1992 Electromation case, the NLRB ruled that "action com-
mittees'" established by the Electromation Company were illegal under the Wagner
Act. 11 was held that the company dominated the teams and discussed areas
reserved for collective bargaining such as work rules and wages. In 1993, in a case
involving Du Pont's Chambers Works plant and the plant's Chemical Workers
Association, the NLRB ordered Du Pont to disband several committees that had
been formed to deal with recreation and safety issues.
A likely consequence of these decisions will be a major effort in Congress to
amend the National Labour Relations Act toward supporting employee involvement
efforts. Furthermore, former Labour Secretary Robert Reich has repeatedly stated
that he would seek legislation in support of worker-management teams if the
actions of the NLRB served to stifle them. In addition, President Clinton's nominee
to the board stated late in 1993 that he firmly backed labour-management teams.
Meanwhile, some guidelines written by a former NLRB member may suffice.
They were written after an administrative law judge had ruled in the Electromation
case and before the full NLRB had ruled: Participation in such groups as action
teams, improvement teams, quality circles, and the like, should be strictly
voluntary. Committees should focus on such areas as improving productivity and
product/customer service quality or supplier relations. Meetings should not be held
 148
that appear to be negotiations between management and labour over the terms and
conditions of employment. Committees should not be formed when the company is
facing a union organizing campaign.
14.3.8 Monetary Costs and Skill Demands
The use of external and internal third parties in the role of practitioners, the
use of off-site workshops, and additional training programs are obviously going to
cost money. If an organization development effort is successful, however, it must
have commitment of top management to the notion that the development of the
total organization, including the development of human resources and the social
system, is a continuous process worthy of an ongoing investment.
In addition, the costs in terms of effort and skill demands should not be
ignored. In some ways, the environment we have been describing is more difficult
and demanding than that found in more traditional organizational cultures. Team
members, for example, no longer are comfortable letting the formal leader carry the
total responsibility for decision making, nor do they conveniently blame others
when things go wrong. The newer culture is likely to include a commitment to
examine all of the forces bearing on a problem or challenge, including one's own
impact. Thus, while the newer culture may be, and usually is, more exciting and
rewarding, it is likely to be more difficult and challenging as well.
14.3.9 Conclusion
A sustained, successful organization development effort will have extensive
ramifications throughout the system. Attention will need lobe paid to the role of the
human resources department and staff, to managing resistance to change, to
leadership style throughout the organization, to training including training in
consultation skills, to the reward system, to the kinds and quality of feedback
systems, to many aspects of staffing and career development, to managing crises, to
systems of organizational justice, and to labour relations and labour law. Monetary
and time costs will be significant, and demands for improved performance will be
ongoing. But the culture and climate and, hopefully, more tangible rewards as well
are likely to be much more exciting and satisfying to participants.
14.4 REVISION POINTS
1. OD efforts have implications for staffing, rewards, training and development,
labour relations, and other broad HR processes. Many HR professionals are
expected to have or develop expertise as OD practitioners.
2. OD practitioners have a major role in recommending participative/influence
processes that will minimize unneeded resistance, and in urging top
management to pay attention to matters of fairness and full communications.
3. The more that organizational members in general are helpful to peers,
subordinates, and superiors and to customers and suppliers in listening, in
examining options, and in running meetings, the more successful both the OD
effort and the organization are likely to be.
 149
4. The greater the participation by members of the organization in the entire
collection-feedback process the more change comes from the data.
5. Group input in the selection of formal leaders would also be congruent with
the thrust of an OD effort. Although such an approach, like a number of
others we have mentioned, can and does occur outside of OD efforts, it would
be inconsistent with the OD process not to consider the feelings and
perceptions of group members in these important decisions.
6. It is clearly consistent for a system that values openness to retain
mechanisms that tend to protect openness.
7. Meetings should not be held that appear to be negotiations between
management and labour over the terms and conditions of employment.
Committees should not be formed when the company is facing a union
organizing campaign.
8. While the newer culture may be, and usually is, more exciting and rewarding,
it is likely to be more difficult and challenging as well.
14.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by System Ramifications?
2. Explain about HR relationships and involvement.
3. Explain about leadership and leadership styles.
4. What are the rewards?
5. How Staffing and Career Development issues will be rectified?
6. Explain about Labour Relations.
7. Explain about Monetary costs and skills demands.
14.6 SUMMARY
Systems theory and a good deal of accumulated expertise by OD practitioners
tell us that an intensive ripple impact happens as OD interventions begin to occur
in a corporation. This assessment is also an irony as a result of a number of the
ramifications within the total structure system may be comprehensive. The
ramifications we'll mention may be major challenges; all should be attended to if
associate degree OD effort is to succeed for the future.
14.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. write short note on the following:.
a) Human Resource Relationships
b) Resistance to Change Efforts
c) Rewards
d) Staffing and Career Development
e) Organizational Justice
f) Labour Relations
14.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
 150
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
14.9 ASSIGNMENTS
1. Discuss in detail on various areas which influence on System Ramifications.
2. Explain the significance of Monetary Costs and Skill Demands.

14.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES

1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi., 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
14.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify the different areas of System Ramifications in the field of
Organizational Development.
14.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, System Ramifications, Leadership Styles,
Rewards, Career Development, Organizational Justice, Labour Relations, Skill
Demands.
H
 151
LESSON – 15

POWER, POLITICS AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

15.1 INTRODUCTION
Power and politics, indisputable facts of organizational life, must be
understood if one is to be effective in organizations. In this chapter we examine
power and politics in relation to organization development. The OD practitioner
needs both knowledge and skill in the arenas of organizational power and politics.
As Warner Burke observes: "Organization development signifies change, and for
change to occur in an organization, power must be exercised."
Organization development has been criticized for not taking into account
power in organizations. That criticism was essentially correct for many years
although it is less valid today. Recent years have seen a sizable outpouring of
theory and research on power and politics from which OD practitioners have
derived implications and applications for the field of OD. But we are still in the
early stages of knowing how power and organization development should be related.
One goal of this chapter is to advance our understanding of the role of power in OD
and the role of OD in a power setting.
15.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About what is Power and Politics in Organizational Development
 Various Frameworks for Analyzing Power and Politics
 The Role of Power and Politics in the Practice of OD
 Planned Change, Acquiring and Using Power Skills
15.3 CONTENT
15.3.1 Power
15.3.2 Theories about the Sources of Social Power
15.3.3 Organizational Politics Defined and Explored
15.3.4 Frameworks for Analyzing Power and Politics
15.3.5 The Role of Power and Politics in the Practice of OD
15.3.6 Acquiring and Using Power Skills
15.3.7 Planned Change, Power and Politics
15.3.8 Conclusion
15.3.1 Power
"Power is the intentional influence over the beliefs, emotions, and behaviours
of people. Potential power is the capacity to do so, but kinetic power is the act of
doing so.... One person exerts power over another to the degree that he is able to
exact compliance as desired." "A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to
do something that B would otherwise not do."
Power is "the ability of those who possess power to bring about the outcomes
they desire."
 152
"Power is defined in this book simply as the capacity to effect (or affect)
organizational outcomes. The French word 'pouvoir' stands for both the noun
'power' and the verb 'to be able.' To have power is to be able to get desired things
done, to effect outcomes— actions and the decisions that precede them.”
Analyzing these definitions shows some common elements: effectance—getting
one's way; the necessity of social interaction between two or more parties; the act or
ability of influencing others; and outcomes favouring one party over the other. We
therefore define interpersonal power as the ability to get one's way in a social
situation.
The phenomenon of power is ubiquitous. Without influence (power) people
would have no cooperation and no society. Without leadership (power) in medical,
political, technological, financial, spiritual, and organizational activities,
humankind would not have the standard of living it does today. Without leadership
(power) directed toward warfare, confiscation, and repression, humankind would
not have much of the misery it does today. Power-in-action may take many forms,
both positive and negative. Leading, influencing, selling, persuading—these are
examples of positive uses of power. Crushing, forcing, hurting, coercing—these are
examples of negative uses of power. Power per se is probably neither good nor bad
although Lord Acton observed that "power tends to corruption; absolute power
corrupts absolutely." A moment's reflection, however, suggests that many problems
with power stem from the goals of persons with power and the means they use, not
the possession of power as such.
Two Faces of Power
David McClelland proposed an important distinction when he identified "two
faces of power"—positive and negative. McClelland observed that while power has a
negative connotation for most people, it is through the use of power that things get
done in the world. According to him, the negative face of power is characterized by,
a primitive, unsocialized need to dominate others. The positive face of power is
characterized by a socialized need to initiate, influence, and lead. This positive face
of power enables others to reach their goals as well as lets the person exercising
power reach his or her goals. The negative face of power seeks to dominate and
control others; the positive face of power seeks to empower self and others. We
think this distinction provides a good insight into the concept of power.
In most organizations the positive face of power is much more prevalent than
the negative face of power. Patchen studied organizational decision making and
found that coercive tactics were "noticeable chiefly by their absence" while problem
solving and consensus seeking were much more prevalent. Roberts came to a
similar conclusion in her study of "collective power" and "competitive power." Her
research in four organizations showed both kinds of power being exercised, with
collective, or positive, power being the predominant mode.
 153
15.3.2 Theories about the Sources of Social Power
Power exists in virtually all social situations. It is especially salient in
coordinated activities such as those found in organizations. In fact, for
organizations to function, an authority or power dimension is required. How do
some people come to possess power? How is power generated, bestowed, or
acquired? In this section we will examine four different views about who gets power
and how: Emerson's "power-dependence theory," French and Raven's "bases of
social power," Salancik and Pfcffer's "strategic-contingency model of power," and
Mintzberg's observations on the genesis of power in organizations.
Power-dependence theory states that power is inherent in any social
relationship in which one person is dependent on another. The sociologist Richard
Emerson states that "the dependence of Actor A upon Actor B is (1) directly
proportional to As motivational investment in the goals mediated by B, and (2)
inversely proportional to the availability of those goals to A outside of the A-B
relation."13 In other words, if a person has something we want badly and we cannot
get it any other place, that person has power over us. The components of this
theory are a social relation between two parties and resources (commodities, goals,
rewards) that are controlled by one party, and desired by the other.
Power-dependence theory is related to a broader framework of social
interaction called social exchange theory, which posits that what goes on between
persons is an exchange of social commodities: love, hate, respect, power, influence,
information, praise, blame, attraction, rejection, and so forth. We enter into and
continue in exchange relationships when what we receive from others is equivalent
to or in excess of what we must give to others. When the net balance for us is
positive, we will continue the exchange relationship; when the net balance for us is
negative, we will terminate or alter the relationship. Social interaction represents an
exchange of social goods and services. Viewed in this light, giving someone power
over us is the commodity we exchange when we are dependent on that person for
something we want.
Closely related to these ideas is the classic statement by John R. P. French
and Bertram Raven on "the bases of social power." These authors suggested five
sources, or bases, of social power as follows:
 Reward power—power based on the ability of the power holder to reward
another, that is, to give something valued by the other.
 Coercive power—power based on the ability of the power holder to punish
another, that is, to give something negatively valued by the other.
 Legitimate power—power based on everyone's belief that the power holder has a
legitimate right to exert influence and that the power-receiver has a legitimate
obligation to accept the influence.
 Referent power—power based on the power-receiver having an identification
with (attraction to, or feeling of oneness with) the power holder.
 154

 Expert power—power based on the power holder possessing expert knowledge

or expertise needed by the other. Informational power is a form of expert power
where the power holder possesses important facts or information needed by the
other.
In this theory, power belongs to those persons who control or mediate desired
commodities. Exchange theory and power-dependence theory are quite compatible
with the ideas proposed by French and Raven.
The strategic-contingency model of power asserts that power in organizations
accrues to the subunits (individuals, units, or departments) most important for
solving the organization's most critical problems. 15 These critical problems are
generally "uncertainties" posed by the environment. This theory, like the ones
discussed previously, supports the notion that those who have something highly
valued by others—in this case, the special expertise needed for the organization’s
survival—has power.
Salancik and Pfeffer further suggest how power is used: "Power is used by sub-
units, indeed, used by all who have it, to enhance their own survival through
control of scarce critical resources, through the placement of allies in key positions,
and through the definition of organizational problems and policies. These authors
view organizational power as a good thing, for power in the hands of the critical
problem solvers helps the organization cope with the various realities it faces.
Henry has developed a theory of organizational power drawn from the
organization theory literature and his own creative synthesis abilities. This theory,
"is built on the premise that organizational behaviour is a power game in which
various players, called influencers, seek to control the organization's decisions and
actions." The three basic conditions for the exercise of power are (1) some source or
basis of power, coupled with (2) the expenditure of energy in a (3) politically skillful
way. According to Mintzberg, the five possible bases of power arc, first, control of a
resource; second, control of a technical skill; and, third, control of a body of
knowledge. All of these must be critical to the organization. The fourth basis is legal
prerogatives—being given exclusive rights to impose choices. A fifth basis of power
is access to those who have power based on the first four bases.'' In addition to a
base of power, the influencer must have both the "will" and the "skill" to use it.
An organization has many potential influencers, such as the board of
directors, the managers, the top executives, the employees, the unions, suppliers,
customers, regulators, and so forth. The important aspects of Mintzberg's theory
are that the sources of power derive from possession of a commodity desired by
others, that power-in-action requires will and skill, and that the organization is the
context for the exercise of power.
In summary, these four views of the sources of power are remarkably similar—
power stems from possession of or mediation of desired resources. The resources
may be ability to reward and punish, being in control of critical skills, knowledge,
 155
or information, the ability to solve critical problems or exigencies—anything that
creates dependence of one actor or set of actors on another.
15.3.3 Organizational Politics Defined and Explored
Let us now examine the concept of politics in organizations. Following are
several representative definitions of politics:
Harold Lasswell defined politics simply as the study of who gets what, when,
and how. Organizational politics involve those activities taken within organizations
to acquire, develop and use power and other resources to obtain one's preferred
outcomes in a situation in which there is uncertainty or dissensus about choices.
Organizational politics involve intentional acts of influence to enhance or
protect the self-interest of individuals or groups.
Organizational politics is the management of influence to obtain ends not
sanctioned by the organization or to obtain ends through non-sanctioned influence
means.
We view politics as a subset of power, treating it... as informal power,
illegitimate in nature. Likewise we also treat authority as a subset of power, but in
this sense, format power, the power vested in office, the capacity to get things done
by virtue of the position held.
Analyzing these definitions suggests that the concepts of power and politics
are similar. Both relate to getting one's way—acceptance. Both relate to pursuit of
self-interest and overcoming the resistance of others. For our purposes,
organizational politics is power-in-action in organizations; it is engaging in activities
to get one's way.
One important feature in these definitions should be examined further. The
first three definitions treat politics as a neutral set of activities; the last two
definitions view politics as illegitimate or unsanctioned activities. We are inclined to
consider politics as neither good nor bad per se but believe that politics, like power,
has two faces.
The negative face of politics is characterized by extreme pursuit of self-interest;
unsocialized needs to dominate others; a tendency to view situations in win-lose
terms—what I win, you must lose—rather than win-win terms; and predominant
use of the tactics of fighting—secrecy, surprise, holding hidden agendas,
withholding information, deceiving. The positive face is characterized by a balanced
pursuit of self-interest and the interests of others; viewing situations in win-win
terms as much as possible; engaging in open problem solving followed by action
and influencing; a relative absence of the tactics of fighting; and a socialized need to
lead, initiate, and influence others.
Pursuit of unsanctioned organizational goals or the use of unsanctioned
organizational means might be examples of the negative face of politics. Illegitimate
uses of authority, information, or resources might also be examples of the negative
face of politics. But we see a positive face of politics whenever "hard decisions" must
 156
be made, are made, and most organizational members feel good about what was
decided and how it was decided. In this regard, Jeffrey Pfeffer argues that politics
are necessary if organizations are to function effectively. This concept of the two
faces of politics handles the two sides of the phenomenon we all see in our common
experience. Some organizations reflect a mostly positive face of politics, and other
organizations reflect a mostly negative face of politics.
Organizational politics tend to be associated with decision-making, resource
allocation, and conflict resolution processes. These key areas are the battlefields
where actors win and lose; they are where the "goods" are distributed and the goals
decided. In fact, one gains a quick understanding of the overall “political climate” of
an organization by studying its methods of resource allocation, conflict resolution,
and choosing among alternative means and goals.
Organizations often display consistent patterns of decision making, resource
allocation, and conflict resolution. Three patterns identified in the organization
literature are the bureaucratic, rational, and political models. 25 In a bureaucratic
model, decisions are made on the basis of rules, procedures, traditions, and
historical precedents. In a rational model, decisions are made on the basis of
rational problem solving: goals are identified and agreed upon; situations are
analyzed objectively in relation to goals; alternative action plans are generated and
evaluated; and certain alternatives are chosen and implemented. In a political
model, decisions are made on the basis of perceived self-interest by coalitions
jockeying for dominance, influence, or resource control. Most organizations exhibit
all these models, although in some organizations one predominates. A
predominantly political orientation is only one of several possibilities.
15.3.4 Frameworks for analyzing Power and Politics
Two conceptual models will provide a picture of the component parts of
situations involving organizational power and politics. The first is taken from
Pfeffer's book, Power in Organizations. The second is derived from the literature on
game theory.
Pfeffer's model of the antecedents and conditions for power, political activities
are seen to be the outcome of a number of conditions. When these conditions exist,
power and politics result. According to Pfeffer, the environment of the organization
imposes demands and constraints that will be accommodated in the form of
"means" and "ends"—that is, how the organization gets its job done and the goals it
pursues. Often heterogeneous or incompatible goals are sought by members of the
organization. Likewise, members may seek different or incompatible ways to
accomplish the goals. Preferences for different means to the goals is what is meant
by the term "heterogeneous beliefs about technology." "Differentiation" refers to the
fact that division of labour in organizations creates many subgroups, which in turn
produces different world views, different subgroup goals, and "tunnel vision" of sub-
group members.
 157
The primary conditions giving rise to conflict are differentiation, scarcity
(insufficient resources prevent all parties from having all they want),
interdependence (the distribution of resources affects everyone in some way), and
incompatible goals and/or means to goals. When these conditions exist, conflict
occurs. And when conflict exists, power and political behaviour are likely to result if
two additional features are present. As Pfeffer states: Together the conditions of
scarcity, interdependence, and heterogeneous goals and beliefs about technology
produce conflict. Whether that conflict eventuates in politics, the use of power in
organizational settings depends upon two other conditions. The first condition is
the importance of the decision issue or the resource. In the case of our example, the
resource was very important—necessary for survival. In situations in which the
decision may be perceived as less critical, power and politics may not be employed
to resolve the decision because the issue is too trivial to merit the investment of
political resources and effort. The second condition is the distribution of power.
Political activity, bargaining, and coalition formation occur primarily when power is
dispersed. When power is highly centralized, the centralized authority makes
decisions using its own rules and values. The political contests that sometimes
occur in organizations take place only because there is some dispersion of power
and authority in the social system.
It is possible to increase or decrease the amount of political activity in
organizations by manipulating the conditions of power and politics shown in the
model. For example, if resource abundance replaced resource scarcity, conflict
would be reduced and politics would be reduced. If organizational actors became
less interdependent (for instance, through the use of profit centers and other
structural arrangements), conflict would be reduced. Likewise, increased consensus
about goals and means and more centralized power would reduce conflict and,
hence, reduce political activity.
A second model comes from game theory literature. The conditions giving rise
to cooperation and competition and to the use of power have been studied
extensively by economists and behavioural scientists in an attempt to understand
wars, strikes, and arguments as well as cooperation and altruism. Several concepts
from game theory provide a framework for understanding power and politics. Some
of these concepts are conflict, the payoff matrix, the nature of interdependent
relationships, and integrative and distributive bargaining.
Game theory views conflict as a critical condition leading to power and political
behaviour. In conflict of interest, different parties prefer different goals. In conflict or
competition for scarce resources, different parties want the same resources but both
parties cannot possess them.
Thus conflict arises from the real or perceived nature of the payoff matrix, the
way in which the goods and services sought by two or more parties are to be
distributed. Some payoff matrixes promote cooperation and minimal power use;
other payoff matrixes promote competition, conflict, and maximal power use.
 158
Understanding the payoff matrix is the key to understanding conflict, which in turn
is the key to understanding political behaviour. To analyze a particular situation for
its potential for organizational politics we want to know answers to the following
questions:
 What is the commodity or issue that is under decision?
 How important is the commodity or issue?
 What possible payoffs are available?
 What are the likely payoffs?
 Can all parties get their desires, or must one party win and one party lose?
These questions lead to another concept involved in power and politics—the
nature of the relationship between the parties. Two parties in interdependent
interaction can have one of three possible relationships based on the nature of the
payoff matrix. purely competitive (a win-lose or zero-sum situation in which what
one party wins the other party loses and the total payoffs always sum to zero),
purely cooperative (a situation in which both parties have completely compatible
interests but must engage in communication or coordination to receive their
payoffs), and mixed or mixed motive (a situation in which both a push to compete
and a push to cooperate are inherent in the payoffs). Power and politics will
predominate in the purely competitive, win-lose situation. Power should be absent
from the purely cooperative, win-win situation; here the appropriate behaviours are
communication, coordination, and cooperation. Power may or may not prevail in
the mixed-motive situation; here each party needs the other to transact an
exchange, yet each party is seeking to maximize its own gains. In the mixed-motive
situation too much competition may cause both parties to lose; yet "too little"
competition by one party may allow the other to gain a significant advantage.
Mixed-motive relationships are prominent in many social and organizational
settings. In fact, many everyday situations are mixed-motive in nature. One sees
examples in labour-management relations; the relations between two peers striving
for a promotion that only one can obtain; and relations among members of a sports
team, all of whom want the team to win, but each of whom wants to be the "star."
Mixed-motive situations thus contain a potential for both cooperation and
competition, and which of these occurs depends on the behaviours of the two
parties. The important thing to realize is that cooperating effectively and competing
effectively require quite different kinds of behaviours. Cooperation requires problem
solving; competition requires power-oriented action.
This notion brings us to the concepts of integrative and distributive bargaining
proposed by Walton and McKersie.29 They studied labour-management bargaining
situations and concluded that for best results for both parties the bargaining
process should be conceptualized in two-phases: (1) a problem-solving,
collaborative phase in which the total joint payoffs are maximized, and (2) a
bargaining phase in which the payoffs are divided between the parties. In the first
phase, called integrative bargaining, the parties try to identify areas of mutual
 159
concern, search for alternative courses of action, and create the largest joint sum of
values possible. It is a cooperative, problem-solving phase. In the second phase,
called distributive bargaining, the parties are in conflict as they "divide up the pie"
created during integrative bargaining. Here each party tries to establish norms and
procedures that will help to maximize its gains while trying to keep the gains of the
other party to a minimum. Integrative bargaining calls for problem solving, honesty,
open communication, and mutual exploration of all ideas. Distributive bargaining
calls for secrecy, suspicion, deception, and not accepting the ideas of the other
party. By separating bargaining into these two phases, both parties can achieve
better solutions.
15.3.5 The Role of Power and politics in the Practice of OD
These concepts from game theory apply to political processes in organizations.
The sources of conflict are competition for scarce resources and conflict over incom-
patible goals and means to goals. A key factor is the nature of the payoffs to all
parties— what they stand to win or lose. Positive outcomes for both parties can
often be enhanced through a two-phase bargaining process in which integrative
bargaining precedes distributive bargaining.
The Nature of OD in Relation to Power and Politics
Organization development was founded on the belief that using behavioural
science methods to increase collaborative problem solving would increase both
organizational effectiveness and individual well-being. This belief gave rise to the
field and is a guiding premise behind its technology. To increase collaborative
problem solving is to increase the positive face of power and decrease the negative
face of power. Thus from its inception OD addressed issues of power and politics by
proposing that collaboration, cooperation, and joint problem solving are better ways
to get things done in organizations than relying solely on bargaining and politics.
The nature of OD in relation to power and politics can be examined from several
perspectives—its strategy of change, its interventions, its values, and the role of the
OD practitioner.
To use the framework of Robert Chin and Kenneth Benne, OD programs imple-
ment normative-reeducative and empirical-rational strategies of change, not a
power-coercive strategy. The normative-reeducative strategy of change focuses on
norms, culture, processes, and prevailing attitudes and belief systems. Change
occurs by changing norms and beliefs, usually through education and re-
education. The empirical-rational strategy of change seeks facts and information in
an attempt to find "better" ways to do things. Change occurs by discovering these
better ways and then adopting them. The power-coercive strategy of change focuses
on gaining and using power and on developing enforcement methods. Change
occurs when people with more power force their preferences on people with less
power. OD practitioners advocate normative-reeducative and empirical-rational
strategies of change, and OD interventions are designed to implement these
strategies. Organization development thus has a strong bias toward a normative-
reeducative strategy of change and against a power strategy.
 160
Virtually all OD interventions promote problem solving, not politics, as a pre-
ferred way to get things accomplished. OD interventions increase problem solving,
collaboration, cooperation, fact-finding, and effective pursuit of goals while
decreasing reliance on the negative faces of power and politics. We know of no OD
interventions designed to increase coercion or unilateral power. For example, OD
interventions typically generate valid, public data about the organization's culture,
processes, strengths, and weaknesses. Valid, public data are indispensable for
problem solving but anathema for organizational politics. OD interventions do not
deny or attempt to abolish the reality of power in organizations; rather, they
enhance the positive face of power, thereby making the negative face of power less
prevalent and/or necessary. Not only is organization development not a
power/political intervention strategy, it is instead a rational problem-solving
approach that is incompatible with extreme power-oriented situations.
OD values are consistent with the positive face of power, but not with the
negative face of power. Values such as trust, openness, collaboration, individual
dignity, and promoting individual and organizational competence are part of the
foundation of organization development. These values are congruent with rational
problem solving and incongruent with extremely political modes of operating.
"Power equalization" has long been described as one of the values of organization
development. Emphasis on power equalization stems from two beliefs: first,
problem solving is usually superior to power coercion as a way to find solutions to
problematic situations; second, power equalization, being one aspect of the positive
face of power, increases the amount of power available to organization members,
and by so doing adds power to the organization
The role of the OD practitioner is that of a facilitator, catalyst, problem solver,
and educator. The practitioner is not a political activist or power broker. According
to Chris Argyris, the "interventionist" has three primary tasks: (1) to generate valid
useful information, (2) to promote free, informed choice, and (3) to promote the
client's internal commitment to the choices made. The practitioner works to
strengthen skills and knowledge in the organization. But organization members are
free to accept or reject the practitioner, his or her program, and his or her values,
methods, and expertise. The OD consultant, like all consultants, provides a service
that the organization is free to "buy" or "not buy." The facilitator or educator role is
incompatible with a political activist role because cooperation requires one set of
behaviours and competition requires a different set of behaviours, as we discussed
earlier. Cobb and Margulies caution that OD practitioners can get into trouble if
they move from a facilitator role to a political role.
In summary, organization development represents an approach and method to
enable organization members to go beyond the negative face of power and politics.
This major strength of OD derives from the strategy of change, the technology, the
values, and the roles of OD practitioners.
 161
Operating in a Political Environment
We will present some general observations on operating in a political
environment, followed by some rules of thumb for the OD practitioner.
First, organization development practitioners operate from a potentially strong
power base they can use to advantage. According to the framework of French
and Raven, the OD consultant possesses power from the following bases:
legitimate power (the OD program and consultant are authorized by the
organization's decision makers); expert power (the consultant possesses expert
knowledge); informational power (the consultant has a wealth of information
about the strengths and weaknesses of the organization); and possibly
referent power (others may identify with and be attracted to the consultant).
These sources of influence produce a substantial power base that will enhance
the likelihood of success. Michael Beer has identified additional means by
which an OD group can gain and wield power in organizations: Paying
attention to these sources of power will enhance the likelihood of success of
OD programs.
Second, the models presented in this discussion suggest ways the OD practitioner
can help organization members reduce the negative face of power. Creating
slack resources, replacing tight coupling of interdependent relationships with
more loose coupling, gaining agreement on goals and means for goal
accomplishment, centralizing some decision making, and addressing mixed-
motive situations in two phases as indicated by integrative and distributive
bargaining—all these processes can reduce the negative consequences of
intense power and politics. The OD practitioner can help implement these
conditions in the organization, thereby modifying the political climate.
Third, the concept of the positive and negative faces of power and politics suggests
where the practitioner is likely to be more effective and less effective. We believe
that OD programs are likely to be unsuccessful in organizations with high
negative faces of politics and power: the OD program will likely be used as a pawn
in the organization's power struggles, and the OD practitioner can become a
scapegoat when conditions require a "sacrifice." On the other hand, OD programs
are likely to be highly effective in organizations with positive faces of power and
politics: the practitioner helps organization members build multiple power bases
in the organization (more power to everyone); he or she promotes collaborative
problem solving, which leads to better decisions; and the practitioner teaches
organization members how to manage mixed-motive situations to ensure the best
outcomes.
Fourth, the OD practitioner should learn as much as possible about bargaining,
negotiations, the nature of power and politics, the strategy and tactics of
influence, and the characteristics and behaviours of power holders. This
knowledge is not for the purpose of becoming a political activist, but rather to
understand better those organizational dynamics where power is an important
factor. This knowledge will also make the OD practitioner a more competent
actor in the organization and a more effective consultant in helping
 162
organization members solve their problems and take advantage of
opportunities.
Fifth, the OD practitioner realizes that power stems from possessing a commodity
valued by others. If the OD program indeed improves individual and organi-
zational functioning, if the OD practitioner has indeed learned his or her craft
well, then a valuable commodity has been produced that will be welcomed by
the organization power holders.
What advice is available for OD practitioners who want to operate more effec-
tively in a political environment? Several rules of thumb are implied by the
fact that power accrues to persons who control valued resources or
commodities.
15.3.6 Acquiring and using Power Skills
The OD practitioner is neither power activist nor power broker, but that does
not mean practitioners must be naive or incompetent in the political arena. Earlier
we stated that the OD practitioner should learn as much as possible about
bargaining, negotiations, the nature of power and politics, the strategy and tactics
of influence, and the characteristics and behaviours of power holders. The purpose
of this section is to contribute to that learning; specifically, we examine how to
acquire and use skills to increase the positive face of power in organizations.
The book by Larry Greiner and Virginia Schein, Power and Organization Devel-
opment: Mobilizing Power to Implement Change, provides a comprehensive look at
power and OD. The authors argue that OD values of trust, cooperation, and
collaboration not only can coexist with a "pluralistic/political" model of
organizations, but can make those organizations more humane and effective. The
pluralistic/political model assumes that organizations contain self-interested
groups seeking their own goals. The thrust of the book is that"... power and OD are
not incompatible if used constructively and responsibly." This thesis is appealing.
They write: The effective combination of OD and power represents, for us, taking
the high road to organization improvement. It begins by adhering to the valuable
roots of OD where an educational process is used to encourage people to
collaborate in making decisions that affect their own destiny. But as we will attempt
to show in this book, OD goes on to incorporate modern approaches to power by (1)
building its own power base so that it has access to those in power, (2) utilizing
power strategies that are open and above-board for influencing key power holders
to accept the use of OD, (3) providing a facilitative process for these power holders
to address critical substantive issues that proves more creative and efficient than
political bargaining, (4) assisting the power structure to confront and transform
itself so that change can be more lasting, and (5) upholding the concerns and
interests of those with less power who are affected by these changes.
The low road represents vested political interest groups who, if left only to
power and deception without OD, can destroy organizations by failing to tap human
potential. Ironically, the low road also includes not only traditional champions of
power who think that manipulation and political games are the essence of success,
 163
but those OD chameleons who sell out to power. Careful reflection on this
quotation reveals that Greiner and Schein are breaking new ground on the topic of
power and OD. In essence, they are saying we should use OD values and methods to
show the power holders better ways to wield power for the good of the entire
organization. These new insights are valuable for the field of OD. The authors
proceed to show how to achieve the five goals listed earlier through examples,
research, theory, and a large case study. For example, they discuss methods for
increasing one's power base. They also discuss different power strategies and iden-
tify three sets of successful power strategies.
Individual power derives from knowledge, others' support, and personality
characteristics. Three successful power strategies are "playing it straight," "using
social networks," and "going around the formal system." OD practitioners have
typically pursued a "playing it straight" strategy as their sole means of exerting
power. The authors propose adding the "using social networks" strategy to their
repertoires, thereby greatly expanding practitioner influence. One carries out such
a strategy by participating in alliances and coalitions, dealing directly with power-
holders and decision makers, and using contacts for information. Networking is
recognized as a potent, viable, yet legitimate means of acquiring power. Greiner and
Schein’s recommendation is a good one. "Going around the formal system" is a
high-risk strategy, usually not recommended.
Having power is one thing; actually using it to get things done is another.
According to these authors, power-in-use is called influence. They write: "Influence
entails actually securing the consent of others to work with you in accomplishing
an objective." And, "Power is converted into influence when the target individual
consents to behave according to the desires of the power holder." Three things are
involved in converting power into influence: (1) resisting other people's inappro-
priate influence attempts, (2) selecting the proper influence strategy, and (3)
empowering others. Three influence strategies can be used to influence others—
reason, reciprocity, and retribution. Reason refers to persuasion by facts, reciprocity
refers to exchange of favours, and retribution refers to coercion and threats. Usually
reason is the preferred strategy, and reciprocity can be useful when reason fails.
Retribution is not recommended except in unusual cases. Whetton and Cameron
suggest several means of resisting others' influence attempts such as confrontation
and using countervailing power. Methods for empowering others are the following:
(1) involve subordinates in assigning work, (2) provide a positive, collaborative work
environment, (3) reward and encourage others in visible and personal ways, (4)
express confidence, (5) foster initiative and responsibility, and (6) build on success.
15.3.7 Planned Change, Power and Politics
Now let's look at power and politics through the eyes of a management
consultant specializing in planned change. David Nadler and the Delta Consulting
Group have twenty years of experience helping leaders implement change in more
than 130 organizations. Change always involves power and politics, Nadler states in
Champions of Change: "Changes ... bring instability, upheaval, and uncertainty....
 164
Change means new patterns of power, influence, and control—and, consequently,
high-stakes office politics. That's what change entails—and that's why it's so hard."
Nadler observes that power and politics reach their highest pitch during the
transition state—that period after the change program has begun when people know
that old structures, procedures, and behaviours are no longer appropriate, but
before they know what is appropriate and are confident and competent in new roles
and behaviours. In Lewin's three-stage model of unfreezing-moving-refreezing, the
transition state is synonymous with "moving." Managing the transition state is one
of the biggest challenges of large-scale change efforts. Transition states always
involve three characteristics: instability, uncertainty, and stress. Instability arises
because people don't know what jobs, authority, and roles they will have in the
future; they have given up a stable, known past for a mirky, unknown future.
Uncertainty arises because no one has "the answers" when people ask questions
about their place in the "new" organization. The result of instability and uncertainty
is stress—for both leaders and followers.
According to Nadler, instability, uncertainty, and stress invariably lead to
three problems that must be resolved and managed: power, anxiety, and control.
On the problem of power he states: "Every organization is a political system. Every
organization has identifiable groups, cliques, and coalitions, each of which holds
fast to its own values and beliefs During periods of change, there's a tectonic shift
in the distribution of power.
The result is an upsurge in political activity. Those who have power worry about
losing it and work to tighten their control; those with less power see new openings and
begin maneuvering for a bigger share of the pie."49 On the problem of anxiety he states
that people become anxious because they don't know how the change will affect them
personally—they don't know whether it will be beneficial or harmful. On the problem of
control he states: "Because the organization usually starts to dismantle the current
state before the future state is up and running, the current state collapses in the
minds of employees long before its formal structures have disappeared. The moment
people suspect that a major change is in the offing, they start to believe all bets are off.
At that point, management begins to lose control."
15.3.8 Conclusion
In this lesson we have examined power and politics with the goals of
understanding the phenomena and deriving implications for OD practitioners.
Power and politics are similar in nature, arise from known conditions, and are
amenable to positive control. Suggestions for using power to operate effectively in
organizations may help practitioners avoid the perils and pitfalls of power that "go
with the territory" of organizational change.
15.4 REVISION POINTS
1. "Power is the intentional influence over the beliefs, emotions, and behaviours
of people. Many problems with power stem from the goals of persons with
power and the means they use, not the possession of power as such.
 165
2. Power exists in virtually all social situations. It is especially salient in
coordinated activities such as those found in organizations. These authors
suggested five sources, or bases, of social power as follows: Reward power;
Coercive power; Legitimate power; Referent power and Expert power.
3. Organizational politics involve intentional acts of influence to enhance or
protect the self-interest of individuals or groups. A predominantly political
orientation is only one of several possibilities.
4. Distributive bargaining calls for secrecy, suspicion, deception, and not
accepting the ideas of the other party. By separating bargaining into these two
phases, both parties can achieve better solutions. Positive outcomes for both
parties can often be enhanced through a two-phase bargaining process in
which integrative bargaining precedes distributive bargaining.
5. The OD practitioner is neither power activist nor power broker, but that does
not mean practitioners must be naive or incompetent in the political arena.
6. Methods for empowering others are the following: (1) involve subordinates in
assigning work, (2) provide a positive, collaborative work environment, (3)
reward and encourage others in visible and personal ways, (4) express
confidence, (5) foster initiative and responsibility, and (6) build on success.
7. The moment people suspect that a major change is in the offing, they start to
believe all bets are off. At that point, management begins to lose control."
15.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Power?
2. What are the sources of Power?
3. What do you mean by Political Power?
4. Mention the role of power and politics in the practice of OD?
5. How planned change has significant influence on Power and Politics?
15.6 SUMMARY
In summary, these views of the sources of power are remarkably similar—
power stems from possession of or mediation of desired resources. The resources
may be ability to reward and punish, being in control of critical skills, knowledge,
or information, the ability to solve critical problems or exigencies—anything that
creates dependence of one actor or set of actors on another.
15.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:
a) Sources of Social Power
b) Organizational Politics
c) Power and Politics
d) Power Skills
15.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
 166
15.9 ASSIGNMENTS
1. Discuss the role of power and politics in the practice of OD.
2. Elaborately discuss about the various frameworks of Analyzing Power and
Politics.
15.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
15.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify and learn about the different sources of Social Power, Frameworks for
Analyzing Power and Politics and Role of Power and Politics in the practice of OD.
15.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, Planned Change, Social Power, Role of Power,
Power Skills
H
 167
LESSON – 16

RESEARCH IN ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT,

THE FUTURE AND CURRENT STATE OF OD
16.1 INTRODUCTION
The aims of this lesson are to describe the problems inherent in conducting re-
search on OD, to show the substantial progress made in improving research in the
field, and to summarize the results of studies conducted on OD and OD processes.
16.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About Research Studies in Organizational Development
 The Current and Future state of OD
16.3 CONTENT
16.3.1 Assessing the Current Effects of OD
16.3.2 The Future of OD
16.3.3 Positive Developments in Research on OD
16.3.4 Conclusion
16.3.1 Assessing the Current Effects of OD
Organization development is a prescription for a process of planned change
that includes concepts, values, and interventions. The desired outcomes are
making the organization and its members and work groups more effective while
also making the organization a better place to satisfy human needs. The OD
process uses various techniques to bring about improvement in target groups—
individuals, groups, and the total organization. Viewed from a research perspective,
two questions arise: Does OD in fact bring about these desired effects? If we
observe these desired effects in an organization engaged in an OD program, can we
attribute the effects to the OD program? Unambiguous answers to these questions
can come only from careful, controlled, empirical research.
In research terminology the OD program could be called the independent
variable (IV), or the treatment, or "cause." It is presumed to cause variation in the
dependent variable (DV), or "effect." The independent variable is manipulated (by
being either present or absent), and this causes changes on the dependent variable.
If we let the independent variable be X and the dependent variable be Y, then the
relation between the two is stated as "X leads to Y "; "X is a determining condition of
Y"; or "X causes Y." In research on organization development we are interested in
determining whether OD (X) causes greater effectiveness of individuals, groups, and
organizations (Y).
Parenthetically, Pate, Nielsen, Arid Bacon suggest, and we agree, that it may
be incorrect to conceptualize OD or an OD program as an independent variable;
rather it is a treatment whereby the independent variable is manipulated.
 168
Some researchers regarded OD itself to be an independent variable. However,
in our view, OD does not generally constitute the independent variable, but is only
instrumental in its manipulation. For example, one might expect introduction of
participative decision making (OD intervention) to facilitate worker awareness of the
rationale for organizational actions (independent variable), which in turn may
increase support for and commitment to those actions (dependent variable). 2
In most cases we don't know what "causes" the effects of an OD intervention;
we only know that something within the overall activities caused changes. In the
strictest sense, the cause is the independent variable, and since that is usually not
identified in OD research, we will loosely refer to the OD intervention or program as
a "treatment" that contains some independent variables affecting dependent
variables of interest.
Problems with Definitions and Concepts
One of the first problems in research on organization development is that X
and Y are not precise terms. There are endless variations of "OD." A program can
consist of many activities or only one or two activities, and in either case be referred
to as OD. A program can be a one-shot intervention or a multiyear intervention and
be called OD. A program can include a particular intervention—say, intergroup
team building—or not include it and still be called OD And some programs we
would not label OD are called OD. Therefore, research on OD is not on OD per se
but rather on specific sets of treatment activities.
Robert Kahn has criticized the field of OD for its lack of precise meaning as
follows:
Organizational development is not a concept, at least not in the scientific sense
of the word: it is not precisely defined; it is not reducible to specific, uniform,
observable behaviours; it does not have a prescribed and verifiable place in a
network of logically related concepts, a theory.
We agree with this assessment and believe that lack of precise definitions has
slowed the development of research on the OD process.
Furthermore, the Y, improved effectiveness, is not a precise term. Is it to" mean
greater efficiency? Greater productivity? Greater profits? More positive attitudes? Is it
to mean improvements in individual functioning, group functioning, the functioning of
most of the organization, or the functioning of all of the organization? And how much
"better" must the improvement be over the status quo to be called improvement? An-
swers to these questions are generally not found in the research literature. Thus, im-
proved organizational effectiveness is treated in a variety of ways in OD research; it is a
global term that refers to many different outcomes.
The major means of overcoming the problem of imprecise definitions is to be
more specific in defining As and Ys, which is done by giving operational definitions
to the terms. An operational definition states the specific operations or activities
involved in both implementing the treatment and measuring the effects or results.
 169
We must also move from describing global treatments and global effects to
describing independent and dependent variables—cause-effect linkages.
Problems with Internal Validity
A second problem in research on OD is demonstrating that the X of interest,
some OD activities, and not some other known or unknown X, in fact caused the
variation in Y. It is the problem of internal validity. "Internal validity is the basic
minimum without which any experiment is uninterruptable: Did in fact the
experimental treatments make a difference in this specific experimental instance?"
All field research and evaluation research experiences this problem: so much is
going on in the real-world situation that it is difficult to pinpoint what causes the
changes that occur. The key to overcoming or at least attenuating this problem lies
in the research design—the structure of the research effort from start to finish. The
research must be so executed that rival explanations for changes in the dependent
variables can be systematically discounted. For example, if simultaneously with an
OD program everyone in the organization received a substantial salary increase,
and if we were measuring the effects of the program on attitudes toward work and
the organization, then any positive shift in attitudes could be caused by the OD
program, by the salary raise, or by some other unknown factor or factors.
Campbell and Stanley have suggested a number of research designs that over-
come threats to internal validity. In addition, when conditions do not permit true
experimental designs, they suggest ways to build "quasi-experimental" designs that
will rule out rival explanations for the changes found. The research designs used in
OD are getting better at controlling threats to internal validity: in a review of 37
research studies on OD, Pate, Nielsen, and Bacon found that experimental or
quasi-experimental designs were used in 29 of them; in a review of OD research
from 1964 to 1974, White and Mitchell found that experimental or quasi-
experimental designs were used in only 12 of 44 studies, Porras and Berg reviewed
160 organizational change studies conducted between 1959 and mid-1975. Of
these, 35 reflected carefully executed and carefully evaluated OD interventions.
Analysis of the 35 studies showed that 77 percent used quasi-experimental designs
and 49 percent used comparison groups.
Several design features enhance internal validity. One of the best methods is
having comparison or control groups that receive no treatment but are measured
on the dependent variables. If changes occur in the experimental groups receiving
the treatment but no changes occur in the control groups, this evidence indicates
the treatment caused the observed effects. Of course pre-treatment and post-
treatment measures must be taken to register any changes. Post-treatment
measures only are of limited value, since one can never know whether the
treatment led to the results observed or whether the results would have appeared
without the treatment.
“Time-series” designs offer a compromise between control groups and no
control groups. In a time-series design, multiple measures are made on the
 170
experimental group over time. Changes in the measures that occur after the
treatments offer some support for the hypothesis that the treatment caused the
changes. Norman Berkowitz discussed the problems inherent in research on OD
and proposed an elaborate time series design. He further suggests that excessive
concern for internal validity in OD research, trying to use truly experimental
designs rather than quasi-experimental designs, may be inappropriate at this stage
of the research efforts.
Finally, random assignment of units (individuals, groups, or organizations) to
experimental and control groups is a way of controlling for rival explanations for the
change and controlling for extraneous variables. But random assignment is often
difficult to achieve in field research. Organizations involved in OD self-select
themselves to engage in such programs and would probably be unwilling to be
placed in a "no-treatment" control group for research purposes. Furthermore, an
organization hostile to OD is in the "no-treatment" group for definite reasons. With
self-selection it is never possible to know that any changes were due to the
treatment and not to other unknown factors.
Problems with External Validity
A third problem in research on OD is external validity. As Campbell and
Stanley observe, "External validity asks the question of generalizability. To what
populations, settings, treatment variables, and measurement variables can this
effect be generalized?" This question of generalizability to other settings and
circumstances is always important and will probably become even more important
in the future. Organization development is being applied in an ever-increasing
number of settings, and what "works" in one setting may not work in another. For
example, organization development techniques are effective in middle-class
suburban schools, but are they also effective in ghetto urban schools? Organization
development techniques increase productivity in private sector business
organizations; can they do the same in a federal bureaucracy? No doubt some
techniques or treatments will be found to be situation specific, while others are
more widely applicable.
Problems with Lack of Theory
Another problem is that most OD research is not theory-guided research.
Kerlinger defines theory as "a set of interrelated constructs (concepts), definitions,
and propositions that present a systematic view of phenomena by specifying
relations among variables, with the purpose of explaining and predicting the
phenomena." Without an established theory of organization development, the
relations among variables and the variables themselves are unknown. Organization
development researchers are forced to fall back on a strategy of measuring the
effects of global treatments (not independent variables) on a potpourri of dependent
variables—things that should probably be affected by .the intervention.
Theory-guided research is more efficient, more precise, and more definitive. With
theory, researchers know what to look for and where to look for it in their research ef-
 171
forts. Research either confirms or does not confirm the theory; if the theory is
disconfirmed, it is modified and new avenues for further research are indicated.
The first major step in building theory in OD is identifying and specifying inde-
pendent and dependent variables that explain the phenomena. Next researchers
must specify the relations among these variables with increasing precision. These
identification and specification tasks will be the major chores of OD practitioners,
researchers, and theoreticians in the future. Significant progress is being made,
however, in the development of theory and the identification and specification of
relevant independent and dependent variables, Alderfer has coalesced a number of
disparate ideas relating to planned organizational change into a coherent theory
with research implications; Argyris has proposed a general theory of intervention in
human systems based on his experience and research; Blake and Mouton have
developed a theory and classification scheme for the consultation process; and Vaill
has discussed some of the unique requirements for building a "practice theory"—a
theory applicable to applied change problems. Bowers, Franklin, and Peeorella have
developed a taxonomy that starts to clarify the variables involved in organizational
improvement strategies by focusing on both the problems the intervention is
designed to rectify and the interventions themselves.
In their review of OD research, White and Mitchell draw on facet theory to pro-
pose a classification system for independent and dependent variables found in OD
interventions.1BThese authors identify three underlying dimensions (facets) of OD
interventions and the effects of OD interventions: (1) a target or recipient of change,
(2) a specific content area of change, and (3) the context or relationships that are
supposed to change. The first facet, target of change, consists of three elements—
the individual, the subgroup, and the total organization. The content area of change
consists of four elements: conceptual, behavioural, procedural, and structural. The
context of change consists of five elements: intrapersonal, interpersonal, intragroup,
intergroup, and organizational. Almost all OD interventions and their desired effects
can be specified on these three facets and twelve elements. For example, a team-
building intervention would have as a target the subgroup, the content area of
change would be either conceptual or behavioural, and the relationships of change
would be either interpersonal or intragroup. With such a classification system in
mind, researchers can design data collection methods better and can start to test
for the effects of various interventions on the different facets and elements. This
structure will lead to research based on specified hypothesized relations among
variables instead of a "shotgun" approach in which numerous measures are taken
on variables to "see if anything happened."
Dunn and Swierczek applied a refined content analysis technique (called
"retrospective case analysis") to 67 successful and unsuccessful change efforts,
many of them case studies, in an attempt to test hypothesized relations from the
OD literature about what causes success. They examined 11 hypotheses. These
hypotheses consist of such statements as "Change efforts in economic
 172
organizations will be more successful than will change efforts in other types of
organizations"—not supported by the data—and "Change efforts directed at the
total organization will be more successful than will change efforts directed at lower
levels"—also not supported by the evidence. Three hypotheses received moderate
support as marking successful versus unsuccessful change efforts. First, change
efforts in which the mode of intervention is collaborative as opposed to other
intervention modes tend to be more successful. Second, change efforts in which the
change agent has a participative orientation versus other orientations tend to be
more successful. Third, change efforts employing standardized strategies that
involve high levels of participation will be more successful than those that involve
low levels of participation. This effort toward building a theory of organizational
change processes "grounded" or based on empirical research is a laudable one.
Benefits derive both from discovering which hypotheses are supported and from
discovering which hypotheses are not supported. These hypotheses specify
relations among variables that can form the basis for a theory of organization
change and development.
Problems with Measuring Attitude Change
Research on organization development often involves administering
preintervention and post intervention attitude questionnaires and observing pre-
and post intervention differences on the attitude scores. If responses become more
favourable, that result is taken as evidence the intervention helped to produce
positive attitude change. If responses slay the same or become less favourable, that
result is taken as evidence the intervention had no effect or had a negative effect.
In an important article in 1976, Golembiewski, Billingsley, and Yeagcr
suggested that three different kinds of change can occur between the pre- and post
measures. They labelled these alpha, beta, and gamma change.22 Alpha change is
real or true change; attitude is more positive or negative after the intervention and
the questionnaires accurately reflect that change. Beta change is change based on
scale recalibration; you view the scale intervals differently after the intervention—
for example, a "5" on a 10-point scale of "trust in my group" has taken on a
different meaning for you. Gamma change is change based on a reconceptualization
or redefinition of the concept being measured; you now view the concept itself in a
totally different way.
The problem identified by Golembiewski and his colleagues appears to be
valid. What is a researcher to do? Fortunately, researchers such as Armenakis and
Zmud, Randolph, and Terborg, Howard, and Maxwell have developed methods to
measure the three types of change if and when they occur. OD research must be
carefully planned to identify these changes, but the methods for doing so are
available. For example, Porras and others conducted a behaviour modeling OD
program in plywood mills that produced many positive changes. Were they real?
Porras and Singh examined the results and found that true (alpha) change occurred
as well as some scale recalibration (beta) change, but found no gamma change.
 173
The implications for practitioners and researchers are that additional care and
planning must go into research that involves measuring attitude changes.
Problems with "Normal Science"
One controversy within organization development centers on the best ways to
conduct research on action programs. Specifically, an increasing number of
theorists and researchers are rejecting "normal science" with its requirements of
replication, control groups, random assignment to treatment conditions, specifying
single cause-and-effect linkages, and so forth in favour of less rigorous but richer
"action research."
Earlier we noted Argyris's call for "action science" (a form of action research) as a
more effective means for studying complex social change than normal science. Other
authors are calling attention to the need for other research methods for OD. Blumberg
and Pringle show how using control groups in the Rushton Coal Mine experiment
distorted the data and even forced the termination of the experiment. Bullock and
Svyantck argue that use of random strategies of selection and assignment to study the
OD process itself is logically impossible. They say that OD techniques can be evaluated
using random strategies, but not organization development itself because it is by
nature collaborative and diagnosis-based—that is, what one does depends on each
specific situation's needs. Bullock and Svyantek state:
No one has ever suggested that a rigorous OD researcher randomly select
organizations from across the country—including, for example, volunteer
organizations, work organizations, political organizations, health service
organizations—then randomly assign them to OD interventions (the local Boy Scout
troop to management by objectives, General Motors to team building, the Ku Klux
Klan to T groups, the nursing home to career planning) designed to fundamentally
change the organizations as social systems, and with that change to alter the lives
and careers of individuals. Yet we continue to evaluate OD research as if such an
action were reasonable.
Bullock and Bullock report an experiment involving two kinds of data feedback
to an organization, "pure science" and "science-action." Minimal change and
usefulness resulted from the pure science feedback approach (giving a one-inch
thick book of statistics tables to decision makers); extensive change, problem
solving, and energy resulted from the science-action approach in which the
scientist acted also as a change agent/OD facilitator.
Beer and Walton criticize the methods of current OD research on four counts.
First, the research attempts to identify causation associated with a single
intervention while overlooking the systemic nature of organizations. Clearly other
internal and external forces are operating during OD programs. Second, the
research is not sufficiently longitudinal to capture long-term change or to identify
non-permanent change. Third, the research is "flat"; it does not describe in enough
detail the intervention and the context. And finally, the research does not fit the
needs of its users. Beer and Walton conclude: "What we are recommending is a
 174
return to the action research traditions of OD with full participation of the client in
the research but with much longer time frames and the inclusion of rich
descriptions of context and system dynamics.
16.3.2 The Future OD
The future of OD research will no doubt see movement away from evaluation
and validation studies (the does-it-work-and-can-we-demonstrate-that-it-does
stage) to a theory-building and hypothesis-testing stage that will signify a more
mature level of research. Friedlander and Brown indicate some of the challenges of
the future for OD research:
If the practice and theory of OD is to merge into a broader field of planned
change, what role will research play in this transformation? We believe that
research will dither play a far more crucial role in the advancement of this field, or
become an increasingly irrelevant appendage to it. Thus far it has utilized its
techniques primarily for evaluation and validation, and its current techniques are
well adapted to this. Thus far it has chosen to play a relatively uninvolved and
distant role in the change-practice situation. Thus far focused on producing data
for research needs rather than practice needs. As a result, we have theory from an
external research perspective only. We have generally failed to produce a theory of
change which emerges from the change process itself. We need a way of enriching
our understanding and our action synergistically rather than at one or the other's
expense—to become a science in which knowledge-getting and knowledge-giving are
an integrated process, and one that is valuable to all parties involved. We believe
that a theory of planned change must be a theory of practice, which emerges from
practice data and is of the practice situation, not merely about it.
16.3.3 Positive Developments in Research on OD
We have already cited some advances in the area of research on organization
development, namely, increasing use of experimental and quasi-experimental
research designs that really permit us to know what the treatment effects are and
increasing attention to formulating theory and testable hypotheses. These advances
augur well for the future of OD research.
Another positive feature is the increasing incidence of longitudinal studies. In
the review article by Pate, Nielsen, and Bacon, 18 of the 37 studies examined are
longitudinal research efforts. Although these authors end their review with a plea
for more systematic, longitudinal research, it is a good sign that such studies are
becoming more prevalent. Longitudinal research allows both short- and long-term
effects of OD interventions to be noted; it permits tighter research designs; and it
allows for the differential effects of different interventions to be discovered.
Development of theory will go hand in hand with more longitudinal research on OD.
Several longitudinal research efforts of a programmatic nature exist. The
Institute for Survey Research of the University of Michigan has been engaged for
many years in gathering data on a variety of organizations. 36 These data serve as a
repository for measuring the effects of a variety of factors impacting the
 175
organizations including planned change programs.37 Another long-range
programmatic research effort directed specifically at measuring the effects of
organizational improvement programs was the Quality of Work Life program located
at the University of Michigan. This program, under the direction of professor
Edward E. Lawler III, now at the University of Southern California, monitored and
evaluated a number of quality of work life (QWL) projects initiated in the mid- and
late-1970s.The results were promising: significant gains in productivity and job
satisfaction occurred in several (but by no means all) of the projects. Advances in
measurement techniques and valid measurement instruments have also
contributed to better research on OD. Alderfer reviewed the OD research from the
1974-1976 period and noted several advances along these lines: There have been
significant research developments in OD during the time covered by this review.
More rigorous research designs have been employed to evaluate interventions; both
positive and negative outcomes have been observed. There is clear evidence that
better measuring instruments are being developed, and greater understanding of
measurement errors is being obtained.
Research and verified theory can advance only as fast as the measurement
capabilities of a scientific field. Therefore, these improvements in measurement
techniques are important developments.
In a critique of the OD research literature, Nancy Roberts and Jerry Porras
find several reasons for cautious optimism. They note substantial progress in four
major areas: operational zing the concept of change, improving measurement
processes, improving measurement procedures, and developing appropriate
statistical and analytical models.
Furthermore, practitioners and clients are increasingly aware of the value and
usefulness of research on OD. In part this awareness may be due to a "coming of
age" of OD and research on OD. But credit is also due to the numerous excellent
reviews and critiques of OD research that have appeared in the professional
journals and a number of books. Friedlander and Brown, Alderfer, Faucheux,
Amado, and Laurent, Beer and Walton, and Porras and Silvers have written
comprehensive reviews and critiques of OD research for the 1974,1977,1982,1987,
and 1991 editions, respectively, of the Annual Review of Psychology. Michael Beer,
George Strauss, and Jerry Porras and Peter Robertson have told the broad story of
OD in three important handbooks. White and Mitchell, Pate, Nielsen, and Bacon,
Porras and Berg, and Golembiewski, Proehl, and Sink reviewed the research on OD
and offered helpful suggestions for improving it. All these contributions have played
a role in emphasizing the need for competent research on OD and have raised the
level of research sophistication.
Marshall Sashkin and Warner Burke reviewed the state of OD research in
1987 and identified several positive trends. One positive development is the use of
"meta analysis" to evaluate OD studies (we discuss this topic later). On the quality
of OD research, they report consistent improvement with each decade, as indicated
 176
by greater methodological rigor and better measurement. Regarding the true effects
of OD interventions, they state: "There is little doubt that, when applied properly,
OD has substantial positive effects in terms of performance measures." Sashkin
and Burke draw these conclusions: OD research has, by the mid-1980s, shed quite
a bit of light on the effects and effectiveness of OD. We are also in the position of
understanding far more clearly than ever the key research problems in OD.
Solutions are another matter. Although few today are willing to argue that OD has
no real effects, there remains considerable uncertainty over how properly to
measure these effects. And it may well be that effective OD is actually inconsistent
with rigorous research, as some Have argued.
All in all, the Sashkin and Burke review reflects positively on the state of
research on OD. Porras and Silvers reviewed published OD research from 1985
through 1989 and also report advances in research methods and research
results.57 Positive developments include better theories, improved study designs,
improved measurement, better statistical methods, and good use of meta-analytical
techniques. They notice a shift away from research on social factors such as
interpersonal relations, management, values, norms, and so on, toward research on
organizing arrangements such as organization structure, strategies, administrative
systems, and so on. This shift represents a move toward examining organizational-
level issues, that is, a look at how systems change as a result of OD efforts. This
review reflects generally good news about OD research.
In a comprehensive review, Porras and Robertson examine the effects of
different OD and human resource interventions on individual and organizational
performance. In addition, they test a theory of planned change that we discussed in
chapter 5. See Figures 5-5 and 5-6 for their model. This work merits a closer look,
Porras and his associates focus on the work setting as the primary source of indi-
vidual behaviour. Furthermore, change occurs when individuals start to behave
differently. This notion is the foundation of the theory. The four categories of
variables included in the work setting are: organizing arrangements (OA), social
factors (SF), physical setting (PS), and technology (T).
Porras and Robertson write: "The process of intervening into organizational
systems, creating changes in organizational components that will in turn result in
changes in the work behaviours of organizational members, constitutes the primary
activity of organizational development." For these authors, OD interventions impact
the variables comprising the work setting; this impact in turn leads to changes in
individual behaviours which lead to organizational performance and individual
development, the desired outcomes of OD programs.
In this model, the environment places constraints and opportunities on the
organization, which serve as inputs for the leaders to formulate a vision. "Vision is
the force that guides the organization, for both the short and long term.
Organizational vision is a complex concept comprised of four distinct, yet
interdependent parts: (a) the core values and beliefs of the organization, (b) the
 177
organization's enduring purpose, (c) a highly compelling mission, and (d) the vivid
description that brings the mission to life."
The work setting provides information and cues to members regarding what to
think and how to act. Other organizational members also provide such information
and cues. The result is individual cognitions (beliefs and attitudes) about how to
behave, which determine on-the-job behaviour.
Next Porras and Robertson related or "mapped" various OD interventions to or-
ganization variables; for example, team building should impact social factors,
parallel learning structures and quality circles should impact organizing
arrangements. Then research studies of different interventions were examined to
see whether they (1) changed the work setting, which (2) changed individual
cognitions, which (3) changed on-the-job behaviours, which (4) led to outcomes of
organizational performance and individual development. Sixty-three research
studies were used to test the model. The results were complicated and mixed, but
moderately supportive, especially for such an ambitious undertaking. For example,
interventions related to organizing arrangements and social factors appeared to
have a positive impact on organizational performance, as expected.
Research in Management and Organization
A number of recent "management" books provide direct and indirect support
for the viability of organization development's principles and practices. These
studies demonstrate the importance of the human side of organizations—
structures, job designs, leadership styles, human resource practices, participative
processes, and "putting people first" practices—and designing interventions that
"get it right." As we will see, the nature of work and organizations is changing
fundamentally in ways highly congruent with organization development
assumptions and values. Let's look at four recent studies.
Robert Waterman's What America Does Right examines the strategic and
organizational reasons why some of America's most admired companies are so
successful. First he notes that U.S. workers out produce German and French
workers by about 20 percent, British workers by more than 30 percent, and
Japanese workers by more than 60 percent. Why does he find such differences? He
conducted lengthy interviews at Proctor and Gamble, Federal Express, Applied
Energy Systems Corporation (AES), Levi Strauss, Rubbermaid, Merck, Motorola,
and other companies. He found that workers are more productive because of their
company's organizational arrangements. This term refers to organizational culture,
processes, structures, values, and leadership practices. He writes:
What makes top-performing companies different?, I would urge, is their
organizational arrangements. Specifically: They are better organized to meet the
needs of their people, so that they attract better people than their competitors do
and their people are more greatly motivated to do a superior job, whatever it is they
do. They are better organized to meet the needs of customers so that they are either
more innovative in anticipating customer needs, more reliable in meeting customer
 178
expectations, better able to deliver their product or service more cheaply, or some
combination of the above.
The right kind of organizational arrangements are those that meet employees'
needs (1) to feel in control, (2) to believe in the value of their work, (3) to be
challenged, (4) to be engaged in lifelong learning, and (5) to be recognized for their
achievements. Different companies do this in different ways. For example, Proctor
and Gamble uses self-directed teams to operate its plants. Merck out-innovates its
competitors by its values (produce great science), the way it invests in its people,
and the way it organizes its research and marketing activities. Federal Express
espouses "putting people first" and implements that principle through annual
surveys to identify and correct problems, leader selection and training methods,
and support systems that help employees succeed.
Jeffrey Pfeffer studied companies that deliver outstanding financial returns to
shareholders and enjoy significant competitive advantage over their peers. What do
they do that makes them successful? His answer is that a firm's competitive
advantage comes from its people; and people produce those results because of the
ways they are treated and managed. In Competitive Advantage Through People:
Unleashing the Power of the Work Force (1994) and The Human Equation: Building
Profits by Putting People First (1998) Pfeffer explores the organizational and
managerial practices leading to extraordinary performance and profits. He identifies
seven practices: (1) employment security; (2) selective hiring of new personnel; (3)
self-managed teams and decentralization of decision making as the basic principles
of organizational design; (4) comparatively high compensation contingent on
organizational performance; (5) extensive training; (6) reduced status distinctions
and barriers, including dress, language, office arrangements, and wage differences
across levels; and (7) extensive sharing of financial and performance information
throughout the organization.
Pfeffer's conclusions are similar to Waterman's: Superior performance derives
from organizational arrangements and leadership/management practices.
Organizational culture, processes, systems, and values are aligned to create an
environment in which people thrive.
James Collins and Jerry Porras conducted a six-year research project designed
to discover the factors underlying the success of long-lived, best-in-their-industry
companies, which they termed "visionary companies." Their book, Built To Last:
Successful Habits of Visionary Companies, became an overnight sensation. Collins
and Porras compared 18 visionary companies with 18 similar companies to
determine the characteristics distinguishing the great from the good.
The book's central concepts are the following. First, the authors distinguish
between "clock-building and time-telling." Founders and early leaders of visionary
companies set out to build an organization, not just make and sell products. These
people are clock-builders—they create an instrument to produce value for all time,
 179
not a onetime achievement. The organization was the creation, not a "great idea" for
producing goods and services.
Second, visionary companies reject "The Tyranny of the OR" and embrace "The
Genius of the AND." Such a view means not compromising on the usual "tradeoffs"
such as quantity or quality, productivity or safety, good financial results or ethical
behaviour. Visionary companies pursue and achieve both values in tradeoffs
situations.
Third, visionary companies seek "more than profits," they have a core ideology
continuously guiding and sustaining them through good times and bad. Core
ideology is an important distinguishing feature of visionary companies versus the
comparison companies. A core ideology consists of "core values" and "purpose," as
follows: Core Values = The organization's essential and enduring tenets—a small set
of general guiding principles; not to be confused with specific cultural or operating
practices; not to be compromised for financial gain or short-term expediency.
Purpose = The organization's fundamental reasons for existence, beyond just
making money—a perpetual guiding star on the horizon; not to be confused with
specific goals or business strategies.
Fourth, the key concept of the book is a Yin and Yang dualism between
"Preserve the Core" and "Stimulate Progress." Core ideologies give stability and
direction, must never be compromised, are rarely changed, and must always be
preserved. But success in business also comes from stimulating progress—
aggressively learning, adapting, and competing in the marketplace. Businesses
must change, adapt, and continuously improve to survive. That's what is meant by
"stimulate progress." Visionary companies optimize the dynamic tension between
preserving the core and stimulating progress.
Fifth, visionary companies exhibit five "habits" or methods by which they
preserve the core and stimulate progress. These habits are:
Big Hairy Audacious Goals (BHAGs): Commitment to challenging, audacious—
and often risky—goals and projects toward which a visionary company channels its
efforts (stimulates progress).
Cult-like Cultures: Great places to work only for those who buy into the core
ideology; those who don't fit with the ideology are ejected like a virus (preserves the
core). Try a Lot of Stuff and Keep What Works: High levels of action and
experimentation—often unplanned and undirected—that produce new and
unexpected paths of progress and enables visionary companies to mimic the
biological evolution of species (stimulates progress).
Home-Grown Management: Promotion from within, bringing to senior levels
only those who've spent significant time steeped in the core ideology of the company
(preserves the core).
Good Enough Never Is: A continual process of relentless self-improvement with
the aim of doing better and better, forever into the future (stimulates progress).
 180
Edward E. Lawler III believes it is time to scrap our old theories of
management and organization and replace them with more accurate theories,
models, and assumptions. In his book From the Ground Up, Lawler argues
convincingly that the command-and-control, hierarchical, bureaucratic
organization model is the wrong way to organize and manage people. He proposes
six principles constituting a new logic (paradigm) for building people-oriented
organizations from the ground up. Organizations built on the new logic have a
competitive advantage over old logic companies because they are organized and
managed to bring out the best in people. He writes: "The challenge is to define not
just a program or a limited approach to improving organizations but a new com-
plete approach to organizing: one that begins with the statement of a new paradigm
that replaces traditional logic principles with new logic principles."
These management books contain original research, refer to hundreds of
research studies by others, and craft the results into plausible theories and models
that greatly advance our understanding. We believe these works provide strong
support for OD principles, practices, assumptions, and values.
16.3.4 Conclusion
This overview of problems, positive developments, and results for research on
organization development substantiates the valuable contribution OD makes to
organizations and the people in them. OD practitioners have always had "faith" in
the power of OD; "faith-plus-data" is even more reassuring.
16.4 REVISION POINTS
The revision points of the lesson are these:
1. Organization development works, that is, it produces organizational
improvement and individual development.
2. Good evidence supports the efficacy of OD.
3. Explanations of why OD works are rudimentary at this time due to lack of
explanatory theories. Evaluating OD programs is complicated and difficult.
4. Teasing out the effects of specific interventions or a package of interventions is
a formidable task because field research of this nature is prone to
confounding from many sources.
16.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you know about the Research Studies in Organizational Development?
2. Write about the Current Effects of OD.
3. Mention about the Future of OD.
4. What are the positive developments in research on OD?
16.6 SUMMARY
We have discussed six major problems confronting research on OD:
imprecision of definitions and conceptualizations concerning OD research,
problems with internal and external validity, lack of supporting theory to guide
research, problems with measuring attitude change, and problems with using
 181
normal science methods to study OD programs. These problems are not
insurmountable, although they continue to plague research efforts.
16.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:.
a) Current Effects of OD
b) The Future of OD
c) Positive Developments in Research on OD
16.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
16.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss in detail on various Research Studies in Organizational Development.
16.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
16.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify and learn about the future and current state of Organizational
Development in Indian Context.
16. KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, Research in OD, Future and Current state of OD.
H
 182
UNIT - V
LESSON – 17
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE, CONCEPTS, EVOLUTION
AND IMPORTANCE
17.1 INTRODUCTION
The pace of global, economic, and technological development makes change an
inevitable feature of organizational life. However, change that happens to an
organization can be distinguished from change that is planned by its members. In
this lesson, the term change will refer to planned change. Organization
development is directed at bringing about planned change to increase an
organization’s effectiveness and capability to change itself.
17.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About what is Organizational Change.
 Concept of Organizational Change, Major theories, General Model of
Planned Change, Critique of Planned Change.
17.3 CONTENT
17.3.1 Concept of Organizational Change
17.3.2 Major Theories of Organizational Change
17.3.3 General Model of Planned Change
17.3.4 Different Types of Planned Change
17.3.5 Critique of Planned Change
17.3.6 Conclusion
17.3.1 Concept of Organizational Change
It is generally initiated and implemented by managers, often with the help of
an OD practitioner from either inside or outside of the organization. Organizations
can use planned change to solve problems, to learn from experience, to reframe
shared perceptions, to adapt to external environmental changes, to improve
performance, and to influence future changes. All approaches to OD rely on some
theory about planned change. The theories describe the different stages through
which planned change may be effected in organizations and explain the temporal
process of applying OD methods to help organization members manage change.
17.3.2 Major Theories of Organization Change
In this lesson, we first describe and compare three major theories of
organization change that have received considerable attention in the field: Lewin’s
change model, the action research model, and the positive model. Next, we present
a general model of planned change that integrates the earlier models and
incorporates recent conceptual advances in OD. The general model has broad
applicability to many types of planned change efforts. We then discuss different
types of change and how the process can vary depending on the change situation.
Finally, we present several critiques of planned change.
 183
Theories of Planned Change
Conceptions of planned change have tended to focus on how change can be
implemented in organizations called “theories of changing,” these frameworks
describe the activities that must take place to initiate and carry out successful
organizational change. In this section, we describe and compare three theories of
changing: Lewin’s change model, the action research model, and the positive model.
These frameworks have received widespread attention in OD and serve as the
primary basis for a general model of planned change.
Lewin’s Change Model One of the earliest models of planned change was
provided by Kurt Lewin. He conceived of change as modification of those forces
keeping a system’s behaviour stable. Specifically, a particular set of behaviours at
any moment in time is the result of two groups of forces: those striving to maintain
the status quo and those pushing for change. When both sets of forces are about
equal, current behaviours are maintained in what Lewin termed a state of “quasi-
stationary equilibrium.” To change that state, one can increase those forces
pushing for change, decrease those forces maintaining the current state, or apply
some combination of both. For example, the level of performance of a work group
might be stable because group norms maintaining that level are equivalent to the
supervisor’s pressures for change to higher levels. This level can be increased either
by changing the group norms to support higher levels of performance or by
increasing supervisor pressures to produce at higher levels. Lewin suggested that
decreasing those forces maintaining the status quo produces less tension and
resistance than increasing forces for change and consequently is a more effective
change strategy. Lewin viewed this change process as consisting of the following
three steps, which are shown in Figure 17.1):
Unfreezing: This step usually involves reducing those forces maintaining the
organization’s behaviour at its present level. Unfreezing is sometimes accomplished
through a process of “psychological disconfirmation.” By introducing information that
shows discrepancies between behaviours desired by organization members and those
behaviours currently exhibited, members can be motivated to engage in change
activities.
Moving: This step shifts the behaviour of the organization, department, or
individual to a new level. It involves intervening in the system to develop new behaviours,
values, and attitudes through changes in organizational structures and processes.
Refreezing: This step stabilizes the organization at a new state of equilibrium. It
is frequently accomplished through the use of supporting mechanisms that reinforce
the new organizational state, such as organizational culture, rewards, and structures.
Lewin’s model provides a general framework for understanding organizational
change. Because the three steps of change are relatively broad, considerable effort
has gone into elaborating them. For example, the planning model developed by
Lippitt, Watson, and Westley arranges Lewin’s model into seven steps: scouting,
entry, diagnosis (unfreezing), planning, action (moving), stabilization and
evaluation, and termination (refreezing).
Similarly, Kotter’s eightwstage process can be mapped onto Lewin’s phases:
establishing a sense of urgency, creating the guiding coalition, developing a vision
 184
and strategy, and communicating the change vision (unfreezing); empowering
broad-based action, generating short-term wins (moving); and consolidating gains
and producing more change, and anchoring new approaches in the culture
(refreezing). Lewin’s model remains closely identified with the field of OD, however,
and is used to illustrate how other types of change can be implemented. For
example, Lewin’s three-step model has been used to explain how information
technologies can be implemented more effectively.
Action Research Model The classic action research model focuses on planned
change as a cyclical process in which initial research about the organization
provides information to guide subsequent action. Then the results of the action are
assessed to provide further information to guide further action, and so on. This
iterative cycle of research and action involves considerable collaboration among
organization members and OD practitioners. It places heavy emphasis on data
gathering and diagnosis prior to action planning and implementation, as well as
careful evaluation of results after action is taken. Action research is traditionally
aimed both at helping specific organizations implement planned change and at
developing more general knowledge that can be applied to other settings. Although
action research was originally developed to have this dual focus on change and
knowledge generation, it has been adapted to OD efforts in which the major
emphasis is on planned change.

Figure 17.1: Comparison of Planned Change Models

 185
phases of planned change as defined by the original action research model.
There are eight main steps.
Problem Identification
This stage usually begins when an executive in the organization or someone
with power and influence senses that the organization has one or more problems
that might be solved with the help of an OD practitioner.
Consultation with a Behavioural Science Expert
During the initial contact, the OD practitioner and the client carefully assess
each other. The practitioner has his or her own normative, developmental theory or
frame of reference and must be conscious of those assumptions and values.
Sharing them with the client from the beginning establishes an open and
collaborative atmosphere.
Data Gathering and Preliminary Diagnosis
This step is usually completed by the OD practitioner, often in conjunction
with organization members. It involves gathering appropriate information and
analyzing it to determine the underlying causes of organizational problems. The
four basic methods of gathering data are interviews, process observation,
questionnaires, and organizational performance data (unfortunately, often
overlooked). One approach to diagnosis begins with observation, proceeds to a semi
structured interview, and concludes with a questionnaire to measure precisely the
problems identified by the earlier steps. When gathering diagnostic information, OD
practitioners may influence members from whom they are collecting data. In OD,
any action by the OD practitioner can be viewed as an intervention that will have
some effect on the organization. Feedback to a Key Client or Group. Because action
research is a collaborative activity, the diagnostic data are fed back to the client,
usually in a group or work team meeting. The feedback step, in which members are
given the information gathered by the OD practitioner, helps them determine the
strengths and weaknesses of the organization or unit under study. The consultant
provides the client with all relevant and useful data. Obviously, the practitioner will
protect confidential sources of information and, at times, may even withhold data.
Defining what is relevant and useful involves consideration of privacy and ethics as
well as judgment about whether the group is ready for the information or if the
information would make the client overly defensive.
Joint Diagnosis of the Problem
At this point, members discuss the feedback and explore with the OD
practitioner whether they want to work on identified problems. A close
interrelationship exists among data gathering, feedback, and diagnosis because the
consultant summarizes the basic data from the client members and presents the
data to them for validation and further diagnosis. An important point to remember,
as Schein suggests, is that the action research process is very different from the
doctor–patient model, in which the consultant comes in, makes a diagnosis, and
prescribes a solution. Schein notes that the failure to establish a common frame of
reference in the client–consultant relationship may lead to a faulty diagnosis or to a
 186
communication gap whereby the client is sometimes “unwilling to believe the
diagnosis or accept the prescription.” He believes that “most companies have
drawers full of reports by consultants, each loaded with diagnoses and
recommendations which are either not understood or not accepted by the ‘patient.’
Joint Action Planning
Next, the OD practitioner and the client members jointly agree on further
actions to be taken. This is the beginning of the moving process (described in
Lewin’s change model), as the organization decides how best to reach a different
quasi-stationary equilibrium. At this stage, the specific action to be taken depends
on the culture, technology, and environment of the organization; the diagnosis of
the problem; and the time and expense of the intervention.
Action
This stage involves the actual change from one organizational state to another.
It may include installing new methods and procedures, reorganizing structures and
work designs, and reinforcing new behaviours. Such actions typically cannot be
implemented immediately but require a transition period as the organization moves
from the present to a desired future state.
Data Gathering After Action
Because action research is a cyclical process, data must also be gathered after
the action has been taken to measure and determine the effects of the action and to
feed the results back to the organization. This, in turn, may lead to rediagnosis and
new action.
The action research model underlies most current approaches to planned
change and is often considered synonymous with OD. Recently, it has been refined
and extended to new settings and applications, and consequently, researchers and
practitioners have made requisite adaptations of its basic framework. Trends in the
application of action research include movement from smaller subunits of
organizations to total systems and communities. In these larger contexts, action
research is more complex and political than in smaller settings. Therefore, the
action research cycle is coordinated across multiple change processes and includes
a diversity of stakeholders who have an interest in the organization.
Action research also is applied increasingly in international settings,
particularly in developing nations in the southern hemisphere. Embedded within
the action research model, however, are “northern hemisphere” assumptions about
change. For example, action research traditionally views change more linearly than
do Asian cultures, and it treats the change process more collaboratively than do
Latin American and African countries. To achieve success in these settings, action
research is tailored to fit cultural assumptions.
Finally, action research is applied increasingly to promote social change and
innovation, as demonstrated most clearly in community development and global
social change projects. These applications are heavily value laden and seek to
redress imbalances in power and resource allocations across different groups.
Action researchers tend to play an activist role in the change process, which is
often chaotic and conflictual.
 187
In light of these general trends, contemporary applications of action research
have substantially increased the degree of member involvement in the change
process. This contrasts with traditional approaches to planned change, whereby
consultants carried out most of the change activities, with the agreement and
collaboration of management. Although consultant-dominated change still persists
in OD, there is a growing tendency to involve organization members in learning
about their organization and how to change it. Referred to as “participatory action
research,” “action learning,” “action science,” or “self-design,” this approach to
planned change emphasizes the need for organization members to learn firsthand
about planned change if they are to gain the knowledge and skills needed to change
the organization.
In today’s complex and changing environment, some argue that OD must go
beyond solving particular problems to helping members gain the competence
needed to change and improve the organization continually. In this modification of
action research, the role of OD consultants is to work with members to facilitate the
learning process. Both parties are “co-learners” in diagnosing the organization,
designing changes, and implementing and assessing them. Neither party dominates
the change process. Rather, each participant brings unique information and
expertise to the situation, and they combine their resources to learn how to change
the organization. Consultants, for example, know how to design diagnostic
instruments and OD interventions, and organization members have “local
knowledge” about the organization and how it functions. Each participant learns
from the change process. Organization members learn how to change their
organization and how to refine and improve it. OD consultants learn how to
facilitate complex organizational change and learning. The action research model
will continue to be the dominant methodological basis for planned change in the
near future. But the basic philosophy of science on which traditional action
research operates is also evolving and is described below.
The Positive Model
The third model of change, the positive model, represents an important
departure from Lewin’s model and the action research process. Those models are
primarily deficit based; they focus on the organization’s problems and how they can
be solved so it functions better.
The positive model focuses on what the organization is doing right. It helps
members understand their organization when it is working at its best and builds off
those capabilities to achieve even better results. This positive approach to change is
consistent with a growing movement in the social sciences called “positive
organizational scholarship,” which focuses on positive dynamics in organizations
that give rise to extraordinary outcomes.
Considerable research on expectation effects also supports this model of
planned change. It shows that people tend to act in ways that make their
expectations occur. Thus, positive expectations about the organization can create
 188
an anticipation that energizes and directs behaviour toward making those beliefs
happen. The positive model has been applied to planned change primarily through
a process called appreciative inquiry. As a “reformist and rebellious” form of social
constructionism, Appreciative inquiry explicitly infuses a positive value orientation
into analyzing and changing organizations. Social constructionism assumes that
organization members’ shared experiences and interactions influence how they
perceive the organization and behave in it. Because such shared meaning can
determine how members approach planned change, AI encourages a positive
orientation to how change is conceived and managed. It promotes broad member
involvement in creating a shared vision about the organization’s positive potential.
That shared appreciation provides a powerful and guiding image of what the
organization could be.
Initiate the Inquiry. This first phase determines the subject of change. It
emphasizes member involvement to identify the organizational issue they have the
most energy to address. For example, members can choose to look for successful
male–female collaboration (as opposed to sexual discrimination), instances of
customer satisfaction (as opposed to customer dissatisfaction), particularly effective
work teams, or product development processes that brought new ideas to market
especially fast. If the focus of inquiry is real and vital to organization members, the
change process itself will take on these positive attributes. Inquire into Best
Practices. This phase involves gathering information about the “best of what is” in
the organization. If the topic is organizational innovation, then members help to
develop an interview protocol that collects stories of new ideas that were developed
and implemented in the organization. The interviews are conducted by organization
members; they interview each other and tell stories of innovation in which they
have personally been involved. These stories are pulled together to create a pool of
information describing the organization as an innovative system. Discover the
Themes. In this third phase, members examine the stories, both large and small, to
identify a set of themes representing the common dimensions of people’s
experiences. For example, the stories of innovation may contain themes about how
managers gave people the freedom to explore a new idea, the support organization
members received from their co-workers, or how the exposure to customers sparked
creative thinking. No theme is too small to be represented; it is important that all of
the underlying mechanisms that helped to generate and support the themes be
described. The themes represent the basis for moving from “what is” to “what could
be.” Envision a Preferred Future. Members then examine the identified themes,
challenge the status quo, and describe a compelling future. Based on the
organization’s successful past, members collectively visualize the organization’s
future and develop “possibility propositions”—statements that bridge the
organization’s current best practices with ideal possibilities for future organizing.
These propositions should present a truly exciting, provocative, and possible
picture of the future.
 189
Based on these possibilities, members identify the relevant stakeholders and
critical organization processes that must be aligned to support the emergence of the
envisioned future. The vision becomes a statement of “what should be.” Design and
Deliver Ways to Create the Future. The final phase involves the design and delivery
of ways to create the future. It describes the activities and creates the plans
necessary to bring about the vision. It proceeds to action and assessment phases
similar to those of action research described previously. Members make changes,
assess the results, make necessary adjustments, and so on as they move the
organization toward the vision and sustain “what will be.” The process is continued
by renewing the conversations about the best of what is.
Comparisons of Change Models All three models—Lewin’s change model, the
action research model, and the positive model—describe the phases by which
planned change occurs in organizations. As shown in Figure 17.1, the models
overlap in that their emphasis on action to implement organizational change is
preceded by a preliminary stage (unfreezing, diagnosis, or initiate the inquiry) and
is followed by a closing stage (refreezing or evaluation). Moreover, all three
approaches emphasize the application of behavioural science knowledge, involve
organization members in the change process to varying degrees, and recognize that
any interaction between a consultant and an organization constitutes an
intervention that may affect the organization. However, Lewin’s change model
differs from the other two in that it focuses on the general process of planned
change, rather than on specific OD activities. Lewin’s model and the action
research model differ from the positive approach in terms of the level of involvement
of the participants and the focus of change. Lewin’s model and traditional action
research emphasize the role of the consultant with relatively limited member
involvement in the change process. Contemporary applications of action research
and the positive model, on the other hand, treat both consultants and participants
as co-learners who are heavily involved in planned change. In addition, Lewin’s
model and action research are more concerned with fixing problems than with
focusing on what the organization does well and leveraging those strengths.
17.3.3. General Model of Planned Change
The three models of planned change suggest a general framework for planned
change. The framework describes the four basic activities that practitioners and
organization members jointly carry out in organization development. The arrows
connecting the different activities in the model show the typical sequence of events,
from entering and contracting, to diagnosing, to planning and implementing
change, to evaluating and institutionalizing change. The lines connecting the
activities emphasize that organizational change is not a straightforward, linear
process but involves considerable overlap and feedback among the activities.
Entering and Contracting
The first set of activities in planned change concerns entering and contracting.
Those events help managers decide whether they want to engage further in a
planned change program and to commit resources to such a process. Entering an
 190
organization involves gathering initial data to understand the problems facing the
organization or to determine the positive areas for inquiry. Once this information is
collected, the problems or opportunities are discussed with managers and other
organization members to develop a contract or agreement to engage in planned
change. The contract spells out future change activities, the resources that will be
committed to the process, and how OD practitioners and organization members will
be involved. In many cases, organizations do not get beyond this early stage of
planned change because one or more situations arise: Disagreements about the
need for change surface, resource constraints are encountered, or other methods
for change appear more feasible. When OD is used in non-traditional and
international settings, the entering and contracting process must be sensitive to the
context in which the change is taking place.
Diagnosing
In this stage of planned change, the client system is carefully studied.
Diagnosis can focus on understanding organizational problems, including their
causes and consequences, or on collecting stories about the organization’s positive
attributes. The diagnostic process is one of the most important activities in OD. It
includes choosing an appropriate model for understanding the organization and
gathering, analyzing, and feeding back information to managers and organization
members about the problems or opportunities that exist. Diagnostic models for
analyzing problems explore three levels of activities. Organization issues represent
the most complex level of analysis and involve the total system. Group-level issues
are associated with department and group effectiveness. Individual-level issues
involve the way jobs are designed and performed. Gathering, analyzing, and feeding
back data are the central change activities in diagnosis.
Planning and Implementing Change
In this stage, organization members and practitioners jointly plan and
implement OD interventions. They design interventions to achieve the
organization’s vision or goals and make action plans to implement them. There are
several criteria for designing interventions, including the organization’s readiness
for change, its current change capability, its culture and power distributions, and
the change agent’s skills and abilities.
Depending on the outcomes of diagnosis, there are four major types of
interventions in OD:
Human process interventions at the individual, group, and total system levels,
Interventions that modify an organization’s structure and technology Strategic
interventions that involve managing the organization’s relationship to its external
environment and the internal structure and process necessary to support a
business strategy.
Implementing interventions is concerned with leading and managing the
change process. It includes motivating change, creating a desired future vision of
the organization, developing political support, managing the transition toward the
vision, and sustaining momentum for change.
 191
Evaluating and Institutionalizing Change
The final stage in planned change involves evaluating the effects of the
intervention and managing the institutionalization of successful change programs
so they persist.
Feedback to organization members about the intervention’s results provides
information about whether the changes should be continued, modified, or
suspended. Institutionalizing successful changes involves reinforcing them through
feedback, rewards, and training. It provides especially rich detail on the planning
and implementing phase of change, and on how people can be involved in the
process.
17.3.4 Different Types of Planned Change
The general model of planned change describes how the OD process typically
unfolds in organizations. In actual practice, the different phases are not nearly as
orderly as the model implies. OD practitioners tend to modify or adjust the stages
to fit the needs of the situation. Steps in planned change may be implemented in a
variety of ways, depending on the client’s needs and goals, the change agent’s skills
and values, and the organization’s context. Thus, planned change can vary
enormously from one situation to another. To understand the differences better,
planned change can be contrasted across situations on three key dimensions: the
magnitude of organizational change, the degree to which the client system is
organized, and whether the setting is domestic or international.
Magnitude of Change Planned change efforts can be characterized as falling
along a continuum ranging from incremental changes that involve fine-tuning the
organization to fundamental changes that entail radically altering how it operates.
Incremental changes tend to involve limited dimensions and levels of the
organization, such as the decision-making processes of work groups. They occur
within the context of the organization’s existing business strategy, structure, and
culture and are aimed at improving the status quo Fundamental changes, on the
other hand, are directed at significantly altering how the organization operates.
They tend to involve several organizational dimensions, including structure,
culture, reward systems, information processes, and work design. They also involve
changing multiple levels of the organization, from top-level management through
departments and work groups to individual jobs. Planned change traditionally has
been applied in situations involving incremental change. Organizations in the
1960s and 1970s were concerned mainly with fine-tuning their bureaucratic
structures by resolving many of the social problems that emerged with increasing
size and complexity. In those situations, planned change involves a relatively
bounded set of problem-solving activities. OD practitioners are typically contracted
by managers to help solve specific problems in particular organizational systems,
such as poor communication among members of a work team or low customer
satisfaction scores in a department store. Diagnostic and change activities tend to
be limited to the defined issues, although additional problems may be uncovered
 192
and may need to be addressed. Similarly, the change process tends to focus on
those organizational systems having specific problems, and it generally terminates
when the problems are resolved. Of course, the change agent may contract to help
solve additional problems. In recent years, OD has been increasingly concerned
with fundamental change. The greater competitiveness and uncertainty of today’s
environment have led a growing number of organizations to alter drastically the way
in which they operate. In such situations, planned change is more complex,
extensive, and long term than when applied to incremental change. Because
fundamental change involves most features and levels of the organization, it is
typically driven from the top, where corporate strategy and values are set. Change
agents help senior executives create a vision of a desired future organization and
energize movement in that direction. They also help them develop structures for
managing the transition from the present to the future organization and may
include, for example, a program management office and a variety of overlapping
steering committees and redesign teams. Staff experts also may redesign many
features of the firm, such as performance measures, rewards, planning processes,
work designs, and information systems. Because of the complexity and
extensiveness of fundamental change, OD professionals often work in teams
comprising members with different yet complementary areas of expertise. The
consulting relationship persists over relatively long time periods and includes a
great deal of renegotiation and experimentation among consultants and managers.
The boundaries of the change effort are more uncertain and diffuse than those in
incremental change, thus making diagnosis and change seem more like discovery
than like problem solving.
It is important to emphasize that fundamental change may or may not be
developmental in nature. Organizations may drastically alter their strategic
direction and way of operating without significantly developing their capacity to
solve problems and to achieve both high performance and quality of work life. For
example, firms may simply change their marketing mix, dropping or adding
products, services, or customers; they may drastically downsize by cutting out
marginal businesses and laying off managers and workers; or they may tighten
managerial and financial controls and attempt to squeeze more out of the labour
force. On the other hand, organizations may undertake fundamental change from a
developmental perspective. They may seek to make themselves more competitive by
developing their human resources; by getting managers and employees more
involved in problem solving and innovation; and by promoting flexibility and direct,
open communication. The OD approach to fundamental change is particularly
relevant in today’s rapidly changing and competitive environment. To succeed in
this setting, firms such as General Electric, Kimberly-Clark, ABB, Hewlett-Packard,
and Motorola are transforming themselves from control-oriented bureaucracies to
high-involvement organizations capable of changing and improving themselves
continually.
 193
Degree of Organization
Planned change efforts also can vary depending on the degree to which the
organization or client system is organized. In over organized situations, such as in
highly mechanistic, bureaucratic organizations, various dimensions such as
leadership styles, job designs, organization structure, and policies and procedures
are too rigid and overly defined for effective task performance. Communication
between management and employees is typically suppressed, conflicts are avoided,
and employees are apathetic. In under organized organizations, on the other hand,
there is too little constraint or regulation for effective task performance. Leadership,
structure, job design, and policy are poorly defined and fail to direct task
behaviours effectively. Communication is fragmented, job responsibilities are
ambiguous, and employees’ energies are dissipated because they lack direction.
Under organized situations are typically found in such areas as product
development, project management, and community development, where
relationships among diverse groups and participants must be coordinated around
complex, uncertain tasks. In over organized situations, where much of OD practice
has historically taken place, planned change is generally aimed at loosening
constraints on behaviour. Changes in leadership, job design, structure, and other
features are designed to liberate suppressed energy, to increase the flow of relevant
information between employees and managers, and to promote effective conflict
resolution. The typical steps of planned change— entry, diagnosis, intervention,
and evaluation—are intended to penetrate a relatively closed organization or
department and make it increasingly open to self-diagnosis and revitalization. The
relationship between the OD practitioner and the management team attempts to
model this loosening process. The consultant shares leadership of the change
process with management, encourages open communications and confrontation of
conflict, and maintains flexibility in relating to the organization. When applied to
organizations facing problems in being under organized, planned change is aimed
at increasing organization by clarifying leadership roles, structuring communication
between managers and employees, and specifying job and departmental
responsibilities. These activities require a modification of the traditional phases of
planned change and include the following four steps:
Identification. This step identifies the relevant people or groups who need to
be involved in the change program. In many under organized situations, people and
departments can be so disconnected that there is ambiguity about who should be
included in the problem-solving process. For example, when managers of different
departments have only limited interaction with each other, they may disagree or be
confused about which departments should be involved in developing a new product
or service.
Convention. In this step, the relevant people or departments in the company
are brought together to begin organizing for task performance. For example,
department managers might be asked to attend a series of organizing meetings to
discuss the division of labour and the coordination required to introduce a new
product.
 194
Organization
Different organizing mechanisms are created to structure the newly required
interactions among people and departments. This might include creating new
leadership positions, establishing communication channels, and specifying
appropriate plans and policies.
Evaluation
In this final step, the outcomes of the organization step are assessed. The
evaluation might signal the need for adjustments in the organizing process or for
further identification, convention, and organization activities.
In carrying out these four steps of planned change in under organized
situations, the relationship between the OD practitioner and the client system
attempts to reinforce the organizing process. The consultant develops a well-defined
leadership role, which might be autocratic during the early stages of the change
program. Similarly, the consulting relationship is clearly defined and tightly
specified. In effect, the interaction between the consultant and the client system
supports the larger process of bringing order to the situation.
Domestic Vs. International Settings
Planned change efforts have traditionally been applied in North American and
European settings, but they are increasingly used outside of these cultures.
Developed in Western societies, OD reflects the underlying values and assumptions
of these cultural settings, including equality, involvement, and short-term time
horizons. Under these conditions, it works quite well. In other societies, a different
set of cultural values and assumptions can be operating and make the application
of OD problematic. In contrast to Western societies, for example, the cultures of
most Asian countries are more hierarchical and status conscious, less open to
discussing personal issues, more concerned with “saving face,” and have a longer
time horizon for results. These cultural differences can make OD more difficult to
implement, especially for North American or European practitioners; they may
simply be unaware of the cultural norms and values that permeate the society. The
cultural values that guide OD practice in the United States, for example, include a
tolerance for ambiguity, equality among people, individuality, and achievement
motives. An OD process that encourages openness among individuals, high levels of
participation, and actions that promote increased effectiveness is viewed
favourably. The OD practitioner is also assumed to hold these values and to model
them in the conduct of planned change. Most reported cases of OD involve
Western-based organizations using practitioners trained in the traditional model
and raised and experienced in Western society. When OD is applied outside of
North America or Europe (and sometimes even within these settings), the action
research process must be adapted to fit the cultural context. For example, the
diagnostic phase, which is aimed at understanding the current drivers of
organization effectiveness, can be modified in a variety of ways. Diagnosis can
involve many organization members or include only senior executives; be directed
from the top, conducted by an outside consultant, or performed by internal
 195
consultants; or involve face-to-face interviews or organizational documents. Each
step in the general model of planned change must be carefully mapped against the
cultural context. Conducting OD in international settings can be highly stressful on
OD practitioners. To be successful, they must develop a keen awareness of their
own cultural biases, be open to seeing a variety of issues from another perspective,
be fluent in the values and assumptions of the host country, and understand the
economic and political context of business in the host country. Most OD
practitioners are not able to meet all of those criteria and partner with a “cultural
guide,” often a member of the client organization, to help navigate the cultural,
operational, and political nuances of change in that society.
17.3.5 Critique of Planned Change
Despite their continued refinement, the models and practice of planned change
are still in a formative stage of development, and there is considerable room for
improvement. Critics of OD have pointed out several problems with the way
planned change has been conceptualized and practiced.
Conceptualization of Planned Change
Planned change has typically been characterized as involving a series of
activities for carrying out effective organization development. Although current
models outline a general set of steps to be followed, considerably more information
is needed to guide how those steps should be performed in specific situations. In an
extensive review and critique of planned change theory, Porras and Robertson
argued that planned change activities should be guided by information about (1)
the organizational features that can be changed, (2) the intended outcomes from
making those changes, (3) the causal mechanisms by which those outcomes are
achieved, and (4) the contingencies upon which successful change depends. In
particular, they noted that the key to organizational change is change in the
behaviour of each member and that the information available about the causal
mechanisms that produce individual change is lacking. Overall, Porras and
Robertson concluded that the information necessary to guide change is only
partially available and that a good deal more research and thinking are needed to
fill the gaps.
A related area where current thinking about planned change is deficient is
knowledge about how the stages of planned change differ across situations. Most
models specify a general set of steps that are intended to be applicable to most
change efforts. However, the previous section of this chapter showed how change
activities can vary depending on such factors as the magnitude of change, the
degree to which the client system is organized, and whether the change is being
conducted in a domestic or an international setting. Considerably more effort needs
to be expended identifying situational factors that may require modifying the
general stages of planned change. That would likely lead to a rich array of planned
change models, each geared to a specific set of situational conditions. Such
contingency thinking is greatly needed in planned change. Planned change also
tends to be described as a rationally controlled, orderly process. Critics have argued
 196
that although this view may be comforting, it is seriously misleading. They point
out that planned change has a more chaotic quality, often involving shifting goals,
discontinuous activities, surprising events, and unexpected combinations of
changes. For example, executives often initiate changes without plans that clarify
their strategies and goals. As change unfolds, new stakeholders may emerge and
demand modifications reflecting previously unknown or unvoiced needs. Those
emergent conditions make planned change a far more disorderly and dynamic
process than is customarily portrayed, and conceptions need to capture that
reality. Most descriptions of planned change typically describe a beginning, middle,
and end to the process. Critics have argued that planned change models that
advocate evaluation and institutionalization processes reinforce the belief that the
organization will “refreeze” into some form of equilibrium following change. In the
face of increasing globalization and technological change, it is unlikely that change
will ever “be over.” Executives, managers, and organization members must be
prepared for constant change in a variety of organizational features that are not
obvious in most models of planned change. Finally, the relationship between
planned change and organizational performance and effectiveness is not well
understood. OD traditionally has had problems assessing whether interventions are
producing observed results. The complexity of the change situation, the lack of
sophisticated analyses, and the long time periods for producing results have
contributed to weak evaluation of OD efforts. Moreover, managers have often
accounted for OD efforts with post hoc testimonials, reports of possible future
benefits, and calls to support OD as the right thing to do. In the absence of rigorous
assessment and measurement, it is difficult to make resource allocation decisions
about change programs and to know which interventions are most effective in
certain situations.
Practice of Planned Change
Critics have suggested several problems with the way planned change is
carried out. Their concerns are not with the planned change model itself but with
how change takes place and with the qualifications and activities of OD
practitioners. A growing number of OD practitioners have acquired skills in a
specific technique, such as team building, total quality management, AI, large-
group interventions, or gain sharing, and have chosen to specialize in that method.
Although such specialization may be necessary, it can lead to a certain myopia
given the complex array of techniques that define OD. Some OD practitioners
favour particular techniques and ignore other strategies that might be more
appropriate, tending to interpret organizational problems as requiring the favoured
technique. Thus, for example, it is not unusual to see consultants pushing such
methods as diversity training, reengineering, organization learning, or self-
managing work teams as solutions to most organizational problems. Effective
change depends on a careful diagnosis of how the organization is functioning.
Diagnosis identifies the underlying causes of organizational problems, such as poor
product quality and employee dissatisfaction, or determines the positive
 197
opportunities that need to be promoted. It requires both time and money, and some
organizations are not willing to make the necessary investment. Rather, they rely
on preconceptions about what the problem is and hire consultants with skills
appropriate to solve that problem. Managers may think, for example, that work
design is the problem, so they hire an expert in job enrichment to implement a
change program. The problem may be caused by other factors such as poor reward
practices, however, and job enrichment would be inappropriate. Careful diagnosis
can help to avoid such mistakes. In situations requiring complex organizational
changes, planned change is a long-term process involving considerable innovation
and learning on-site. It requires a good deal of time and commitment and a
willingness to modify and refine changes as the circumstances require. Some
organizations demand more rapid solutions to their problems and seek quick fixes
from experts. Unfortunately, some OD consultants are more than willing to provide
quick solutions.
They sell pre-packaged programs for organizations to adopt. Those programs
appeal to managers because they typically include an explicit recipe to be followed,
standard training materials, and clear time and cost boundaries. The quick fixes
have trouble gaining wide organizational support and commitment, however, and
seldom produce the positive results that have been advertised. Other organizations
have not recognized the systemic nature of change. Too often, they believe that
intervention into one aspect or subpart of the organization will be sufficient to
ameliorate the problems, and they are unprepared for the other changes that may
be necessary to support a particular intervention. For example, at Verizon, the
positive benefits of an employee involvement program did not begin to appear until
after the organization redesigned its reward system to support the cross-functional
collaboration necessary to solve highly complex problems. Changing any one part or
feature of an organization often requires adjustments in the other parts to maintain
an appropriate alignment. Thus, although quick fixes and change programs that
focus on only one part or aspect of the organization may resolve some specific
problems, they generally do not lead to complex organizational change or increase
members’ capacity to carry out change include an explicit recipe to be followed,
standard training materials, and clear time and cost boundaries. The quick fixes
have trouble gaining wide organizational support and commitment, however, and
seldom produce the positive results that have been advertised. Other organizations
have not recognized the systemic nature of change. Too often, they believe that
intervention into one aspect or subpart of the organization will be sufficient to
ameliorate the problems, and they are unprepared for the other changes that may
be necessary to support a particular intervention. For example, at Verizon, the
positive benefits of an employee involvement program did not begin to appear until
after the organization redesigned its reward system to support the cross-functional
collaboration necessary to solve highly complex problems. Changing any one part or
feature of an organization often requires adjustments in the other parts to maintain
an appropriate alignment. Thus, although quick fixes and change programs that
 198
focus on only one part or aspect of the organization may resolve some specific
problems, they generally do not lead to complex organizational change or increase
members’ capacity to carry out change
17.3.6 Conclusion
Planned change theories can be integrated into a general model. Four sets of
activities—entering and contracting, diagnosing, planning and implementing, and
evaluating and institutionalizing—can be used to describe how change is
accomplished in organizations. These four sets of activities also describe the general
structure of the chapters in this book. The general model has broad applicability to
planned change. It identifies the steps an organization typically moves through to
implement change and specifies the OD activities needed to effect change. Although
the planned change models describe general stages of how the OD process unfolds,
there are different types of change depending on the situation. Planned change
efforts can vary in terms of the magnitude of the change, the degree to which the
client system is organized, and whether the setting is domestic or international.
When situations differ on those dimensions, planned change can vary greatly.
Critics of OD have pointed out several problems with the way planned change has
been conceptualized and practiced, and specific areas where planned change can
be improved.
17.4 REVISION POINTS
1. Theories of planned change describe the activities necessary to modify
strategies, structures, and processes to increase an organization’s
effectiveness.
2. Lewin’s change model, the action research model, and the positive model offer
different views of the phases through which planned change occurs in
organizations.
3. Lewin’s change model views planned change as a three-step process of
unfreezing, moving, and refreezing. It provides a general description of the
process of planned change.
4. The action research model focuses on planned change as a cyclical process
involving joint activities between organization members and OD practitioners.
It involves multiple steps that overlap and interact in practice: problem
identification, consultation with a behavioural science expert, data gathering
and preliminary diagnosis, feedback to a key client or group, joint diagnosis of
the problem, joint action planning, action, and data gathering after action.
5. The action research model places heavy emphasis on data gathering and
diagnosis prior to action planning and implementation, and on assessment of
results after action is taken.
17.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Organizational Change?
2. What are the major theories of Organizational Change?
3. Write about General model of planned change.
4. Mention the different types of planned change.
 199
17.6 SUMMARY
Change strategies often are modified on the basis of continued diagnosis, and
termination of one OD program may lead to further work in other areas of the firm.
The positive model is oriented to what the organization is doing right. It seeks to
build on positive opportunities that can lead to extraordinary performance.
17.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:
a) Organizational Change
b) Models of Planned Change
c) Different types of planned change
17.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
17.9 ASSIGNMENTS
1. Elaborately discuss about the Concepts of Organizational Change.
2. Compare and Contrast about the different models of planned change.
17.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French And Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi., 2006.
7. Dr.Donald.L.Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
17.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify and learn about the evolution and the importance of Organizational
Change according to the globalized business world.
17.12 KEY WORDS
1. Planned Change, Models of Planned Change, Critique of Planned Change.
H
 200
LESSON – 18

TYPES OF CHANGE
18.1. INTRODUCTION
This lesson discusses change programs relating to interpersonal relations and
group dynamics. These interventions are among the earliest ones devised in OD
and the most popular. They represent attempts to improve people’s working
relationships with one another. The interventions are aimed at helping members of
groups assess their interactions and devise more effective ways of working. These
change programs represent a basic skill requirement for an OD practitioner.
Interpersonal and group process approaches, including process consultation, third-
party interventions, and team building, are among the most enduring OD
interventions. Process consultation helps group members understand, diagnose,
and improve their behaviours.
18.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About different types of Change
 Process Consultation, Group Process, Third-Party Interventions and
Team-Building.
18.3 CONTENT
18.3.1 Process Consultation
18.3.2 Group Process
18.3.3 Third-Party Intervention
18.3.4 Team Building
18.3.5 Conclusion
18.3.1 Process Consultation
Process consultation (PC) is a general framework for carrying out helping
relationships. Schein defines process consultation as “the creation of a relationship
that permits the client to perceive, understand, and act on the process events that
occur in [his or her] internal and external environment in order to improve the
situation as defined by the client.” The process consultant does not offer expert
help in the form of solutions to problems, as in the doctor–patient model. Rather,
the process consultant works to help managers, employees, and groups assess and
improve human processes, such as communication, interpersonal relations,
decision making, and task performance. Schein argues that effective consultants
and managers should be good helpers, aiding others in getting things done and in
achieving the goals they have set. Thus, PC is as much a philosophy as a set of
techniques aimed at performing this helping relationship. The philosophy ensures
that those who are receiving the help own their problems, gain the skills and
expertise to diagnose them, and solve the problems themselves. PC is an approach
to helping people and groups help themselves. As a philosophy of helping in
 201
relationships, Schein proposes ten principles to guide the process consultant’s
actions.
Always try to be helpful: Process consultants must be mindful of their
intentions, and each interaction must be oriented toward being helpful.
Always stay in touch with the current reality: Each interaction should
produce diagnostic information about the current situation. It includes data about
the client’s opinions, beliefs, and emotions; the system’s current functioning; and
the practitioner’s reactions, thoughts, and feelings.
Access your ignorance: An important source of information about current
reality is the practitioner’s understanding of what is known, what is assumed, and
what is not known. Process consultants must use themselves as instruments of
change.
Everything you do is an intervention: Any interaction in a consultative
relationship generates information as well as consequences. Simply conducting
preliminary interviews with group members, for example, can raise members’
awareness of a situation and help them see it in a new light. The client owns the
problem and the solution: This is a key principle in all OD practice. Practitioners
help clients solve their own problems and learn to manage future change.
Go with the flow: When process consultants access their own ignorance, they
often realize that there is much about the client system and its culture that they do
not know. Thus, practitioners must work to understand the client’s motivations
and perceptions.
Timing is crucial: Observations, comments, questions, and other
interventions intended to be helpful may work in some circumstances and fail in
others. Process consultants must be vigilant to occasions when the client is open
(or not open) to suggestions.
Be constructively opportunistic with confrontive interventions: Although
process consultants must be willing to go with the flow, they also must be willing to
take appropriate risks. From time to time and in their best judgment, practitioners
must learn to take advantage of “teachable moments.” A well-crafted process
observation or piece of feedback can provide a group or individual with great insight
into their behaviour. Everything is information; errors will always occur and are
the prime source for learning: Process consultants never can know fully the
client’s reality and invariably will make mistakes. The consequences of these
mistakes, the unexpected and surprising reactions, are important data that must
be used in the ongoing development of the relationship.
When in doubt, share the problem: The default intervention in a helping
relationship is to model openness by sharing the dilemma of what to do next.
18.3.2 Group Process
Process consultation deals primarily with the interpersonal and group
processes that describe how organization members interact with each other. Such
 202
social processes directly and indirectly affect how work is accomplished. When
group process promotes effective interactions, groups are likely to perform tasks
successfully. Group process includes:
Communication: One of the process consultant’s areas of interest is the
nature and style of communication, or the process of transmitting and receiving
thoughts, facts, and feelings. Communication can be overt—who talks to whom,
about what, for how long, and how often. It can include body language, including
facial expressions, fidgeting, posture, and hand gestures. Communication can also
be covert, as when a manager says, “I’m not embarrassed” as his or her face turns
scarlet. Covert communication is “hidden” and the process consultant often seeks
to find the best way to make the message more explicit.
The functional roles of group members: The process consultant must be
keenly aware of the different roles individual members take on in a group. Both
upon entering and while remaining in a group, individuals must address and
understand their self-identity, influence, and power that will satisfy personal needs
while working to accomplish group goals. In addition, group members must take on
roles that enhance (a) task-related activities, such as giving and seeking
information and elaborating, coordinating, and evaluating activities; and (b) group-
maintenance actions, directed toward holding the group together as a cohesive
team, including encouraging, harmonizing, compromising, setting standards, and
observing. Most ineffective groups perform little group maintenance, and this is a
primary reason for bringing in a process consultant.
Group problem solving and decision making: To be effective, a group must
be able to identify problems, examine alternatives, and make decisions. For
example, one way of making decisions is to ignore a suggestion, as when one
person makes a suggestion and someone else offers another before the first has
been discussed. A second method is to give decision-making power to the person in
authority. Sometimes, decisions are made by minority rule, with the leader arriving
at a decision and turning for agreement to several people who will comply.
Frequently, silence is regarded as consent. Decisions can also be made by majority
rule, consensus, or unanimous consent. The process consultant can help the group
understand how it makes decisions and the consequences of each decision process,
as well as help diagnose which type of decision process may be the most effective in
a given situation. Decision by unanimous consent or consensus, for example, may
be ideal in some circumstances but too time-consuming or costly in other
situations.
Group norms: Especially if a group of people work together over a period of
time, it develops group norms or standards of behaviour about what is good or bad,
allowed or forbidden, right or wrong. The process consultant can be very helpful in
assisting the group to understand and articulate its own norms and to determine
whether those norms are helpful or dysfunctional. By understanding its norms and
recognizing which ones are helpful, the group can grow and deal realistically with
 203
its environment, make optimum use of its own resources, and learn from its own
experiences.
The use of leadership and authority: A process consultant needs to
understand processes involved in leadership and how different leadership styles
can help or hinder a group’s functioning. In addition, the consultant can help the
leader adjust his or her style to fit the situation.
Basic Process Interventions: For each of the interpersonal and group
processes described above, a variety of interventions may be used. In broad terms,
these are aimed at making individuals and groups more effective.
Individual Interventions
These interventions are designed primarily to help people be more effective in
their communication with others. For example, the process consultant can provide
feedback to one or more individuals about their overt behaviours during meetings.
At the covert or hidden level of communication, feedback can be more personal and
is aimed at increasing the individual’s awareness of how their behaviour affects
others. A useful model for this process has been developed by Luft in what is called
the Johari Window. Johari Window, shows that some personal issues are perceived
by both the individual and others. This is the “open” window. In the “hidden”
window, people are aware of their behaviour, motives, and issues, but they conceal
them from others. People with certain feelings about themselves or others in the
work group may not share with others unless they feel safe and protected; by not
revealing reactions they feel might be hurtful or impolite, they lessen the degree of
communication.
Group Interventions: These interventions are aimed at the process, content,
or structure of the group. Process interventions sensitize the group to its own
internal processes and generate interest in analyzing them. Interventions include
comments, questions, or observations about relationships between and among
group members; problem solving and decision making; and the identity and
purpose of the group. For example, process consultants can help by suggesting that
some part of each meeting be reserved for examining how these decisions are made
and periodically assessing the feelings of the group’s members. As Schein points
out, however, the basic purpose of the process consultant is not to take on the role
of expert but to help the group share in its own diagnosis and do a better job in
learning to diagnose its own processes: “It is important that the process consultant
encourage the group not only to allocate time for diagnosis but to take the lead
itself in trying to articulate and understand its own processes.”
Content interventions help the group determine what it works on. They
include comments, questions, or observations about group membership; agenda
setting, review, and testing procedures; interpersonal issues; and conceptual inputs
on task-related topics.
Finally, structural interventions help the group examine the stable and
recurring methods it uses to accomplish tasks and deal with external issues. They
 204
include comments, questions, or observations about inputs, resources, and
customers; methods for determining goals, developing strategies, accomplishing
work, assigning responsibility, monitoring progress, and addressing problems; and
relationships to authority, formal rules, and levels of intimacy.
18.3.3 Third-Party Interventions
Third-party interventions focus on conflicts arising between two or more
people within the same organization. Conflict is inherent in groups and
organizations and can arise from various sources, including differences in
personality, task orientation, goal interdependence, and perceptions among group
members, as well as competition for scarce resources. Tjosvold notes that too little
consensus on the definition of conflict has contributed to the perception that
conflict is bad. Moreover, when it is defined as opposing interests or divergent
goals, it narrows the range of potentially productive interventions. He suggests that
conflict is best viewed as “incompatible activities.” Such a definition opens up
options for resolution, places responsibility for the conflict with the individuals
involved, and allows conflict to be seen in a positive way. To emphasize that conflict
is neither good nor bad per se is important.
Conflict can enhance motivation and innovation and lead to greater
understanding of ideas and views. On the other hand, it can prevent people from
working together constructively, destroying necessary task interactions among
group members. Consequently, third-party interventions are used primarily in
situations in which conflict significantly disrupts necessary task interactions and
work relationships among members.
Third-party interventions vary considerably depending on the kind of issues
underlying the conflict. Conflict can arise over substantive issues, such as work
methods, pay rates, and conditions of employment, or it can emerge from
interpersonal issues, such as personalities and misperceptions. When applied to
substantive issues, conflict resolution interventions often involve resolving labour–
management disputes through arbitration and mediation. The methods used in
such substantive interventions require considerable training and expertise in law
and labour relations and generally are not considered part of OD practice. For
example, when union and management representatives cannot resolve a joint
problem, they can call upon the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to help
them resolve the conflict. In addition, “alternative dispute resolution” (ADR)
practices increasingly are offered in lieu of more expensive and time-consuming
court trials.
Conflicts also may arise at the boundaries of the organization, such as
between suppliers and the company, between a company and a public policy
agency, or between multiple organizations or groups. When conflict involves
interpersonal issues, however, OD has developed approaches that help control and
resolve it. These third-party interventions help the parties interact with each other
 205
directly, recognize the personal choices each party is making, and facilitate their
diagnosis of the conflict and its resolution.
The ability to facilitate conflict resolution is a basic skill in OD and applies to
all of the process interventions discussed in this chapter. Consultants, for example,
frequently coach clients through a conflict or help organization members resolve
interpersonal conflicts that invariably arise during process consultation and team
building. Third-party interventions cannot resolve all interpersonal conflicts in
organizations, nor should they. Many times, interpersonal conflicts are not severe
or disruptive enough to warrant attention. At other times, they simply may burn
themselves out. Evidence also suggests that other methods may be more
appropriate under certain conditions. For example, managers tend to control the
process and outcomes of conflict resolution actively when they are under heavy
time pressures, when the disputants are not expected to work together in the
future, and when the resolution of the dispute has a broad impact on the
organization. Under those conditions, the third party may resolve the conflict
unilaterally with little input from the conflicting parties.
18.3.4 Team Building
Team building refers to a broad range of planned activities that help groups
improve the way they accomplish tasks, help members enhance their interpersonal
and problem-solving skills, and increase team performance. Organizations comprise
many different types of groups including permanent work groups, temporary
project teams, and virtual teams. Team building is an effective approach to
improving teamwork and task accomplishment in such environments. It can help
problem-solving groups make maximum use of members’ resources and
contributions. It can help members develop a high level of motivation to implement
group decisions. Team building also can help groups overcome specific problems,
such as apathy and general lack of member interest; loss of productivity; increasing
complaints within the group; confusion about assignments; low participation in
meetings; lack of innovation and initiation; increasing complaints from those
outside the group about the quality, timeliness, and effectiveness of services and
products; and hostility or conflicts among members. It is equally important that
team building can facilitate other OD interventions, such as employee involvement,
work design, restructuring, and strategic change. Those change programs typically
are designed by management teams and implemented through various committees
and work groups. Team building can help the groups design high-quality change
programs and ensure that the programs are accepted and implemented by
organization members. Indeed, most techno structural, human resources
management, and strategic interventions depend on some form of team building for
effective implementation. The importance of team building is well established, and
its high use is expected to continue in the coming years. Management teams are
encountering issues of greater complexity and uncertainty, especially in such fast-
paced industries as software and hardware development, entertainment, and health
and financial services. Team building can provide the kind of teamwork and
 206
problem-solving skills needed to tackle such issues. When the team represents the
senior management of an organization, team building can be an important part of
establishing a coherent corporate strategy, and can promote the kind of close
cooperation needed to implement complex strategies and new forms of governance.
As manufacturing and service technologies continue to develop—for example, just-
in-time inventory systems, lean manufacturing, robotics, and service quality
concepts—there is increasing pressure on organizations to implement team-based
work designs. Team building can assist in the development of group goals and
norms that support high productivity and quality of work life. The globalization of
work and organizations implies that people from different cultures and geographic
locations will increasingly interact over complex management and operational tasks
using a variety of information and communication technologies. Team-building
activities for these “virtual” teams have increased substantially over the past several
years.
Most team building processes are based on assumptions of face-to-face
interaction and relationships are built partially on the basis of visual cues. In
virtual teams, research suggests that closeness between team members is created
through proactive offers of help and support on task related issues, and maintained
through frequent, short, and task-focused communications (often technology
mediated). Thus, team-building can help virtual teams to examine cross-cultural
issues and their impact on decision making and problem solving, facilitate
communication processes where tone and body language clues are absent, and
build trust. Finally, mergers and acquisitions, restructurings, and strategic
alliances continue to proliferate. The success of these endeavours depends partly
on getting members from different organizations to work together effectively. Team
building can facilitate the formation of a unified team with common goals and
procedures. In the OD literature, team building is not clearly differentiated from
process consultation and group facilitation. This confusion exists because most
team building includes process consultation—helping the group diagnose and
understand its own internal processes—and facilitation—providing structure to a
group’s interactions so that it can focus on an agenda and exchange information.
However, process consultation is a more general approach to helping relationships
than is team building. Team building focuses explicitly on helping groups perform
tasks and solve problems more effectively. Process consultation, on the other hand,
is concerned with establishing effective helping relationships in organizations while
facilitation often represents a substitute for group process. It is seen as key to
effective management and consultation and can be applied to any helping
relationship, from subordinate development to interpersonal relationships to group
development. Thus, team building consists of process consultation plus other, more
task-oriented interventions. Team building is applicable in a large number of
situations, from starting a new team, to resolving conflicts among members, to
revitalizing a complacent team. Dyer has developed a checklist for identifying
whether a team-building program is needed and whether the organization is ready
 207
to start such a program (Table 18.1). If the problem is a structural or technical one,
an intergroup issue, an administrative mistake, or a conflict between only two
people, team building would not be an appropriate change strategy.
Team-Building Activities
A team is a group of interdependent people who share a common purpose,
have common work methods, and hold each other accountable. The nature of that
interdependence varies, creating the following types of teams: groups reporting to
the same supervisor, manager, or executive; groups involving people with common
organizational goals; temporary groups formed to do a specific, one-time task;
groups consisting of people whose work roles are interdependent; and groups
whose members have no formal links in the organization but whose collective
purpose is to achieve tasks they cannot accomplish alone. Another important
variable in teams is location. When team members are in close proximity, a
traditional team exists; when members are geographically dispersed and their
interaction is mediated by information technology, a virtual team exists.
Several factors can affect the outcomes of any specific team-building activity:
the length of time allocated to the activity, the team’s willingness to look at its
processes, the length of time the team has been working together, and the team’s
permanence. Consequently, the results of team-building activities can range from
comparatively modest changes in the team’s operating mechanisms (for example,
meeting more frequently or gathering agenda items from more sources) to much
deeper changes (for example, modifying team members’ behaviour patterns or the
nature and style of the group’s management, or developing greater openness and
trust). Hackman has proposed that effective teams produce outputs that satisfy
external stakeholders, constantly improve their team functioning, and have
members that are learning. As a result, team-building activities can be classified
according to their level and orientation (see Table 18.2). Team-building activities
can focus on the following levels: (1) one or more individuals; (2) the group’s
operation and behaviour; or (3) the group’s relationship with the rest of the
organization. They also can be classified according to whether their orientation is
(1) diagnostic or (2) development.
Orientation of Activity
Level of Activity
Diagnostic Development
One or more individuals Instruments, interviews, and Coaching, 360-degree feedback,
feedback to understand style and Third-party interventions
motivations of group members
Group operations and Surveys, interviews, and team Role clarification, Mission and goal
behaviour meetings to understand the group’s development, Decision-making
processes and procedures processes, Normative change
Relationships with the Surveys and interview to understand Strategic Planning, Stakeholder
organization how the group relates to its organization analysis
context
 208
Source: W. G. Dyer, Team Building: Issues and Alternatives, 42–46. © 1987. Reprinted
by permission of the Estate of W. G. Dyer.
A particular team-building activity can overlap these categories, and, on
occasion, a change in one area will have negative results in other areas. For
example, a very cohesive team may increase its isolation from other groups, leading
to intergroup conflict or other dysfunctional results, which in turn can have a
negative impact on the total organization unless the team develops sufficient
diagnostic skills to recognize and deal with such problems.
Activities Relevant to One or More Individuals
People come into groups and organizations with varying needs for achievement,
inclusion, influence, and belonging. These needs can be supported and nurtured by
the team’s structure and process or they can be discouraged. Diagnostic interviews
and survey instruments can help members to better understand their motivations,
style, or emotions in the group context. It results in one or more of the members
gaining a better understanding of the way inclusion, emotions, control, and power
affect problem solving and other group processes, and provide choices about their
degree of involvement and commitment. Such activities provide information so that
people have a clearer sense of how their needs and wants can or will be supported.
Developmental activities that address one or more members of the group include
coaching, 360-degree feedback, and assistance with conflict. These interventions
attempt to alter the group’s ongoing processes by focusing on the behaviours and
attitudes of individual members. For example, one team’s typical decision-making
process included the leader having several agenda items for discussion. Each of the
items, however, had a predetermined set of actions that she wanted the group to
take. Most members were frustrated by their inability to influence the conclusions.
The team-building process consisted of coaching the team leader and group members
about ways to change this process. The leader received feedback about specific
examples of her not-so-subtle manipulation to arrive at preconceived decisions and
how group members felt about it. At the next meeting, the leader acknowledged the
feedback and indicated her willingness to be challenged about such preconceived
decisions. Team members expressed their increased willingness to engage in
problem-solving discussions, their trust in the leader, and their ability to make the
challenge without fear of reprisal.
Activities Oriented to the Group’s Operation and Behaviour
The most common focus of team-building activities is behaviour related to task
performance and group process. In an effective team, task behaviour and group
process must be integrated with each other as well as with the needs and wants of
the people making up the group. Diagnostic activities involve gathering data
through the use of questionnaires or, more commonly, through interviews. The
nature of the data gathered will vary depending on the purpose of the team-building
program, the consultant’s knowledge about the organization and its culture, and
the people involved. The consultant already may have obtained a great deal of data
by sitting in as a process observer at staff and other meetings. The data gathered
 209
also will depend on what other OD efforts have taken place in the organization. By
whatever method obtained, however, the data usually include information on
leadership styles and behaviour; goals, objectives, and decision-making processes;
organizational culture, communication patterns, and interpersonal relationships
and processes; barriers to effective group functioning; and task and related
technical problems. Diagnostic activities often establish a framework within which
further work can be done.
18.3.5 CONCLUSION
Developmental activities aim to improve the group’s process and functioning.
French and Bell have defined team development as “an inward look by the team at
its own performance, behaviour, and culture for the purposes of dropping out
dysfunctional behaviours and strengthening functional ones.”
18.4 REVISION POINTS
Through process consultation, the group should become better able to use its
own resources to identify and solve interpersonal problems that often block the
solving of work-related problems.
Third-party interventions focus directly on dysfunctional interpersonal conflict.
This approach is used only in special circumstances and only when both parties are
willing to engage in the process of direct confrontation.
Team building is aimed both at helping a team perform its tasks better and at
satisfying individual needs. Through team- building activities, group goals and
norms become clearer. In addition, team members become better able to confront
difficulties and problems and to understand the roles of individuals within the
team.
Among the specialized team-building approaches presented are interventions
with ongoing teams and temporary teams such as project teams and task forces.
18.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Process Consultation?
2. What is a Group Process?
3. Write about Third-Party Intervention.
4. What are the major goals of Team-Building?
18.6 SUMMARY
A variety of team development activities and exercises have been described by
different authors. They include role clarification, improving goal clarity and member
commitment, modifying the decision-making or problem-solving process, changing
norms, increasing risk taking and trust, and improving communication.
18.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:
a) Process Consultation
b) Group Process
 210
c) Third-Party Interventions
d) Team - Building
18.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
18.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss in detail about the different types of Change.
18.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
18.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify and learn about the steps in Process Consultation, Group Process,
Third-Party Intervention and Team-Building.
18.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development Planned Change, Types of Change.
H
 211
LESSON – 19

REASONS FOR CHANGE

19.1 INTRODUCTION
As the twenty-first century unfolds, a large number of organizations are
radically altering how they operate and relate to their environments. Increased
global competition is forcing many organizations to downsize or consolidate and
become leaner, more efficient, and flexible. Deregulation is pushing firms in the
financial services, telecommunications, and airline industries to rethink business
strategies and reshape how they operate. Public demand for less government
intervention and lowered deficits is forcing public sector agencies to streamline
operations and to deliver more for less.
19.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About what is Organizational Change
 Various reasons for Organizational Change
19.3 CONTENT
19.3.1 Reasons for Change
19.3.2 Conclusion
19.3.1. Reasons for Change
Change is Triggered by Environmental and Internal Disruptions
Organizations are unlikely to undertake transformational change unless
significant reasons to do so emerge. Power, emotion, and expertise are vested in the
existing organizational arrangements, and when faced with problems, organizations
are more likely to fine-tune those structures than to alter them drastically. Thus, in
most cases, organizations must experience or anticipate a severe threat to survival
before they will be motivated to undertake transformational change. Such threats
arise when environmental and internal changes render existing organizational
strategies and designs obsolete. The changes threaten the very existence of the
organization as it presently is constituted. In studying a large number of
organization transformations, Tushman, Newman, and Romanelli showed that
transformational change occurs in response to at least three kinds of disruption:
Industry discontinuities—sharp changes in legal, political, economic, and
technological conditions that shift the basis for competition within an industry.
Product life cycle shifts—changes in product life cycle that require different
business strategies
Internal company dynamics—changes in size, corporate portfolio strategy, or
executive turnover.
These disruptions severely jolt organizations and push them to question their
business strategy and, in turn, their mission, values, structure, systems, and
procedures.
 212
Change is aimed at Competitive Advantage
Transformational change is concerned with choices organizations make to
improve their competitive performance. To establish a competitive advantage,
organizations must achieve a favoured position vis-à-vis their competitors or
perform internally in ways that are unique, valuable, and difficult to imitate.
Although typically associated with for-profit firms, these competitive criteria can
also apply to non-profit and governmental organizations. Activities that are unique,
valuable, and difficult to imitate enhance the organization’s performance by
establishing a competitive advantage over its rivals.
Uniqueness
All organizations possess a unique bundle of resources and processes which,
individually or in combination, represent the source of competitive advantage. An
important task in transformational change is to understand these unique
organizational features. For example, resources can be financial, such as access to
low-cost capital; reputational, such as brand image or a history of product quality;
technological, such as patents, know-how, or a strong research and development
department; and human, such as excellent labour–management relationships or
employees with scarce and valuable skills. Apple’s reputation as a leading-edge
innovator of consumer electronic products, such as the iPod and iPhone, makes a
powerful case for how resources alone can represent a unique advantage. An
organization’s processes—regular patterns of organizational activity involving a
sequence of tasks performed by individuals—use resources to produce goods and
services. For example, a software development process combines computer
resources, programming languages, typing skills, knowledge of computer
languages, and customer requirements to produce a new software application.
Other organizational processes include new product development, strategic
planning, appraising member performance, making sales calls, fulfilling customer
orders, and the like. When resources and processes are formed into capabilities
that allow the organization to perform complex activities better than others, a
distinctive competence is identified. Collins found that a key determinant in an
organization’s transition from “good to great” was a clear understanding and
commitment to the one thing an organization does better than anyone else.
Value
Organizations achieve competitive advantage when their unique resources and
processes are arranged in such a way that products or services either warrant a
higher-than-average price or are exceptionally low in cost. Both advantages are
valuable according to a performance/price criterion. Products and services with
highly desirable features or capabilities, although expensive, are valuable because
of their ability to satisfy customer demands for high quality or some other
performance dimension. BMW automobiles are valuable because the perceived
benefits of superior handling exceed the price paid. On the other hand, outputs
that cost little to produce are valuable because of their ability to satisfy customer
demands at a low price. Hyundai automobiles are valuable because they provide
 213
basic transportation at a low price. BMW and Hyundai are both profitable, but they
achieve that outcome through different value propositions.
Difficult to Imitate
Finally, competitive advantage is sustainable when unique and valuable
resources and processes are difficult to mimic or duplicate by other organizations.
Organizations have devised a number of methods for making imitation difficult. For
example, they can protect their competitive advantage by making it difficult for
other firms to identify their distinctive competence. Disclosing unimportant
information at trade shows or forgoing superior profits can make it difficult for
competitors to identify an organization’s strengths. Organizations also can
aggressively pursue a range of opportunities, thus raising the cost for competitors
who try to replicate their success. Finally, organizations can seek to retain key
human resources through attractive compensation and reward practices, thereby
making it more difficult and costly for competitors to attract such talent. The
success of a competitive strategy depends on organization responses that result in
unique, valuable, and difficult-to-imitate advantages. Transformational change
assists organizations in developing these advantages and managing strategic
change.
Change is Systemic and Revolutionary
Transformational change involves reshaping the organization’s design
elements and culture. These changes can be characterized as systemic and
revolutionary because the entire nature of the organization is altered
fundamentally. Typically driven by senior executives, change may occur rapidly so
that it does not get mired in politics, individual resistance, and other forms of
organizational inertia. This is particularly pertinent to changing the different
features of the organization, such as structure, information systems, human
resources practices, and work design. These features tend to reinforce one another,
thus making it difficult to change them in a piecemeal manner. They need to be
changed together and in a coordinated fashion so that they can mutually support
each other and the new cultural values and assumptions. Ultimately, these changes
should motivate and direct people’s behaviour in a new strategic direction. They are
considered transformational when a majority of individuals in an organization
change their behaviour. Long-term studies of organizational evolution underscore
the revolutionary nature of transformational change. They suggest that
organizations typically move through relatively long periods of smooth growth and
operation. These periods of convergence or evolution are characterized by
incremental changes. At times, however, most organizations experience severe
external or internal disruptions that render existing organizational arrangements
ineffective. Successful firms respond to these threats to survival by transforming
themselves to fit the new conditions. These periods of total system and quantum
changes represent abrupt shifts in the organization’s structure, culture, and
processes. If successful, the shifts enable the organization to experience another
long period of smooth functioning until the next disruption signals the need for
 214
drastic change. These studies of organization evolution and revolution point to the
benefits of implementing transformational change as rapidly as possible. The faster
the organization can respond to disruptions, the quicker it can attain the benefits of
operating in a new way. Rapid change enables the organization to reach a period of
smooth growth and functioning sooner, thus providing it with a competitive
advantage over those firms that change more slowly.
Change Demands a New Organizing Paradigm
Organizations undertaking transformational change are, by definition, involved
in second-order or gamma types of change. Gamma change involves discontinuous
shifts in mental or organizational frameworks. Creative metaphors, such as
“organization learning” or “continuous improvement,” are often used to help
members visualize the new paradigm. Increases in technological change, concern
for quality, and worker participation have led many organizations to shift their
organizing paradigm. Characterized as the transition from a “control-based” to a
“commitment-based” organization, the features of the new paradigm include leaner,
more flexible structures; information and decision making pushed down to the
lowest levels; decentralized teams and business units accountable for specific
products, services, or customers; and participative management and teamwork.
This new organizing paradigm is well suited to changing conditions.
Change is Driven by Senior Executives and Line Management
A key feature of transformational change is the active role of senior executives
and line managers in all phases of the change process. They are responsible for the
strategic direction and operation of the organization and actively lead the
transformation. They decide when to initiate transformational change, what the
change should be, how it should be implemented, and who should be responsible
for directing it. Because existing executives may lack the talent, energy, and
commitment to undertake these tasks, they may be replaced by outsiders who are
recruited to lead the change. Research on transformational change suggests that
externally recruited executives are three times more likely to initiate such change
than are existing executives. The critical role of executive leadership in
transformational change is clearly emerging. Lucid accounts of transformational
leaders describe how executives, such as Jack Welch at General Electric, Lou
Gerstner at IBM, and Sir Colin Marshall at British Airways, actively managed both
the organizational and personal dynamics of transformational change. The work of
Nadler, Tushman, and others points to three key roles for executive leadership of
such change.
Envisioning: Executives must articulate a clear and credible vision of the new
strategic orientation. They also must set new and difficult standards for
performance, and generate pride in past accomplishments and enthusiasm for the
new strategy.
Energizing: Executives must demonstrate personal excitement for the changes
and model the behaviours that are expected of others. Behavioural integrity,
 215
credibility, and “walking the talk” are important ingredients. They must
communicate examples of early success to mobilize energy for change.
Enabling: Executives must provide the resources necessary for undertaking
significant change and use rewards to reinforce new behaviours. Leaders also must
build an effective top-management team to manage the new organization and
develop management practices to support the change process.
Change involves Significant Learning
Transformational change requires much learning and innovation.
Organizational members must learn how to enact the new behaviours required to
implement new strategic directions. This typically involves trying new behaviours,
assessing their consequences, and modifying them if necessary. Because members
usually must learn qualitatively different ways of perceiving, thinking, and
behaving, the learning process is likely to be substantial and to involve much
unlearning. It is directed by a vision of the future organization and by the values
and norms needed to support it. Learning occurs at all levels of the organization,
from senior executives to lower-level employees. Because the environment itself is
likely to be changing during the change process, transformational change rarely
has a delimited time frame but is likely to persist as long as the firm needs to adapt
to change. Learning how to manage change continuously can help the organization
keep pace with a dynamic environment. It can provide the built-in capacity to fit the
organization continually to its environment.
19.3.2 Conclusion
In this lesson, we discussed interventions for helping organizations transform
themselves. These changes can occur at any level in the organization, but their
ultimate intent is to change the total system. They typically happen in response to
or in anticipation of significant environmental, technological, or internal changes.
19.4 REVISION POINTS
Rapid changes in technologies render many organizational practices obsolete,
pushing firms to be continually innovative and nimble. Organization transformation
implies radical changes in how members perceive, think, and behave at work.
These changes go far beyond making the existing organization better or fine-
tuning the status quo.
They are concerned with fundamentally altering the prevailing assumptions
about how the organization functions and relates to its environment.
19.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What are the major reasons for Change?
2. How change is triggered by the environment?
19.6 SUMMARY
Changing assumptions entails significant shifts in corporate values and norms
and in the structures and organizational arrangements that shape members’
 216
behaviours. Not only is the magnitude of change greater, but the change
fundamentally alters the qualitative nature of the organization.
19.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:
a) Reasons for Change,
b) Envisioning
c) Energizing
d) Enabling
19.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
19.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Change is Triggered by Environmental and Internal Disruptions. Justify with
examples.
19.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
19.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify and learn about how change is triggered by Environmental and
Internal Disruptions.
19.12 KEY WORDS
1. Reasons for Change, Envisioning, Energizing, Enabling.
H
 217
LESSON – 20

BECKHARD AND HARRIS CHANGES FORMULA

20.1 INTRODUCTION
A model in the field of Organization Development, referred to as the change
formula, it is one of the most practical, widely recognized tool developed in the last
50 years. The formula describes the conditions, that when met, will move an
individual, group, or whole system in a direction of their choosing. In this lesson,
the formula is described in detail.
20.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About Beckhard and Harris Changes Formula
 Understanding Change, Dissatisfaction with the Status Quo, Vision for
Change, Resistance to Change
20.3 CONTENT
20.3.1 Understanding Change
20.3.2 Dissatisfaction with the Status Quo
20.3.3 Vision for Change
20.3.4 Resistance to Change
20.3.5 Conclusion
20.3.2 Understanding Change
David Gleicher walked up to the blackboard to share his observations about
the behavioural problem-solving work, they were doing in organizations. He then
wrote C = (ABD) > X on the blackboard, it was nothing special, just a common
sense way of thinking about the work that the group was doing. To the group,
however, the formula became to go-to framework, especially for difficult problems
that required an incredible amount of energy to resolve.
The equation went from being called an equation to a formula and was printed as:
C = (ABD) > X,
where C = Change,
A = Level of dissatisfaction with the status quo,
B = Clear or understood desired state,
D = Practical first steps toward a desired state, and
X = “Cost” of changing
The next time the formula was published by Beckhard and Harris (1977) with
attribution to Gleicher, a useful formula for thinking about the resistance process,
appeared with slight revisions to
B and D;
where
B = Desirability of the proposed change or end state, and
D = Practicality of the change (minimal risk and disruption).
 218
In the 1980s, change was viewed as a mysterious, theoretical, and complex
subject. Kathie Dannemiller’s original intent in creating the second generation of
the formula was to demystify change and provide a guide for individuals, groups,
and whole organizations in creating their preferred futures.
The Beckhard—Harris change model describes the conditions necessary for
change to occur. The model specifies that organizations and individuals change
when, there is
Dissatisfaction (D) with the current state (of whatever the focus of change
might be), and, there is a clear and shared Vision (V) of a preferred future, and,
there is an acceptable First Steps (F) Roadmap to achieving the vision, and, the
product of D x V x F is greater than the existing Resistance to change among those
whose support is required for successful implementation. These conditions give rise
to a change formula:
DxVxF>R
This change formula also implies that all three elements on the left side,
Desires, Vision and First Steps must be present for the change to occur. If any
element is mission, the product of multiplication is zero, which will always be less
than the Resistance to change which is always present to some degree.
20.3.2 Disatisfaction with the Status QUO
All change begins with (a) dissatisfaction with the current state based on
recognition that the pain of not changing is likely to be greater than the uncertainty
of change, and, (b) a willingness to search for alternatives. The combination of these
two elements creates desire for change. Organizational leaders should never take
for granted that the rest of the enterprise will see the need for change as clearly as
they do.
20.3.3 Vision for Change
When individuals or groups desire change, but cannot identify a “way out”, the
result is anger, depression, frustration, anxiety and/or apathy. Whatever the
reaction, it is seldom positive. Mobilizing the energy generated by a desire for
change requires a Vision. At its simplest, shared vision is the answer to the
question, “what do we want to create or achieve – together?”
Although it is not particularly important where in the organization the Vision
originated, it is critical that the Vision be communicated in such a way that
organizational members are encouraged – not mandated – to share the vision.
First Steps
While Dissatisfaction without Vision often leads to despair, Vision without
Action is no more than a “castle in the air”, a great idea without a roadmap. This
too can create frustration and feelings of helplessness, feelings which often result in
apathy and/or cynicism.
When engaging organizational memberships in the process of change, they
must have the opportunity to describe their own reality, influence the shaping of a
 219
new vision for the future, and to participate in developing action-plans (First Steps)
for making the Vision a Reality.
20.3.4 Resistance to Change
In order that the product of Desire, Vision and First Steps is greater than the
Resistance to change, it is important to have a method of gauging the degree and
nature of resistance. Organizations do not resist change – people do. And although
they resist change for highly personal reasons, there are some general principles.
People resist change when they,
 Believe they will lose something of value in the change (status, belonging,
competence)
 Lack trust in-those prompting or driving the change
 Feel they will not be able to adapt to the change and will not have a place in the
organization;
 Believe the change is not in the best interests of the organisation;
 Believe they have been provided insufficient time to understand and commit to
the change.
 “It’s not that people resist change; It’s just that they resist “being changed”.
By far the most effective method of dealing with resistance to engage
stakeholders in shaping the elements on the left side of the change equation. By
involving stakeholders in assessing the need for change (Dissatisfaction) creating a
Vision of a preferred future, and determining First Steps toward achieving the
vision, the system not only becomes richer in wisdom and passion, but many real
or potential concerns about the change will be addressed.
DVF at Two Levels
The preceding discussion suggests that in every organizational change
situation, stakeholders must experience Dissatisfaction, Vision and First steps at
two distinct yet related levels:
 At the level of whole change initiative; and
 At the level of the personal impact of the change.
 The parallel change “streams” are illustrated below:
Acceptance of the need for Understanding and Understanding and
organizational change acceptance of where the acceptance of the plan for
organization is headed achieving the vision
Dissatisfaction Vision First Steps
Understanding and
Understanding and acceptance of specific steps
Acceptance of the need for acceptance of their new role s/he must take to adopt new
personal change in behaviour and/or behaviour roles and behaviours
Requirements for Personal Change
 220
Making the Formula Accessible
With a passion for usability and common sense, Dannemiller considered
the formula, first steps to take in the short term that are necessary in order to
reach the vision (F).
The product of these must be greater than the resistance to change (R)
in order to bring about real change.
D x V x F > R
Depending on the organization and current realities one or more of the
elements of the formula may have needed more attention. The goal was to create a
solid and shared understanding in a critical mass of the organization around each
factor. The multiplier effect sets the stage for two helpful conversations when
applying the formula to understanding a situation or designing a participative
intervention. Both rely on the multiplicative nature of the formula. First, if any one
element is low it leads to the product of the entire equation on the left side being
low, making it unlikely to impossible that change will occur, since most people
resist change at least to some extent. This conversation focuses on interventions
designed to increase, D, V, or F, while decrease R. Second, if any of the elements
are missing (i.e., zero), the resulting product will be zero. Therefore D x V x F = 0,
which is not greater than resistance (R). This conversation is starker and addresses
the issue of leaving out one of the elements, all together. For example a leadership
team might believe that they have created a compelling vision (V), yet left the
strategic planning session without clear first steps (F); hence, the CEOs finds that
vision in ineffective and the strategic plan is collecting dust.
20.3.5 Conclusion
Leaders and other organizational members alike have a firm grip on their own
individual assumptions, experiences, and beliefs. Good work on the Change
Formula means both being curious about what others can contribute to the
collective understanding of each element and advocating for the value. In
conclusion, it was intended to provide an accurate picture of the organizational
change model known as the change equation.
20.4 REVISION POINTS
David Gleicher walked up to the blackboard to share his observations about
the behavioural problem-solving work, they were doing in organizations. He then
wrote C = (ABD) > X on the blackboard, it was nothing special, just a common
sense way of thinking about the work that the group was doing.
The next time the formula was published by Beckhard and Harris (1977) with
attribution to Gleicher, a useful formula for thinking about the resistance process,
appeared with slight revisions to B and D;
where
B = Desirability of the proposed change or end state, and
D = Practicality of the change (minimal risk and disruption).
 221
The Beckhard—Harris change model describes the conditions necessary for
change to occur. The model specifies that organizations and individuals change
when, there is Dissatisfaction (D) with the current state (of whatever the focus of
change might be), and, there is a clear and shared Vision (V) of a preferred future,
and, there is an acceptable First Steps (F) Roadmap to achieving the vision, and,
the product of D x V x F is greater than the existing Resistance to change among
those whose support is required for successful implementation.
20.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you understand about Change?
2. Write about dissatisfaction with the status quo.
3. Mention about vision for Change.
4. Why resistance is more for Change?
20.6 SUMMARY
The type of resistance reflected in the change formula does not represent every
single type. That exploration will be left for future writing because contemporary
researchers, especially positive organizational scholars, have identified an
important part of resistance most often called positive deviance that was outside
the scope. It is important to emphasize that for the change formula, the key
message is everyone’s truth is truth. Everyone from the CEO down to the front line
employees need to have a place within each variable DVFS or the model will not
work. For example, if the top leaders do not acknowledge bottom-up problems
publicly, it is not a true D. People tend to be in touch with their own perceptions
while understanding little, or even caring about anyone else’s.
20.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:.
a) Change Management,
b) Dissatisfaction with the Status Quo,
c) Vision for Change, Resistance to Chance,
d) Beckhard and Harris Changes Formula
21.8. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
21.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss in detail about the Beckhard and Harris Changes Formula.
21.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
 222
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
21.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Learn and apply the Beckhard and Harris Change formula in an organization
you are more familiar.
21.12 KEY WORDS
1. Planned Change, Dissatisfaction with status quo, vision for change and
Resistance to Change.
H
 223
UNIT - VI
Lesson – 21

IMPLEMENTATION OF CHANGE; METHODS AND TECHNIQUES OF

OVERCOMING RESISTANCE TO CHANGE
21.1. INTRODUCTION
After diagnosis reveals the causes of problems or identifies opportunities for
development, organization members begin planning and subsequently leading and
implementing the changes necessary to improve organization effectiveness and
performance. A large part of OD is concerned with interventions for improving
organizations. The previous chapter discussed the design of interventions and
introduced the major ones currently used in OD. This chapter addresses the key
activities associated with successfully leading and managing organizational
changes. Change can vary in complexity from the introduction of relatively simple
processes into a small work group to transforming the strategies and design
features of the whole organization. Although change management differs across
situations, in this chapter we discuss tasks that must be performed in managing
any kind of organizational change.
21.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About Implementation of Change
 Methods and Techniques of Overcoming Resistance to Change
21.3 CONTENT
21.3.1 Overview of Change Activities
21.3.2 Motivating Change
21.3.3 Overcoming Resistance to Change
21.3.4 Creating a Vision
21.3.5 Developing Political Support
21.3.6 Managing the Transition
21.3.7 Sustaining Momentum
21.3.8 Conclusion
21.3.1 Overview of Change Activities
The OD literature has directed considerable attention at leading and managing
change. Much of the material is highly prescriptive, advising managers about how to
plan and implement organizational changes. For example, one study suggested that
successful managers in continuously changing organizations (1) provide employees
with clear responsibility and priorities, including extensive communication and
freedom to improvise; (2) explore the future by experimenting with a wide variety of
low-cost probes; and (3) link current projects to the future with predictable (time-
paced rather than event-paced) intervals and choreographed transition procedures.
Traditionally, change management has focused on identifying sources of resistance to
change and offering ways to overcome them. Other contributions have challenged the
 224
focus on resistance and have been aimed at creating visions and desired futures,
gaining political support for them, and managing the transition of the organization
toward them. Still others have described the learning practices and leader behaviours
that accelerate complex change.
The diversity of practical advice for managing change can be organized into five
major activities, as shown in Figure 21.1. The activities contribute to effective
change management and are listed roughly in the order in which they typically are
performed. Each activity represents a key element in change leadership. The first
activity involves motivating change and includes creating a readiness for change
among organization members and helping them address resistance to change.
Leadership must create an environment in which people accept the need for change
and commit physical and psychological energy to it.

Figure 21.1: Activities contributing to Effective Implementation of Change

 225
Motivation is a critical issue in starting change because ample evidence
indicates that people and organizations seek to preserve the status quo and are
willing to change only when there are compelling reasons to do so. The second
activity is concerned with creating a vision and is closely aligned with leadership
activities. The vision provides a purpose and reason for change and describes the
desired future state. Together, they provide the “why” and “what” of planned
change. The third activity involves developing political support for change.
Organizations are composed of powerful individuals and groups that can either
block or promote change, and leaders and change agents need to gain their support
to implement changes. The fourth activity is concerned with managing the
transition from the current state to the desired future state. It involves creating a
plan for managing the change activities as well as planning special management
structures for operating the organization during the transition. The fifth activity
involves sustaining momentum for change so that it will be carried to completion.
This includes providing resources for implementing the changes, building a support
system for change agents, developing new competencies and skills, and reinforcing
the new behaviours needed to implement the changes. Each of the activities shown
in Figure 21.1 is important for managing change. Although little research has been
conducted on their relative contributions, organizational leaders must give careful
attention to each activity when planning and implementing organizational change.
Unless individuals are motivated and committed to change, getting movement on
the desired change will be extremely difficult. In the absence of vision, change is
likely to be disorganized and diffuse. Without the support of powerful individuals
and groups, change may be blocked and possibly sabotaged. Unless the transition
process is managed carefully, the organization will have difficulty functioning while
it moves from the current state to the future state. Without efforts to sustain
momentum for change, the organization will have problems carrying the changes
through to completion. Thus, all five activities must be managed effectively to
realize success. In the following sections of this chapter, we discuss more fully each
of these change activities, directing attention to how leaders contribute to planning
and implementing organizational change.
21.3.2 Motivating Change
Organizational change involves moving from the known to the unknown.
Because the future is uncertain and may adversely affect people’s competencies,
worth, and coping abilities, organization members generally do not support change
unless compelling reasons convince them to do so. Similarly, organizations tend to
be heavily invested in the status quo, and they resist changing it in the face of
uncertain future benefits. Consequently, a key issue in planning for action is how
to motivate commitment to organizational change. As shown in Figure 21.1, this
requires attention to two related tasks: creating readiness for change and
overcoming resistance to change.
Creating Readiness for Change One of the more fundamental axioms of OD is that
people’s readiness for change depends on creating a felt need for change. This involves
 226
making people so dissatisfied with the status quo that they are motivated to try new
work processes, technologies, or ways of behaving. Creating such dissatisfaction can
be difficult, as anyone knows who has tried to lose weight, stop smoking, or change
some other habitual behaviour. Generally, people and organizations need to experience
deep levels of hurt before they will seriously undertake meaningful change. For
example, IBM, GM, and Sears experienced threats to their very survival before they
undertook significant change programs. The following three methods can help generate
sufficient dissatisfaction to produce change:
Sensitize organizations to pressures for change. Innumerable pressures for
change operate both externally and internally to organizations. Modern
organizations face unprecedented environmental pressures to change themselves,
including heavy foreign competition, rapidly changing technology, and the draw of
global markets. Internal pressures to change include new leadership, poor product
quality, high production costs, and excessive employee absenteeism and turnover.
Before these pressures can serve as triggers for change, however, organizations
must be sensitive to them. The pressures must pass beyond an organization’s
threshold of awareness if managers are to respond to them. Many organizations,
such as Kodak, Polaroid, and Northwest Airlines, set their thresholds of awareness
too high and neglected pressures for change until those pressures reached
disastrous levels. Organizations can make themselves more sensitive to pressures
for change by encouraging leaders to surround themselves with devil’s advocates;
by cultivating external networks that comprise people or organizations with
different perspectives and views; by visiting other organizations to gain exposure to
new ideas and methods; and by using external standards of performance, such as
competitors’ progress or benchmarks, rather than the organization’s own past
standards of performance. Reveal discrepancies between current and desired
states. In this approach to generating a felt need for change, information about the
organization’s current functioning is gathered and compared with desired states of
operation. These desired states may include organizational goals and standards, as
well as a general vision of a more desirable future state. Significant discrepancies
between actual and ideal states can motivate organization members to initiate
corrective changes, particularly when members are committed to achieving those
ideals. A major goal of diagnosis, is to provide members with feedback about
current organizational functioning so that the information can be compared with
goals or with desired future states. Such feedback can energize action to improve
the organization. Convey credible positive expectations for the change. Organization
members invariably have expectations about the results of organizational changes.
The positive approaches to planned change suggest that these expectations can
play an important role in generating motivation for change. Expectations can serve
as a self-fulfilling prophecy, leading members to invest energy in change programs
that they expect will succeed. When members expect success, they are likely to
develop greater commitment to the change process and to direct more energy into
the constructive behaviours needed to implement it. The key to achieving these
 227
positive effects is to communicate realistic, positive expectations about the
organizational changes. Research suggests that information about why the change
is occurring, how it will benefit the organization, and how people will be involved in
the design and implementation of the change was most helpful. Organization
members also can be taught about the benefits of positive expectations and be
encouraged to set credible positive expectations for the change program.
21.3.3 Overcoming Resistance to Change
Change can generate deep resistance in people and in organizations, thus
making it difficult, if not impossible, to implement organizational improvements. At
a personal level, change can arouse considerable anxiety about letting go of the
known and moving to an uncertain future. People may be unsure whether their
existing skills and contributions will be valued in the future, or may have
significant questions about whether they can learn to function effectively and to
achieve benefits in the new situation.
At the organization level, resistance to change can come from three sources.
Technical resistance comes from the habit of following common procedures and the
consideration of sunk costs invested in the status quo. Political resistance can arise
when organizational changes threaten powerful stakeholders, such as top executive
or staff personnel, or call into question the past decisions of leaders. Organization
change often implies a different allocation of already scarce resources, such as
capital, training budgets, and good people. Finally, cultural resistance takes the form
of systems and procedures that reinforce the status quo, promoting conformity to
existing values, norms, and assumptions about how things should operate. There are
at least three major strategies for dealing with resistance to change.
Empathy and support
A first step in overcoming resistance is learning how people are experiencing
change. This strategy can identify people who are having trouble accepting the
changes, the nature of their resistance, and possible ways to overcome it, but it
requires a great deal of empathy and support. It demands a willingness to suspend
judgment and to see the situation from another’s perspective, a process called
active listening. When people feel that those people who are responsible for
managing change are genuinely interested in their feelings and perceptions, they
are likely to be less defensive and more willing to share their concerns and fears.
This more open relationship not only provides useful information about resistance
but also helps establish the basis for the kind of joint problem solving needed to
overcome barriers to change.
Communication
People resist change when they are uncertain about its consequences. Lack of
adequate information fuels rumours and gossip and adds to the anxiety generally
associated with change. Effective communication about changes and their likely
results can reduce this speculation and allay unfounded fears. It can help members
realistically prepare for change. However, communication is also one of the most
 228
frustrating aspects of managing change. Organization members constantly receive
data about current operations and future plans as well as informal rumours about
people, changes, and politics. Managers and OD practitioners must think seriously
about how to break through this stream of information. One strategy is to make
change information more salient by communicating through a new or different
channel. If most information is delivered through memos and emails, then change
information can be delivered through meetings and presentations. Another method
that can be effective during large-scale change is to deliberately substitute change
information for normal operating information. This sends a message that changing
one’s activities is a critical part of one’s job.
Participation and involvement
One of the oldest and most effective strategies for overcoming resistance is to
involve organization members directly in planning and implementing change.
Participation can lead both to designing high- quality changes and to overcoming
resistance to implementing them. Members can provide a diversity of information
and ideas, which can contribute to making the innovations effective and
appropriate to the situation. They also can identify pitfalls and barriers to
implementation. Involvement in planning the changes increases the likelihood that
members’ interests and needs will be accounted for during the intervention.
Consequently, participants will be committed to implementing the changes because
doing so will suit their interests and meet their needs. Moreover, for people having
strong needs for involvement, the act of participation itself can be motivating,
leading to greater effort to make the changes work.
21.3.4 Creating a Vision
The second activity in leading and managing change involves creating a vision
of what members want the organization to look like or become. It is one of the most
popular yet least understood practices in management. Generally, a vision
describes the core values and purpose that guide the organization as well as an
envisioned future toward which change is directed. It provides a valued direction for
designing, implementing, and assessing organizational changes. The vision also can
energize commitment to change by providing members with a common goal and a
compelling rationale for why change is necessary and worth the effort. However, if
the vision is seen as impossible or promotes changes that the organization cannot
implement, it actually can depress member motivation. For example, George Bush’s
unfulfilled “thousand points of light” vision was emotionally appealing, but it was
too vague and contained little inherent benefit. In contrast, John Kennedy’s vision
of “putting a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth” was just
beyond engineering and technical feasibility. In the context of the 1960s, it was
bold, alluring, and vivid; it provided not only a purpose but a valued direction for
the country. Recent research suggests that corporations with carefully crafted
visions can significantly outperform the stock market over long periods of time.
Creating a vision is considered a key element in most leadership frameworks.
Organization or subunit leaders are responsible for effectiveness, and they must
 229
take an active role in describing a desired future and energizing commitment to it.
In the best cases, leaders encourage participation in developing the vision to gain
wider input and support. For example, they involve subordinates and others who
have a stake in the changes. The popular media frequently offer accounts of
executives who have helped to mobilize and direct organizational change.
Describing a desired future is no less important for people leading change in small
departments and work groups than for senior executives. At lower organizational
levels, there are ample opportunities to involve employees directly in the visioning
process. Developing a vision is heavily driven by people’s values and preferences for
what the organization should look like and how it should function. The envisioned
future represents people’s ideals, fantasies, or dreams of what they would like the
organization to look like or become. Unfortunately, dreaming about the future is
discouraged in most organizations because it requires creative and intuitive
thought processes that tend to conflict with the rational, short-term, analytical
methods prevalent there. Consequently, leaders may need to create special
conditions in which to describe a desired future, such as off-site workshops or
exercises that stimulate creative thinking. Research suggests that compelling
visions are composed of two parts: (1) a relatively stable identity or core ideology
that describes the organization’s core values and purpose, and (2) an envisioned
future with bold goals and a vivid description of the desired future state that
reflects the specific change under consideration.
Describing the Core Ideology
The fundamental basis of a vision for change is the organization’s core
ideology. It describes the organization’s core values and purpose and is relatively
stable over time. Core values typically include three to five basic principles or
beliefs that have stood the test of time and best represent what the organization
stands for. Although the vision ultimately describes a desired future, it must
acknowledge the organization’s historical roots—the intrinsically meaningful core
values and principles that have guided and will guide the organization over time.
Core values are not “espoused values”; they are the “values in use” that actually
inform members what is important in the organization. The retailer, for example,
has clear values around the importance of customer service; toymaker has distinct
values around the importance of families; and the Disney companies have explicit
values around wholesomeness and imagination. These values define the true
nature of these firms and cannot be separated from them. Thus, core values are not
determined or designed; they are discovered and described through a process of
inquiry. Members can spend considerable time and energy discovering their
organization’s core values through long discussions about organizational history,
key events, founder’s beliefs, the work people actually do, and the “glue” that holds
the organization together. In many cases, organizations want the core values to be
something they are not. For example, many firms want “teamwork” to be a core
value despite strong cultural norms and organizational practices that reward
individuality. The organization’s core purpose is its reason for being, the idealistic
 230
motivation that brings people to work each day and gives work meaning. A core
purpose is not a strategy. Purpose describes why the organization exists and the
organization’s understanding of its image, brand, and reputation; strategy describes
how an objective will be achieved. Research suggests that organization purposes
may fall into one of four categories and that organizations often create a slogan or
metaphor that captures the real reason they are in business. For example, Heroism,
refers to a purpose that expert members to do great things. Dell Computer,
Microsoft, and Ford were all founded to change the world for the better. Henry Ford
wanted to “build a machine to improve the world.” Discovery, a core purpose for
Apple, Sony, and 3M, refers to an innate desire to learn new things. A third
purpose, Altruism, infers a belief in serving others. Disney’s return to prominence
in the late 1980s and 1990s was guided by the essential purpose of “making people
happy” and Tata Corporation’s purpose of “what India needs next” has supported
their growth for over 100 years.
Identity—the way core values, purpose, brand, and reputation are integrated—
provides guidelines for the strategic choices that will work and can be implemented
versus those that will not work because they contradict the true nature of the
organization. Lawler and Worley suggested that the real power of an organization’s
identity was its ability to consistently support and encourage change even though
identity itself remained fairly stable. An envisioned future can be compelling and
emotionally powerful to members only if it aligns with and supports the
organization’s core values, purpose, and identity.
Constructing the Envisioned Future
The core ideology provides the context for the envisioned future. Unlike core
values and purpose, which are stable aspects of the organization and must be
discovered, the envisioned future is specific to the change project at hand and must
be created. The envisioned future varies in complexity and scope depending on the
changes being considered. A relatively simple upgrading of a work group’s word-
processing software requires a less complex envisioned future than the
transformation of a government bureaucracy. The envisioned future typically
includes the following two elements that can be communicated to organization
members:
Bold and valued outcomes
Descriptions of envisioned futures often include specific performance and
human outcomes that the organization or unit would like to achieve. These valued
outcomes can serve as goals for the change process and standards for assessing
progress. For example, BHAGs (Big, Hairy, Audacious Goals) are clear, tangible,
energizing targets that serve as rallying points for organization action. They can
challenge members to meet clear target levels of sales growth or customer
satisfaction, to overcome key competitors, to achieve role-model status in the
industry, or to transform the organization in some meaningful way. For example, in
1990 Wal-Mart Stores made a statement of intent “to become a $125 billion
company by the year 2000.” (Net sales in 1999 exceeded $137.6 billion.) Following
 231
the downsizing of the U.S. military budget, Rockwell proposed the following bold
outcome for its change efforts: “Transform this company from a defence contractor
into the best diversified high-technology company in the world.”
Desired future state
This element of the envisioned future specifies, in vivid detail, what the
organization should look like to achieve bold and valued outcomes. It is a
passionate and engaging statement intended to draw organization members into
the future. The organizational features described in the statement help define a
desired future state toward which change activities should move. This aspect of the
visioning process is exciting and compelling. It seeks to create a word picture that
is emotionally powerful to members and motivates them to change.
21.3.5 Developing Political Support
From a political perspective, organizations can be seen as loosely structured
coalitions of individuals and groups having different preferences and interests. For
example, shop-floor workers may want secure, high-paying jobs, and top executives
may be interested in diversifying the organization into new businesses. The
marketing department might be interested in developing new products and
markets, and the production department may want to manufacture standard
products in the most efficient ways. These different groups or coalitions compete
with one another for scarce resources and influence. They act to preserve or
enhance their self-interests while managing to arrive at a sufficient balance of
power to sustain commitment to the organization and achieve overall effectiveness.
Given this political view, attempts to change the organization often threaten the
balance of power among groups, thus resulting in political conflicts and struggles.
Individuals and groups will be concerned with how the changes affect their own
power and influence, and they will act accordingly. Some groups will become less
powerful; others will gain influence. Those whose power is threatened by the
change will act defensively and seek to preserve the status quo. For example, they
may try to present compelling evidence that change is unnecessary or that only
minor modifications are needed. On the other hand, those participants who will
gain power from the changes will push heavily for them, perhaps bringing in
seemingly impartial consultants to legitimize the need for change. Consequently,
significant organizational changes are frequently accompanied by conflicting
interests, distorted information, and political turmoil. Methods for managing the
political dynamics of organizational change are relatively recent additions to OD.
Traditionally, OD has neglected political issues mainly because its humanistic roots
promoted collaboration and power sharing among individuals and groups. Today,
change agents are paying increased attention to power and political activity,
particularly as they engage in strategic change involving most parts and features of
organizations. Some practitioners are concerned, however, about whether power
and OD are compatible. A growing number of advocates suggest that OD
practitioners can use power in positive ways. They can build their own power base
to gain access to other power holders within the organization. Without such access,
 232
those who influence or make decisions may not have the advantage of an OD
perspective. OD practitioners can use power strategies that are open and
aboveboard to get those in power to consider OD applications. They can facilitate
processes for examining the uses of power in organizations and help power holders
devise more creative and positive strategies than political bargaining, deceit, and
the like. They can help power holders confront the need for change and can help
ensure that the interests and concerns of those with less power are considered.
Although OD professionals can use power constructively in organizations, they
probably will continue to be ambivalent and tense about whether such uses
promote OD values and ethics or whether they represent the destructive, negative
side of power. That tension seems healthy, and we hope that it will guide the wise
use of power in OD. Managing the political dynamics of change includes the
following activities: assessing the change agent’s power, identifying key
stakeholders, and influencing stakeholders.
Assessing Change Agent Power
The first task is to evaluate the change agent’s own sources of power. This
agent may be the leader of the organization or department undergoing change, or
he or she may be the OD consultant if professional help is being used. By assessing
their own power base, change agents can determine how to use it to influence
others to support changes. They also can identify areas in which they need to
enhance their sources of power. Greiner and Schein, in the first OD book written
entirely from a power perspective, identified three key sources of personal power in
organizations (in addition to one’s formal position): knowledge, personality, and
others’ support. Knowledge bases of power include having expertise that is valued
by others and controlling important information. OD professionals typically gain
power through their expertise in organizational change.
Personality sources of power can derive from change agents’ charisma,
reputation, and professional credibility. Charismatic leaders can inspire devotion
and enthusiasm for change from subordinates. OD consultants with strong
reputations and professional credibility can wield considerable power during
organizational change. Others’ support can contribute to individual power by
providing access to information and resource networks. Others also may use their
power on behalf of the change agent. For example, leaders in organizational units
undergoing change can call on their informal networks for resources and support,
and encourage subordinates to exercise power in support of the change.
Identifying Key Stakeholders
Having assessed their own power bases, change agents should identify
powerful individuals and groups with an interest in the changes, such as staff
groups, unions, departmental managers, and top-level executives. These key
stakeholders can thwart or support change, and it is important to gain broad-based
support to minimize the risk that a single interest group will block the changes. As
organizations have become more global, networked, and customer focused, and
change has become more strategic, it is also important to identity key external
 233
stakeholders. Customers, regulatory agencies, suppliers, and the local community,
for example, can exert considerable influence over change. Identifying key
stakeholders can start with the simple question, “Who stands to gain or to lose
from the changes?” Once stakeholders are identified, creating a map of their
influence may be useful. The map could show relationships among the stakeholders
in terms of who influences whom and what the stakes are for each party. This
would provide change agents with information about which people and groups need
to be influenced to accept and support the changes.
Influencing Stakeholders
This activity involves gaining the support of key stakeholders to motivate a
critical mass for change. There are at least three major strategies for using power to
influence others in OD: playing it straight, using social networks, and going around
the formal system.
The strategy of playing it straight is very consistent with an OD perspective,
and thus it is the most widely used power strategy in OD. It involves determining
the needs of particular stakeholders and presenting information about how the
changes can benefit them. This relatively straightforward approach is based on the
premise that information and knowledge can persuade people about the need and
direction for change. The success of this strategy relies heavily on the change
agent’s knowledge base. He or she must have the expertise and information to
persuade stakeholders that the changes are a logical way to meet their needs. For
example, a change agent might present diagnostic data, such as company reports
on productivity and absenteeism or surveys of members’ perceptions of problems,
to generate a felt need for change among specific stakeholders. Other persuasive
evidence might include educational material and expert testimony, such as case
studies and research reports, demonstrating how organizational changes can
address pertinent issues. The second power strategy, using social networks, is more
foreign to OD and involves forming alliances and coalitions with other powerful
individuals and groups, dealing directly with key decision makers, and using formal
and informal contacts to gain information. In this strategy, change agents attempt
to use their social relationships to gain support for changes. They use the
individual power base of others’ support to gain the resources, commitment, and
political momentum needed to implement change. This social networking might
include, for example, meeting with other powerful groups and forming alliances to
support specific changes. This would likely involve ensuring that the interests of
the different parties—labour and management, for example—are considered in the
change process. Many union and management quality-of-work-life efforts involve
forming such alliances. This strategy also might include using informal contacts to
discover key roadblocks to change and to gain access to major decision makers who
need to sanction the changes. The power strategy of going around the formal
system is probably least used in OD and involves purposely circumventing
organizational structures and procedures to get the changes made. Existing
organizational arrangements can be roadblocks to change, and working around the
 234
barriers may be more expedient and effective than taking the time and energy to
remove them. This strategy relies on a strong personality base of power. The change
agent’s charisma, reputation, or professional credibility lend legitimacy to going
around the system and can reduce the likelihood of negative reprisals. For example,
managers with reputations as winners often can bend the rules to implement
organizational changes. Their judgment is trusted by those whose support they
need to enact the changes. This power strategy is relatively easy to abuse, however,
and OD practitioners should consider carefully the ethical issues and possible
unintended consequences of circumventing formal policies and practices.
21.3.6 Managing The Transition
Implementing organization change involves moving from an existing
organization state to a desired future state. Such movement does not occur
immediately but, instead requires a transition period during which the organization
learns how to implement the conditions needed to reach the desired future.
Beckhard and Harris pointed out that the transition may be quite different from the
present state of the organization and consequently may require special
management structures and activities. They identified three major activities and
structures to facilitate organizational transition: activity planning, commitment
planning, and change-management structures. A fourth set of activities involves
managing the learning process during change.
Activity Planning
Activity planning involves making a road map for change, citing specific
activities and events that must occur if the transition is to be successful. It should
clearly identify, temporally orient, and integrate discrete change tasks, and it
should explicitly link these tasks to the organization’s change goals and priorities.
Activity planning also should gain top-management approval, be cost effective, and
remain adaptable as feedback is received during the change process.
Organization Change as a Transition State
An important feature of activity planning is that visions and desired future
states can be quite general when compared with the realities of implementing
change. As a result, it may be necessary to supplement them with midpoint goals
as part of the activity plan. Such goals represent desirable organizational conditions
between the current state and the desired future state.

For example, if the organization is implementing continuous improvement

processes, an important midpoint goal can be the establishment of a certain
number of improvement teams focused on understanding and controlling key work
processes. Midpoint goals are clearer and more detailed than desired future states,
and thus they provide more concrete and manageable steps and benchmarks for
 235
change. Activity plans can use midpoint goals to provide members with the
direction and security they need to work toward the desired future.

Commitment Planning
This activity involves identifying key people and groups whose commitment is
needed for change to occur and formulating a strategy for gaining their support.
Although commitment planning is generally a part of developing political support,
discussed above, specific plans for identifying key stakeholders and obtaining their
commitment to change need to be made early in the change process.
Change-Management Structures
Because organizational transitions tend to be ambiguous and to need
direction, special structures for managing the change process need to be created.
These management structures should include people who have the power to
mobilize resources to promote change, the respect of the existing leadership and
change advocates, and the interpersonal and political skills to guide the change
process. Alternative management structures include the following:
 The chief executive or head person manages the change effort.
 A project manager temporarily is assigned to coordinate the transition.
 A steering committee of representatives from the major constituencies involved
in the change jointly manage the project.
 Natural leaders who have the confidence and trust of large numbers of affected
employees are selected to manage the transition.
 A cross section of people representing different organizational functions and
levels manages the change.
 A “kitchen cabinet” representing people whom the chief executive consults with
and confides in manages the change effort.
Learning Processes
Most organization changes involve the acquisition of new knowledge and skills
that support new behaviours. Research at the Center for Effective Organizations
suggests that change can be implemented more quickly when leaders consciously
design learning processes into the transition. Four practices, supported by a
continuous dialogue and conversation process, were associated with accelerated
transitions.
The first learning practice, creating a system view of the organization, involves
creating a model of work and change that allows individual organizational members
to see how their efforts contribute to organizational functioning and performance.
When people can see how their efforts support change, it is easier for them to pick
up new skills and knowledge; there is a context created that demands new
behaviours.
The second learning practice, creating shared meaning, describes the use of
models, language, tools, and processes that provide people with a way to making
 236
sense of the change. Most organization change is accompanied by considerable
anxiety as the organization begins moving from the known to the unknown. By
creating common ways of viewing the change, work, customers, and the new
organization, people develop a shared view of the new reality. This shared view
lowers anxiety and allows organization members to learn new skills and behaviours
more quickly.
Engaging in “after-action reviews” or other processes that reflect on experience
is the third learning practice. In this activity, initial attempts to try out new
activities, new processes, or new behaviours are assessed and reviewed.
Organization members get to ask, “how well did we do?” and “what can we learn
from that?” The answers to these questions are then used to redesign or redefine
correct behaviour and applied again. When people get timely and supportive
feedback on new behaviours, their ability to learn more quickly increases.
The final learning practice involves decentralizing implementation processes and
decisions to the lowest levels possible in the organization, what the researchers called
“local self-design.” Complex organization change contains too many variables,
uncertainties, and local contingencies to be completely programmed from the top of
the organization. By allowing organizational units in the lower organization levels to
be responsible for the implementation of change, the overall change is accelerated. It
is important in this process of local self-design to ensure that the organizational
units have a clear understanding of their boundaries. That is, senior leaders in the
organization need to be clear about what resources are available for change, the
timeline within which the change must occur, and the things that cannot be changed
in achieving the change goals. These four learning practices are held together by
conversation and dialogue. More than any other single practice, it is the opportunity
to discuss the organization change— to create shared meaning, to understand how
each individual fits into the change, to reflect on experience, and to discuss the
change at local levels—that integrates the practices and accelerates implementation.
Leading change, therefore, is largely a function of creating opportunities for
organization members to discuss change activities.
21.3.7 Sustaining Momentum
Once organizational changes are under way, explicit attention must be
directed to sustaining energy and commitment for implementing them. The initial
excitement and activity of changing often dissipate in the face of practical problems
of trying to learn new ways of operating. A strong tendency exists among
organization members to return to old behaviours and well-known processes unless
they receive sustained support and reinforcement for carrying the changes through
to completion. In this section, we present approaches for sustaining momentum for
change. also are helpful to provide a buffer as performance drops during the
transition period. Organizations can underestimate seriously the need for special
resources devoted to the change process. Significant organizational change
invariably requires considerable management time and energy, as well as the help
of consultants. A separate “change budget” that exists along with capital and
 237
operating budgets can earmark the resources needed for training members in how
to behave differently and for assessing progress and making necessary
modifications in the change program. Unless these extra resources are planned for
and provided, meaningful change is less likely to occur.
Building a Support System for Change Agents Organization change can be
difficult and filled with tension, not only for participants but for change agents as
well. They often must often give members emotional support, but they may receive
little support themselves. They often must maintain “psychological distance” from
others to gain the perspective needed to lead the change process. This separation
can produce considerable tension and isolation, and change agents may need to
create their own support system to help them cope with such problems. A support
system typically consists of a network of people with whom the change agent has
close personal relationships—people who can give emotional support, serve as a
sounding board for ideas and problems, and challenge untested assumptions. For
example, OD professionals often use trusted colleagues as “shadow consultants” to
help them think through difficult issues with clients and to offer conceptual and
emotional support.
Developing New Competencies and Skills Organizational changes frequently
demand new knowledge, skills, and behaviours from organization members. In
many cases, the changes cannot be implemented unless members gain new
competencies. For example, employee-involvement programs often require
managers to learn new leadership styles and new approaches to problem solving.
Change agents must ensure that such learning occurs. They need to provide
multiple learning opportunities, such as traditional training programs, on-the-job
counseling and coaching, and experiential simulations, covering both technical and
social skills. Because it is easy to overlook the social component, change agents
may need to devote special time and resources to helping members gain the social
skills required to implement changes. As part of McKesson’s commitment to
quality, the corporation identified specially selected high performers to become six-
sigma black belts and then promoted them accordingly to signal the importance of
these skills and knowledge in career planning. In addition, senior managers in all of
the divisions are required to attend training that builds new problem-solving skills,
team behaviours, and a commitment to the quality philosophy.
Reinforcing New Behaviors
In organizations, people generally do those things that bring them rewards.
Consequently, one of the most effective ways to sustain momentum for change is to
reinforce the kinds of behaviours needed to implement the changes. This can be
accomplished by linking formal rewards directly to the desired behaviours. For
example, Integra Financial encouraged more teamwork by designing a rewards and
recognition program in which the best team players got both financial rewards and
management attention, and a variety of behaviours aimed at promoting self-interest
were directly discouraged. In addition, desired behaviours can be reinforced more
frequently through informal recognition, encouragement, and praise. Perhaps
 238
equally important are the intrinsic rewards that people can experience through
early success in the change effort. Achieving identifiable early successes can make
participants feel good about themselves and their behaviours, and thus reinforce
the drive to change.
Staying the Course
Change requires time, and many of the expected financial and organizational
benefits from change lag behind its implementation. If the organization changes
again too quickly or abandons the change before it is fully implemented, the desired
results may never materialize. There are two primary reasons that managers do not
keep a steady focus on change implementation. First, many managers fail to
anticipate the decline in performance, productivity, or satisfaction as change is
implemented. Organization members need time to practice, develop, and learn new
behaviours; they do not abandon old ways of doing things and adopt a new set of
behaviours overnight. Moreover, change activities, such as training, extra meetings,
and consulting assistance, are extra expenses added onto current operating
expenditures. There should be little surprise, therefore, that effectiveness declines
before it gets better. However, perfectly good change projects often are abandoned
when questions are raised about short-term performance declines. Patience and trust
in the diagnosis and intervention design work are necessary. Second, many
managers do not keep focused on a change because they want to implement the next
big idea that comes along. When organizations change before they have to, in
response to the latest management fad, a “flavour-of-the-month” cynicism can
develop. As a result, organization members provide only token support to a change
under the (accurate) notion that the current change won’t last. Successful
organizational change requires persistent leadership that does not waver
unnecessarily.
21.3.8 Conclusion
We described five kinds of activities that change agents must carry out when
planning and implementing changes. The first activity is motivating change, which
involves creating a readiness for change among organization members and overcoming
their resistance. The second activity concerns creating a vision that builds on an
organization’s core ideology. It describes an envisioned future that includes a bold and
valued outcome and a vividly described desired future state. The core ideology and
envisioned future articulate a compelling reason for implementing change. The third
task for change agents is developing political support for the changes. Change agents
first must assess their own sources of power, then identify key stakeholders whose
support is needed for change and devise strategies for gaining their support. The fourth
activity concerns managing the transition of the organization from its current state to
the desired future state. This requires planning a road map for the change activities, as
well as planning how to gain commitment for the changes. It also may involve creating
special change-management structures and a set of learning processes that accelerate
the transition. The fifth change task is sustaining momentum for the changes so that
they are carried to completion. This includes providing resources for the change
 239
program, creating a support system for change agents, developing new competencies
and skills, reinforcing the new behaviours required to implement the changes, and
staying the course.
21.4 REVISION POINTS
1. Five kinds of activities that change agents must carry out when planning and
implementing changes.
2. The first activity is motivating change, which involves creating a readiness for
change among organization members and overcoming their resistance.
3. The second activity concerns creating a vision that builds on an organization’s
core ideology. It describes an envisioned future that includes a bold and
valued outcome and a vividly described desired future state. The core ideology
and envisioned future articulate a compelling reason for implementing change.
4. The third task for change agents is developing political support for the
changes. Change agents first must assess their own sources of power, then
identify key stakeholders whose support is needed for change and devise
strategies for gaining their support.
5. The fourth activity concerns managing the transition of the organization from
its current state to the desired future state. This requires planning a road map
for the change activities, as well as planning how to gain commitment for the
changes. It also may involve creating special change-management structures
and a set of learning processes that accelerate the transition.
6. The fifth change task is sustaining momentum for the changes so that they
are carried to completion.
21.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Change Activities?
2. How to overcome Resistance to Change?
3. How to create Vision?
4. What are the strategies to develop political support?
5. How to manage the Transition?
6. What do you understand by Sustaining Momentum?
21.6 SUMMARY
In this lesson, we described five kinds of activities that change agents must
carry out when planning and implementing changes. The first activity is motivating
change, which involves creating a readiness for change among organization
members and overcoming their resistance. The second activity concerns creating a
vision that builds on an organization’s core ideology. The third task for change
agents is developing political support for the changes. The fourth activity concerns
managing the transition of the organization from its current state to the desired
future state. The fifth change task is sustaining momentum for the changes so that
they are carried to completion.
21.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:.
 240
a) Change Activities
b) Overcoming Resistance to Change
c) Developing Political Support
d) Managing the Transition
e) Sustaining Momentum
21.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
21.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Elaborately discuss on various methods and techniques of overcoming
Resistance to Change.
21.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
21.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify and learn how organizations implement changes in the present
globalized scenario. Prepare a detailed report.
21.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, Change Management, Implementation of
Change, Overcoming Resistance to Change
H
 241
LESSON – 22

READINESS OF CHANGE
22.1 INTRODUCTION
The general model of planned change describes how the OD process typically
unfolds in organizations. In actual practice, the different phases are not nearly as
orderly as the model implies. OD practitioners tend to modify or adjust the stages
to fit the needs of the situation. Steps in planned change may be implemented in a
variety of ways, depending on the client’s needs and goals, the change agent’s skills
and values, and the organization’s context.
Magnitude of Change Planned change efforts can be characterized as falling
along a continuum ranging from incremental changes that involve fine-tuning the
organization to fundamental changes that entail radically altering how it operates.
Incremental changes tend to involve limited dimensions and levels of the
organization, such as the decision-making processes of work groups. They occur
within the context of the organization’s existing business strategy, structure, and
culture and are aimed at improving the status quo.
Fundamental changes, on the other hand, are directed at significantly altering
how the organization operates. They tend to involve several organizational
dimensions, including structure, culture, reward systems, information processes,
and work design. They also involve changing multiple levels of the organization, from
top-level management through departments and work groups to individual jobs.
Planned change traditionally has been applied in situations involving incremental
change. Organizations in the 1960s and 1970s were concerned mainly with fine-
tuning their bureaucratic structures by resolving many of the social problems that
emerged with increasing size and complexity. In those situations, planned change
involves a relatively bounded set of problem-solving activities. OD practitioners are
typically contracted by managers to help solve specific problems in particular
organizational systems, such as poor communication among members of a work
team or low customer satisfaction scores in a department store. Diagnostic and
change activities tend to be limited to the defined issues, although additional
problems may be uncovered and may need to be addressed. Similarly, the change
process tends to focus on those organizational systems having specific problems, and
it generally terminates when the problems are resolved. Of course, the change agent
may contract to help solve additional problems. In recent years, OD has been
increasingly concerned with fundamental change. The greater competitiveness and
uncertainty of today’s environment have led a growing number of organizations to
alter drastically the way in which they operate. In such situations, planned change is
more complex, extensive, and long term than when applied to incremental change.30
Because fundamental change involves most features and levels of the organization, it
is typically driven from the top, where corporate strategy and values are set. Change
agents help senior executives create a vision of a desired future organization and
energize movement in that direction. They also help them develop structures for
 242
managing the transition from the present to the future organization and may include,
for example, a program management office and a variety of overlapping steering
committees and redesign teams. Staff experts also may redesign many features of the
firm, such as performance measures, rewards, planning processes, work designs,
and information systems. Because of the complexity and extensiveness of
fundamental change, OD professionals often work in teams comprising members
with different yet complementary areas of expertise. The consulting relationship
persists over relatively long time periods and includes a great deal of renegotiation
and experimentation among consultants and managers. The boundaries of the
change effort are more uncertain and diffuse than those in incremental change, thus
making diagnosis and change seem more like discovery than like problem solving. It
is important to emphasize that fundamental change may or may not be
developmental in nature. Organizations may drastically alter their strategic direction
and way of operating without significantly developing their capacity to solve problems
and to achieve both high performance and quality of work life. For example, firms
may simply change their marketing mix, dropping or adding products, services, or
customers; they may drastically downsize by cutting out marginal businesses and
laying off managers and workers; or they may tighten managerial and financial
controls and attempt to squeeze more out of the labour force. On the other hand,
organizations may undertake fundamental change from a developmental perspective.
They may seek to make themselves more competitive by developing their human
resources; by getting managers and employees more involved in problem solving and
innovation; and by promoting flexibility and direct, open communication. The OD
approach to fundamental change is particularly relevant in today’s rapidly changing
and competitive environment. To succeed in this setting, firms such as General
Electric, Kimberly-Clark, ABB, Hewlett Packard, and Motorola are transforming
themselves from control-oriented bureaucracies to high-involvement organizations
capable of changing and improving themselves continually.
Degree of Organization Planned change efforts also can vary depending on the
degree to which the organization or client system is organized. In over organized
situations, such as in highly mechanistic, bureaucratic organizations, various
dimensions such as leadership styles, job designs, organization structure, and
policies and procedures are too rigid and overly defined for effective task
performance. Communication between management and employees is typically
suppressed, conflicts are avoided, and employees are apathetic. In under organized
organizations, on the other hand, there is too little constraint or regulation for
effective task performance. Leadership, structure, job design, and policy are poorly
defined and fail to direct task behaviours effectively. Communication is fragmented,
job responsibilities are ambiguous, and employees’ energies are dissipated because
they lack direction. Under organized situations are typically found in such areas as
product development, project management, and community development, where
relationships among diverse groups and participants must be coordinated around
complex, uncertain tasks. In over organized situations, where much of OD practice
 243
has historically taken place, planned change is generally aimed at loosening
constraints on behaviour. Changes in leadership, job design, structure, and other
features are designed to liberate suppressed energy, to increase the flow of relevant
information between employees and managers, and to promote effective conflict
resolution. The typical steps of planned change— entry, diagnosis, intervention,
and evaluation—are intended to penetrate a relatively closed organization or
department and make it increasingly open to self-diagnosis and revitalization. The
relationship between the OD practitioner and the management team attempts to
model this loosening process. The consultant shares leadership of the change
process with management, encourages open communications and confrontation of
conflict, and maintains flexibility in relating to the organization. When applied to
organizations facing problems in being under organized, planned change is aimed
at increasing organization by clarifying leadership roles, structuring communication
between managers and employees, and specifying job and departmental
responsibilities. These activities require a modification of the traditional phases of
planned change and include the following four steps:
Identification: This step identifies the relevant people or groups who need to
be involved in the change program. In many under organized situations, people and
departments can be so disconnected that there is ambiguity about who should be
included in the problem-solving process. For example, when managers of different
departments have only limited interaction with each other, they may disagree or be
confused about which departments should be involved in developing a new product
or service.
Convention: In this step, the relevant people or departments in the company are
brought together to begin organizing for task performance. For example, department
managers might be asked to attend a series of organizing meetings to discuss the
division of labour and the coordination required to introduce a new product.
Organization: Different organizing mechanisms are created to structure the
newly required interactions among people and departments. This might include
creating new leadership positions, establishing communication channels, and
specifying appropriate plans and policies.
Evaluation: In this final step, the outcomes of the organization step are
assessed. The evaluation might signal the need for adjustments in the organizing
process or for further identification, convention, and organization activities.
In carrying out these four steps of planned change in under organized
situations, the relationship between the OD practitioner and the client system
attempts to reinforce the organizing process. The consultant develops a well-defined
leadership role, which might be autocratic during the early stages of the change
program. Similarly, the consulting relationship is clearly defined and tightly
specified. In effect, the interaction between the consultant and the client system
supports the larger process of bringing order to the situation. Application 2.2 is an
example of planned change in an under organized situation. In this case, the
 244
change agent is a person from industry who identifies a multifaceted problem:
University research that should be helpful to manufacturing organizations is not
being shaped, coordinated, or transferred. In response, he forms an organization to
tighten up the relationships between the two parties.
22.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About Readiness of Organizational Change
 Critique of Planned Change and Traditional phases of Planned Change.
22.3 CONTENT
22.3.1 Critique of Planned Change
22.3.2 Conclusion
22.3.1 Critique of Planned Change
Despite their continued refinement, the models and practice of planned change
are still in a formative stage of development, and there is considerable room for
improvement. Critics of OD have pointed out several problems with the way
planned change has been conceptualized and practiced.
Conceptualization of Planned Change Planned change has typically been
characterized as involving a series of activities for carrying out effective organization
development. Although current models outline a general set of steps to be followed,
considerably more information is needed to guide how those steps should be
performed in specific situations. In an extensive review and critique of planned
change theory, Porras and Robertson argued that planned change activities should
be guided by information about (1) the organizational features that can be changed,
(2) the intended outcomes from making those changes, (3) the causal mechanisms
by which those outcomes are achieved, and (4) the contingencies upon which
successful change depends. In particular, they noted that the key to organizational
change is change in the behaviour of each member and that the information
available about the causal mechanisms that produce individual change is lacking.
Overall, Porras and Robertson concluded that the information necessary to guide
change is only partially available and that a good deal more research and thinking
are needed to fill the gaps. A related area where current thinking about planned
change is deficient is knowledge about how the stages of planned change differ
across situations. Most models specify a general set of steps that are intended to be
applicable to most change efforts. However, the previous section of this chapter
showed how change activities can vary depending on such factors as the magnitude
of change, the degree to which the client system is organized, and whether the
change is being conducted in a domestic or an international setting. Considerably
more effort needs to be expended identifying situational factors that may require
modifying the general stages of planned change. That would likely lead to a rich
array of planned change models, each geared to a specific set of situational
conditions. Such contingency thinking is greatly needed in planned change.
Planned change also tends to be described as a rationally controlled, orderly
 245
process. Critics have argued that although this view may be comforting, it is
seriously misleading. They point out that planned change has a more chaotic
quality, often involving shifting goals, discontinuous activities, surprising events,
and unexpected combinations of changes. For example, executives often initiate
changes without plans that clarify their strategies and goals. As change unfolds,
new stakeholders may emerge and demand modifications reflecting previously
unknown or unvoiced needs. Those emergent conditions make planned change a
far more disorderly and dynamic process than is customarily portrayed, and
conceptions need to capture that reality. Most descriptions of planned change
typically describe a beginning, middle, and end to the process. Critics have argued
that planned change models that advocate evaluation and institutionalization
processes reinforce the belief that the organization will “refreeze” into some form of
equilibrium following change. In the face of increasing globalization and
technological change, it is unlikely that change will ever “be over.” Executives,
managers, and organization members must be prepared for constant change in a
variety of organizational features that are not obvious in most models of planned
change. Finally, the relationship between planned change and organizational
performance and effectiveness is not well understood. OD traditionally has had
problems assessing whether interventions are producing observed results. The
complexity of the change situation, the lack of sophisticated analyses, and the long
time periods for producing results have contributed to weak evaluation of OD
efforts. Moreover, managers have often accounted for OD efforts with post hoc
testimonials, reports of possible future benefits, and calls to support OD as the
right thing to do. In the absence of rigorous assessment and measurement, it is
difficult to make resource allocation decisions about change programs and to know
which interventions are most effective in certain situations.
Practice of Planned Change Critics have suggested several problems with the
way planned change is carried out. Their concerns are not with the planned change
model itself but with how change takes place and with the qualifications and
activities of OD practitioners. A growing number of OD practitioners have acquired
skills in a specific technique, such as team building, total quality management, AI,
large-group interventions, or gain sharing, and have chosen to specialize in that
method. Although such specialization may be necessary, it can lead to a certain
myopia given the complex array of techniques that define OD. Some OD
practitioners favour particular techniques and ignore other strategies that might be
more appropriate, tending to interpret organizational problems as requiring the
favoured technique. Thus, for example, it is not unusual to see consultants pushing
such methods as diversity training, reengineering, organization learning, or self-
managing work teams as solutions to most organizational problems. Effective
change depends on a careful diagnosis of how the organization is functioning.
Diagnosis identifies the underlying causes of organizational problems, such as poor
product quality and employee dissatisfaction, or determines the positive
opportunities that need to be promoted. It requires both time and money, and some
 246
organizations are not willing to make the necessary investment. Rather, they rely
on preconceptions about what the problem is and hire consultants with skills
appropriate to solve that problem. Managers may think, for example, that work
design is the problem, so they hire an expert in job enrichment to implement a
change program. The problem may be caused by other factors such as poor reward
practices, however, and job enrichment would be inappropriate. Careful diagnosis
can help to avoid such mistakes. In situations requiring complex organizational
changes, planned change is a long-term process involving considerable innovation
and learning on-site. It requires a good deal of time and commitment and a
willingness to modify and refine changes as the circumstances require. Some
organizations demand more rapid solutions to their problems and seek quick fixes
from experts. Unfortunately, some OD consultants are more than willing to provide
quick solutions. They sell pre-packaged programs for organizations to adopt. Those
programs appeal to managers because they typically include an explicit recipe to be
followed, standard training materials, and clear time and cost boundaries. The
quick fixes have trouble gaining wide organizational support and commitment,
however, and seldom produce the positive results that have been advertised. Other
organizations have not recognized the systemic nature of change. Too often, they
believe that intervention into one aspect or subpart of the organization will be
sufficient to ameliorate the problems, and they are unprepared for the other
changes that may be necessary to support a particular intervention. For example,
at Verizon, the positive benefits of an employee involvement program did not begin
to appear until after the organization redesigned its reward system to support the
cross-functional collaboration necessary to solve highly complex problems.
Changing any one part or feature of an organization often requires adjustments in
the other parts to maintain an appropriate alignment. Thus, although quick fixes
and change programs that focus on only one part or aspect of the organization may
resolve some specific problems, they generally do not lead to complex organizational
change or increase members’ capacity to carry out change.
22.3.2 Conclusion
Thus, planned change can vary enormously from one situation to another. To
understand the differences better, planned change can be contrasted across
situations on three key dimensions: the magnitude of organizational change, the
degree to which the client system is organized, and whether the setting is domestic
or international.
22.4 Revision Points
Planned change theories can be integrated into a general model. Four sets of
activities—entering and contracting, diagnosing, planning and implementing, and
evaluating and institutionalizing—can be used to describe how change is
accomplished in organizations.
These four sets of activities also describe the general structure. The general
model has broad applicability to planned change. It identifies the steps an
organization typically moves through to implement change and specifies the OD
 247
activities needed to effect change. Although the planned change models describe
general stages of how the OD process unfolds, there are different types of change
depending on the situation.
The modification of the traditional phases of planned change and include the
following four steps:
Identification: This step identifies the relevant people or groups who need to
be involved in the change program. In many under organized situations, people and
departments can be so disconnected that there is ambiguity about who should be
included in the problem-solving process.
Convention: In this step, the relevant people or departments in the company are
brought together to begin organizing for task performance. For example, department
managers might be asked to attend a series of organizing meetings to discuss the
division of labour and the coordination required to introduce a new product.
Organization: Different organizing mechanisms are created to structure the
newly required interactions among people and departments. This might include
creating new leadership positions, establishing communication channels, and
specifying appropriate plans and policies.
Evaluation: In this final step, the outcomes of the organization step are
assessed. The evaluation might signal the need for adjustments in the organizing
process or for further identification, convention, and organization activities.
22.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Readiness to Change?
2. What are the traditional phases of Change?
3. What are the Critique of Planned Change?
22.6 SUMMARY
Planned change efforts can vary in terms of the magnitude of the change, the
degree to which the client system is organized, and whether the setting is domestic
or international. When situations differ on those dimensions, planned change can
vary greatly. Critics of OD have pointed out several problems with the way planned
change has been conceptualized and practiced, and specific areas where planned
change can be improved.
22.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:.
a) Different traditional phases of planned change,
b) Critique of Planned Change,
c) Readiness of Change
22.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
 248
22.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss in detail on various strategies and phases formulated on Readiness of
Change.
22.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
22.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify and learn about how organizations dealing with the resistance and
manage the transition moment. Further identify the traditional phases of
planned change at the present Business Corporations.
22.12 KEY WORDS
1. Identification, Convention, Organization, Evaluation, Readiness to Change,
Critique of Planned Change.
H
 249
LESSON – 23

CHANGE STRATEGIES AND APPROACHES

23.1 INTRODUCTION
Change Strategies extend traditional OD processes into the content oriented
discipline of strategic management. It is a deliberate, coordinated process that leads
gradually or radically to systemic realignments between the environment and a
firm’s strategic orientation, and that results in improvement in performance and
effectiveness.
23.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About Change Strategies and Stages i.e., Application Stage, Performing the
Strategic Analysis, Exercising Strategic Choice, Designing the Strategic
Change Plan and Implementing the Plan.
 Organizational Design
23.3 CONTENT
23.3.1 Change Strategies
23.3.2 Organizational Design
23.3.3 Conclusion
23.3.1 Change Strategies
The change strategic process was initially developed by Worley, Hitchin, and
Ross in response to managers’ complaints that good business strategies often are
not implemented. In the traditional process, senior managers and strategic
planning staff prepare economic forecasts, competitor analyses, and market
studies. They discuss these studies and rationally align the firm’s strengths and
weaknesses with environmental opportunities and threats to form the
organization’s strategy. Then, implementation occurs as middle managers,
supervisors, and employees hear about the new strategy through memos,
restructuring announcements, changes in job responsibilities, or new departmental
objectives. Consequently, because participation has been limited to top
management, there is little understanding of the need for change and little
ownership of the new behaviours, initiatives, and tactics required to achieve the
announced objectives. In contrast to the traditional process, was designed to be a
highly participative process. It has three key features:
1. The relevant unit of analysis is the organization’s strategic orientation
comprising its strategy and organization design. Strategy and the design that
supports it must be considered as an integrated whole.
2. Creating the strategic plan, gaining commitment and support for it, planning its
implementation, and executing it are treated as one integrated process. The
ability to repeat such a process quickly and effectively when conditions warrant
is valuable, rare, and difficult to imitate. Thus, a strategic change capability
represents a sustainable competitive advantage.
 250
3. Individuals and groups throughout the organization are integrated into the
analysis, planning, and implementation process to create a more achievable
plan, to maintain the firm’s strategic focus, to direct attention and resources on
the organization’s key competencies, to improve coordination and integration
within the organization, and to create higher levels of shared ownership and
commitment.
Application Stages
The strategic change process is applied in four phases: performing a strategic
analysis, exercising strategic choice, designing a strategic change plan, and
implementing the plan. The four steps are discussed sequentially here but actually
unfold in overlapping and integrated ways. Figure 23.1 displays the steps in the
strategic change process and its change components. An organization’s existing
strategic orientation, identified as its current strategy (S1) and organization design (O1),
is linked to its future strategic orientation (S2/O2) by the strategic change plan.

Figure 23.1. Steps in Strategic Change Process

Performing the strategic analysis: The strategic change process begins with
a diagnosis of the organization’s readiness for change and its current strategy and
organization design (S1/O1). The most important indicator of readiness is senior
management’s willingness and ability to carry out strategic change. Greiner and
Schein suggest that the two key dimensions in this analysis are the leader’s
willingness and commitment to change and the senior team’s willingness and
ability to follow the leader’s initiative.
Organizations whose leaders are not willing to lead and whose senior
managers are not willing and able to support the new strategic direction when
necessary should consider team-building processes to ensure their commitment.
The second stage in strategic analysis is understanding the current strategy and
organization design. The process begins with an examination of the organization’s
industry as well as its current financial performance and effectiveness. This
information provides the necessary context to assess the current strategic
orientation’s viability. Next, the current strategic orientation is described to explain
current levels of performance and human outcomes. Several models for guiding this
 251
diagnosis exist. For example, the organization’s current strategy, structure, and
processes can be assessed according to the model and methods. A metaphor or
other label that describes how the organization’s mission, objectives, and business
policies lead to improved performance can be used to represent strategy. 3M’s
traditional strategy of “differentiation” aptly summarizes its mission to solve
unsolved problems innovatively, its goal of having a large percentage of current
revenues come from products developed in the last five years, and its policies that
support innovation, such as encouraging engineers to spend up to 15% of their
time on new projects. An organization’s objectives, policies, and budgets signal
which parts of the environment are important, and allocate and direct resources to
particular environmental relationships. Intel’s new-product development objectives
and allocation of more than 20% of revenues to research and development signal
the importance of its linkage to the technological environment. The organization’s
design is described by the structure, work design, information system, and human
resources system. Other models for understanding the organization’s strategic
orientation include the competitive positioning model35 and other typologies. These
frameworks assist in assessing customer satisfaction; product and service offerings;
financial health; technological capabilities; and organizational culture, structure,
and systems. The strategic analysis process actively involves organization members.
Large group conferences; employee focus groups; interviews with salespeople,
customers, and purchasing agents; and other methods allow a variety of employees
and managers to participate in the diagnosis and increase the amount and
relevance of the data collected. This builds commitment to and ownership of the
analysis; should a strategic change effort result, members are more likely to
understand why and be supportive of it.
Exercising strategic choice
Once the existing strategic orientation is understood, a new one must be
designed. For example, the strategic analysis might reveal misfits among the
organization’s environment, strategic orientation, and performance. These misfits
can be used as inputs for crafting the future strategy and organization design.
Based on this analysis, senior management formulates visions for the future and
broadly defines two or three alternative sets of strategies and objectives for
achieving those visions. Market forecasts, employees’ readiness and willingness to
change, competitor analyses, and other projections can be used to develop the
alternative future scenarios. The different sets of strategies and objectives also
include projections about the organization design changes that will be necessary to
support each alternative. Although participation from other organizational
stakeholders is important in the alternative generation phase, choosing the
appropriate strategic orientation ultimately rests with top management and cannot
easily be delegated. Senior executives are in the unique position of viewing a
strategy from a general-management position. When major strategic decisions are
given to lower-level managers, the risk of focusing too narrowly on a product,
market, or technology increases. This step determines the content or “what” of
 252
strategic change. The desired strategy (S2) defines the products or services to offer,
the markets to be served, and the way these outputs will be produced and
positioned. The desired organization design (O2) specifies the organization
structures and processes necessary to support the new strategy. Aligning an
organization’s design with a particular strategy can be a major source of superior
performance and competitive advantage.
Designing the strategic change plan
The strategic change plan is a comprehensive agenda for moving the
organization from its current strategy and organization design to the desired future
strategic orientation. It represents the process or “how” of strategic change. The
change plan describes the types, magnitude, and schedule of change activities, as
well as the costs associated with them. It also specifies how the changes will be
implemented, given power and political issues; the nature of the organizational
culture; and the current ability of the organization to implement change.
Implementing the plan
The final step in the strategic change process is the actual implementation of
the strategic change plan. This draws heavily on knowledge of motivation, group
dynamics, and change processes. It deals continuously with such issues as
alignment, adaptability, teamwork, and organizational and personal learning.
Implementation requires senior managers to champion the different elements of the
change plan. They can, for example, initiate action and allocate resources to
particular activities, set high but achievable goals, and provide feedback on
accomplishments. In addition, leaders must hold people accountable to the change
objectives, institutionalize the changes that occur, and be prepared to solve
problems as they arise. This final point recognizes that no strategic change plan
can account for all of the contingencies that emerge. There must be a willingness to
adjust the plan as implementation unfolds to address unforeseen and
unpredictable events and to take advantage of new opportunities.
23.3.2 Organization Design
Organization design configures the organization’s structure, work design,
human resources practices, and management and information systems to guide
members’ behaviours in a strategic direction. This intervention typically occurs in
response to a major change in the organization’s strategy that requires
fundamentally new ways for the organization to function and members to behave. It
involves many of the organizational features discussed in previous chapters such as
restructuring organizations, work design, and performance management. Because
they all significantly affect member behaviour, organization design constructs them
to fit with each other so they all mutually reinforce the desired behaviour in the
new strategic direction. This comprehensive intervention contrasts sharply with
piecemeal approaches that address the design elements separately and thus risk
misaligning them with each other and sending mixed signals about desired
behaviours. For example, many organizations have experienced problems
 253
implementing team-based structures because their existing information and reward
systems emphasize individual-based performance.
Conceptual Framework
A key notion in organization design is “fit,” “congruence,” or “alignment”
among the organizational elements. Figure 23.2 presents a systems model showing
the different components of organization design and the interdependencies among
them. It highlights the idea that the organization is designed to support a particular
strategy (strategic fit) and that the different design elements must be aligned with
each other and all work together to guide members’ behaviour in that strategic
direction (design fit). Research shows that the better these fits, the more effective
the organization is likely to be. Most of the design components have been described
previously in this book, so they are reviewed briefly below.

Figure 23.2. Organizational Design Model

Strategy determines how the organization will use its resources to gain
competitive advantage. It may focus on introducing new products and services
(innovation strategy), controlling costs and reducing prices (cost-minimization
strategy), or some combination of both (imitation strategy). Strategy sets the
direction for organization design by identifying the criteria for making design
choices and the organizational capabilities needed to make the strategy happen.
Structure has to do with how the organization divides tasks, assigns them to
departments, and coordinates across them. It generally appears on an organization
chart showing the chain of command—where formal power and authority reside
and how departments relate to each other. Structures can be highly formal and
promote control and efficiency, such as a functional structure; or they can be
loosely defined and flexible and favour change and innovation, such as a matrix,
process, or network structure.
Work design specifies how tasks are performed and assigned to jobs or
groups. It can create traditional jobs and groups that involve standard tasks with
 254
little task variety and decision making, or enriched jobs and self-managed teams
that involve highly variable, challenging, and discretionary work.
Human resources practices involve selecting people and training, developing,
and rewarding them. These methods can be oriented to hiring and paying people for
specific jobs, training them when necessary, and rewarding their individual
performance. Conversely, human resources practices can also select people to fit
the organization’s culture, continually develop them, and pay them for learning
multiple skills and contributing to business success.
Management and information systems have to do with how employees are
led and the nature and kinds of information they are provided to guide their work.
Managers can lead through command and control, relying on hierarchical authority
and the chain of command; or they can be highly participative and facilitate
employee involvement in decision making. Information systems can be highly
centralized, with limited access and data sharing; or they can be open and
distribute copious information throughout the organization.
Table 23.1 shows how these design components can be configured into two
radically different organization designs: mechanistic, supporting efficiency and control,
and organic, promoting innovation and change. Mechanistic designs have been
prevalent in organizations for over a century; they propelled organizations into the
industrial age. Today, competitive conditions require many organizations to be more
flexible, fast, and inventive. Thus, organization design is aimed more and more at
creating organic designs, both in entirely new start-ups and in existing firms that
reconfigure mechanistic designs to make them more organic. Designing a new
organization is much easier than redesigning an existing one in which multiple sources
of inertia and resistance to change are likely embedded. As shown in Table 23.1, a
mechanistic design supports an organization strategy emphasizing cost minimization,
such as might be found at Wal-Mart and McDonalds or other firms competing on price.
The organization tends to be structured into functional departments, with employees
performing similar tasks grouped together for maximum efficiency. The managerial
hierarchy is the main source of coordination and control.
Accordingly, work design follows traditional principles, with jobs and work
groups being highly standardized with minimal decision making and skill variety.
Human resources practices are geared toward selecting people to fit specific jobs
and training them periodically when the need arises. Employees are paid on the
basis of the job they perform, share a standard set of fringe benefits, and achieve
merit raises based on their individual performance. Management practices stress
command and control, with power concentrated at the top of the organization and
orders flowing downward through the chain of command. Similarly, information
systems are highly centralized, limited in access, and do not permit sharing data
widely in the organization. When taken together, all of these design elements direct
organizational behaviour toward efficiency and cost minimization.
 255

Mechanistic Design Organic Design

Strategy Cost minimization Innovation
Formal / hierarchical Flat, lean, and flexible
Structure
Functional Matrix, process, and network
Traditional Jobs Enriched jobs
Work Design
Traditional work groups Self-managed teams
Selection to fit job Selection to fit organization
Continuous training and
Up-front training
development
Human Resources
Standard reward mix Individual choice rewards
Practices
Pay for performance and individual Pay for performance and
merit business success
Job-based pay Skill-based pay
Management and Command and Control Employee Involvement
Information Closed, exclusive centralized Open, inclusive, distributed
System information information
Table 23.1: Strategic Organization Designs
Table 23.1 shows that an organic design supports an organization strategy
aimed at innovation, such as might be found at 3M, Apple Computer, and Intel or
other firms competing on new products and services. All the design elements are
geared to getting employees directly involved in the innovation process, facilitating
interaction among them, developing and rewarding their knowledge and expertise,
and providing them with relevant and timely information. Consequently, the
organization’s structure tends to be flat, lean, and flexible like the matrix, process,
and network structures. Work design is aimed at employee motivation and decision
making with enriched jobs and self-managed teams. Human resources practices
focus on attracting, motivating, and retaining talented employees. They send a
strong signal that employees’ knowledge and expertise are key sources of
competitive advantage. Members are selected to fit an organization culture valuing
participation, teamwork, and invention. Training and development are intense and
continuous. Members are rewarded for learning multiple skills, have choice about
fringe benefits, and gain merit pay based on the business success of their work
unit. Management practices are highly participative and promote employee
involvement. Information systems are highly open and inclusive, providing relevant
and timely information throughout the organization. In sum, these design choices
guide members’ behaviours toward change and innovation.
Application Stages
Organization design can be applied to the whole organization or to a major
subpart such as a large department or stand-alone unit. It can start from a clean
slate in a new organization or reconfigure an existing organization design. To
construct the different design elements appropriately requires broad content
knowledge of them. Thus, organization design typically involves a team of OD
 256
practitioners with expertise in corporate strategy, organization structure, work
design, human resources practices, and management and information systems.
This team works closely with senior executives who are responsible for determining
the organization’s strategic direction and leading the organization design
intervention. The design process itself can be highly participative, involving
stakeholders from throughout the organization. This can increase the design’s
quality and stakeholders’ commitment to implementing it. Organization design
generally follows the three broad steps outlined in this section. Although they are
presented sequentially, in practice they are highly interactive, often feeding back on
each other and requiring continual revision as the process unfolds.
Clarifying the design focus
This preliminary stage involves assessing the organization to create the overall
framework for design. It starts with examining the organization’s strategy and
objectives and determining what organization capabilities are needed to achieve
them. These become the design criteria for making choices about how to configure
the design components. Then, the organization is assessed against these design
criteria to uncover gaps between how it currently functions and is designed and the
desired capabilities. This gap analysis identifies current problems the design
intervention should address. It provides information for determining which design
elements will receive the most attention and the likely magnitude and time frame of
the design process.
Designing the organization
This key step in organization design involves configuring the design
components to support the organization’s strategy and objectives. It starts with a
broad outline of how the organization should be structured and how the design
components should fit together to form a particular design usually falling
somewhere along the continuum from mechanistic to organic. Senior executives
responsible for the overall direction of the organization typically design this
overarching structure. Next, the design process addresses the specific details of the
components, which involves generating alternatives and making specific design
choices. A broader set of organizational members often participates in these
decisions, relying on its own as well as experts’ experience and know-how,
knowledge of best practices, and information gained from visits to other
organizations willing to share design experience. This stage results in an overall
design for the organization, detailed designs for the components, and preliminary
plans for how they will fit together and be implemented.
Implementing the design
The final step involves making the new design happen by putting into place
the new structures, practices, and systems. It draws heavily on the methods for
leading and managing change and applies them to the entire organization or
subunit, and not just limited parts. Because organization design generally involves
large amounts of transformational change, this intervention can place heavy
demands on the organization’s resources and leadership expertise. Members from
 257
throughout the organization must be motivated to implement the new design; all
relevant stakeholders must support it politically. Organization designs usually
cannot be implemented in one step but must proceed in phases that involve
considerable transition management. They often entail significant new work
behaviours and relationships that require extensive and continuous organization
learning.
23.3.3 Conclusion
Change Strategies is a comprehensive intervention for responding to complex
and uncertain environmental pressures. In addition, these factors are highly
integrated during the process of assessing the current strategy and organization
design, selecting the desired strategic orientation, developing a strategic change
plan, and implementing it. Finally, implementation involves putting the new
structures, practices, and systems into place using many of the methods for leading
and managing change.
23.4 REVISION POINTS
1. Change strategic change is a comprehensive intervention for responding to
complex and uncertain environmental pressures.
2. It gives equal weight to the strategic and organizational factors affecting
organization performance and effectiveness.
3. In addition, these factors are highly integrated during the process of assessing
the current strategy and organization design, selecting the desired strategic
orientation, developing a strategic change plan, and implementing it.
4. Organization design involves the organization’s structure, work design, human
resources practices, and management and information systems.
5. It aligns these components with the organization’s strategy and with each
other so they mutually direct behaviour to execute the strategy.
6. This results in organization designs that vary along a continuum form
mechanistic to organic depending on the requirements of the firm’s strategy.
7. Organization design typically starts with assessing the organization to clarify
the design focus. Then the design components are configured to support the
organization’s strategy.
8. Finally, implementation involves putting the new structures, practices, and
systems into place using many of the methods for leading and managing
change.
23.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. What do you mean by Change Strategies?
2. What is an Organizational Design?
23.6 SUMMARY
Research suggests that too little attention is given to the change process and
human resources issues necessary to execute strategy. The predominant paradigm
in strategic management—formulation and implementation—artificially separates
 258
strategic thinking from operational and tactical actions; it ignores the contributions
that planned change processes can make to implementation.
23.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:.
a) Change Strategies
b) Application Stage
c) Performing the Strategic Analysis
d)Exercising Strategic Choice
e) Designing the Strategic Change Plan
f) Organization Design
23.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9th Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
23.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss the various Change Strategies and Approaches in Change
Management Practice.
23.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
23.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Identify and learn about how organizations are designed according to the
different change stages.
23.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development, Change Strategies, Strategic Analysis, Strategic
Choice, Strategic Change Plan.
H
 259
LESSON – 24

CHANGE PROCESS
24.1 INTRODUCTION
The pace of global, economic, and technological development makes change an
inevitable feature of organizational life. However, change that happens to an
organization can be distinguished from change that is planned by its members. It is
generally initiated and implemented by managers, often with the help of an OD
practitioner from either inside or outside of the organization.
24.2 OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson you will understand
 About Change Process
 Kurt Lewin’s Change Model (Unfreezing, Moving, Refreezing)
 Model for Planned Change
24.3 CONTENT
24.3.1 Lewin’s Change Model
24.3.2 Model for Planned Change
24.3.3 Conclusion
24.3.1 Lewin’s Change Model
One of the earliest models of planned change was provided by Kurt Lewin. He
conceived of change as modification of those forces keeping a system’s behaviour
stable. Specifically, a particular set of behaviours at any moment in time is the
result of two groups of forces: those striving to maintain the status quo and those
pushing for change. When both sets of forces are about equal, current behaviours
are maintained in what Lewin termed a state of “quasi-stationary equilibrium.” To
change that state, one can increase those forces pushing for change, decrease those
forces maintaining the current state, or apply some combination of both. For
example, the level of performance of a work group might be stable because group
norms maintaining that level are equivalent to the supervisor’s pressures for
change to higher levels. This level can be increased either by changing the group
norms to support higher levels of performance or by increasing supervisor
pressures to produce at higher levels. Lewin suggested that decreasing those forces
maintaining the status quo produces less tension and resistance than increasing
forces for change and consequently is a more effective change strategy. Lewin
viewed this change process as consisting of the following three steps.
Unfreezing: This step usually involves reducing those forces maintaining the
organization’s behaviour at its present level. Unfreezing is sometimes accomplished
through a process of “psychological disconfirmation.” By introducing information
that shows discrepancies between behaviours desired by organization members and
those behaviours currently exhibited, members can be motivated to engage in
change activities.
 260
Moving: This step shifts the behaviour of the organization, department, or
individual to a new level. It involves intervening in the system to develop new
behaviours, values, and attitudes through changes in organizational structures and
processes
Refreezing: This step stabilizes the organization at a new state of equilibrium. It
is frequently accomplished through the use of supporting mechanisms that reinforce
the new organizational state, such as organizational culture, rewards, and structures.
Lewin’s model provides a general framework for understanding organizational
change. Because the three steps of change are relatively broad, considerable effort
has gone into elaborating them.
24.3.2 Model for Planned Change
The lack of fundamental OD research has underscored the need for a
universally accepted model of planned change. Because of the lack of generic
model, change process and intervention theories are recklessly combined and
crossed levels of abstraction, levels of analysis, and narrowly defined discipline
boundaries. The purpose of this session is to present a model change that attempts
to provide a framework for integrating OD theory, research, and practice. The
Porras and Silvers model of planned change provides a useful framework for
introducing change within an organizational setting (Figure 24.1.) Specifically, it
addresses how planned interventions targeted at specific organization variables will
result in positive organizational outcomes. There are four distinct parts of this
model. First, it distinguishes two types of intervention strategies – OD and
organization transformation. Porras and Silvers feel that OT should be a separate
entity because the underlying theories and concepts are not as well defined as OD.
In comparison, human process-based and techno structural theories have gained
widespread acceptance among OD practitioners.
The second part of the model shows the relationship between change
interventions and organizational target variables. The model shows two sets of target
variables. The first is vision variables, which are the underlying organizational values,
beliefs, and principles that guide management decisions and provide the foundation for
the purpose and mission of the organization. The second type of target variables are
identified as work setting variables include policies, procedures, work rules, job
descriptions, formal reporting lines, social factors, and communication patterns. In
essence, these form the framework for organization structure.
The third part of the model focuses on the type of individual cognitive change.
Porras and Silvers conceptualize cognitive change as the alteration of a person’s
perception of some existing organizational variable or paradigm. An organizational
paradigm can be defined as a generally accepted view or belief that is based on
unexamined assumptions. Cognitive change can occur at four levels.
Alpha changes are possible when individual perceive a change in the levels of
variables (e.g., a perceived improvement in skills) within a paradigm, without
altering their configuration (e.g., job design).
 261
Beta changes are possible when individuals perceive a change in the value of
variables (e.g. A change in work standards) within an existing paradigm, without
altering their configuration.
Gamma (A) changes are possible when individuals perceive a change in the
configuration of an existing paradigm, without the addition of new variables (e.g.,
changing the central value of a product-driven paradigm from cost-containment to
total quality focus, this results in the reconfiguration of all variables within this
paradigm.
Gamma (B) changes are possible when individuals perceive a replacement of
one paradigm with another that new variables (e.g., replacing a product-driven
paradigm with a customer responsive paradigm).

Figure 24.1: Model of Planned Change

As the definitions indicate, each level of cognitive change represents change as
an occurrence on a broader scope, from individual to organizational. For example,
suppose a shipping clerk attends a training program to improve her reading skill.
An alpha change can be said to have occurred if at the end of training she perceives
that her reading skill has improved. Further, suppose that the shipping manager
attempts to improve productivity by reducing the standard for effective order
processing time from forty-eight hours to twenty-four hours. A beta change can be
said to have occurred if the shipping clerks accept this new standard legitimate.
This is so because the employee now define success as processing an order in less
than twenty-four hours, as opposed to less than forty-eight hours.
Gamma A and B changes refer to changes occurring at the organizational level.
Gamma A changes are directed at the manner in which the operation’s mission or
philosophy is accomplished, but where the core mission remains intact. For
 262
example, if a product-driven organization introduced new cost-containment
procedures, without changing its operation philosophy, a gamma A change would
have occurred. Alternatively, gamma B changes are directed at the core mission or
philosophy. For example, a gamma B changes has occurred if the organization
redefines itself from being product driven to being customer driven. Unlike a
gamma A change, a gamma B change alters existing behaviours, creates new
behaviours, and gives individual employees a totally new way of viewing their work.
There are several benefits from distinguishing between levels of cognitive
change. First, this can help the change agent to select the kind of intervention
strategy that would be appropriate to achieve the desired change. Second, this
approach provides a conceptual framework for evaluating OD interventions.
Specifically, the level of change dictates the appropriate research designs and
measurement techniques that should be used to assess it. Third, effectiveness can
be reported as a change at one or more of the four cognitive levels, making
communication of result clearer.
The fourth, and last part of the model focuses on how individual behavioural
changes can lead to two possible outcomes – improved organizational performance
and enhanced individual development. Organizational performance, in this context,
refers to improvements in efficiency, effectiveness, productivity, and profitability.
Enhanced individual development refers to the alteration of behaviours or skills, or
both, resulting in such things as improved work habits, increased commitment,
and improved performance.
24.3.3 Conclusion
Organizations can use planned change to solve problems, to learn from
experience, to reframe shared perceptions, to adapt to external environmental
changes, to improve performance, and to influence future changes. In this lesson,
we described and compared three change process models namely, Lewin’s change
model and the action research model.
24.4 REVISION POINTS
One of the earliest models of planned change was provided by Kurt Lewin. He
viewed this change process as consisting of the following three steps.
Unfreezing: This step usually involves reducing those forces maintaining the
organization’s behaviour at its present level. Unfreezing is sometimes accomplished
through a process of “psychological disconfirmation.” By introducing information
that shows discrepancies between behaviours desired by organization members and
those behaviours currently exhibited, members can be motivated to engage in
change activities.
Moving: This step shifts the behaviour of the organization, department, or
individual to a new level. It involves intervening in the system to develop new
behaviours, values, and attitudes through changes in organizational structures and
processes
 263
Refreezing: This step stabilizes the organization at a new state of equilibrium.
It is frequently accomplished through the use of supporting mechanisms that
reinforce the new organizational state, such as organizational culture, rewards, and
structures.
The lack of fundamental OD research has underscored the need for a
universally accepted model of planned change. Because of the lack of generic
model, change process and intervention theories are recklessly combined and
crossed levels of abstraction, levels of analysis, and narrowly defined discipline
boundaries.
Human process-based and techno structural theories have gained widespread
acceptance among OD practitioners.
The second part of the model shows the relationship between change
interventions and organizational target variables. The model shows two sets of
target variables. The first is vision variables, which are the underlying
organizational values, beliefs, and principles that guide management decisions and
provide the foundation for the purpose and mission of the organization. The second
type of target variables are identified as work setting variables include policies,
procedures, work rules, job descriptions, formal reporting lines, social factors, and
communication patterns.
The third part of the model focuses on the type of individual cognitive change.
Porras and Silvers conceptualize cognitive change as the alteration of a person’s
perception of some existing organizational variable or paradigm. An organizational
paradigm can be defined as a generally accepted view or belief that is based on
unexamined assumptions.
24.5 INTEXT QUESTIONS
1. Write about the Change Process?
2. Mention about Lewin’s Change model?
3. What is Unfreezing?
4. What Moving?
5. What is Refreezing?
24.6 SUMMARY
Lewin’s model provides a general framework for understanding organizational
change. Because the three steps of change are relatively broad, considerable effort
has gone into elaborating them. There are several benefits from distinguishing
between levels of cognitive change. First, this can help the change agent to select
the kind of intervention strategy that would be appropriate to achieve the desired
change. Second, this approach provides a conceptual framework for evaluating OD
interventions. Specifically, the level of change dictates the appropriate research
designs and measurement techniques that should be used to assess it. Third,
effectiveness can be reported as a change at one or more of the four cognitive levels,
making communication of result clearer. The fourth, and last part of the model
focuses on how individual behavioural changes can lead to two possible outcomes –
 264
improved organizational performance and enhanced individual development.
Organizational performance, in this context, refers to improvements in efficiency,
effectiveness, productivity, and profitability. Enhanced individual development
refers to the alteration of behaviours or skills, or both, resulting in such things as
improved work habits, increased commitment, and improved performance.
24.7 TERMINAL EXERCISE
1. Write short note on the following:.
a) Change Process
b) Unfreezing
c) Moving
d) Refreezing
e) Planned change model
24.8 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
1. Thomas G. Cummings and Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development
& Change, 9e Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008.
24.9 ASSIGNMENT
1. Discuss in detail about the Lewin’s Change Management Model.
24.10 SUGGESTED READINGS / REFERENCES
1. Journal on Organisational Development.
2. Organisational Development Journal.
3. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal.
4. Journal of Organisation Change Management.
5. French and Bell, Organizational Development, Prentice Hall, 2012.
6. Fred Luthans, Organizational Behaviour, McGraw Hill Book Co. Ltd., New
Delhi, 2006.
7. Dr. Donald. L. Anderson, OD: The process of Lead, 2013.
8. Keith Davis, Human Behaviour at Work, McGraw Hill Book Co., International
Edition, 2004.
24.11 LEARNING ACTIVITY
1. Porras and Silvers conceptualize cognitive change as the alteration of a
person’s perception of some existing organizational variable or paradigm.
Learn and understand their model on Change.
24.12 KEY WORDS
1. Organizational Development Planned Change, Change Process, Cognitive
Change, Unfreezing, Moving, Refreezing.
H

347EN210
ANNAMALAI UNIVERSITY PRESS 2017 - 2018