WHAT IS ORGANISATION DEVELOPMENT?

We are often asked this question as to what is consulting in Organization Development.

Often asked this question because currently theres no agreement on the meaning of the
term organization development, and it is still less clear what a consultant in organization development is.
That is why I am going to explain what we mean by that. We firmly believe that only companies having an
internal structure corresponding to their goals are able to develop successfully.
That is why our main goal is to help our clients to organize their internal resources in the most efficient way
for their development.
For instance, to distribute functions and authority, to create transparent system of interaction and control, to
develop a common set of values, to unite various divisions into inefficient team for the purpose of performing
clearly defined tasks...
For us the key term is development. And development is a process, and this implies the fact that besides
analysis and advice, helping to carry out organizational changes is also a significant part of our work.
An organization is a system consisting of four interacting subsystems:
1. structure,
2. technology,
3. people
4. Task.

Structure refers to the formal interactions within the organization as evidenced in the organizational
chart or organ gram.
Task refers to the set of activities to be performed. In other words, the behavioral specification
associated with a job.
Technology relates to the level of sophistication determining the workflow and performance of jobs in
an organization. Higher technology, most often, means higher job knowledge and skills of
employees. Organizations may be classified as to their level of technology:
1. high,
2. medium,
3. Low.
People variable refers to the human input in the organization i.e., individuals (in terms of their physical
and mental skills,
personalities.) working in the organization. Organization as a system can be changed and developed to
achieve its goals in the best possible way.



The goals of an organization generally are:
1. survival,
2. stability,
3. profitability,
4. growth
5. Service to society.
From one organization to another, the goal or goals may differ depending upon at what stage of development
the organization is.
Organization can achieve its goal if it is able to respond to changes within the external and internal
environment. The external environment is inters of forces in the social, political, economic and cultural
factors. Organization development (OD) is planned approach to respond effectively to changes in its external
and internal environment.
DEFINITION:
OD may be defined as a systematic, integrated and planned approach to improve the effectiveness of
the enterprise.
It is designed to solve problems that adversely affect the operational efficiency at all levels.
It is based on scientific awareness of human behavior and organization dynamics.
Being an organization wide effort, it is directed towards more participative management and
integration of individual
goals with organization goals OD is intended to create an internal environment of openness, trust,
mutual confidence and collaboration and to help the members of the organization to interact more
effectively in the pursuit of organizational goals.
Thus, the organization is enabled to cope effectively with external force in the environment.
OBJECTIVES OF OD
Improved organizational performance as measured by profitability, market share, innovativeness etc.
Better adaptability of the organization to its environment.
Willingness of the members to face organizational problems and contribute creative solutions to these
problems
Improvement in internal behavior patterns such as interpersonal relations, intercrop relations, level of
trust and support among role members, understanding, openness and meaningful communication and
involvement in planning for organizational development.

CONCEPTS OF INTERVENTION
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 her task goals are related directly .a indirectly to
organizational improvement.
First of all, OD interventions are not the only interventions in organization change it is only a subset
of interventions. Secondly, emphasis placed on task may be re-exanimate as there are
hundred other things than task that an organization, even a work organization, is preoccupied with.
Personal development may not bean part of goal directed tasks
or instrumental to the organizations improvement. Set the organization may make provisions for it.
Thirdly, the concept of improvement is to be properly understood. In using the term improvement
conceptually a value mention of movement form bad to good, dysfunctional to functional, immature to
mature is implied.
Interventions are also needed to maintain the state of maturity if an organization has attained the maturity.
The desire of a healthy person to maintain his health may require interventions that maillot be seen, as
improvement in health. Similarly, all organization may need interventions that maintain its present level of
maturity.
Types of Intervention
1. Organizational change interventions could be divided into broad categories;
1. Interventions that are directed towards manifest change in the organization:
restructuring,
re-organizing, and introducing new systems,
Diversification and etc.
2. OD interventions that deal with processes, basic assumptions, beliefs, value, etc., which are underlying
the manifest changes and directly or indirectly influence the manifest changes.

Team Interventions
Most of us have either participated in or watched games that involve team work. Teams a group of individuals
with complementary skills who depend upon one another to
accomplish a common purpose or set of performance goals for which they hold themselves mutually
accountable.
Teamwork is work done by members, all subordinating personal prominence for the good of the team. In
effective teams, members are open and honest with one another. There is support and trust; there is a high
degree of cooperation and collaboration, decisions are reached by consensus, communication channels are
open indwell developed. And there is a strong commitment to the team goals.
Many management theorists suggest the team-based organization is the wave of the future. The self-
managed team should be one of the basic building blocks of the
organization and may well become the productivity breakthrough of the 1990s.
.





Issues in consultant-client relationships
A number if 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
Trust
The nature of the consultants expertise
Diagnosis and appropriate interventions
The depth of interventions
On being absorbed by the culture
The consultant as a model
The consultant team as a microcosm
Action research and the OD process
Client dependency and terminating the relationship
Ethical standards in OD
Implications of OD for the client there are no simple prescriptions for resolving dilemmas or problems
in these aspects of OD, but we do have some options about managing these areas.

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. There is a telephone call: 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 consultants expertise is reasonable fit for
the situation, an agreement is made to pursue the matter over a meal or through an appointment at the
executives 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 arent as thorough and
as cordial as they
Ought to be, the consultant asks for examples to get better fix on the nature of the problem and its dynamics.
Almost inevitably there are several interrelated problems. Or if the potential client says, I want to move to
self-managed teams in Plant B, the rationale and objectives forth 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 the top 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 the key people, in particular, can be a
serious Mistake.All kinds of nuances can arise in this discussion. In addition to problems of who can and who
should attend a workshop, there are matters of when and where it could be held, whether or not the
management group can be away from their offices for the desired period, whether or not 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.
Defining the client system
The question of who the client is quickly becomes an important issue in consultant-client relationships. (We
will 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 is an individual or a managements 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. Ideally, this begins to occur in the first interview.
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 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 the consultant will need to earn trust in
these and other areas and that high trust will not be immediate.
The nature of the consultants expertise
Partly because of the unfamiliarity with organization development methods, client 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, for 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 consultants
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 this 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. Moving into the expert or advocate role or as Schein says, the purchase of expertise role or the
doctor-patient model frequently stems from an overriding desire to please the client. The consultant
wishes to maintain the relationship for a verity 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. There are at least four good reasons why the OD consultant
should largely stay out of 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 defending ones 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. 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. A fourth reason has to do with expectations. If the
consultant goes very far in the direction of being an expert on substance in contrast to process, the clients
likely to expect more and more substantive recommendations, thus negating the OD consultants central
mission, which is to help with process. In the other words, the OD consultant should act in the expert role on
the process used but on the task.
Diagnosis and appropriate interventions
Another pitfall for the consultant is the temptation to apply an intervention technique, which he or she
particularly likes and which 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 wed
like
Might be more on target and more timely than launching into the role analysis technique with the bosss role
as the focus of discussion. It might be too soon; that is, there might be too much defensiveness on the part of
the boss and too much apprehension on the part of subordinates for a productive discussion to take place.
Depth of intervention
A major aspect of selecting appropriate interventions is the matter of depth of intervention. In Roger
Harrisons 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. By individuality is meant the closeness
tithe persons perceptions of self and the degree to which effects of an intervention are in the individual in
contrast to the organization. We are assuming that the closer one move son 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
that these interventions are appropriate and relevant. If they are inappropriate, they may be destructive or, at
minimum, unacceptable to the client or the client system. The consultant, then, needs to have the skills to
intervene effectively down through these progressively smaller frequently simultaneously according to
whether the issue is How well are we performing as a total organization? How well are 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 continuum of the formal system
s, and self, suggests that the consultant needs an extensive repertoire of conceptual models, intervention
techniques, and sensitivities to beagle to be helpful at various levels. The consultants awareness of his or her
own capabilities and limitations, of course, is extremely important.
On being absorbed 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. While 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 it is clear to
everyone that such bantering is in fun and means inclusion and linking participating in the
organizations pathology will neutralize the consultants effectiveness.
The dependency issue and terminating the relationship
If the consultant is in the business of enhancing the client systems 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 tends not be much of an issue, 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. 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. We think there is a satisfactory solution to this dilemma. A good case can be
made, we believe, for a gradual reduction in external consultant use as an OD effort reaches maturity. In
a large organization, one or more key consultant 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 clients good, to avoid wasting the consultants own
professional resources, and to be congruent, the consultant should confront the issue. A particularly
troublesome dilemma occurs when the use of the
Ethical standards in OD
Much of this chapter 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:
Misrepresentation of the consultants skills
An obvious area for unethical behavior would be to distort or misrepresent ones background, training, compe
tencies, 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 behavior stemming from lack of expertise is pervasive in Otto give one example
using Harrisons 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
readiness or a willingness 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. (This may be a
situation that calls for the shadow consultant, the consultant to a single individual, in this case another
consultant.)
Misuse of data
Again, the possibilities for unethical behavior 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 consultants disclosure to the
boss of who provided information about the bosss dysfunctional behavior. Another example would be
showing climate survey results from Department A to the head of Department B if this had not been
authorized. Serious distortions of the data would also be unethical. Lets imagine scenario in which the
consultant interviews the top 20 members of management and finds several department heads are angry
about the behaviors of fellow department head Z is
hostile and uncooperative with the consultant in the data gathering interview. The consultant is now angry
takes the form of overstating and overemphasizing the dysfunctional aspects of Zs unit. (In an ironic twist,
the group might turn on the consultant and defend Z. As a colleague of ours says, Never attack the worst
member of the group the group will reject you.)
Will be no recriminations, but it should be understood that the group will go ahead and tyro reach consensus
an 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 .Thus, 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.
Implications of OD for the client
An OD effort has some fundamental implications for the chief executive officer and top managers of an
organization, and we believe that these implications need to be shared and understood at the outset. We
reach the following conclusions when we ask ourselves, what is top management buying into in participating
in the supporting an OD effort? Basically, OD interventions as we have described them, are conscious effort on
the part of top management: 1. To enlarge the database for making management decisions: In particular, the
expertise, perceptions and sentiments of team members throughout the organization are more extensively
considered than heretofore.2. To expand the influence processes: The OD process tends to further a process
of mutual influences; managers and subordinates alike tend to be influential in ways they have-not
experienced previously.3. To capitalize on the strengths of the informal system and to make the formal and
the informal system more congruent: A great deal of information that has previously been suppressed within
individuals or within the informal system (e.g. appreciations, frustration, hurts, opinions
about how to do things more effectively, fears) begins to be surfaced and dealt with. Engineers spent
suppressing matters can now be rechanneled into cooperative effort.4. To become more responsive:
Management must now respond to data that have been submerged and must begin to move in the direction
of personal, team, and organizational effectiveness suggested by the data.5. To legitimatize conflict as an area
of collaborative management: Rather than win-lose, smoothing, or withdrawal modes of conflict resolution,
the mode gradually becomes one of confronting the underlying basis for the conflict and working the problem
through to a successfulresolution.6. To examine its own leadership style and ways of managing: We do not
think an Ode fort can be viable long if the top management team (the CEO plus subordinate team or top team
of an essentially autonomous unit) does not actively participate in the effort. The top team inevitably is a
powerful determinant of organizational culture. OD is not
televised game being played for viewing by top management; members of top management are the key
players. 7. To legitimatize and encourage the collaborative management of team, and organization cultures:
This is largely the essence of Odawa think that these items largely describe the underlying implications for top
management and that the OD effort. These issues have to do with establishing the initial contract, identifying
implications for top management and that thread consultant needs to be clear about them from the very
beginning and to help the top-management group be clear about them as the process unfolds
0Ds Future
How large a role OD will play in the constantly changing organizational, political, and -economic milieu of the
future will depend upon a number of interrelated conditions. Most of the conditions we see
are generally favorable to OD, but countertrends and/or uncertainties will have to be addressed. These
conditions and contingencies have to do with leadership And values; knowledge about OD; OD training; the
interdisciplinary nature of OD; diffusion of technique; integrative practice; mergers, acquisitions; and al-
alliances; rediscovering and recording history; and the search for community. Leadership
and Values For OD to flourish, top management-CEOs, boards of directors, top executives, including the
human resources executive-and OD consultants must place high value on strong individual, team, and
organizational performance coupled with people-oriented values. As OBoyle says, management can
Choose
To try to create organizations that have both profitability and humanistic/developmental objectives whether
or not the two are necessarily correlated.4 In an almost schizophrenic situation in the United States, some top
managements are highly attentive and committed to this duality of objectives, and others are concerned only
with the bottom line and/or the price of stock. As George Strauss says, some executives have a slash and
bum mentality.


COMPREHENSIVE INTERVENTIONS
OD comprehensive interventions are used to directly create change throughout an entire
organization, rather than focusing on organizational change through subgroup interventions.
One of the most popular comprehensive interventions is survey feedback. This technique basically entails
surveying employee attitudes at all levels of the company and then disseminating a report that details those
findings.
The employees then use the data in feedback sessions to create solutions to perceived problems.
A number of questionnaires developed specifically for such interventions have been developed.
This chapter will examine several systems - wide approaches organization development:
1) TQM
2) Reengineering
3) Grid-OD
4) Survey research feedback
5) Linkers system 4model.
In the simulation, you will have an opportunity to experience and practice the concepts of system wide
change approaches.
Total Quality

Management
One system wide approach to change is termed Total Quality management (TQM).
Tames dedicated to having organization members who are committed to continuous
improvement and meeting or exceeding customer expectations. During a time of downsizing and
restructuring, many American companies are finding that they must learn
to manage more effectively, and TQM involves all levels of the organization in developing practices that are
customer oriented, flexible and responsive to changing needs. Total Quality management has been the most
widely adopted system change strategy to improve productivity and competitiveness during the past five
years. This concept began with Demings work with Japanese management, and its initial focus was on
improving quality. But as it is now being applied, TQM represents a system wide change approach, which is
being used by leading companies around the world. Total
Quality management (TQM) involves all organization members in ensuring that every activity related to the
production of goods or services relates to product quality. In
essence all organization members focus performance on maintaining the quality of products offered by the
company. In TQM, all improve the quality of products. Although the TQM movement actually began in the
United States, the establishment, growth, and
development of the movement throughout the world began with the Japanese. Reengineering: A Radical
Redesign Although is too early to predict the long term results of reengineering change programs,
many companies including Boeing, Ford, Hallmark, Kodak, and PepsiCo. Have applied Reengineering tow work
process.
Reengineering
-like TQM is a system wide change approach focusing on changing the basic processes of an organization.
Reengineering (as set forth by Michael Hammer and James
Company) may be defined as the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to
achieve drastic improvements in performance. Reengineering as the name implies focuses on the design of
work activities of processes: how the task is
accomplished. It dislike designing a circuit, examining the flows or sequences of activities from input to output
in an attempt to eliminate inefficiencies, and improve productivity, Reengineering seeks to
Make all processes more efficient by combining, eliminating or restructuring tasks without regard to
traditional methods: the way things have always been done around here. The idea is toga in a large or
quantum leap in performance, improvements of100 percent or more. Like TQM, the main focus is the
customer. Companies such as AT&T and Pacific Bell have reengineered the process used to implement
telephone service to new customers. The result has-been faster, better, and easier for both employees and
customers, cutting down customer service time by one half. Reengineering does not refer to minor
modifications of current practices. Instead it means starting with a clean sheet of paper, includes radical
changes in work processes and work relationships. The main emphasis one reengineering is making the
customer happy. The first step is to identify the key business processes of a department or work team. The
next step is to identify performance measures in terms of customer satisfaction and to examine current
processes to meet these measures. The customer doesnt care about internal rewards, or turf wars, the
customer just wants the product or service done right, anon time. The third step is to reengineer the process,
organizing work around the process, not functions or departments. Work is simplified by combining
related tasks and eliminating any elements that do not directly add customer value. Finally, there designed
process is implemented and all activities undergo a continuing reevaluation. As technology, computers, and
customers change, work processes are continually reexamined. Reengineering examines each process and
evaluates the processing terms of how it usually focuses on incremental changes, while reengineering is
seeking a radical reexaminations amide at large scale increases in productivity. While some OD practitioners
have criticized reengineering as atop down, or numbers approach, this approach lends employee involvement,
empowerment, and teams, reengineering is similar to the socio technical approach to change.
High-Performance Systems (HPS)
One of the more recent developments in large-scale change is the concept of high performing systems, (HPS) a
term originated by Peter Vail. The idea is that todays organizations need continuing excellence and renewal as
a way of bringing innovation into our systems. In order to be effective, HPS leaders must see that the
excessive layers of structure within the organization are removed and create a climate, which
emphasizes participation and communication across ability to display energy and zest for the task being
Worked on, the product being built and ones fellow team members. Leading by examples a popular way for
managers to create excitement and electricity within the workplace. Displaying enthusiasm tends to greatly
impact the morale and productivity of the workface.10 a high performing system has been defined as an
excellent human system - one that performs at an unusually high level of excellence. But, as Peter Vail points
out, how we define excellence and performance depends upon our values.HPS Criteria Wail has identified a
set of eight criteria, which may be used to Examine systems: 1. they are performing excellently against
a known external standard.2. They are performing excellently against what is assumed to be their potential
level of performance.3. They are performing excellently in relation to where they were at some earlier point
intime.4. They are judged by informed observers to be doing substantially better qualifiedly than other
comparable systems.5. They are doing whatever they do with significantly less resources than it is assumed
are needed to do what they do.6. They are perceived as exemplars of the way to do whatever they do, and
thus they become a source of ideas and7. They are perceived to fulfill at a high level the ideals for the
within which they exist.8. They are the only organizations that have been able to do what they do at all
The Grid OD Program
One of the most widely used approaches to system wide planned change is Grid organization development. A
change model designed by Robert R. Blake and Jane Simonton and marketed by Scientific Methods. Inc. This
program is a systematic approach aimed at achieving corporate excellence. Blake and Mouton feel that in
order to increase the effectiveness of managers and the organization, change must take place in the Basic
culture of the system. Grid organization development starts with a focus on
individual behavior, specifically on the managerial styles of executives using what Blake and
Mouton call The Managerial Grid. The program them moves through a series of sequential phases involving
the work team, the relationships between groups or subunits,
High-Performance Systems (HPS)
One of the more recent developments in large-scale change is the concept of high performing systems, (HPS) a
term originated by Peter Vail. The idea is that todays organizations need continuing excellence and renewal as
a way of bringing innovation into our systems. In order to be effective, HPS leaders must see that the
excessive layers of structure within the organization are removed and create a climate, which
emphasizes participation and communication across ability to display energy and zest for the task being
Worked on, the product being built and ones fellow team members. Leading by examples a popular way for
managers to create excitement and electricity within the workplace. Displaying enthusiasm tends to greatly
impact the morale and productivity of the workface.10 a high performing system has been defined as an
excellent human system - one that performs at an unusually high level of excellence. But, as Peter Vail points
out, how we define excellence and performance depends upon our values.HPS Criteria Wail has identified a
set of eight criteria, which may be used to Examine systems: 1. they are performing excellently against
a known external standard.2. They are performing excellently against what is assumed to be their potential
level of performance.3. They are performing excellently in relation to where they were at some earlier point
intime.4. They are judged by informed observers to be doing substantially better qualifiedly than other
comparable systems.5. They are doing whatever they do with significantly less resources than it is assumed
are needed to do what they do.6. They are perceived as exemplars of the way to do whatever they do, and
thus they become a source of ideas and7. They are perceived to fulfill at a high level the ideals for the
within which they exist.8. They are the only organizations that have been able to do what they do at all
The Grid OD Program
One of the most widely used approaches to system wide planned change is Grid organization development. A
change model designed by Robert R. Blake and Jane Simonton and marketed by Scientific Methods. Inc. This
program is a systematic approach aimed at achieving corporate excellence. Blake and Mouton feel that in
order to increase the effectiveness of managers and the organization, change must take place in the Basic
culture of the system. Grid organization development starts with a focus on
individual behavior, specifically on the managerial styles of executives using what Blake and
Mouton call The Managerial Grid. The program them moves through a series of sequential phases involving
the work team, the relationships between groups or subunits,

Phase 2: Teamwork Development AN organization is composed of many subgroups or teams whose members
range from top management to assembly-line workers, Phase 2 is concerned with improving teamwork and
includes a boss and his or her immediate subordinates meeting together for a I-
week session. Teamwork development begins with the top manager in the organization and the employees
who report directly to him or her. These people later attend another team meeting with their
own subordinates. This continues down through the entire organization. Teamwork development is a planned
activity that begins with each team member completing various Grid instruments. The teams deal with
subjects directly relevant to their daily operations and behaviors. The team members are also getting feedback
from participants on their Grid styles in real situations. Before the conclusion of the week, the team sets group
and individual goals Phase 3: Intergroup Development
The Phase 2 teamwork development meetings have cut vertically through the organization encompassing
natural work teams, but people also relate with others along
horizontal dimensions: people interact with others in different teams, departments, divisions, and sections,
Unintended competition between departments may develop into awing-
lose contest resulting in a loss of organization effectiveness. Coordination,
cooperation, and collaboration between elements are necessary for an effective
organization, and to accomplish this intergroup development meeting are held and attended by the key
members of two segments or divisions where barriers exist. Inter group development involves group-to-group
relationships where members of interfacing teams meet for three or four days to identify those things that
would be present in an ideal relationship between their two segments. The objective is for the two segments
to agree on the elements for an ideal relationship and then develop specific actions to attain the ideal. As in
Phase 2, participants leave the meetings with actual goals and objectives plus an increased understanding of
communication with one another. Phase 4: Development of an Ideal Strategic Model The development of an
ideal strategic model provides an organization with the knowledge and skills to move from reactionary
approach to one of systematic development. This phase is concerned with the overall norms, policies,
and structure of the organizations. The responsibility for these matters is with the top manager and those
reporting to him other. During a week of study, the key people in the organization Define what the
organization would be like if it were truly excellent. It is not unusual for a moderate-sized organization to
spend six months to a year perfecting the ideal strategic model. During this time other people at various levels
have the opportunity to contribute to the model. This helps build commitment to the model needed
for implementation. Phase 5: Implementing the Ideal
Strategic Model the manner in which the ideal strategic model is implemented determines the success of Grid
OD in the organization. AN edict coming from above will probably fall on deaf ears and be doomed to failure
from the beginning. The Grid OD program has an implementation model that can be adapted to any
organization. An organization can be divided into identifiable segments such as products, profit centers, or
Geographical areas. Once the segments are identified, the top management team assigns one
planning team to each segment, one team to the corporate headquarter, and coordinator of Phase 5. The
coordinator recommends tactics of implementation to the top line executive. The task of each planning team
is to analyze all aspects of its sections operations and determine how that section would act ideally. The
design is based on the ideal strategic model determined is Phase 4 but is interpreted and implemented for
each section by the planning team. The task is aided by the skills attained during Phase 1, 2, and 3. The studies
to convert the ideal model into reality for each section may take three months to a year, and the actual
conversion may take six months to five years of even longer. Phase 6: Systematic Critique the final phase in
Grid OD is a systematic examination of progress toward change goals. The
Systematic critique
Determines the degree of organization excellence after Phase 5comparedWith measurements taken
Before
Phase 1. The basic instruments a 100-question survey investigating managerial behavior, teamwork, intercrop
relations, and corporate strategy. Through the use of instruments administered at each phase, its possible to
observe the degree of change and gain insight into the total process of change. I am gratifying for people to
seethe movement they have made toward their goals, as success may not be
readily apparent considering that the entire Grid OD program may have been
implemented over a period of five to ten years. Because change never ceases, this discovery sets the stage for
a new beginning. The Results of Grid OD Programs As with many OD intervention techniques, there is a great
deal of anecdotal evidence regarding Grid OD programs but little Empirical evidence. The results of one Grid
OD program have been reported in an
article by Blake, Mouton, and Barnes, andGreiner.15 their findings can be summarized asfollows: 1. the
analysis of data showed within a three-year period as increase in productivity of 30 percent and a decrease in
costs of 14 percent.2. Subordinates reported a 12 percent improvement in ratings of their managers style and
ability to manage.3. The study suggests that managerial and team effectiveness can be improved and that
Grid OD can make significant contributions to organization effectiveness.
SURVEY RESEARCH AND FEEDBACK
Making, superior subordinate relationship, and job satisfaction. The data generated by the questionnaire are
then used as a basis for further change efforts. Therefore, this method provides techniques for Changing work
relationships and also a means for measuring the effects of such changes
within organizations. The client system is usually involved in the data collection activities, and members of
management and other organization members are usually asked to submit questions for the survey and to
plan the data collection itself. The data
Are usually fed back to the organization through work teams, that is, the superior and those immediately
reporting to him or her in a work-related
Group. These feedback conferences then provide the client system with data about problems, leading to speci
fic action plans and programs to improve work team effectiveness. The Step in Survey Feedback the survey
feed approach as developed byte Survey Research Center usually includes the following steps:
Step 1.
The involvement of top management in preliminary planning of the survey questionnaire. Other organization
members may be involved if appropriate.
Step 2.
The survey questionnaire is administered by the outside staff to all organization members.
Step 3.
The data are summarized by the outside staff and then fed back to work teams throughout the hierarchy of
the organization, usually beginning with the top management team and flowing down to successive levels of
the organization, a so called waterfall effect. Some guidelines for providing survey results include. each
manager should receive the results from his/her own Work team. Results should be shared with the whole
work team. everyone should see the results to the organization as awhile.
Step 4.
Each manager then has a meeting of his or her own work team to
diagnose problems from the data presentation and to develop action plans and programs for improvement.
An outside consultant involved in the survey usually attends each work team meeting acting as a process
consultant or resource person. This process may be
described as a series of interlocking conferences or meetings structured in term of organizational family units-
the superior and immediate subordinates considering the survey data together. The data presented to each
group were those pertaining to their own
group or for those subunits for which members of the organizational unit were responsible. The purposes of
survey feedback include the following: 91) to develop an understanding of the problems, (2) to improve
working relationships, and (3) to identify factors and opportunities for
change or to determine areas where more research is required. In one such company-wide study of employee
and management attitudes and opinions over a period of two years, three different sets of data were fed
back: 91)information on the attitudes and perception soft 8,000 no supervisory employees toward their work,
promotions opportunities, supervision, fellow employees, and so on: (2) first-and second line supervisors
feelings about various aspects of their job and supervisory belief: and (3) information from intermediate and
top levels of management
about their supervisory philosophies, roles, policy information, problems of organizational integration, and so
on
Human Process Interventions

Coaching

Training and Development Training and Development

Process Consultation and Team Process Consultation and Teambuilding Building

Third-party Interventions (Conflict Third-party Interventions (Conflict Resolution) Resolution)

Organization Confrontation Meeting Organization Confrontation Meeting

Intergroup Relationships Intergroup Relationships

Large-group Interventions Large-group Interventions

Techno structural Interventions

Structural
Design

Downsizing

Reengineering

Employee
Involvement

Work Design Work Design

MODELS OF OD
1) Kurt Levins Unfreezing -Changing-Refreezing Model
2) Grievers Sequential Process
3) Leavitts System Model

Organization Development Theories
Change process t theory
Implement action t theory
Change process theory
According to Lewin and Schein, there are three types of


Implementation theory
It deals with

Human resource

Social-technical system

Organizational transformation
Salient issues in OD
1. The OD effort should begin at the top-level of the management and permeate organization till it reaches
the lower levels.
2. The external consultant helps in problem identification, problem solving and implementing action plan
without creating dependency needs in the client system. In other words, the external agent helps the client to
help himself so that the latter develops ability to function independently.
3. Client is either a particular target group or the total organization
4. Change may occur in individual behavior organizational behavior.
5. Identifying the needed change depends upon determining the nature and type of the problem within the
organization
6. While the earlier approaches have concentrated in individual changes, the present trend emphasizes on the
holistic approach of dealing with group or teams.
7. Evaluating effectiveness of OD programmes is as important as identifying the problem and the appropriate
intervention techniques