Organization Process Approaches:Application Stages, Microcosm Groups

<< Interpersonal and Group Process Approaches:Team Management Styles

Restructuring Organizations:Structural Design, Process-Based Structures >>

Organization Development MGMT 628

Lesson 33

Organization Process Approaches

Now we will discuss system wide process interventions change programs directed at improving such

processes as organizational problem solving, leadership, visioning, and task accomplishment between

groups--for a major subsystem or for an entire organization.

The first type of intervention, the organization confrontation meeting, is among the earliest organization

wide process approaches. It helps mobilize the problem-solving resources of a major subsystem or whole

organization by encouraging members to identify and confront pressing issues.

The second organization process approach is called inter-group relations. It consists of two interventions:

the inter-group conflict resolution meeting and microcosm groups. Both interventions are aimed at

diagnosing and addressing important organizational level processes, such as conflict, the coordination of

organizational units, and diversity. The inter-group conflict intervention is specifically oriented toward

conflict processes, whereas the microcosm group is a more generic system wide change strategy.

A third system wide process approach, the large-group intervention, has received considerable attention

recently and is one of the fastest-growing areas in OD. Large-group interventions get a "whole system into

the room" and create processes that allow a variety of stakeholders to interact simultaneously. A large-

group intervention can be used to clarify important organizational values, develop new ways of looking at

problems, articulate a new vision for the organization, solve cross-functional problems, restructure

operations, or devise an organizational strategy. It is a powerful tool for addressing organizational problems

and opportunities and for accelerating the pace of organizational change.

The final is a normative approach to OD: Blake and Mouton's Grid Organization Development. It is a

popular intervention, particularly in large organizations. Grid OD is a packaged program that organizations

can purchase and train members to use. In contrast to modern contingency approaches, the Grid proposes

one best way to manage organizations. Consequently, OD practitioners increasingly have questioned its

applicability and effectiveness in contemporary organizations.

Organization Confrontation Meeting:

The confrontation meeting is an intervention designed to mobilize the resources of the entire organization

to identify problems, set priorities and action targets, and begins working on identified problems. Originally

developed by Beckhard, the intervention can be used at any time but is particularly useful when the

organization is in stress and when there is a gap between the top and the rest of the organization (such as

when a new top manager joins the organization). General Electric's Work-Out" program is a recent

example of how the confrontation meeting has been adapted to fit today's organizations. Although the

original model involved only managerial and professional people, it has since been used successfully with

technicians, clerical personnel, and assembly workers.

Application Stages:

The organization confrontation meeting typically involves the following steps:

1. A group meeting of all those involved is scheduled and held in an appropriate place. Usually the

task is to identity problems about the work environment and the effectiveness of the organization.

2. Groups are appointed representing all departments of the organization. Thus, each group might

have one or more members from sales, purchasing, finance, operations, and quality assurance. For

obvious reasons, a subordinate should not be in the same group as his or her boss, and top

management should form its own group. Group size can vary from five to fifteen members,

depending on such factors as the size of the organization and available meeting places.

3. The point is stressed that the groups are to be open and honest and to work hard at identifying

problems they see in the organization. No one will be criticized for bringing up problems and, in

fact, the groups will be judged on their ability to do so.

4. The groups are given an hour or two to identify organization problems. Generally, an OD

practitioner goes from group to group, encouraging openness and assisting the groups with their

tasks.

5. The groups then reconvene in a central meeting place. Each group reports the problems it has

identified and sometimes offers solutions. Because each group hears the reports of all the others, a

maximum amount of information is shared.

6. Either then or later, the master list of problems is broken down into categories. This can be done

by the participants, by the person leading the session, or by the manager and his or her staff. This

process eliminates duplication and overlap and allows the problems to be separated according to

functional or other appropriate areas.

Organization Development MGMT 628

7. Following problem categorization, participants are divided into problem-solving groups whose

composition may, and usually does, differ from that of the original problem-identification groups.

For example, all operations problems may be handled by people in that subunit. Or task forces

representing appropriate cross sections of the organization may be formed.

8. Each group ranks the problems, develops a tactical action plan, and determines an appropriate

timetable for completing this phase of the process.

9. Each group then periodically reports its list of priorities and tactical plans of action to management

or to the larger group.

10. Schedules for periodic (frequently monthly) follow-up meetings are established. At these sessions,

the team leaders report either to top management, to the other team leaders, or to the group as a

whole regarding their team's progress and plans for future action. The formal establishment of

such follow-up meetings ensures both continuing action and the modification of priorities and

timetables as needed.

Inter-group Relations Interventions:

The ability to diagnose and understand inter-group relations is important for OD practitioners because (1)

groups often must work with and through other groups to accomplish their goals; (2) groups within the

organization often create problems and place demands on each other; and (3) the quality of the

relationships between groups can affect the degree of organizational effectiveness. Two OD

interventions--microcosm groups and inter-group conflict resolution--are described here. A microcosm

group uses members from several groups to help solve organization- wide problems. Inter-group issues are

explored in this context, and then solutions are implemented in the larger organization. Inter-group conflict

resolution helps two groups work out dysfunctional relationships. Together, these approaches help improve

inter-group processes and lead to organizational effectiveness.

Microcosm Groups:

A microcosm group consists of a small number of individuals who reflect the issue being addressed. For

example, a microcosm group composed of members representing a spectrum of ethnic backgrounds,

cultures, and races can be created to address diversity issues in the organization. This group, assisted by OD

practitioners, can create programs and processes targeted at specific problems. In addition to addressing

diversity problems, microcosm groups have been used to carry out organization diagnoses, solve

communications problems, integrate two cultures, smooth the transition to a new structure, and address

dysfunctional political processes.

Microcosm groups work through "parallel processes," which are the unconscious changes that take place in

individuals when two or more groups interact. After groups interact, members often find that their

characteristic patterns of roles and interactions change to reflect the roles and dynamics of the group with

whom they were relating. Put simply, groups seem to "infect" and become "infected" by the other groups.

The following example given by Alderfer helps to clarify how parallel processes work.

An organizational diagnosis team had assigned its members to each of five departments in a small

manufacturing company. Members of the team had interviewed each department head and several

department members, and had observed department meetings. The team was preparing to observe their

first meeting of department heads and was trying to anticipate the group's behavior. At first they seemed to

have no `rational" basis for predicting the top group's behavior because they "had no data" from direct

observation. They decided to role-play the group meeting they had never seen. Diagnostic team members

behaved as they thought the department heads would, and the result was uncanny. Team members found

that they easily became engaged with one another in the simulated department-head meeting; emotional

involvement occurred quickly for all participants. When the team actually was able to observe a

department-head meeting, they were amazed at how closely the simulated meeting had approximated the

actual session.

Thus, if a small and representative group can intimately understand and solve a complex organizational

problem for themselves; they are in a good position to recommended action to address the problem in the

larger system.

Application Stages

The process of using a microcosm group to address organization wide issues involves the following five

steps:

1. Identify an issue. This step involves finding a system wide problem to be addressed. This may result

from an organizational diagnosis or may be an idea generated by an organization member or task force. For

example, one microcosm group charged with improving organizational communications was started by a

division manager. He was concerned that the information provided by those reporting directly to him

Organization Development MGMT 628

differed from the data he received from informal conversations with people throughout the division.

2. Convene the group. Once an issue is identified, the microcosm group can be formed. The most

important convening principle is that group membership needs to reflect the appropriate mix of

stakeholders related to the issue. If the issue is organizational communication, then the group should

contain people from all hierarchical levels and function, including staff groups and unions, if applicable. If

the issue is integrating two corporate cultures following a merger, the microcosm group should contain

people from both organizations who understand their respective cultures. Following the initial setup, the

group itself becomes responsible for determining its membership. It will decide whether to add new

members and how to fill vacant positions.

Convening the group also draws attention to the issue and gives the group status. Members also need to be

perceived as credible representatives of the problem. This will increase the likelihood that organization

members will listen to and follow the suggestions they make.

3. Provide group training. Once the microcosm group is established, training is provided in group

problem solving and decision making. Team-building interventions also may be appropriate. Group

training focuses on establishing a group mission or charter, working relationships among members, group

decision- making norms, and definitions of the problem to be addressed.

From a group-process perspective, OD practitioners may need to observe and comment on how the group

develops. Because the group is a microcosm of the organization, it will tend, through its behavior and

attitudes, to reflect the problem in the larger organization. For example, if the group is addressing

communication problems in the organization, it is likely to have its own difficulties with communication.

Recognizing within the group the problem or issue it was formed to address is the first step toward solving

the problem in the larger system.

4. Address the issue. This step involves solving the problem and implementing solutions. OD

practitioners may help the group diagnose, design, implement, and evaluate changes. A key issue is gaining

commitment in the wider organization to implementing the group's solutions. The following factors can

facilitate such ownership. First, a communication plan should link group activities to the organization. This

may include publishing minutes from team meetings; inviting organization members, such as middle

managers, union representatives, or hourly workers, into the meetings; and making presentations to

different organizational groups. Second, group members need to be visible and accessible to management

and labor. This can ensure that the appropriate support and resources are developed for the

recommendations. Third, problem-solving processes should include an appropriate level of participation by

organization members. Different data collection methods can be used to gain member input

and to produce ownership of the problem and solutions.

5. Dissolve the group. The microcosm group can be disbanded following successful implementation of

changes. This typically involves writing a final report or holding a final meeting.

Large Group Interventions:

The third system wide process intervention is called large-group intervention. Such change programs have

been referred to variously as "search conferences," "open-space meetings," "open-systems planning," and

"future searches." They focus on issues that affect the whole organization or large segments of it, such as

developing new products or services, responding to environmental change, or introducing new technology.

The defining feature of large-group intervention is the bringing together large numbers of organization

members and other stakeholders, often more than one hundred, for a two- to four-day meeting or

conference. Here, conference attendees' work together to identify and resolve organization wide problems,

to design new approaches to structuring and managing the firm, or to propose future directions for the

organization. Large-group interventions are among the fastest-growing OD applications.

Large-group interventions can vary on several dimensions, including purpose, size, length, structure, and

number. The purpose of these change methods can range from solving particular organizational problems

to envisioning future strategic directions. Large-group interventions have been run with groups of less than

fifty to more than two thousand participants and have lasted between one and five days. Some large-group

processes are relatively planned and structured; others are more informal. Some interventions involve a

single large-group meeting; others include a succession of meetings to accomplish system wide change in a

short period of time.

Application Stages:

Conducting a large-group intervention generally involves preparing for the meeting, conducting it, and

following up on outcomes. These activities are described below.

Preparing for the Large-Group Meeting

Organization Development MGMT 628

A design team comprising OD practitioners and several organization members is formed to organize the

event. The team generally addresses three key ingredients for successful large-group meetings: a compelling

meeting theme, appropriate participants, and relevant tasks to address the theme.

1. Compelling meeting theme. Large-group interventions require a compelling reason or focal point for

change. Although "people problems" can be an important focus, more powerful reasons for large-group

efforts include managing impending mergers or reorganizations, responding to environmental threats and

opportunities, or proposing radical organizational changes. Whatever the focal point for change, senior

leaders need to make clear to others the purpose of the large-group meeting. Ambiguity about the reason

for the intervention can dissipate participants' energy and commitment to change. For example, a large-

group meeting that successfully envisioned a hospital's future organization design was viewed as a failure by

a few key managers who thought that the purpose was to cut costs from the hospital's budget. Their

subsequent lack of support stalled the change effort.

2. Appropriate participants. A fundamental goal of large-group interventions is to "get the whole system

in the room." This involves inviting as many people as possible who have a stake in the conference theme

and who are energized and committed to conceiving and initiating change. Senior managers, suppliers,

union leaders, internal and external customers, trade group representatives, government and regulatory

officials, and organization members from a variety of jobs, genders, races, and ages are potential

participants.

3. Relevant tasks to address the conference theme. As described below, these tasks typically are

assigned to several subgroups responsible for examining the theme and drawing conclusions for action.

Generally, participants rely on their own experience and expertise to address system wide Issues, rather

than drawing on resources from outside of the large-group meeting. This ensures that the meeting can be

completed within the allotted time and that members can participate fully as important sources of

information.

Conducting the Meeting:

The flow of events in a large-group meeting can vary greatly, depending on its purpose and the framework

adopted. Most large-group processes, however, fit within two primary frameworks: open-systems methods

and open-space methods.

Open-Systems Methods:

A variety of large-group approaches, such as search conferences, open-systems planning, and real-time

strategic change, have their basis in open-systems methods. These approaches help organizations assess

their environments systematically and develop strategic responses to them. They help organization

members develop a strategic mission for relating to the environment and influencing it in favorable

directions, Open-systems methods begin with a diagnosis of the existing environment and how the

organization relates to it. They proceed to develop possible future environments and action plans to bring

them about. These steps are described below.

1. Map the current environment surrounding the organization. In this step, the different domains or

parts of the environment are identified and prioritized. This involves listing all external groups directly

interacting with the organization, such as customers, suppliers, or government agencies, and ranking them

in importance. Participants then are asked to describe each domain's expectations for the organization's

behavior.

2. Assess the organization's responses to environmental expectations. This step asks participants to

describe how the organization currently addresses the environmental expectations identified in step 1

3. Identify the core mission of the organization. This step helps to identify the underlying purpose or

core mission of the organization, as derived from how it responds to external demands. Attention is

directed at discovering the mission as it is revealed in the organization's behavior, not as it is pronounced in

the organization's official statement of purpose. This is accomplished by examining the organization and

environment transactions identified in Steps 1 and 2 and then assessing the values that seem to underlie

those interactions. These values provide clues about the actual identity or mission of the organization.

4. Create a realistic future scenario of environmental expectations and organization responses. This

step asks members to project the organization and its environment into the near future, assuming no real

changes in the organization. It asks participants to address the question, "What will happen if the

organization continues to operate as it does at present?" Participant responses are combined to develop a

likely organization future under the assumption of no change.

5. Create an ideal future scenario of environmental expectations and organization responses.

Members are asked to create alternative desirable futures. This involves going back over steps 1, 2, and 3

and asking what members ideally would like to see happen in the near future in both the environment and

Organization Development MGMT 628

the organization. People are encouraged to fantasize about desired futures without

worrying about possible constraints.

6. Compare the present with the ideal future and prepare an action plan for reducing the

discrepancy. This last step identifies specific actions that will move both the environment and the

organization toward the desired future. Planning for appropriate interventions typically occurs in three

timeframes: tomorrow, six months from now, and two years from now. Participants also decide on a

follow- up schedule for sharing the flow of actions and updating the planning process.

There are a number of variations on this basic model, each of which follows a similar pattern of creating

common ground, discussing the issues, and devising an agenda for change. For example, search

conferences begin with an exercise called "appreciating the past," which asks participants to examine the

significant events, milestones, and highlights of the organization's previous thirty years (or less, in the case

of newer organizations). It demonstrates that participants share a common history, although they may

come from different organizations, departments, age groups, or hierarchical levels.

Once common ground is established, members can discuss the system wide issue or theme. To promote

widespread participation, members typically organize into subgroups of eight to ten people representing as

many stakeholder viewpoints as possible. The subgroups may address a general question (for example,

"What are the opportunities for new business in our global market?") or focus on a specific issue (For

example, "How can we improve quality and cut costs on a particular product line?"). Subgroup members

brainstorm answers to these questions, record them on flipchart paper, and share them with the larger

group. The whole group compares responses from the subgroups and identifies common themes. Other

methods, such as presentations to the large group, small-group meetings on particular aspects of the

conference theme, or spontaneous meetings of interest to the participants, are used to discuss the

conference theme and distribute information to members.

The final task of large-group meetings based on open-systems methods is creating an agenda for change.

Participants are asked to reflect on what they have learned at the meeting and to suggest changes for

themselves, their department, and the whole organization. Members from the same department often are

grouped together to discuss their proposals and decide on action plans, timetables, and accountabilities.

Action items for the total organization are referred to a steering committee that addresses organization

wide policy issues and action plans. At the conclusion of the large-group meeting, the departmental

subgroups and the steering committee report their conclusions to all participants and seek initial

commitment to change.

Open-Space Methods. The second approach to large-group interventions is distinguished by its lack of

formal structure. Open-space methods temporarily restructure or "self-organize" participants around

interests and topics associated with the conference theme. They generally follow these steps:

1. Set the conditions for self-organizing. In the first step, the OD practitioner or manager responsible

for the large-group intervention sets the stage by announcing the theme of the session and the norms that

will govern it. In addition, participants are informed that the meeting will consist of small-group discussions

convened by the participants and addressing any topic they believe critical to the theme of the conference.

Two sets of norms govern how open-space methods are applied, and although the norms may sound

ambiguous, they are critical to establishing the conditions for a successful meeting.

The first set of norms concerns the "Law of Two Feet." It encourages people to take' responsibility for

their own behavior; to go to meetings and discussions where they are learning, contributing, or in some way

remaining interested. Moving from group to group is legitimized by the roles of "butterflies" and

"bumblebees." Butterflies attract others into spontaneous conversations and, in fact, may never attend a

formal meeting. Bumblebees go from group to group and sprinkle knowledge, information, or new ideas

into different meetings.

The second set of norms is labeled the "Four Principles." The first principle is "whoever comes is the right

people." It is intended to free people to begin conversations with anyone at any time. It also signals that the

quality of a conversation is what's most important, not who's involved. The second principle, "Whatever

happens is the only thing that could have," infuses the group with responsibility, encourages participants to

be flexible, and prepares them to be surprised. "Whenever it starts is the right time" is the third principle

and is aimed at encouraging creativity and following the natural energy in the group. The final principle,

"When it is over, it is over," allows people to move on and not feel like they have to meet for a certain time

period or satisfy someone else's requirements.

2. Create the agenda. The second step in Open-Space interventions is to develop a road map for the

remainder of the conference. This is accomplished by asking participants to describe a topic related to the

conference theme that they have passion for and interest in discussing. This topic is written on a large piece

of paper, announced to the group, and then posted on the community bulletin board where meeting topics

and locations are displayed. The person announcing the topic agrees to convene the meeting at the posted

time and place. This process continues until everyone who wants to define a topic has been given the

Organization Development MGMT 628

chance to speak. The final activity in this step asks participants to sign up for as many of the sessions as

they have interest in. The open-space meeting begins with the first scheduled sessions.

3. Coordinate activity through information. During an open-space session, there are two ways to

coordinate activities. First, each morning and evening a community meeting is held to announce new topics

that have emerged for which meeting dates and times have been assigned, or to share observations and

learning. Second, as the different meetings occur, the conveners produce one-page summaries of what

happened, who attended, what subjects were discussed, and what recommendations or actions were

proposed. Typically, this is done on computer in a room dedicated for this purpose. These summaries are

posted near the community bulletin board in an area often labeled "newsroom." Participants are

encouraged to visit the newsroom and become familiar with what other groups have been discussing. The

summaries also can be printed and copied for conference participants.

Following up of Meeting Outcomes:

Follow-up efforts are vital to implementing the action plans from large-scale interventions. These efforts

involve communicating the results of the meeting to the rest of the organization, gaining wider

commitment to the changes, and structuring the change process. In those cases where all the members of

the organization were involved in the large-group meeting, implementation can proceed immediately

according to the timetable included in the action plans.

Grid Organization Development: A Normative Approach

Grid OD, a change model is one of the most widely used approaches to system-wide planned change. This

process is a systematic approach aimed at achieving corporate excellence. It is believed that managers and

organizations can only be made more effective if the basic culture of the system is changed.

Grid OD starts with a focus on individual behavior, specifically on the managerial styles of executives,

called Managerial Grid. The program moves through a series of sequential phases involving the work team,

the relationships between groups or subunits, and finally the overall culture of the organization.

According to the Managerial Grid, an individual's style can be described according to his or her concern for

production and concern for people.

A concern for production covers a range of behaviors, such as accomplishing productive tasks, developing

creative ideas, making quality policy decisions, establishing thorough and high-quality staff services, or

creating efficient workload measurements. Concern for production is not limited to things but also may

involve human accomplishment within the organization, regardless of the assigned tasks or activities.

A concern for people encompasses a variety of issues, including concern for the individual's personal

worth, good working conditions, a degree of involvement or commitment to completing the job, security, a

fair salary structure and fringe benefits, and good social and other relationships.

Managers who have a low concern for production and a high concern for people view people's feelings,

attitudes, and needs as valuable in their own right. This type of manager strives to provide subordinates

with work conditions that provide ease, security, and comfort. On the other hand managers who have a

high concern for production but a low concern for people minimize the attitudes and feelings of

subordinates and give little attention to individual creativity, conflict, and commitment. As a result, the

focus is on the work organization.

Managerial style is the most effective in overcoming the communications barrier to corporate excellence.

The basic assumptions behind this managerial style differ qualitatively and quantitatively from those

underlying the other managerial styles, which assume there is an inherent conflict between the needs of the

organization and the needs of people. By showing a high concern for both people and production,

managers allow employees to think and to influence the organization, thus promoting active support for

organizational plans. Employee participation means that better communication is critical; therefore,

necessary information is shared by all relevant parties. Moreover, better communication means self-

direction and self-control, rather than unquestioning, blind obedience. Organizational commitment arises

out of discussion, deliberation, and debate over major organizational issues.

Application Stages:

Grid Organization Development has two key objectives: to improve planning by developing a strategy for

organizational excellence based on clear logic, and to help managers gain the necessary knowledge and skills

to supervise effectively. It consists of six phases designed to analyze an entire business and to overcome the

planning and communications barriers to corporate excellence.

Phase 1: The Grid Seminar

In this one-week program, participants analyze their personal styles on the Managerial Grid and learn team

methods of problem solving. Top management attends the seminar and then leads the next level of

Organization Development MGMT 628

management through a similar experience. In addition to assessing themselves using questionnaires and

case studies, participants receive feedback on their styles from other group members.

The learning objectives for the week include:

· Learning the GRID in a way to analyze thinking.

· Increasing one's personal objectivity in appraising oneself.

· Achieving clear and candid communication.

· Learning and working effectively in a team.

· Learning to manage inter-group conflict.

· Analyzing one's corporate work culture by applying the GRID framework.

· Gaining an understanding of the phases of GRID OD.

Participants in the seminar analyze their own managerial approaches and learn alternative ways of

managing. In addition, they study methods of team action. They measure and evaluate team effectiveness in

solving problems with others. A high point of the seminar learning is reached when the participants critique

one another's styles of managerial performance. Another is when managers critique the dominant style of

their own organization's culture, its traditions, precedents, and past practices. A third is when participants

consider steps for increasing the effectiveness of the whole organization.

Phase 2: Teamwork Development:

Teamwork development begins with the organization's top manager and 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.

During this session the team deals with subjects directly relevant to their daily operations and behaviors.

Before the conclusion of the week, the team sets group and individual goals.

Phase 3: Inter-group Development:

Although an organization may have various sections or units, each with specialized tasks and different

goals, it still must work as a whole if it is to achieve organizational excellence. A fair amount of inter-group

or interdepartmental conflict is present in most organizations. Each group builds negative stereotypes of

other groups, and this conflict can escalate easily into subtle or overt power struggles that result in win-lose

situations. Improving inter-group relations involves the following steps:

· Before the sessions, each person prepares a written description of the actual working relationship,

as contrasted with the ideal relationship;

· Each group isolates itself for several days to summarize its perceptions of the actual and ideal

relationships;

· The two groups meet and limit their interaction to comparing their perceptions via a spokesperson;

and

· The two groups then work on making the relationship more productive. The action step is

completed when both groups have a clear understanding of the specific actions each group will

take and how those actions will be followed up.

Phase 4: Developing an Ideal Strategic Organization Model

The top managers in the organization now work toward achieving a model of organizational excellence,

incorporating six basic factors:

· Clear definitions of minimum and optimum organizational financial objectives;

· Clear, explicit definitions of the character and nature of organizational activities;

· Clear operational definitions of the character and scope of markets, customers, or clients;

· An organizational structure that integrates operations for synergistic results;

· Basic policies for organizational decision making; and

· Approaches to implement growth capacity and avoid stagnation or obsolescence.

Phase 5: Implementing the Ideal Strategic Model

The Grid OD program has an implementation model that can be adapted to any organization.

Organizations can be divided into identifiable segments, such as products, profit centers, or geographical

areas.

· The top management team assigns one planning team to each segment.

· Because the units cannot be completely autonomous, one corporate headquarters team and a

coordinator must be established.

Organization Development MGMT 628

Finally, the planning coordinator and the corporate headquarter team need to ensure that the

implementation plan is understood clearly.

Phase 6: Systematic Critique:

The systematic critique determines the degree of organization excellence after Phase 5 compared with

measurements taken before Phase 1. The basic instrument is a 100-question survey investigating behavior,

teamwork, inter-group relations, and corporate strategy. With instruments administered at each phase, it is

possible to observe the degree of change and gain insight into the total process of change. Because change

never ceases, discovery sets the stage for a new beginning.

Table of Contents: