|
|||||
Organization
Development MGMT
628
VU
Lesson
05
The
Evolution of OD
Figure:
04
3.
Participative
Management
The
intellectual and practical advances
from the laboratory training
stem and the action
research/survey-
feedback
stem were followed closely
by the belief that a human relations
approach represented a
one-best-
way
to manage organizations. This
belief was exemplified in
research that associated
Likert's Participative
Management
(System 4) style with organizational
effectiveness. This framework characterized
organizations
as
having one of four types of
management systems:
Exploitative
authoritative systems
(System 1) exhibit an autocratic,
top-down approach to
leadership.
Employee
motivation is based on punishment and
occasional rewards. Communication is
primarily
downward,
and there is little lateral
interaction or teamwork. Decision making and
control reside
primarily
at
the top of the organization. System 1
results in mediocre
performance.
Benevolent
authoritative systems
(System 2) are similar to
System 1, except that
management is more
paternalistic.
Employees are allowed a little
more interaction, communication, and
decision making but
within
boundaries defined by
management.
Consultative
systems
(System 3) increase employee interaction,
communication, and decision
making.
Although
employees are consulted about
problems and decisions,
management still makes the
final
decisions.
Productivity is good, and employees
are moderately satisfied
with the organization.
Participative
group
systems (System 4) are
almost the opposite of System 1. Designed
around group
methods
of decision making and supervision, this
system fosters high degrees
of member involvement
and
participation.
Work groups are highly
involved in setting goals, making
decisions, improving methods,
and
appraising
results. Communication occurs both
laterally and vertically, and
decisions are linked
throughout
the
organization by overlapping group
membership. System 4 achieves
high levels of productivity,
quality,
and
member satisfaction.
Likert
applied System 4 management to
organizations using a survey-feedback
process. The
intervention
generally
started with organization members
completing the Profile of Organizational
Characteristics. The
survey
asked members for their
opinions about both the present
and ideal conditions of six
organizational
features:
leadership, motivation, communication,
decisions, goals, and
control. In the second stage, the
data
were
fed back to different work
groups within the organization. Group
members examined the
discrepancy
between
their present situation and
their ideal, generally using
System 4 as the ideal benchmark,
and
generated
action plans to move the organization toward
System 4 conditions.
Organization
Development MGMT
628
VU
Quality
of Work Life:
The
contribution of the productivity and
quality-of-work (QWL) background to OD
can be described in
two
phases. The first phase,
starting in 1950s, aimed at better integrating
technology and people. These
QWL
programs generally involved
joint participation by unions and
management in the design of work
and
resulted
in work designs giving
employees high levels of discretion,
task variety, and feedback
about results.
Perhaps
the most distinguishing characteristic of
these QWL programs was the
development of self-
managing
work groups as a new form of
work design. These groups
were composed of
multiskilled
workers
who were given the necessary autonomy
and information to design
and manage their own
task
performances.
Two
definitions of QWL emerged
during its initial development.
QWL was first defined in
terms of
people's
reaction to work, particularly individual
outcomes related to job
satisfaction and mental
health.
Using
this definition, QWL focused
primarily on the personal consequences of
the work experience
and
how
to improve work to satisfy
personal needs.
A
second definition of QWL
defined it as an approach or method.
People defined QWL in terms
of
specific
techniques and approaches
used for improving work. It
was viewed as synonymous
with methods
such
as job enrichment, self-managed teams,
and labor-management committees. This
technique
orientation
derived mainly from the growing publicity
surrounding QWL projects, such as
.....
Starting
in 1979, a second phase of
QWL activity emerged. A major
factor contributing to the
resurgence
of
QWL was growing
international competition faced by the US
in markets at home and
abroad. It became
increasingly
clear that the relatively low
cost and high quality of
foreign-made goods resulted partially
from
the
management practices used
abroad, especially in
Japan.
As
a result, QWL programs
expanded beyond their initial
focus on work design to include
other features of
the
workplace that can affect employee
productivity and satisfaction,
such as reward systems, work
flows,
management
styles, and the physical
work environment. This
expanded focus resulted in
larger-scale and
longer-term
projects than had the early
job enrichment programs and shifted
attention beyond the
individual
worker to work groups and
the larger work context. Equally
important, it added the critical
dimension
of organizational efficiency to what had been up to
that time a primary concern for the
human
dimension.
At
one point, the productivity
and QWL approach became so
popular that it was called
an ideological
movement.
This was particularly evident in the
spread of quality circles
within many
companies.
Popularized
in Japan, quality circles
are groups of employees trained in
problem-solving methods who
meet
regularly
to resolve work-environment,
productivity, and quality-control
concerns and to develop
more
efficient
ways of working.
Today,
this second phase of QWL
activity continues primarily under the
banner of "employee
involvement,"
rather than of QWL. For many
OD practitioners, the term "EL" signifies, more
than the
name
QWL, the growing emphasis on
how employees can contribute
more to running the organization
so
it
can be more flexible,
productive, and competitive. Recently,
the term "employee empowerment" has
been
used interchangeably with the term
EL, the former suggesting the power
inherent in moving
decision
making
downward in the organization. Employee empowerment may
be too restrictive, however.
Because
it
draws attention to the power aspects of
these interventions, it may
lead practitioners to neglect
other
important
elements needed for success,
such as information, skills,
and rewards. Consequently, EL
seems a
broader
and less restrictive banner
than does employee
empowerment for these
approaches to
organizational
improvement.
Finally,
the productivity and QWL
approach has gained new
momentum by joining forces with the
total
quality
movement advocated by Demming &
Juran. In this approach, the organization is
viewed as a set of
processes
that can be linked to the
quality of products and services,
modeled through statistical
techniques
and
improved continuously.
Strategic
Change:
The
strategic change stem is a
recent influence on OD's evolution. As
organizations and
their
technological,
political, and social environments
have become more complex and
more uncertain, the scale
and
intricacies of organizational change have
increased. This trend has produced the
need for a strategic
perspective
from OD and encouraged planned
change process at the organization
level.
Strategic
change involves improving the alignment
among an organization's environment,
strategy, and
organization
design. Strategic change
interventions include efforts to improve
both the organization's
relationship
to its environment and the
fit between its technical,
political, and cultural systems.
The need
for
strategic change is usually triggered by
some major disruption to the organization,
such as the lifting of
regulatory
requirements, a technological breakthrough, or a new
chief executive officer coming in
from
outside
the organization.
One
of the first applications of strategic
change was Richard
Beckhard's use of open system
planning. He
proposed
that an organization's environment and
its strategy could be described
and analyzed. Based
on
Organization
Development MGMT
628
VU
the
organization's core mission, the
differences between what the environment
demanded and how the
organization
responded could be reduced and
performance improved. Since then,
change agents have
proposed
a variety of large-scale or strategic
change models, each of which
recognizes that strategic
change
involves
multiple levels of the organization and a
change in its culture, is often
driven from the top
by
powerful
executives, and has
important effects on
performance.
The
strategic change stem has
significantly influenced OD practice. For
example, implementing strategic
change
requires OD practitioners to be familiar
with competitive strategy,
finance, and marketing, as well
as
team
building, action research, and
survey feedback. Together,
these skills have improved
OD's relevance
to
organizations and their
managers.
A
Model for Organizational
Development:
Organization
development is a continuing process of
long-term organizational improvement
consisting of a
series
of stages; the emphasis is placed on a
combination of individual, team,
and organizational
relationships.
The
primary difference between OD and other
behavioral science techniques is the
emphasis upon viewing
the
organization as a total system of interacting
and interrelated elements. Organization development is
the
application
of an organization-wide approach to the functional,
structural, technical, and
personal
relationships
in organizations. OD programs are
based upon a systematic
analysis of problems and a
top
management
actively committed to the change effort.
The purpose of such a program is to
increase
organizational
effectiveness by the application of OD
values and techniques. Many
organization
development
programs use the action research model.
Action research involves collecting
information
about
the organization, feeding this information back to the
client system, and developing
and
implementing
action programs to improve system
performance. The manager
also needs to be aware of
the
processes
that should be considered when one is
attempting to create change. This section
presents a five-
stage
model of the total organization development process.
Each stage is dependent on the
preceding one,
and
successful change is more probable when
each of these stages is
considered in a logical sequence.
Organization
Development MGMT
628
VU
Figure:
05 Organization Development's Five
Stages
Stage
One: Anticipate a Need for
Change:
Before
a program of change can be implemented, the
organization must anticipate the need for
change.
The
first step is the manager's perception
that the organization is somehow in a
state of disequilibrium or
needs
improvement. The state of disequilibrium
may result from growth or
decline or from competitive,
technological,
legal, or social changes in the external
environment. There must be a felt
need, because only
felt
needs convince individuals to adopt
new ways. Managers must be
sensitive to changes in the
competitive
environment, to "what's going on out
there."
When
a new CEO of AT&T Corporation
took over, he made it clear
to top executives that it
was not
business
as usual. In his first week
as CEO, he brought in the company's
top 20 officers to tell them
that
the
company's tradition of keeping people in
top jobs as long as they
didn't mess up was over.
According to
one
person at the meeting, the CEO
said "You are going to be in my
boat or out of it. But
don't be there
barking
or rowing against it
Stage
Two: Develop the Practitioner-Client
Relationship:
After
an organization recognizes a need for
change and an OD practitioner
enters the system, a relationship
begins
to develop between the practitioner and
the client system. The client is the
person or organization
that
is being assisted. The development of this
relationship is an important determinant of the
probable
success
or failure of an OD program. As with many
interpersonal relationships, the exchange
of
expectations
and obligations (the formation of a
psychological contract) depends to a
great degree upon a
good
first impression or match
between the practitioner and the
client system. The
practitioner attempts to
establish
a pattern of open communication, a relationship of trust and an
atmosphere of shared
responsibility.
Issues dealing with responsibility,
rewards, and objectives must
be clarified, defined, or
worked
through at this point.
The
practitioner must decide when to
enter the system and what
his or her role should be.
For instance, the
practitioner
may intervene with the sanction
and approval of top management
and either with or
without
the
sanction and support of members in the
lower levels of the organization. At one
company, OD started
at
the vice-presidential level, and by using
internal OD practitioners the OD program was
gradually
expanded
to include line managers and
workers. At another company, an external
practitioner from a
university
was invited in by the organization's
industrial relations group to initiate
the OD program.
Stage
Three: The Diagnostic
Phase:
After
the OD practitioner has intervened and
developed a working relationship with the client,
the
practitioner
and the client begin to gather
data about the system. The
collection of data is an
important
activity
providing the organization and the
practitioner with a better understanding
of client system
problems:
the diagnosis.
Organization
Development MGMT
628
VU
One
rule of operation for the OD practitioner
is to question the client's diagnosis of the problem,
because
the
client's perspective may be
biased. After acquiring information
relevant to the situation perceived to be
the
problem, the OD practitioner and
client together analyze the data to
identify problem areas and
causal
relationships.
A weak, inaccurate, or faulty
diagnosis can lead to a
costly and ineffective
change program.
The
diagnostic phase, then, is used to
determine the exact problem
that needs solution, to
identify the
forces
causing the situation, and to provide a
basis for selecting effective
change strategies and
techniques.
Although
organizations usually generate a
large amount of "hard" or operational
data, the data may
present
an
incomplete picture of organizational performance. The
practitioner and client may
agree to increase the
range
or depth of the available data by
interview or questionnaire as a basis
for further action
programs.
One
organization, for instance, was having a
problem with high employee
turnover. The
practitioner
investigated
the high turnover rate by
means of a questionnaire to determine
why the problem existed,
and
from
these data designed an OD program to
correct the problems. The firm's
employees felt it had
become
a
bureaucratic organization clogged with
red tape, causing high
turnover. OD programs have
since reduced
employee
turnover to 19 percent, compared
with 34 percent for the
industry.
At
a major food company, a new
executive vice president
needed to move quickly to
improve the division's
performance.
With the help of an external
practitioner, data were
gathered by conducting intensive
interviews
with top management, as well
as with outsiders, to determine
key problem areas. Then,
without
identifying
the source of comments, the management
team worked on the information in a
10-hour session
until
solutions to the major problems was
hammered out and action
plans developed.
Stage
Four: Action Plans, Strategies, and
Techniques:
The
diagnostic phase leads to a
series of interventions, activities, or
programs aimed at resolving
problems
and
increasing organization effectiveness.
These programs apply such OD
techniques as total
quality
management
(TQM), job design, role
analysis, goal setting, team
building, and inter-group development
to
the
causes specified in the diagnostic
phase (all of these techniques
are discussed in detail in
subsequent
chapters).
In all likelihood, more time
will be spent on this fourth
stage than on any of the
other stages of
an
OD program.
Stage
Five: Self-Renewal, Monitor, and
Stabilize:
Once
an action program is implemented, the final step is to
monitor the results and
stabilize the desired
changes.
This stage assesses the
effectiveness of change strategies in
attaining stated objectives. Each
stage
of
an OD program needs to be monitored to
gain feedback on member reaction to the
change efforts. The
system
members need to know the
results of change efforts in
order to determine whether they ought
to
modify,
continue, or discontinue the activities. Once a
problem has been corrected
and a change program is
implemented
and monitored, means must be
devised to make sure that
the new behavior is stabilized
and
internalized.
If this is not done, the system
will regress to previous ineffective
modes or states. The
client
system
needs to develop the capability to maintain innovation
without outside support.
Continuous
Improvement:
In
today's environment, companies
seeking to be successful and survive
are faced with the need
to
continually
introduce changes. The
unlikely has become
commonplace, and the unthinkable
has become
almost
inevitable. The most important
lesson managers need to
learn is that there are
only two kinds of
companies
-- those that are changing,
and those that are going
out of business. Continual
change is a way
of
life. A critical challenge for
managers who are leading
change efforts is to inspire individuals
to work as a
team.
This
five stage model shows how
different OD methods and
approaches are used to continuously
improve
performance
so that the vision can be
achieved. It is important to remember
that no model or paradigm is
perfect,
but it can still provide
useful approaches to
change.
As
an OD program stabilizes, the need for
the practitioner should decrease. If the
client moves toward
independence
and evidences a self-renewal
capacity, the gradual termination of the
practitioner-client
system
relationship is easily accomplished. If the
client system has become
overly dependent upon
the
practitioner,
termination of the relationship can be a
difficult and awkward issue.
At one company, for
example,
the program produced tangible benefits. Of 264
managers involved in the program, 93
percent
reported
that the program led to improved
teamwork.
One
important issue in the implementation of
an OD program is whether or not the practitioner is
able to
deal
effectively with power and the
use of power. Hierarchical organizations,
whether they be business,
governmental,
for-profit, or not-for-profit, rely on
power. The individuals in positions of
influence
generally
constitute the power structure and
frequently are power-motivated people.
Managers compete for
promotions,
and departments and divisions
have disagreements over budget
allocations, Political
infighting
is
a reality (and often a dysfunctional factor) in
most organizations, and the
issue is whether OD
Organization
Development MGMT
628
VU
practitioners
deal with these power issues
in bringing about a change. In a
study of high-speed
decision
making,
Kathleen Eisenhardt and L. J. Bourgeois
III found that politics influence
decisions and those
political
conflicts "within top management
teams are associated with
poor firm
performance.
The
OD practitioner acts as a facilitator to
promote team problem solving
and collaboration,
and
encourages
such values as trust, openness,
and consensus. Given the
nature of an OD program, it is
our
view
that OD is not a political/power type of
intervention. Given the political
nature of organizational
decision
making, however, the OD practitioner must
be aware of politics and use
a problem-solving
approach
that is compatible with power-oriented
situations.
Table of Contents:
|
|||||