ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Organizational Development

Organizational Development

Part I

Introduction

“Organization development” (OD) is an ambiguous phrase associated with the theory and practice of change management in organizations. For reasons explained in this chapter, OD is difficult to define. The phrase OD certainly means different things to different people. This lack of a standard definition can be particularly confusing to those who are new to the subject. However, early in this introduction, it may be helpful to highlight that, in recent years, the practice of OD has become more closely associated with disciplines such as human resource management (HRM) and human resource development (HRD). One indication of these links between OD, HRM, and HRD is that in countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom organizations regularly advertise for full-time OD practitioners in HR professional journals.

At the outset, it should be noted that the origins of the phrase OD are difficult to isolate. French and Bell (1999) suggested that the term OD probably emerged simultaneously in two or three places. This absence of a clearly identifiable founding theorist of OD may help to explain why there is no standard or universal definition. Similarly, it is impossible to pinpoint the date on which OD was introduced to the world, though the work of influential OD theorists such as Lewin, Likert, Lippitt, and Beckhard tended to emerge in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s. However, while the origins of the term OD are rather unclear, there appears to be a consensus surrounding its general aims; that is, as the label suggests, OD is about developing organizations and individuals through the use of carefully planned change-management interventions.

Despite the lack of a universally accepted definition of OD, readers may find it helpful to be provided with two often-quoted definitions. Beckhard (1969) defined OD as an effort planned, organizationwide, and managed from the top to increase organization effectiveness and health, through planned interventions in the organization's processes using behavioral science knowledge. Burke (1994) defined OD as a planned process of change in an organization's culture through the utilization of behavioral science technologies, research, and theory. When viewed side by side, we can glean various insights into traditional OD from these two definitions.

First, both definitions draw attention to the fact that OD is about planned change within organizations. OD theorists propose that OD processes and interventions should proceed in identifiable stages. Thus, to some extent, OD is prescriptive in that proponents argue that OD should be planned and implemented in a sequential manner. As Massarick (1990) pointed out, the very term development , whatever its context, implies a succession of changing sets of conditions, presumably in some knowable and possibly ordered sequence. This ordered sequence often involves (a) a preliminary stage of embarking on the OD process by, for example, isolating an organizational issue that needs to be addressed and then contacting an OD practitioner to facilitate an OD intervention; (b) undertaking diagnostic activities and using interviews, questionnaires, and observations in order to identify key issues that need to be addressed; (c) ...