7 S Framework:

What Is It? The 7-S Framework is a useful tool that describes seven key interdependent variables of organizational design. These variables take into account both the hardware (strategy, structure and systems) and the software (management styles, staff, skills and shared values, i.e. culture) of an organization. The framework can be used as a basis for discussion about organizational capacity and organizational design with relevant stakeholders within the organization. Special attention must be given to the relationships between the seven variables.

The 7-S framework Strategy The direction and scope of the company over the long term. The basic organization of the organization (who reports to whom) to support its Structure objectives. The formal and informal procedures that support the strategy and structure. The procedures, processes and routines that characterize how the work should be System done, i.e. financial systems, recruiting, promotion and performance appraisal, information systems, budgeting systems.

Style Staff Skills Shared values

The leadership approach of management and how key managers behave in achieving the organizations goals. The company's human resources and how they are developed, trained and motivated. The capabilities and competencies that exist within the company. What it does best. The values and beliefs of the company. The central guiding concept and ideas of an organization around which it is strengthened.

Objective To accurately assess the capacity of an organization. Outcome A documented assessment of organizational capacity and how any gaps are impacting on organizational performance and the potential to achieve desired outcomes. Special Considerations/Weaknesses

A key weakness of the 7-S framework is its failure to look at the external environment. In practice, there are a number of external issues that need to be considered, e.g:

1. Supportive legislative structures: Do new laws need to be introduced to enable agency formation? 2. Wider policy context: How does the institutional reform being implemented fit in with other reforms in progress? 3. Other aspects of the wider institutional context: For example, how do informal institutions in society impact on the organizations culture and design?

It is important to remain focused in asking appropriate questions that will provide sufficient detail to assess the identified organizational capacity gaps.

Resources Required A well-prepared series of questions that will be asked of key staff within the organization. Participation Level Low to medium; the assessment is with individuals or within a focus group. Steps 1. Identify key stakeholders within an organization and relevant experts. 2. Gather data on each of the seven areas, based on desk research and interviews with key stakeholders throughout the organization. Key questions to ask may include:

Clarity of vision and goals guiding the organization? Extent to which these are Strategy shared amongst staff? Level of participation in the formulation of these? Shortterm goals to achieve strategy? Organization of functions and roles of main departments and units? Definitions of roles and responsibilities? Mechanisms for participation of key stakeholders Structure staff, government, civil society? Is the structure supportive of strategic and organizational goals? Effectiveness of human, financial and technological systems that support System objectives? Nature of incentives within human resources? Rewards systems? Monitoring and evaluation systems? The management style; how do managers make decisions? How do they spend Style their time? On what do they focus their attention? Extent to which there is a supportive environment for staff? Level of communication? Effectiveness of staff utilization? Adequacy of staff resources? Level of staff Staff motivation? Factors that would increase staff satisfaction? What is the organization best at? Nature of the task requirements and individual Skills skills or knowledge needed for task effectiveness? Adequacy of the taskskill match? Opportunities for training or knowledge sharing? Nature of the rules (formal and informal), values, customs and principles that Shared guide the organization's behaviour? Extent to which core professional values are values internalized? 3. Summarise the findings in a report to key organization members involved in the interview process. This report can be used as a basis for further discussion of capacity needs at the organizational level. A useful reporting framework may be: Organizational capacity Strategy 1 = low 5 = high Structure System Style Staff Skills Shared values Required action and current capacity to perform action Strategic direction clearly laid down through legislation, but poor understanding of strategic direction within organization leading to confused on-ground outcomes and overlapping responsibilities with other natural resource management agencies. Current capacity: 1 2 3 4 5 Required capacity to achieve action outcomes: 1 2 3 4 5

Force Field Analysis

Force field analysis is a management technique developed by Kurt Lewin, a pioneer in the field of social sciences, for diagnosing situations. It will be useful when looking at the variables involved in planning and implementing a change program and will undoubtedly be of use in team building projects,when attempting to overcome resistance to change.Lewin assumes that in any situation there are both driving and restraining forces that influence any change that may occur.

Driving Forces
Driving forces are those forces affecting a situation that are pushing in a particular direction; they tend to initiate a change and keep it going. In terms of improving productivity in a work group, pressure from a supervisor, incentive earnings, and competition may be examples of driving forces.

Restraining Forces
Restraining forces are forces acting to restrain or decrease the driving forces. Apathy, hostility, and poor maintenance of equipment may be examples of restraining forces against increased production. Equilibrium is reached when the sum of the driving forces equals the sum of the restraining forces. In our example, equilibrium represents the present level of productivity, as shown below.

Equilibrium
This equilibrium, or present level of productivity, can be raised or lowered by changes in the relationship between the driving and the restraining forces. For illustration, consider the dilemma of the new manager who takes over a work group in which productivity is high but whose predecessor drained the human resources. The former manager had upset the equilibrium by increasing the driving forces (that is, being autocratic and keeping continual pressure on subordinates) and thus achieving increases in output in the short run. By doing this, however, new restraining forces developed, such as increased hostility and antagonism, and at the time of the former manager's departure the restraining forces were beginning to increase and the results manifested themselves in turnover, absenteeism, and other restraining forces, which lowered productivity shortly after the new manager arrived. Now a new equilibrium at a significantly lower productivity is faced by the new manager. Now just assume that our new manager decides not to increase the driving forces but to reduce the restraining forces. The manager may do this by taking time away from the usual production operation and engaging in problem solving and training and development. In the short run, output will tend to be lowered still further. However, if commitment to objectives and technical know-how of the group are increased in the long run, they may become new driving forces, and that, along with the elimination of the hostility and the apathy that were restraining forces, will now tend to move the balance to a higher level of output. Managers are often in a position in which they must consider not only output but also intervening variables and not only short-term but also long-term goals. It can be seen that force field analysis provides framework that is useful in diagnosing these interrelationships.

THE SIX BOXES MODEL THE SYSTEMS VIEW

Now that weve linked what people do to what the organization wants to accomplish by identifying what they need to produce (the Performance Chain), we can identify and coordinate all the factors that affect a change in behavior, what we call behavior influences.

Behavior influences comprise the far-left link in the Performance Chain, the enablers of human performance. The challenge in any organization is to determine what combination of behavior influences are most likely to produce desired changes in behavior, to establish and accelerate it. The list can be very long, and investments made to change behavior often come from many different parts of the organization. The Six Boxes Model is a comprehensive categorization of these influences, based on over 60 years of basic behavior science, simplified into six easy-to-remember boxes. We use this plain English model to teach leaders, managers, and performance professionals how to think systemically when identifying factors that currently enable or obstruct behavior, when planning for new behavior or programs, and when working on continuous improvement or development. It allows us to coordinate all behavior influences for maximum impact. Balancing and tuning the system of behavior influences that affects any given behavior is how we achieve maximum return on investments that the organization makes in people. Choices of which steps to take (Do they need training? Would a bonus be motivating? Should we provide a coach?) are better understood and addressed when the whole picture of influences is understood. Often, additions of inexpensive programs or simple changes in management are discovered and bring greater impact.

Sharing the Six Boxes Model across levels and functions in an organization leads to a shared understanding and coordinated implementation of all interventions. Organizations can often dramatically improve productivity and profitability per employee while increasing employee engagement by using the Six Boxes Model as the foundation for performance planning and performance improvement.

Organizational Development Models - Weisbords Six-Box Model

Weisbord (1976) proposes six broad categories in his model of organizational life, including purposes, structures, relationships, leadership, rewards, and helpful mechanisms. The purposes of an organization are the organizations mission and goals. Weisbord refers to structure as the way in which the organization is organized; this may be by function where specialists work together or by product, program, or project where multi-skilled teams work together. The ways in which people and units interact is termed relationships. Also included in the box of relationships is the way in which people interact with technology in their work. Rewards are the intrinsic and extrinsic rewards people associate with their work. The leadership box refers to typical leadership tasks, including the balance between the other boxes. Finally, the helping mechanisms are the planning, controlling, budgeting, and information systems that serve to meet organizational goals. The external environment is also depicted in Weisbords model, although it is not represented as a "box" (see figure beow).

Weisbord identifies as inputs the money, people, ideas, and machinery which are used to fulfill the organizations mission. The outputs are products and services. Two premises which are not apparent in Weisbords model are crucial to understanding the boxes in the model. The first premise refers to formal versus informal systems. Formal systems are those policies and procedures the organization claims to do. In contrast, informal systems are those behaviors which actually occur. The bigger the gap between the formal and

informal systems within the organization, the less effective the organization is. The second premise concerns the fit between the organization and the environment, that is, the discrepancy between the existing organization and the way the organization should function to meet external demands. Weisbord defines external demands or pressures as customers, government, and unions. Weisbord poses diagnostic questions for each box of his model. For example, he suggests that OD consultants determine whether organizational members agree with and support the organizations mission and goals within the purposes box. This question refers to his premise regarding the nature of the formal and informal systems within the organization. A sample of some of the questions he poses are as follows: Purposes: Do organizational members agree with and support the organizations mission and goals? Structure: Is there a fit between the purpose and the internal structure of the organization? Relationships: What type of relations exist between individuals, between departments, and between individuals and the nature of their jobs? Is their interdependence? What is the quality of relations? What are the modes of conflict? Rewards: What does the organization formally reward, and for what do organizational members feel they are rewarded and punished? What does the organization need to do to fit with the environment? Leadership: Do leaders define purposes? Do they embody purposes in their programs? What is the normative style of leadership? Helpful Mechanisms: Do these mechanisms help or hinder the accomplishment of organizational objectives? In summary, Weisbords model focuses on internal issues within an organization primarily by posing "diagnostic questions" which have to do with the fit between "what is" and "what should be." The questions he poses are not predicted by the model; rather, they appear to be based on his OD practice. These questions serve to convolute the model because they do not flow from the logic of the model. Moreover, Weisbord omits many interconnections between the boxes of the model. Finally, Weisbord only tangentially addresses the impact of the external environment in the model.