What is Organization Development ?

A set up which brings together individuals from different backgrounds, varied interests and
specializations on a common platform for them to work as a single unit and achieve certain
predefined goals is called an organization.
An organization must make money for its survival. It is essential for the employees to
deliver their level best and eventually increase the productivity of the organization.
What is Organization Development ?
Organization Development refers to the various ways and procedures to increase the
productivity and effectiveness of an organization.
Organization Development includes the various techniques which help the employees as well
as the organization adjust to changing circumstances in a better way.
Why Organization Development ?
The concept of Organization development enables the organization to achieve the
targets and meet the objectives at a much faster rate.
The employees as a result of organization development respond better to changes in
the work culture.
Organization development helps the employees to focus on their jobs and contribute
in their best possible way.
Management can handle the employees in a better way as a result of organization
development.
Kurt Lewin is ideally believed to be the father of Organization development.
When is the Organization Ready for Development ?
1. First Step - Dissatisfied with the current scenario: The employees are not
happy with the current scenario and feel the need for a change in the processes of
the organization.
2. Second Step - Suggesting Changes: In the second step, employees discuss
amongst themselves the various options which would help the organization do better
in the near future.
3. Third Step - Applying the processes: Various policies and procedures are applied
to help the organization respond to external as well as internal changes more
effectively.
Understanding Organization
A six step model for understanding organization was proposed by Weisbord
The goals and objectives of the organization must be clearly defined. The employees
must be aware of their duties and functions in the organization. The individuals must know
what is expected out of them at the workplace.
It is essential to divide the work amongst the individuals as per their interests,
specialization, experience and educational qualification. Job mismatch should be
avoided as it leads to demotivated employees. Let the individuals decide what best they can
do.
The employees must share a cordial relationship with each other. Conflicts and
unnecessary misunderstandings lead to a negative ambience at the workplace. There should
be coordination between various departments for better results. Transparency is a must at
all levels. Individuals must discuss matters among themselves before reaching to final
conclusions. The departments must support each other in their work.
It is important to appreciate the ones who perform well. Those who do well must be
admired in front of all to motivate them and expect the same from them every time. The
management must make the non performers realize their mistakes and ask them to pull up
their socks. They should not be criticized, instead dealt with patience and care. Give them
opportunities but still if they dont perform up to the mark, punish them.
Leaders should be more like mentors and must provide a sense of direction to the
employees. They should bind the employees together and extract the best out of them.
The superiors must be a source of inspiration for the subordinates.
Promote training programs to upgrade the skills of employees and help them face the
challenges and changes in the organization with utmost determination. Plan your
resources well.


Organization Development Characteristics
OD is the act, process, or result of furthering, advancing or promoting the growth of
an organization. OD is an effort planned, organization-wide and, managed from the top, to
increase organization effectiveness and health through planned interventions in the
organization process using behavioural science knowledge. OD is a response to change, a
complex educational strategy intended to change the beliefs, attitudes values, and structure
of organizations so that they can adapt or new technologies, inarkets, and challenges, and
the dizzying rate of change itself.
Characteristics of OD:
A number of special characteristics together distinguish OD from other approaches to
managing and improving organizational functioning.
1. OD is a Planned Strategy to Bring About Organizational change:
OD programmesare planned, not accidental they represent a deliberate entry of either an
OD consultant or OD activities into the client system.
2. OD Always Involves a Collaborative Approach to Change:
In the QD the consultants seeks and maititains a collaborative relationship of relative
equality with the organization members. Collaboration means to labour together
essentially it implies that consultant does not do all the work while the client system
passively wants solutions to its
problems; and it means that the client system does not do all the work while the consultant
.is a disinterested observer. In OD, consultant and clients co-labour.
3. OD Programme Include on Emphasis on Ways to Improve and Enhance
Performance:
OD programmes and efforts are designed to produce organizational effectiveness and
health, better system functioning, greater ability to achieve objectives and so forth. The
basis aims of OD are:
Enhancing congruence between organizational structure, processes, strategy, people,
and culture;
Developing new and creative organizations solutions; and
Developing the organizations self-renewing capacity
It is these self-renewal outcomes that seem particularly distinctive in Organization
Development process.
4. OD Relies on a Set of Humanistic Values About People and Organizations:
OD is- a normative process grounde4 in value-laden assumptions of what constitutes ideal
individual or organizational growth. Development for the OD practitioner means the
movement of individuals and organizations in certain directions consistent with democratic
and humanistic values and ideas, such as autonomy, self-actualization and democracy. OD
also aims at gaining more effective organization by opening up new opportunities for
increased use of human potential.

Discuss the nature of Organization Development.
OD is characterized in several different ways as a process, a a form of applied
behavioural science, as normative re-educative change, as incorporating a systems
approach to organizations as similar to and based on an action research (data-based) model
of planned change, as an experience based learning mode as emphasizing goal setting and
objectives, and as concentrating on intact work teams as the primary instruments for
organizations improvement. These different aspects of OD serve as foundations,
characteristics, distinguishing features or theoretical and practice underpinnings upon which
the process has been built and this foundation has played a significant role in shaping the
practice of OD.
a) OD is an ongoing interactive process: Understanding about OD is greatly facilitated
by viewing it is an ongoing interactive process. A process is an identifiable flow of
interrelated events moving over time toward some goal or end.
b) OD is form of applied behavioural science: An OD programme applies the scientific
and practice principles from several behavioural sciences, social psychology.
c) OD is a normative re-educative strategy of changing: OD is a process of improving
organizational effectiveness; it implies that things will be done in different/improved way
which requires usually changing its processes and culture. Only such changes are desired by
the people who will be affected, which open up alternatives for action rather than closing off
of alternatives for the same. Change is considered as a desirable action step when it
appears to incorporate choices of those actions which have already been demonstrated to
be successful or are considered to be gopd ones on the basis of scientific methods of
inquiry.
d) OD does not aim to attack the values held by indivi4uals about religion, politics,
marriage, nation etc, but it does represent a value frame work which aims at bringing
changes in beliefs regarding work of the individual, beliefs in *he d9sfundtional aspects of
inter- organization and intra organization activities/zero sum games in the organization, and
the beliefs like the worth of workers participation in decision making. In addition, most OD
practitioners would explain their value system to their clients and would like them to decide
whether they want to accept or reject them:
e) OD is a data-based approach hi planned change: A number of OD interventions are
designed either to generate data or to plan actions based on data identified by the clients. A
data based or an action research model is a significant face of OD.
f) OD is experience based: The experience-based nature of the OD process emphasizes.
that people learn about organizational dynamics by living with their experiences and
reflecting on them. People learn to make decisions by making decisions and then evaluating
the same so that they may learn how. to make appropriate decisions in future You learn to
manage conflicts after experiencing the ill effects of conflicts and contra-productive
behaviors. OD interventions tend to focus on real behaviour of individuals and groups, for
solving real world problems and also tend to derive generalizations about organizational
dynamic inductively from experience. .
g) OD emphasizes goal setting and planning: The GD process has goals specifically for
improving functioning of the organization in many ways. GD programmes help in improving
an organization by emphasizing importance of goals and plan and structuring learning
activities designed to improve goal setting and planning skills. Healthy organizations tend to
use goal setting exercise for its personnel at all levels.
Understand the organizational values:
The five basic value orientations that influence ways of doing business and managing,
according to Fons Trompenaars, are
Universalisms vs Particularism : If the espoused values are deterministic irrespective of
situations or circumstances, it refers to universalism. The laid down rules have to be
followed strictly. Most often, head offices determine how local officers carry out their
business. Harmonylies in adhering to rules. Examples of cultures with such values are: the
US, Canada, Switzerland, Germany.
Under particularism, the focus is on the exceptional nature of the present circumstances
with the rules used only as guidelines to interpret and solve the present problem. Harmony
is in maintaining relationships. Moralistic evaluation is more a function of the given
situation. Examples of such cultures can be found in many Asian and South-east Asian
countries.
Collectivism vs Individualism: Is it individual performance or the group performance
(collective effort) that is regarded and rewarded? Organizations, where individualistic values
are espoused are considered instruments to serve individual owners, employees, and
customers. In contrast, under collectivism, organizations are considered as providers of a
social context to give meaning and purpose to the activities of people. The value orientation
of western nations such as the US and Sweden shows a preference for individualism, while
collectivism is more normative of countries in the east such as Thailand, Singapore, etc.
Neutral vs Affective: Value orientation refers to how ones emotions are expressed. In
certain cultures, emotions are restrained rather, than freely expressed, which also governs
relationships at work. Some examples are Japan, UK, and many of the Asian countries. In
other cultures, emotions are freely expressed in interactions with one another both at work
and outside. Thus US, Italy, and France are some examples of cultures high in affectivity.
Diffuse vs Specific: In specific cultures, authority relationships are limited to the work
situation only and are not maintained outside of it. Interactions between people are direct,
purposeful, precise, matter-of-fact, and transparent (examples are cultures like those of the
US, UK, and the Netherlands). In diffuse cultures one is a boss, and regarded so by
employees and others, within and outside the organization Position titles are valued in social
relationships. Communication regardless of rank may not be possible (for example, in
Korea, making eye contract with senior people is considered rude). Interactions between
people are less direct and more cautions, opaque, and tactful in eastern cultures like those
of China, India, Korea, and Singapore.
Achievement vs Ascription: This value dimension relates to how individuals are accorded
their status. Is it based on his achievements or ascribed to him by virtue of age, experience,
education, caste, family lineage, and such other factors? Achieved status is based on doings
and evaluation of the doings with reference to established standards or criteria, while
ascribed status refers to being in a social context in terms of how others respond to ones
attributes or characteristics. Countries such as India, Egypt, Malaysia, and Indonesia
exemplify ascribed status cultures. Achievement oriented cultures are those of the US, UK,
and Canada.
Norms: These are significant elements of the organizations social environment and evolve
out of the organizations values. They are the unwritten rules of behaviour-the informal
roles of the game telling employees what they are supposed to be saying, believing, and
doing and what is right and what is wrong. For example, IBM norms dictate that employees
should. Actively listen and respond to customer demands and complaints.
Organizational development values and Assumptions:
Values have always been an integral part of O.D. We will examine three early statements
regarding OD values that had a significant impact on the field. The Bennis and Beckhard
quotations come from their books in the --Addison-Wesley Six-Pack. Tannenbaum and Davis
presented their ideas in an article. appearing in Industrial Management Review.
Writing in 1969, Warren Bennis proposed that OD practitioners (change agents) share a set
of normative goals based on their humanistic/democratic philosophy. He listed these
normative, goals as follows:
Improvement in interpersonal competence.
A shift in values so that human factors and feelings come to be considered legitimate.
Development of increased understanding between and within working-groups in order to
reduce tensions.
Development of more effective team management, that is, the capacity of functional
groups to work more completely.
Development of better methods of conflict resolution. Rather than the usual bureaucratic
methods which rely mainly on suppression, compromise, and unprincipled power, more -
rational and open methods of conflict resolution are sought.
Development of organic rather than mechanical systems. This is a strong reaction
against the idea of organizations as mechanisms which managers work on, like pushing
buttons.
Bennis clarified some of the salient differences between mechanical systems and organic
systems. (The earlier work by Tom Burns and G.M. Stalker used the term mechanistic in
contrast to Mechanical.) For example, mechanical systems rely on - authority-obedience
relationships while organic systems rely on mutual confidence and trust. Mechanical
systems insist on strict division of labor and hierarchical supervision while organic systems
foster multi group membership and responsibility. Mechanical systems encourage
centralized decision making while organic systems encourage wide sharing of
responsibility and control.
Another major player in the field was Richard Beckhard: he described several assumptions
about the nature and functioning of organizations held by OD practitioners. Here is his list.
1. The basic building blocks of an organization are groups (teams). Therefore, the basic
units of change are groups, not individuals.
2. An always of relevant change goals is the reduction of inappropriate competition between
parts of the organization -and the development of a more collaborative condition.
3. Decision making in a healthy organization is located where the information sources are,
rather than in a particular role or level of hierarchy.
4. Organizations, subunits of organizations, and individuals continuously manage their
affairs against goals. Controls are interim measurements, not the basis of managerial
Strategy.
5. One goal of a healthy organization is to develop generally open communication, mutual
trust, and confidence between and across levels.
6. People support what they help create. People affected by a change must be allowed
active participated and a sense of ownership in the planning and conduct of the change.
Robert Tannenbaum and Sheld Davis presented their view of OD values. They asserted that
an important shift in values was occurring and that this shift signaled a more appropriate
and accurate view of people in organizations. They listed these values in transition as
follows.
Away from a view of people as essentially bad toward a view of people as basically
good.
Away from avoidance of negative evaluation of individuals toward confirming them as
human beings.
Away from a view of individuals as fixed, toward seeing them as being in process.
Away from resisting and fearing individual differences toward accepting and utilizing
them.
Away from utilizing an individual primarily with reference to his or her job description
toward viewing an individual as a whole person:
Away from walling off the expressions of feelings toward making possible both
appropriate expression and effective use.
Away from marksmanship and game playing toward authentic behavior.
Away from use of status for maintaining power and personal prestige toward use of
status for organizationally relevant purposes.
Away from distrusting people toward trusting them.
Away from avoiding facing others with relevant data toward making appropriate
confrontation.
Away from avoidance of risk taking toward willingness to risk.
Away from a view of process work as being unproductive effort toward seeing it as
essential to effective task accomplishment.
Away from a primary emphasis on competition toward a much greater emphasis on
collaboration.
These values and assumptions may not seem profound today, but in the 1950s and 1960s
they represented a radical departure from accepted beliefs and Assumptions. Beliefs such as
trust and respect for the individual, the legitimacy of feelings, open communication,
decentralized decision making, participation and contribution by all organization members,
collaboration and cooperation, appropriate uses of rower, authentic interpersonal relations
and so forth were seldom -espoused and rarely implemented in the vast majority of
organizations at that time.
The democratic values promoted critique and authoritarian, autocratic, and arbitrary
management practices as well as the-dysfunctions of bureaucracies. The humanistic values
prompted a search for better ways to run organizations and develop the people in them.

Assumptions of OD
Assumptions of Organization Development: There are sets of assumptions, basic to
most organization development activities, which relate to people as individuals, to people as
group members arid as leaders, and to people as members of the total organizational
systems. These are: -
1. Assumptions about People as Individuals:
OD efforts make two basic assumptions about people as individuals:
a) Most individuals have drive towards persona! Growth and development: In an
environment that is supportive and challenging most people want to become most of what
they are capable of becoming.
b) Most people are capable of making higher level of contribution to organizational
goals: A tremendous amount of constructive energy can be tapped if organizations
recognize this, for example, by asking for and acting on suggestions to solve problems.
2. Assumption about People in Groups and About Leadership:
a) The most psychologically relevant reference group for most people is the work
group : It basically implies that what goes on in the work team, especially at the informal
level, has great significance for satisfaction and competence.
b) Most people wish to be accepted with at least one small reference group: This
helps them greatly increase their effectiveness and of helping their reference group to solve
problems.
c) Group members must assist each other with effective leadership and ember
behaviour: For a group to optimize its effectiveness, the formal leader cannot perform all
the leadership and maintenance functions in all circumstances at all times and therefore
assistance in leadership is required.
d) Suppressed feelings and attitudes adversely affect problem solving, personal
growth and job satisfaction: The culture in most groups and organizations tends to
suppress the expression of feelings and attitudes that people have about each other and
their behaviors.- both positive and negative and about where their organizations are
heading. If feelings are allowed to be expressed, it trends to open up many avenues for
improved goal setting, leadership, communications, conflict resolutions, problem solving
between groups, collaboration and morale.
e) Level of interpersonal trust, support, and cooperation is much lower in most groups and
organizations than is either desirable or necessary. Typically, a number of forces contribute
to such situations, including an absence of viewing feelings as important data, lack of group
problem solving skills, and leadership styles that reinforce dysfunctional competition.
f) Solutions to most attitudinal and motivational problems in organizations are transactional:
Such problems have the greatest chance of constructive solution if all the
Parties, in the system or subsystem alter their mutual relationship.
3. Assumptions about People in Organizational Systems: A number of assumptions
about people in system also underlie OD efforts. Some of these are:
a) The interplay of dynamic of work team has a powerful effect on the attitudes and
behaviors of people in both groups: In particular, conditions of trust, support, openness and
teamwork tend to influence the style of managers lower down in the hierarchy and rub off
on to their subordinates.
b) Win Lose conflict strategies are not optional in the long run to the solution of most
organizational problems : Most organizations problems can better be approached in terms of
how can we all win?
And finally, there are at least two assumptions made that relate to the complexities and
difficulties involved in helping make major shifts in the culture of the organizations.
I. It takes time and patience, and the key movers in OD efforts need to have a relatively
long-range time perspective.
2. Improved performance from OD efforts need be sustained It can be done by bringing
appropriate changes in the appraisal, compensation, training, staffing, task, and
Communication subsystems in short, in the total human resource system.

History
Kurt Lewin (18981947) is widely recognized as the founding father of OD, although he died
before the concept became current in the mid-1950s.
[1]
From Lewin came the ideas of group
dynamics and action research which underpin the basic OD process as well as providing its
collaborative consultant/client ethos. Institutionally, Lewin founded the "Research Center for
Group Dynamics" (RCGD) at MIT, which moved to Michigan after his death. RCGD
colleagues were among those who founded the National Training Laboratories (NTL), from
which the T-groups and group-based OD emerged.
Kurt Lewin played a key role in the evolution of organization development as it is known
today. As early as World War II, Lewin experimented with a collaborative change process
(involving himself as consultant and a client group) based on a three-step process of
planning, taking action, and measuring results. This was the forerunner of action research,
an important element of OD, which will be discussed later. Lewin then participated in the
beginnings of laboratory training, or T-groups, and, after his death in 1947, his close
associates helped to develop survey-research methods at the University of Michigan. These
procedures became important parts of OD as developments in this field continued at the
National Training Laboratories and in growing numbers of universities and private consulting
firms across the country. Two of the leading universities offering doctoral level
[2]
degrees in
OD are Benedictine University and the Fielding Graduate University.
Douglas McGregor and Richard Beckhard while "consulting together at General Mills in the
1950s, the two coined the term organization development (OD) to describe an innovative
bottoms-up change effort that fit no traditional consulting categories" (Weisbord, 1987,
p. 112).
[3]

The failure of off-site laboratory training to live up to its early promise was one of the
important forces stimulating the development of OD. Laboratory training is learning from a
person's "here and now" experience as a member of an ongoing training group. Such groups
usually meet without a specific agenda. Their purpose is for the members to learn about
themselves from their spontaneous "here and now" responses to an ambiguous hypothetical
situation. Problems of leadership, structure, status, communication, and self-serving
behavior typically arise in such a group. The members have an opportunity to learn
something about themselves and to practice such skills as listening, observing others, and
functioning as effective group members.
[4]

As formerly practiced (and occasionally still practiced for special purposes), laboratory
training was conducted in "stranger groups," or groups composed of individuals from
different organizations, situations, and backgrounds. A major difficulty developed, however,
in transferring knowledge gained from these "stranger labs" to the actual situation "back
home". This required a transfer between two different cultures, the relatively safe and
protected environment of the T-group (or training group) and the give-and-take of the
organizational environment with its traditional values. This led the early pioneers in this
type of learning to begin to apply it to "family groups" that is, groups located within an
organization. From this shift in the locale of the training site and the realization that culture
was an important factor in influencing group members (along with some other
developments in the behavioral sciences) emerged the concept of organization
development.
[4]

Core Values
Underlying Organization Development are humanistic values. Margulies and Raia (1972)
articulated the humanistic values of OD as follows:
1. Providing opportunities for people to function as human beings rather than as
resources in the productive process.
2. Providing opportunities for each organization member, as well as for the organization
itself, to develop to their full potential.
3. Seeking to increase the effectiveness of the organization in terms of all of its goals.
4. Attempting to create an environment in which it is possible to find exciting and
challenging work.
5. Providing opportunities for people in organizations to influence the way in which they
relate to work, the organization, and the environment.
6. Treating each human being as a person with a complex set of needs, all of which are
important to their work and their life.
[5]

Differentiating OD from other change efforts such as- 1. Operation management 2. Training
and Development 3. Technological innovations....etc