Uploaded on

 

More in: Business , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
5,709
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
361
Comments
0
Likes
2

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. CAIRO UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF COMMERCE MBA PROGRAM-BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION SECOND YEAR-ENGLISH Introduction to OD Mohamed Ahmed Mohamed Salem 11/6/2009
  • 2. November 6, 2009 [INTRODUCTION TO OD] Introduction to OD History of OD Kurt Lewin (1898 - 1947) is widely recognized as the founding father of OD, although he died before the concept became current in the mid-1950s. 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" 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-group and group-based OD emerged. In the UK, working as close as was possible with Lewin and his colleagues, the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations was important in developing systems theories. In the late 1960s organizational development was implemented in organizations via consultants, but was relatively unknown as a theory of practice and had no common definition among its practitioners. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s organizational development became a more established field with courses and programs being offered in business, education, and administration curricula. In the 1990s and 2000s organizational development continued to grow and evolve and its influences could be seen in theories and strategies such as total quality management (TQM), team building, job enrichment, and reengineering. Important too was the joint TIHR journal Human Relations, although nowadays the Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences is seen as the leading OD journal. The term "Organization Development" is often used interchangeably with Organizational effectiveness, especially when used as the name of a department within an organization. Organization Development is a growing field that is responsive to many new approaches including Positive Adult Development. Definitions of OD Organization development (OD) is defined as a planned, top-down, organization- wide effort to increase the organization's effectiveness and health. It is a complex strategy intended to change the beliefs, attitudes, values, and structure of organizations so that they can better adapt to new technologies, markets, and challenges. It is a particular kind of change process designed to bring about a particular kind of end result. OD can involve interventions in the organization's "processes," using behavioral science knowledge as well as organizational reflection, system improvement, planning, and self-analysis. Preparedby: MohamedAhmed MohamedSalem Page 2
  • 3. November 6, 2009 [INTRODUCTION TO OD] OD is a long range effort to improve organization's problem solving and renewal processes, particularly through more effective and collaborative management of organizational culture, often with the assistance of a change agent or catalyst and the use of the theory and technology of applied behavioral science. Organization development is a "contractual relationship between a change agent and a sponsoring organization entered into for the purpose of using applied behavioral science in a systems context to improve organizational performance and the capacity of the organization to improve itself. Organization development is an ongoing, systematic process to implement effective change in an organization. Organization development is known as both a field of applied behavioral science focused on understanding and managing organizational change and as a field of scientific study and inquiry. It is interdisciplinary in nature and draws on sociology, psychology, and theories of motivation, learning, and personality. Some Other Definitions of OD Burke (1982) “Planned process of change in an organization’s culture through the utilization of behavioral science technologies, research, and theory. French & Bell “A long-range effort to improve an organization’s (1978) problem solving and renewal processes, particularly through a more effective and collaborative management of an organization culture . . . with the assistance of a change agent, or catalyst, and the use of the theory and technology of applied behavioral science, including action research. Margulies & “A value-based process of self-assessment and Raia (1972) planned change, involving specific strategies and technology, aimed at improving the overall effectiveness of an organizational system. Porras & “Planned, behavioral science-based interventions in Robertson work settings for the purpose of improving (1992) organizational functioning and individual development. Jamieson, Bach “Long-term, planned changes in the culture, Kallick, & Kur technology, and management of a total (1984) organization or at least a significant part of the total organization. Warrick (1984) “Planned, long-range systems and primarily behavioral science strategy for understanding, developing, and changing organizations to improve their present and future effectiveness and health. Preparedby: MohamedAhmed MohamedSalem Page 3
  • 4. November 6, 2009 [INTRODUCTION TO OD] Organization development is a planned process of promoting positive humanistically oriented large-system change and improvement in organizations through the use of social science theory, action research, and behaviorally based data collection and feedback techniques. Regardless of the definition that one subscribes to, however, it should be apparent when reviewing these definitions that although they differ on several important dimensions—for example, some focus on the importance of technology in the change process, whereas others explicitly mention top management support, and still others reference values explicitly—they share common components as well. Given the nature of these definitions and the experience in and exposure to others in the field over the past decade, the OD should be conceptualized as representing three essential components. First and perhaps foremost, OD is fundamentally a data-driven process; diagnosis and intervention are based on some form of behaviorally relevant data (such as observations, assessments, and surveys) collected through a process known as action research. Second, the OD model represents a total systems approach to organizational change in which this change is a formal and planned response to targeted organization-wide issues, problems, and challenges. Finally, although this component is controversial and by no means universally accepted as yet (Church, Burke, & Van Eynde, 1994), it is believed that values represent a third key component to the field. OD is (or should be) a normative and humanistic values-based approach to organizational improvement. In short, OD work should be focused on and conducted for the good of the individual, as well as the good of the organization. Although balancing issues of effectiveness and profitability are certainly important for economic success and survival, it is argued that an OD approach does not prioritize these concerns over the human perspective. Characteristics of OD Long term plane: It is planned and long-term–the process is based on gathering data and planned with the expectation of changes taking years. Change: OD is a planned strategy to bring about organizational change. The change effort aims at specific objectives and is based on a diagnosis of problem areas. Preparedby: MohamedAhmed MohamedSalem Page 4
  • 5. November 6, 2009 [INTRODUCTION TO OD] Change Agent: It involves change agent–there is a distinct role for an active facilitator and ombudsmen of the process, to ensure that changes are real; he stimulate, facilitate, and coordinate change. Action oriented: It’s action-oriented–instead of being descriptive of necessary changes, organizational development is diagnostic and prescriptive, seeking measurable results. Collaborative: OD is typically involves a collaborative approach to change that includes involvement and participation of the organization members most affected by the changes. Performance: OD programs include an emphasis on ways to improve and enhance performance and quality. Learning: It involves learning principles–individuals, groups and managers at all levels of the organization must re-learn how to function together. Managers who embrace organizational development must be committed to effecting fundamental changes in the organization. The learners' experiences in the training environment should be the kind of human problems they encounter at work. The training should NOT be all theory and lecture. Systems orientation: OD represents a system approach concerned with the interrelationship of divisions, departments, groups, and individuals as interdependent subsystems of the total organization, must work together. Scientific: OD is based upon scientific approaches to increase organization effectiveness. Humanistic Values: Positive beliefs about the potential of employees. Preparedby: MohamedAhmed MohamedSalem Page 5
  • 6. November 6, 2009 [INTRODUCTION TO OD] Problem Solving: It is problem-oriented–a multidisciplinary approach is taken to apply theory and research to effect solutions; problems are identified, data is gathered, corrective action is taken, progress is assessed, and adjustments in the problem solving process are made as needed. This process is known as Action Research. Contingency Orientation: Actions are selected and adapted to fit the need. Levels of Interventions: Problems can occur at one or more level in the organization so the strategy will require one or more interventions. Key features of successful OD 1) The organization's environment, 2) The organization itself, 3) Initial contact for the OD projects, 4) Formal entry procedures and commitment, 5) data-gathering activities, 6) Internal and 7) External change agent characteristics, and 8) Exit procedures. Researches indicated an absence of single dimensions that are either essential or sufficient to distinguish between the successful and unsuccessful organizations. Three general areas, however, did serve to differentiate organizations in the two categories: 1. Organizations that are more open to and involved in adjusting to change are more likely to be successful in their OD effort than are those that are more stable and status-quo oriented. 2. Internal change agents who are more carefully selected did not receive training prior to the current OD efforts, and who possess assessment-prescriptive skills is Preparedby: MohamedAhmed MohamedSalem Page 6
  • 7. November 6, 2009 [INTRODUCTION TO OD] most evident in the successful organizations. 3. More specific interest in and greater commitment to the OD projects are associated with successful change. References 1. Smith, 1998, p261. Training and Development in Australia 2. Richard Arvid Johnson. Management, systems, and society: an introduction. Pacific Palisades, Calif.: Goodyear Pub. Co.. 3. Richard Beckhard (1969). Organization development: strategies and models. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. pp. 114. ISBN 0876205406 9780876205402. OCLC 39328. 4. Wendell L French; Cecil Bell. Organization development: behavioral science interventions for organization improvement. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. 5. Richard Arvid Johnson (1976). Management, systems, and society : an introduction. Pacific Palisades, Calif.: Goodyear Pub. Co.. pp. 223–229. ISBN 0876205406 9780876205402. OCLC 2299496. 6. Bradford, D.L. & Burke, W.W.(eds), 2005, Reinventing Organization Development. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. 7. deKler, M. (2007). Healing emotional trauma in organizations: An O.D. Framework and case study. Organizational Development Journal, 25(2), 49-56. 8. Kurt Lewin (1958). Group Decision and Social Change. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. pp. 201. 9. Richard Arvid Johnson (1976). Management, systems, and society: an introduction. Pacific Palisades, Calif.: Goodyear Pub. Co.. pp. 224–226. ISBN 0876205406 9780876205402. OCLC 2299496. 10. Wendell L French; Cecil Bell (1973). Organization development: behavioral science interventions for organization improvement. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. chapter 8. ISBN 0136416624 9780136416623 0136416543 9780136416548. OCLC 314258. 11. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 12, No. 4, 471-492 (1976) DOI: 10.1177/002188637601200402 12. Gibson, J.L., Ivancevich, J.M., & Donnelly, J.H., Jr. (1994). Organizations: Behavior, structure, processes (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Irwin. Preparedby: MohamedAhmed MohamedSalem Page 7