This document outlines the steps for starting a planned organizational change process. It describes entering and contracting as the initial steps, which involve defining problems/opportunities and establishing a collaborative relationship between the OD practitioner and client. It also discusses organizational change approaches like Lewin's three steps of unfreezing, moving, and refreezing; action research; and action learning. Groups are identified as a key focus of change due to their influence on individual behavior.

1. ASSIGNMENT ON ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
TOPIC
TO DESCRIBE THE STEPS ASSOCIATED WITH STARING
A PLANNED CHANGE PROCESS
TO REINFORCE THE DEFINITION OF AN OD
PRACTITIONER AS ANYONE WHO IS HELPING A
SYSTEM TO MAKE PLANNED CHANGES
UNDER GUIDANCE OF SUMBITTED BY
PROF. SUBHASH GUPTA
ROLL NO. 15
SEC- SP3
IIPM SATBARI
1

2. TABLE OF CONTENT
S.NO TOPIC PAGE
NO.
1 INTRODUCTION 3
2 ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
2.1 GROUPS AS FOCUS OF 6
CHANGE
3 APPLICATION OF OD 8
4. Entering into an OD Relationship 18
5. OD PRACTITIONERS 21
6. OD PRACTITIONER SKILLS AND 24
ACTIVITIES
7. CONCLUSION 33
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY 35
2

3. 1. INTRODUCTION
The planned change process generally starts when one or more
managers or administrators sense an opportunity for their
organization, department or group, believe that new capabilities
need to be developed, or decide that performance could be
improved through organization development. The organization might
be successful yet have room for improvement. The organization
could be experiencing particular problems. Conversely the problems
might appear more diffuse and consist simply of feelings that
the organization should be ―more innovative‖, ―more competitive‖
or ―more effective‖.
Entering and contracting are the initial steps in the OD process.
They involve defining in a preliminary manner the organization‘s
problems or opportunities for development and collaborative
relationship between the OD practitioner and members of the
client system about how to work on those issues. Entering and
contracting set the initial parameters for carrying out the
subsequent phases of OD. Diagnosing the organization , planning
and implementing changes, and evaluating and institionalizing them.
They help to define what issues will be addressed by those
activities, who will carry them out, and how they will be
accomplished.
Entering and contracting can vary in complexity and formality
depending on the situation. In those cases where the manager of
a work group or development serves as his or her own OD
practitioner, entering and contracting typically involve the manager
and group members meeting to discuss what issues to work on
and how they will jointly meet the goals they set. Here,
entering and contracting are relatively simple and informal. They
involve all relevant members directly in the process with a
minimum of formal procedures. In situations where managers and
administrators are considering the use of professional OD
practitioners, either from inside or from outside the organization ,
3

4. entering and contracting tend to be more complex and formal.
OD practitioner may need to collect preliminary information to
help define the problematic or development issues. They may
need to meet with the representatives of the client organization
rather than with total membership; they may need to formalize
their respective roles and how the change process will unfold. In
cases where the anticipated changes are strategic and large in
scale, formal proposals from multiple consulting firms are requested
and legal contracts are drawn up.
4

5. 2. ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
All approaches to change must address a key issue inherent in
organizations: why they are so stable and resistant to change.
Knowing how to change organizations starts from understanding the
conditions that promote the status quo or no change. OD has
discovered a long list of causes for resistance to change, such as
structural inertia, work habits, fear of the unknown, powerful
interests, and members‘ security needs. It has also identified a
variety of forces that promote organization change, such as
competitive pressures, performance problems, workforce changes, and
new technologies.
According to Lewin approach, organization change is directed at
processes, not things. The targets of change, such as performance
levels and work methods, are the result of ongoing social
processes occurring in organizations. For example, the level of a
team‘s performance is the product of a myriad of behaviors,
decisions, and interactions occurring among team members over
time. Forces in the situation that drive and restrain change
influence those social processes. In the team example, new work
technologies might push for change while team performance norms
might resist it. When these opposing forces are roughly equal,
targets of change and the social processes underlying them are
relatively stable and resistant to change, a condition called ‗quasi-
stationary equilibrium‘. This stability is not static but dynamic,
like a river flowing in a particular direction at a certain
velocity. Driving and restraining forces, like the banks of a
river, shape how social processes evolve over time. They affect
the degree those processes are stable and hence resistant to
change.
To change organizations, driving and restraining forces that affect
the change target must first be identified and their strength
assessed. Then, depending on the results of this analysis, the
strength of these opposing forces can either be increased or
5

6. decreased to achieve desired changes. Increasing driving forces or
decreasing restraining forces may result in the same degree of
change. The secondary effects of these two change strategies are
likely to be quite different, however. Organization changes that
result from increases in driving forces are likely to be
accompanied by relatively high levels of tension as restraining
forces rise to push back against the changes. Such tension can
lead to higher aggressiveness and emotionality, and lower levels
of commitment to change. The more effective change strategy is
to reduce restraining forces, and thus let driving forces promote
change while facing less resistance. This low-pressure method
results in greater acceptance of the changes and more positive
reactions to them. In the team performance example described
above, improvements in performance are likely to be more
successful if team performance norms (restraining force) are
modified first and then new technologies (driving force) are
introduced.
2.1 GROUPS AS FOCUS OF CHANGE
Organization change involves, either directly or indirectly, changes
in individual behavior. New structures, work methods, and
performance goals, for example, all require adjustments in the
way organization members behave. To change individual behavior,
however, may require changes in the groups to which people
belong.
OD has long discovered that individual behavior is firmly
grounded in groups.
Whether groups emerge formally to perform organization tasks or
informally to meet members‘ social needs, they can have powerful
effects on members‘ behaviors, beliefs, and values.
Example, groups can influence members‘ performance levels, task
methods, and work relationships. They can exert pressure on
members to conform to norms governing group behavior. This can
6

7. make changing individual behavior extremely difficult, as members
are likely to resist organization changes that run counter to
group norms and expectations. To overcome such resistance may
require changing the group itself, thus making it the focus of
change.
Initially referred to as ‗participative management‘, this group
approach to organization change is used extensively in OD. It
includes getting members directly involved in understanding the
need for change, developing appropriate changes, and implementing
them. When members perceive the need for change, pressure for
change is likely to arise from within the group . A key method
for creating shared perceptions of the need for change is to
engage members in analyzing their own situation. This can create
ownership over the diagnosis and the conclusions drawn from it,
therefore promoting a shared readiness for change among members.
Similarly, member participation in developing organization changes
can help to assure commitment to implementing them.
When group members are involved in making decisions about
what changes are most appropriate to their situation, their interests
are likely to be taken into account in those changes.
Consequently, members will be committed to subsequently
implementing the changes because it is in their vested interest to
do so. Moreover, such involvement can bring more diverse and
local knowledge to decisions about change, thus improving their
quality and practical relevance.
7

8. 3. APPLICATION OF OD
How OD is applied in organizations closely follows its historical
roots and psychological foundations.
The processes and activities used to initiate and carry out
organization change are deeply embedded in values of openness,
trust, and collaboration among organization members; they are
grounded in beliefs that members should be treated maturely and
actively involved in change. Based on these fundamentals,
applications of OD have evolved to meet the emerging demands
of organizations and their environments. As shown in the history
section of this chapter, OD interventions have grown larger and
more complex; they have become more strategic, involving a
greater array of stakeholders and organization design components.
These changes are reflected in how OD is carried out and
practiced in organizations today. To understand this evolution of
OD practice requires knowledge of three general approaches to
change:
(1) Lewin‘s three steps; (2) action research; and (3) action
learning.
LEWIN‘S THREE STEPS
This approach to organization change derives from the work of
Lewin and his colleagues on how to overcome resistance to
change and how to sustain change once it is made . It starts
from the premise that targets of change and the social processes
underlying them are relatively stable when forces driving for
change are roughly equal to forces resisting change. To change
this status quo requires a three-step process:
(1) ‗unfreezing‘ the balance of forces that keep the change target
stable;
8

9. (2) ‗moving‘ the change target to a new level or kind of
behavior; and (3) ‗refreezing‘ the balance of forces to reinforce
the new behaviors and to keep them stable. This simple yet
profound framework has guided OD practice for over half a
century. It has led to numerous techniques for leading and
managing change.
Unfreezing
This step underscores the need to assess the present situation
before change is contemplated. Referred to as a ‗force field
analysis‘, this diagnosis examines the driving and restraining forces
in the change.
Situation can reveal which forces are strongest (or weakest) and
which are easiest (or hardest) to modify. Such information is
essential for unfreezing the current situation and creating a
readiness for change among organization members. For example, a
force field analysis might discover that the key forces restraining
change are members‘ lack of understanding about the need for
change and strong group norms about task performance. Techniques
to overcome these resistances, and thus to unfreeze the status
quo, might include clearer and more direct communication about
the rationale underlying the proposed changes and member
participation in the change process itself.
Moving
This stage involves intervening in the situation to change it. OD
includes a variety of interventions for improving organizations.
These change programs address organization issues having to do
with human processes, strategic choices, human resource
management, and work designs and structures.
To implement these changes effectively, OD has devised methods
for creating a compelling vision of the desired changes,
9

10. developing political support for them, and managing the transition
from the current to the desired situation.
Refreezing
This final step involves making changes a permanent part of the
organization‘s functioning. When this stage is ignored, organization
changes rarely persist but regress to their previous stable state.
Thus, refreezing calls for re-balancing the driving and restraining
forces in the changed situation so it remains relatively stable.
OD has discovered a variety of practices that can contribute to
such permanence.
Generally referred to as ‗institutionalizing‘ change, these methods
include: reinforcing organization changes by making rewards
contingent on them; socializing existing members and newcomers
into the beliefs, norms, and values underlying the changes;
diffusing changes throughout the organization to provide a wider
base of support for them; and sensing and calibrating the
changes to detect deviations from desired changes and to take
corrective actions.
Action Research
This approach to organization change shows that research can be
practical; it can serve as an instrument for action and change.
Action research applies scientific methods to help organizations
identify problems, discover their underlying causes, and implement
appropriate changes. It can also produce new knowledge about
organizations and change that can be applied elsewhere. In
addition to its problem solving focus, action research is highly
collaborative, involving both OD practitioners and organization
members in the research and action process. Such participation
gains members‘ input and commitment to the changes, thus
increasing the chances that they will be implemented. It can also
result in higher quality, more situation-relevant changes. Although
several variants of action research have been developed,
10

11. applications to OD generally involve the following cyclical
activities:
(1) preliminary data gathering and diagnosis;
(2) action planning;
(3) implementation;
(4) assessment.
In practice, these activities result in an iterative process where
initial research informs action, and additional research informs
further action, and so on.
Preliminary data gathering and diagnosis
Action research typically starts with a pressing problem that
organization members are motivated to resolve. Based on this
presenting issue, preliminary data are gathered to determine whether
36 foundations and applications problem has been correctly
identified and to diagnose its underlying causes. This initial
research is generally informed by diagnostic models that show
what features of the organization to examine and what data to
collect to discover the source of organizational problems. OD
practitioners use a plethora of diagnostic models to assess various
aspects of organizations, from members‘ individual motivation to
relationships between the organization and other organizations in its
environment. They use a variety of methods to collect diagnostic
data, from informal interviews with a few people to formal
surveys of the total organization. When these data are collected
and analyzed appropriately, they provide valid information about
causes of organization problems.
Action planning
Based on this preliminary research, participants develop action
plans specifying what organization changes will be made and how
they will be implemented. The choice and design of change
11

12. interventions depend on a variety of factors having to do with
the target of change and the change situation itself.
In selecting a change target, participants can draw on a large
diversity of OD interventions to improve various aspects and
problems of organizations. Indeed, OD is known primarily for its
interventions, such as team building, self-managed teams, and high-
involvement organizations. The preliminary diagnosis guides which
of those interventions are most relevant for the organization.
Moreover, it helps participants choose interventions that are likely
to succeed in their specific change situation.
Researchers have identified key situational contingencies that can
affect intervention success, such as individual differences among
members and the nature of the organization‘s technology and
competitive situation. Knowledge of these contingencies can help to
assure that action plans fit well with the change situation.
Implementation
Implementing action plans involves making changes that move the
organization towards its desired future. Such change does not
occur instantly but requires a transition period during which
members learn how to enact the changes and make them work.
OD has identified activities and structures that can facilitate this
transition phase. These include specifying the change tasks that
need to occur, temporally ordering them, and monitoring their
progress. It also involves identifying key stakeholders whose
commitment is needed for change to occur and gaining their
support. In cases where change is large scale and involves
several features and levels of the organization, special structures
for managing the change process may need to be created. These
structures mobilize resources for change, coordinate the changes,
and account for progress. Members who have both the power to
make change happen and the respect of key stakeholders lead
them.
12

13. Assessment
This final phase of action research involves gathering and
analyzing data to determine the effects of the changes. Such
information is used to decide whether the changes are having
their intended results, and, if not, how they can be modified to
be more effective. Assessment tends to occur at different stages
of the change process both during implementation and after it is
completed. During implementation, evaluation provides timely
feedback about whether the changes are being implemented as
intended. Because organization change generally involves considerable
learning and experimentation, such information is vital to members
learning new behaviors and procedures needed to implement
change. Assessment that occurs after implementation provides
feedback.
the overall impact of the organization changes. It helps members
determine whether the changes should continue to be supported or
whether other possible interventions should be tried.
Action Learning
Action learning has been variously referred to as ‗participatory
action research‘ It is a relatively new and still evolving form
of planned change. Action learning moves beyond the problem-
solving focus inherent in traditional applications of OD, and treats
change as a continuous learning and transformation process. It
responds to the enormous pressures for change facing organizations
today. They are experiencing competitive demands to perform more
quickly and efficiently at lower cost and higher quality. They are
being forced to adapt to turbulent environments where
technological, economic, and cultural forces are changing rapidly
and unpredictably. To respond to these forces, organizations are
radically transforming themselves into leaner, more flexible structures
capable of continuous adaptation and change. Such change involves
Considerable learning and innovation as members try new
13

14. Behaviors, structures, and processes, assess the results, make
necessary adjustments, and so on. It also requires significant
support and commitment from key stakeholders including managers,
employees, and staff experts.
Action learning addresses these issues. It helps members acquire
the skills and expertise to design their own innovations, to
manage their own change processes, and, perhaps most important,
to learn how to do these things more effectively and efficiently.
It identifies key stakeholders and gets them actively involved in
analyzing the organization and its environment, designing appropriate
changes, and implementing them. It builds the capacity to change
and to improve continually into the organization so it becomes
part of normal functioning.
Action learning involves a number of interrelated actions that
comprise an iterative learning process.
As members move through these activities, they learn how to
change and improve the organization, including their own work
behaviors and interactions. This learning feeds into the next cycle
of action learning and so on, thus enhancing members‘ capacity
to change both the organization and themselves.
Action learning general includes the following steps:
(1) valuing; (2) diagnosing; (3) designing; and
(4) implementing and assessing.
Valuing
Action learning generally starts with clarifying the values that will
guide the change process. Organization values influence members‘
behaviors and decision-making; they affect which innovations and
changes are seen as good or bad. Because organization values
are tacit and rarely questioned, they tend to perpetuate the status
quo. Thus, valuing seeks to make explicit the organization‘s
14

15. values and to judge their relevance to competitive conditions. This
may result in modifying or replacing certain values, or
considering entirely new ones. Moreover, because stakeholders often
have diverse interests, valuing attempts to uncover underlying value
conflicts and to resolve them so they do not adversely affect
subsequent design and implementation activities. Unless organization
changes take into account the interests of different stakeholders,
there is likely to be differential support and commitment for
them.
OD practitioners have developed various methods for resolving
value conflicts, including collaborating, compromising, and negotiating.
The key objective is to achieve sufficient value agreement among
stakeholders so they can proceed with changing the organization
in a shared and committed direction. A common outcome of
valuing is a ‗vision statement‘ that explains the values that will
guide organization change, including valued human and performance
outcomes and organizational conditions for achieving them .Although
valuing occurs early in action learning, members may periodically
reassess and modify the values as they continually move through
the cycle of learning activities.
Diagnosing
This phase of action learning involves assessing the organization
against the values. This can reveal value gaps where the
organization is not functioning or performing consistent with the
values. Such inconsistencies direct the subsequent design of
organization changes to close the gaps. Thus, action learning is
aimed at continually assessing and improving the organization in
a valued direction.
Designing
This step involves developing specific organization changes to
reduce value gaps and to move the organization in a valued
direction. Depending on the diagnosis, members may determine that
15

16. limited change is necessary and existing conditions only need to
be fine tuned; or that more extensive change is needed requiring
innovations that either imitate what other organizations are doing
or that are entirely new and original. Thus, designing is not
deterministic but involves considerable creativity and choice.
Members explore new ways for organizing that are consistent
with the values. They iterate back and forth between the values
which serve as design guides and the designs themselves.
Designing typically results in organization changes that are
minimally specified and flexible. This enables members to adjust
the changes to fit situational contingencies during implementation.
It provides members with sufficient freedom to modify the
changes as they learn how to enact them behaviorally and how
to modify and improve them as the circumstances demand.
Implementing and assessing
In this phase, members implement and assess organization changes.
This involves learning by doing. Members take action to implement
or modify the changes. They periodically assess whether the
changes and implementation process are progressing as intended,
and, if not, make plans to modify them. This feedback–adjustment
process enables members to learn how to change the organization
and themselves.
It continues indefinitely as members learn how to improve the
organization continuously. Implementing and assessing can involve
three levels of learning. At the most basic level, which is
referred to as ‗single-loop learning‘, members concentrate on
getting the changes implemented in accordance with the values.
They seek to reduce deviations from the changes‘ underlying
values. This learning occurs continuously and involves considerable
Problem solving and trial-and-error as members learn to move the
organization closer to its values. Single-loop learning is involved
in all approaches to organization change, including Lewin‘s three
16

17. steps and action research. It enables members to implement
planned changes as intended. Organization learning processes tend
to be tacit and taken for granted, members are not accustomed
to examining or questioning them. This can lead to repetition of
learning mistakes and disorders. Thus, deutero learning is aimed
at the learning process itself. Members examine values,
organizational conditions, and behaviors that inhibit singleand
double-loop learning; they design more effective learning processes.
Members then engage in implementing and assessing the new
learning behaviors. Over time, deutero learning enables members to
enhance their capacity to learn, and thus become better at
implementing change and improving the organization.
17

18. 4. ENTERING INTO AN OD RELATIONSHIP
An OD process generally starts when a member of an
organization or unit contacts an OD practitioner about potential
help in addressing an organizational issue. The organization
member may be a manager , staff specialist, or some other key
participant; the practitioner may be an OD professional from
inside or outside of the organization.
Entering and contracting are the initial steps in
the OD process. They involve defining in a
preliminary manner the organization‘s problems or
opportunities for development and establishing a
collaborative relationship between the OD practitioner
and members of the client system about how to
work on those issues. Entering and contracting set
the initial parameters for carrying out the subsequent
phases of OD: diagnosing the organization, planning
and implementing changes, and evaluating and
institutionalizing them. They help to define what
issues will be addressed by those activities, which
will carry them out, and how they will be
accomplished. Entering and contracting can vary in
complexity and formality depending on the situation.
Clarifying the Organizational Issue:
When seeking help from OD practitioners, organizations
typically start with a presenting problem—the issue
that has caused them to consider an OD process.
It may be specific (decreased market share,
increased absenteeism) or general (―we‘re growing too
fast,‖ ―we need to prepare for rapid changes‖).
The presenting problem often has an implied or
stated solution. For example, managers may believe
that because members of their teams are in
conflict, team building is the obvious answer. They
may even state the presenting problem in the
form of a solution: ―We need some team
building.‖ In many cases, however, the presenting
problem is only a symptom of an underlying
problem. For example, conflict among members of a
team may result from several deeper causes,
18

19. including ineffective reward systems, personality differences,
inappropriate structure, and poor leadership.
organization or department must be clarified early in
the OD process so that subsequent diagnostic and
intervention activities are focused correctly. Gaining a
clearer perspective on the organizational issue may
require collecting preliminary data. OD practitioners
often examine company records and interview a few
key members to gain an introductory understanding
of the organization, its context, and the nature
of the presenting problem. Those data are gathered
in a relatively short period of time, typically
over a few hours to one or two days. They
are intended to provide enough rudimentary knowledge
of the organizational issue to enable the two
parties to make informed choices about proceeding
with the contracting process. The diagnostic phase
of OD involves a far more extensive assessment
of the problematic or development issue that occurs
during the entering and contracting stage. The
diagnosis also might discover other issues that need
to be addressed, or it might lead to redefining
the initial issue that was identified during the
entering and contracting stage. This is a prime
example of the emergent nature of the OD
process, where things may change as new
information is gathered and new events occur.
19

20. Content Description
Goals of Proposed Descriptive, clear, and concise goals to
Effort achieved
Recommended Action Description of 1) diagnosis, 2) data ana
Plan process,
3) feedback process, and 4) action-planning
process
Specification of What will various leaders, including the
Responsibilities practitioner,
be held accountable for?
Strategy for Provide change strategies, including education/t
Achieving the political influence, structural interventions, and
Desired State confrontation
of resistance.
Fees, terms, and Outline fees and expenses associated with
conditions project
20

21. 5. OD PRACTITIONERS
The system of organizations is very similar, if not the same as,
the system of human beings after all, organizations are made up
of humans! Therefore, when trying to understand the field of
organization development, it might be useful to compare aspects
of the field of organization development to aspects of the field
of medicine.
OD Practitioner Skills and Activities
Much of the literature about the competencies of an effective OD
practitioner reveals a mixture of personality traits, experiences, knowledge,
and skills presumed to lead to effective practice. For example, research on
the characteristics of successful change practitioners yields the following list
of attributes and abilities: diagnostic ability, basic knowledge of behavioral
science techniques, empathy, knowledge of the theories and methods within
the consultant's own discipline, goal setting and ability to perform self-
assessment, ability to see things objectively, imagination, flexibility, honesty,
consistency, and trust. Although these qualities and skills are laudable, there
has been relatively little consensus about their importance to effective OD
practice. Two ongoing projects are attempting to define and categorize the
skills and knowledge required of OD practitioners. In the first effort, fifty
well-known practitioners and researchers annually update a list of
professional competencies. The most recent list has grown to 187 statements
in nine areas of OD practice, including entry, start-up, assessment and
feedback, action planning, intervention, evaluation, adoption, separation, and
general competencies. The statements range from "staying centered in the
present, focusing on the ongoing process" and "understanding and explaining
how diversity will affect the diagnosis of the culture" to "basing change on
business strategy and business needs" and "being comfortable with quantum
leaps, radical shifts, and paradigm changes.Based on the studies available,
all OD practitioners should have the following basic skills and knowledge to
be effective:
21

22. 1. Intrapersonal skills.
Despite the growing knowledge base and sophistication of the field,
organization development is still a human craft. As the primary instrument
of diagnosis and change, practitioners often must process complex,
ambiguous information and make informed judgments about its relevance to
organizational issues. Practitioners must have the personal centering to know
their own values, feelings, and purposes as well as the integrity to behave
responsibly in a helping relationship with others. Because OD is a highly
uncertain process requiring constant adjustment and innovation, practitioners
must have active learning skills and a reasonable balance between their
rational and emotional sides. Finally, OD practice can be highly stressful
and can lead to early burnout, so practitioners need to know how to
manage their own stress.
2. Interpersonal skills.
Practitioners must create and maintain effective relationships with individuals
and groups within the organization and help them gain the competence
necessary to solve their own problems. Group dynamics, comparative
cultural perspectives, and business functions are considered to be the
foundation knowledge, and managing the consulting process and facilitation
as core skills. All of these interpersonal competencies promote effective
helping relationships. Such relationships start with a grasp of the
organization's perspective and require listening to members' perceptions and
feelings to understand how they see themselves and the organization. This
understanding provides a starting point for joint diagnosis and problem
solving. Practitioners must establish trust and rapport with organization
members so that they can share pertinent information and work effectively
together. This requires being able to converse in members' own language
and to give and receive feedback about how the relationship is progressing.
To help members learn new skills and behaviors, practitioners must serve as
concrete role models of what is expected. They must act in ways that are
credible to organization members and provide them with the counseling and
22

23. coaching necessary to develop and change. Because the helping relationship
is jointly determined, practitioners need to be able to negotiate an acceptable
role and to manage changing expectations and demands.
3. General consultation skills.
OD starts with diagnosing an organization or department to understand its
current functioning and to discover areas for further development. OD
practitioners need to know how to carry out an effective diagnosis, at least
at a rudimentary level. They should know how to engage organization
members in diagnosis, how to help them ask the right questions, and how
to collect and analyze information. A manager, for example, should be able
to work with subordinates to determine jointly the organization's or
department's strengths or problems. The manager should know basic
diagnostic questions some methods for gathering information, such as
interviews or surveys, and some techniques for analyzing it, such as force-
field analysis or statistical means and distributions. In addition to diagnosis,
OD practitioners should know how to design and execute an intervention.
They need to be able to define an action plan and to gain commitment to
the program. They also need to know how to tailor the intervention to the
situation, using information about how the change is progressing to guide
implementation. For example, managers should be able to develop action
steps for an intervention with subordinates. They should be able to gain
their commitment to the program (usually through participation), sit down
with them and assess how it is progressing, and make modifications if
necessary.
4. Organization development theory.
The last basic tool OD practitioners should have is a general knowledge of
organization development. They should have some appreciation for planned
change, the action research model, and contemporary approaches to
managing change. They should be familiar with the range of available
interventions and the need for evaluating and institutionalizing change
programs. Perhaps most important is that OD practitioners should understand
23

24. their own role in the emerging field of organization development, whether it
is as an OD professional, a manager, or a specialist in a related area. The
role of the OD practitioner is changing and becoming more complex. The
results of this study reinforce what other theorists have also suggested. The
OD practitioners of today are no longer just process facilitators, but are
expected to know something about strategy, structure, reward systems,
corporate culture, leadership, human resource development and the client
organization's business. As a result, the role of the OD practitioner today is
more challenging and more in the mainstream of the client organization than
in the past.
6. OD PRACTITIONER SKILLS AND ACTIVITIES
Susan Gebelein lists six key skill areas that are critical to the success of
the internal practitioner. The skills that focus on the people-oriented nature
of the OD practitioner include: •
Leadership
Leaders keep members focused on key company values and on opportunities
and need for improvement. A leader's job is to recognize when a company
is headed in the wrong direction and to get it back on the right track.
Project Management
This means involving all the right people and department to keep the
change program on track.
Communication
It is vital to communicate the key values to everyone in the organization.
Problem-Solving
The real challenge is to implement a solution to an organizational problem.
24

25. Forget about today's problems: focus constantly on the next set of problems.
Interpersonal
The number-one priority is to give everybody in the organization the tools
and the confidence to be involved in the change process. This includes
facilitating, building relationships, and process skills.
Personal
The confidence to help the organization make tough decisions, introduce
new techniques, try something new, and see if it works.
Practitioner Skills Profile
The OD practitioner's role is to help employees create their own solutions,
systems, and concepts. When the practitioner uses the above-listed skills to
accomplish these goals, the employees will work hard to make them
succeed, because they are the owners of the change programs.
Consultant’s Abilities
Ten primary abilities are key to an OD consultant‘s effectiveness. Most of
these abilities can be learned, but because of individual differences in
personality or basic temperament, some of them would be easier for some
to learn than for others.
1. The ability to tolerate ambiguity
Every organization is different, and what worked before may not work now;
every OD effort starts from scratch, and it is best to enter with few
preconceived notions other than with the general characteristics that we
know about social systems.
25

26. 2. The ability to influence.
Unless the OD consultant enjoys power and has some talent for persuasion,
he or she is likely to succeed in only minor ways in OD.
3. The ability to confront difficult issues.
Much of OD work consists of exposing issues that organization members
are reluctant to face.
4. The ability to support and nurture others.
This ability is particularly important in times of conflict and stress; it is
also critical just before and during a manager‘s first experience with team
building.
5.The ability to listen well and empathize.
This is especially important during interviews, in conflict situations, and
when client stress is high.
6. The ability to recognize one‘s feelings and intuition quickly.
It is important to be able to distinguish one‘s own perceptions from those
of the client and also be able to use these feelings and intuitions as
interventions when appropriate and timely.
7. The ability to conceptualize.
It is necessary to think and express in understandable words certain
relationships, such as the cause-and-effect and if-then linkages that exist
within the systemic context of the client organization.
8. The ability to discover and mobilize human energy,
Both within oneself and within the client organization. There is energy in
resistance, for example, and the consultant‘s interventions are likely to be
26

27. most effective when they tap existing energy within the organization and
provide direction for the productive use of the energy.
9.The ability to teach or to create learning opportunities.
This ability should not be reserved for classroom activities but should be
utilized on the job, during meetings, and within the mainstream of the
overall change effort.
10. The ability to maintain a sense of humor
both on the client‘s behalf and to help sustain perspective: Humor can be
useful for reducing tension. It is also useful for the consultant to be able to
laugh at himself or herself; not taking oneself too seriously is critical for
maintaining perspective about an OD effort, especially since nothing ever
goes exactly according to plan, even though OD is supposed to be a
planned change effort.
Role of Organization Development Professionals Position: Position:
Organization development professionals have positions that are either internal
or external to the organization. Internal consultants are members of the
organization and often are located in the human resources department. They
may perform the OD role exclusively, or they may combine it with other
tasks, such as compensation practices, training, or labor relations. Many
large organizations, such as Intel, Merck, Abitibi Consolidated, BHP, Philip
Morris, Levi Strauss, Procter & Gamble, Weyerhaeuser; GTE, and Citigroup,
have created specialized OD consulting groups. These internal consultants
typically have a variety of clients within the organization, serving both line
and staff departments. External consultants are not members of the client
organization; they typically work for a consulting firm, a university, or
themselves. Organizations generally hire external consultants to provide a
particular expertise that is unavailable internally and to bring a different and
potentially more objective perspective into the organization development
27

28. process. During the entry process, internal consultants have clear advantages.
They have ready access to and relationships with clients, know the language
of the organization, and have insights about the root cause of many of its
problems. This allows internal consultants to save time in identifying the
organization's culture, informal practices, and sources of power. They have
access to a variety of information, including rumors, company reports, and
direct observations. In addition, entry is more efficient and congenial, and
their pay is not at risk. External consultants, however, have the advantage
of being able to select the clients they want to work with according to
their own criteria. The contracting phase is less formal for internal
consultants and there is less worry about expenses, but there is less choice
about whether to complete the assignment. Both types of consultants must
address issues of confidentiality, risk project termination (and other negative
consequences) by the client, and fill a third-party role. During the diagnosis
process, internal consultants already know most organization members and
enjoy a basic level of rapport and trust. But external consultants often have
higher status than internal consultants, which allows them to probe difficult
issues and assess the organization more objectively. In the intervention
phase, both types of consultants must rely on valid information, free and
informed choice, and internal commitment for their success, However, an
internal consultant's strong ties to the organization may make him or her
overly cautious particularly when powerful others can affect a career.
Internal consultants also may lack certain skills and experience in facilitating
organizational change. Inside he may have some small advantages in being
able to move around the system and cross key organizational boundaries.
Finally, the measures of success and reward differ from those of the
external practitioner in the evaluation process. A promising approach to
having the advantages of both internal and external OD consultants is to
include them both as members of an internal-external consulting team.
External consultants can combine their special expertise and objectivity with
the inside knowledge and acceptance of internal consultants. The two parties
can use complementary consulting skills while sharing the workload and
possibly accomplishing more than either would by operating alone. Internal
consultants, for example, can provide almost continuous contact with the
client, and their external counterparts can provide specialized services
28

29. periodically, such as two or three days each month. External consultants
also can help train their organization partners, thus transferring OD skills
and knowledge to the organization. Although little has been written on
internal-external consulting teams, recent studies suggest that the
effectiveness of such teams depends on members developing strong,
supportive, collegial relationships. They need to take time to develop the
consulting team; confronting individual differences and establishing
appropriate roles and exchanges, member‘s need to provide each other with
continuous feedback and make a commitment to learning from each other.
In the absence of these team-building and learning activities, internal-external
consulting teams can be more troublesome and less effective than
consultants working alone.
The difference between External and Internal Consulting Stage of
change External consultant Internal consultant
Entering •Source clients •Build relationships •Learn company jargon
•―presenting problem‖ challenge •Time consuming •Stressful phase •Select
project/client according to own criteria •Unpredictable outcome •Ready
access to clients •Ready relationships •Knows company jargon •Understands
root causes •Time efficient• Congenial phase •Obligated to work with
everyone •Steady pay Contracting •Formal documents •Can terminate project
at will •Guard against out-of-pocket expenses •Information confidential •Loss
of contract at stake •Maintain third-party role •Informal agreements •Must
complete projects assigned •No out-of-pocket expenses •Information can be
open or confidential •Risk of client retaliation and loss of job at state •Act
as third party, driver (on behalf of client or pair of hands) Diagnosing
•Meet most organization members for the first time• Prestige from being
external •Build trust quickly •Confidential data can increase political
sensitivities •Has relationships with many organization members •Prestige
determined by job rank and client stature •Sustain reputation as trustworthy
over time •Data openly shared can reduce political intrigue Intervening
•Insist on valid information, free and informed choice, and internal
commitment •Confine activities within boundaries of client organization
•Insist on valid information, free and informed choice and internal
29

30. commitment •Run interference for client across organizational lines to align
support Evaluating •Rely on repeat business and customer referral as key
measures of project success •Seldom see long-term results •Rely on repeat
business, pay raise and promotion as key measures of success •Can see
change become institutionalized •Little recognition for job well done
Marginality:
A promising line of research on the professional OD role centers on the
issue of marginality. The marginal person is one who successfully straddles
the boundary between two or more groups with differing goals, value
systems, and behavior patterns. Whereas in the past, the marginal role
always was seen as dysfunctional, marginality now is seen in a more
positive light. There are many examples of marginal roles in organizations:
the salesperson, the buyer, the first-line supervisor, the integrator and the
project manager. Evidence is mounting that some people are better at taking
marginal roles than are others. Those who are good at it seem to have
personal qualities of low dogmatism, neutrality, open-mindedness, objectivity,
flexibility, and adaptable information-processing ability. Rather than being
upset by conflict, ambiguity, and stress, they thrive on it. Individuals with
marginal orientations are more likely than others to develop integrative
decisions that bring together and reconcile viewpoints among opposing
organizational groups and are more likely to remain neutral in controversial
situations. Thus, the research suggests that the marginal role can have
positive effects when it is filled by a person with a marginal orientation.
Such a person can be more objective and better able to perform
successfully in linking, integrative, or conflictladen roles, There are two
other boundaries:
the activities boundary and the membership boundary.
For both, the OD consultant should operate at the boundary, in a marginal
capacity. With respect to change activities, particularly implementation, the
consultant must help but not be directly involved. Suppose an off-site team-
building session, for a manger and his subordinates, he would help the
30

31. manager with the design and process of the meeting but would not lead.
With respect to membership, the OD consultant is never quite in nor quite
out.
Emotional Demands:
The OD practitioner role is emotionally demanding. Research and practice
support the importance of understanding emotions and their impact on the
practitioner's effectiveness. The research on emotional intelligence in
organizations suggests a set of abilities that can aid OD practitioners in
conducting successful change efforts. Emotional intelligence refers to the
ability to recognize and express emotions appropriately, to use emotions in
thought and decisions, and to regulate emotion in oneself and in others. It
is, therefore, a different kind of intelligence from problem-solving ability,
engineering aptitude, or the knowledge of concepts. In tandem with
traditional knowledge and skill, emotional intelligence affects and
supplements rational thought; emotions help prioritize thinking by directing
attention to important information not addressed in models and theories. In
That sense, some researchers argue that emotional intelligence is as
important as cognitive intelligence. Reports from OD practitioners support
the importance of emotional intelligence in practice. At each stage of
planned change, they must relate to and help organization members adapt to
resistance, commitment, and ambiguity. Facing those important and difficult
issues raises emotions such as the fear of failure or rejection. As the client
and others encounter these kinds of emotions, OD practitioners must have a
clear sense of emotional effects, including their own internal emotions.
Ambiguity or denial of emotions can lead to inaccurate and untimely
interventions. For example, a practitioner who is uncomfortable with conflict
may intervene to diffuse conflict because of the discomfort he or she feels,
not because the conflict is destructive. In such a case, the practitioner is
acting to address a personal need rather than intervening to improve the
system's effectiveness. Evidence suggests that emotional intelligence increases
with age and experience. In addition, it can be developed through personal
growth processes such as sensitivity training, counseling, and therapy. It
31

32. seems reasonable to suggest that professional OD practitioners dedicate
themselves to a long-term regimen of development that includes acquiring
both cognitive learning and emotional intelligence.
Use of Knowledge and Experience
The professional OD role has been described in terms of a continuum
ranging from client-centered (using the client's knowledge and experience) to
consultant-centered , Traditionally, OD consultants have worked at the client-
centered end of the continuum. Organization development professionals,
relying mainly on sensitivity training, process consultation, and team
building, have been expected to remain neutral, refusing to offer expert
advice on organizational problems. Rather than contracting to solve specific
problems, the consultant has tended to work with organization members to
identify problems and potential solutions, to help them study what they are
doing now and consider alternative behaviors and solutions, and to help
them discover whether, in fact, the consultant and they can learn to do
things better. In doing that the OD professional has generally listened and
reflected upon members' perceptions and ideas and helped clarify and
interpret their communications and behaviors.
32

33. 7. CONCLUSION
OD is an evolving field of applied social science with an
increasing diversity of concepts and applications. From its
traditional roots in small groups and social processes, OD has
grown to include the total organization and work designs, human
resources, and organization structures. This development closely
parallels the changing needs of modern organizations. It moves
beyond solving the unintended social problems inherent in large
bureaucracies to helping organizations become leaner, more flexible,
and more performance driven, so they can compete in today‘s
complex, rapidly changing environments.
To guide these applications, OD draws on a core set of
psychological concepts. They include humanistic perspectives of
human beings, resulting in organization changes that enhance
members‘ maturity and interpersonal competence; motivation
frameworks that promote changes satisfying a wide array of
members‘ needs; process views of change that account for driving
and restraining forces; groups as
the focus of change, and the need for members to participate
in developing and implementing change.
These psychological foundations influence how OD is applied in
organizations. They result in change processes that are cyclical
and collaborative, and that closely tie research to action. Such
change applications can help organizations address specific problems,
or, more radically, help them learn how to continuously transform
and renew themselves.
Because OD is an action science, it will continue to grow and
evolve as it helps organizations change and improve. As
organizations face new challenges, OD will create new methods
and applications. It will draw on new concepts and approaches
to guide future practice. OD‘s success will depend largely on
how well those ideas and innovations account for the fact that
33

34. organization change is essentially a social process requiring human
beings to change their behavior. Continued attention to the
psychological foundations of OD can help this occur.
34

35. 8. BIBLIOGRAPHY
(Vroom & Jago, 1988).
(Beckhard & Harris, 1987)
(Cummings & Worley, 2001)
Alderfer, C. (1969) An empirical test of a new theory of
human needs.
http://www.zainbooks.com
http://books.google.co.in
http://www.cliffsnotes.com
35