Organization Development (OD) is defined as a systematic process that applies behavioral science principles to help organizations change and improve. It emerged in the late 1940s from the fields of group dynamics and planned change theory. OD focuses on long-term, organization-wide efforts led from the top to increase effectiveness through interventions in organizational processes. Major themes of OD include planned change, a distinctive self-renewal approach, a total systems perspective, and action research. Over time, OD has been influenced by different approaches like laboratory training, action research, participative management, quality of work life programs, and a growing focus on strategic change.

1. ORGANIZATION
DEVELOPMENT

2. Learning Objectives
Chapter One
• To provide a definition of Organization
Development (OD)
• To distinguish OD and planned change from
other forms of organization change
• To describe the historical development of OD

3. The Field of
ORGANIZATION
DEVELOPMENT

4. The Field of OD
OD is
a systematic process
for applying
behavioral science
principles and practices
in organization
to increase
Individual
and organizational
effectiveness.

5. The Field of OD
The orientation is:
Action which
Achieves
Result
As a consequences of
Planned activities.

6. The Field of OD
OD – OVERVIEW:
Emerged in late 1940`s.
Due to group dynamics
and theory of planned
change .
OD
is about how
people &
organizations
functions and
how to get them
to function
better.
OD Programs are
long term planned,
sustained efforts.

7. The Field of OD
OD
Starts when a leader identifies
an undesirable situation
and seeks to change it.

8. The Field of OD
Major Themes of OD:
A. Planned change
B. Distinctive nature/method
C. Total system perspective
D. Action Research

9. The Field of OD
Major Themes of OD:
A. Planned change:
Change means the new state of things &
is different from the old state of things.
Change is an
opportunity
rather than a
threat.
Demand for change comes
from both Internal and
external pressures.
Demand – Internal:
Obsolescence of product or services, new market
opportunity, new directions, diversity of work
force, financial considerations.
Demand – external:
Regulators, competitors, market forces, customer ,
technology and the society.

10. The Field of OD
Major Themes of OD:
A. Planned change:
The result of change is rapid and
turbulent.

11. The Field of OD
Major Themes of OD:
B. Distinctive nature/method:
OD typically do not give substantive solutions to problems.
They lead to “ SELF RENEWAL”
i.e. the aim of OD is to enable the organization members
better understand and solve their own problems.
Learning what needs to be changed and how to go about it.
This is the distinctive feature of OD .

12. The Field of OD
Major Themes of OD:
C. Total system perspective:
OD programs are
identifiable
flows of interrelated events
moving over time
towards the goals of
organizational
improvement & individual
development.

13. The Field of OD
Major Themes of OD:
C. Total system perspective:
System perspective entails:
A. Organizational Culture
B. Organizational Processes
C. Organizational Structure

14. The Field of OD
Major Themes of OD:
C. Total system perspective:
Organizational Culture
The values,
assumptions and
beliefs held in common
by the organizational
members.
It shapes their
perception.
The culture strongly
effects individual and
group behavior.
Organizational Processes
They are also crucial
leverage points.
It includes
communication,
problem solving,
decision making,
resource allocation,
conflict resolution,
reward allocation,
continuous learning,
strategic management
How, what is done ?
Organizational Structure
Over all design of org.
How the parts are
attached to the whole.
Associates:
 Excessive waste,
 Inefficiency,
 Inflexibility,
 High cost.

15. The Field of OD
Major Themes of OD:
D. Action Research:
CHANGE OCCURS BASED ON THE ACTION TAKEN,
AND NEW KNOWLEDGE COME FROM
EXAMINING THE RESULT OF THE ACTION.

16. The Field of OD
Major Themes of OD:
D. Action Research:
(1) A preliminary diagnosis
(2) Date gathering from the client group
(3) Data feedback to the client group
(4) Exploration of the data by the client group
(5) Action planning by the client group
(6) Action taken by the client group
(7) Evaluation and assessment of the results of the action by client with an OD practitioner

17. Warner Burke’s Definition of OD
OD is a planned process of change in
an organization’s culture through the
utilization of behavioral science
technology, research, and theory.

18. Wendell French’s Definition of OD
OD refers to a long-range effort to
improve an organization’s problem-
solving capabilities and its ability to
cope with changes in its external
environment with the help of external
or internal behavioral-scientist
consultants.

19. Richard Beckhard’s Definition of OD
OD is an effort (1) planned, (2)
organization-wide, and (3) managed
from the top, to (4) increase
organization effectiveness and health
through (5) planned interventions in
the organization’s “processes,” using
behavioral science knowledge.

20. Michael Beer’s Definition of OD
OD is a system-wide process of data collection,
diagnosis, action planning, intervention, and
evaluation aimed at: (1) enhancing congruence
between organizational structure, process,
strategy, people, and culture; (2) developing
new and creative organizational solutions; and
(3) developing the organization’s self-renewing
capacity. It occurs through collaboration of
organizational members working with a change
agent using behavioral science theory, research,
and technology.

21. Organization Development is...
a system wide application of behavioral science
knowledge to the planned development, improvement,
and reinforcement of the strategies, structures, and
processes that lead to organization effectiveness.

22. Five Stems of OD Practice
CurrentPractice
Laboratory Training
Action Research/Survey Feedback
Participative Management
Quality of Work Life
Strategic Change
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000+

23. Laboratory Training
This stem of OD pioneered laboratory training, or the T-group
—a small, unstructured group in which participants learn
from their own interactions and evolving group processes
about such issues as:
 interpersonal relations,
 personal growth,
 leadership,
 and group dynamics.
Essentially, laboratory training began in the summer
of 1946 by Kurt Lewin at MIT.

24. Laboratory Training
The researchers drew two conclusions about this first T-group
experiment:
(1) Feedback about group interaction was a rich learning experience.
(2) The process of “group building” had potential for learning that could
be transferred to “back-home” situations.
In the 1950s, three trends emerged:
(1) The emergence of regional laboratories,
(2) The expansion of summer program sessions to year-round
sessions.
(3) The expansion of the T-group into business and industry,
with NTL members becoming increasingly involved with
industry programs.

25. Action Research/Survey Feedback
Kurt Lewin also was involved in the second movement that led
to OD’s emergence as a practical field of social science.
The action research contribution began in the
1940s with studies conducted by social
scientists John Collier, Kurt Lewin, and
William Whyte.
They discovered that research needed to be
closely linked to action if organization
members were to use it to manage change.

26. The results of action research
were two fold:
Members of organizations were able to use research on themselves to
guide action and change.
The social scientists were able to study that process to derive new
knowledge that could be used elsewhere.
A collaborative effort was initiated
between organization members and social
scientists to collect research data about an
organization’s functioning, to analyze it for
causes of problems, and to devise and
implement solutions.
After implementation, further data were
collected to assess the results, and the cycle
of data collection and action often continued.
Action Research/Survey Feedback

27. Participative Management
The intellectual and practical advances from the
laboratory training stem and the action research/survey-
feedback stem were followed closely by the belief that a
human relations approach represented a “one best way”
to manage organizations.
This belief was exemplified in research that
associated Rensis Likert’s Participative Management
Program, characterized organizations as having one
of four types of management systems.

28. Participative Management
EXPLOITIVE AUTHORITATIVE SYSTEMS
(System 1) exhibit an autocratic, top-down approach to leadership.
Employee motivation is based on punishment and occasional rewards.
Communication is primarily downward, and there is little lateral interaction or
teamwork. Decision making and control reside primarily at the top of the organization.
System 1 results in mediocre performance.
BENEVOLENT AUTHORITATIVE SYSTEMS
(System 2) are similar to System 1, except that management is more paternalistic.
Employees are allowed a little more interaction, communication, and decision making
but within boundaries defined by management.

29. Participative Management
CONSULTATIVE SYSTEMS
(System 3) increase employee interaction, communication, and decision making.
Although employees are consulted about problems and decisions, management still
makes the final decisions. Productivity is good, and employees are moderately
satisfied with the organization.

30. Participative Management
PARTICIPATIVE GROUP SYSTEMS
(System 4) are almost the opposite of System 1.
Designed around group methods of decision making and supervision, this system
fosters high degrees of member involvement and participation.
Work groups are highly involved in setting goals, making decisions, improving
methods, and appraising results.
Communication occurs both laterally and vertically, and decisions are linked
throughout the organization by overlapping group membership.
System 4 achieves
high levels of productivity,
quality, and member satisfaction.

31. Quality of Work Life
The contribution of the productivity and quality-of-work-life
(QWL) background to OD can be described in two phases.
THE FIRST PHASE is described by the original projects
developed in Europe in the 1950s and their emergence in the
United States during the 1960s.
Based on the research of Eric Trist and his colleagues
at the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London,
early practitioners in Great Britain,
developed work designs aimed at better integrating technology
and people.

32. Quality of Work Life
These QWL programs generally involved joint participation by
unions and management in the design of work and
resulted in work designs giving employees
high levels of discretion, task variety,
and feedback about results.
Perhaps the most distinguishing
characteristic of these QWL programs was
the discovery of self-managing work groups
as a form of work design.

33. Quality of Work Life
The excitement and popularity of this first phase of QWL in the United
States lasted until the mid-1970s, when other more pressing issues,
such as inflation and energy costs, diverted national attention.
However, starting in 1979, a SECOND PHASE of QWL
activity emerged.
A major factor contributing to the
resurgence of QWL was growing
international competition faced by the US
markets that the relatively low cost and
high quality of foreign-made goods.

34. Quality of Work Life
As a result, QWL programs expanded beyond their initial focus on work
design to include other features of the workplace that can affect employee
productivity and satisfaction, such as ;
o reward systems,
o work flows, management styles,
o and the physical work environment.
This expanded focus resulted in larger-scale and longer-term projects
than had the early job enrichment programs and shifted attention beyond
the individual worker to work groups and the larger work context.

35. Quality of Work Life
Popularized in Japan, quality circles are
groups of employees trained in problem-
solving methods that meet regularly to
resolve work environment, productivity,
and quality-control concerns and to
develop more efficient ways of working.

36. Strategic Change
The strategic change background is
a recent influence on OD’s evolution.
As organizations and their technological, political, and social
environments have become more complex and more uncertain, the
scale and complexity of organizational change have increased.
This trend has produced the need
for a strategic perspective from OD
and encouraged planned change processes at the organization level.

37. Strategic Change
The need for strategic change
is usually triggered by some major disruption to
the organization,
 such as the lifting of regulatory requirements,
 a technological breakthrough,
 or a new chief executive officer coming in from
outside the organization.

38. Today, the field is being influenced by
the globalization and information
technology trends.