At this point, members discuss the feedback and explore with the OD practitioner whether they want to work on identified problems.
A close interrelationship exists among data gathering, feedback, and diagnosis because the consultant summarizes the basic data from the client members and presents the data to them for validation and further diagnosis.
Next, the OD practitioner and the client members jointly agree on further actions to be taken. At this stage, the specific action to be taken depends on the culture, technology, and environment of the organization; the diagnosis of the problem; and the time and expense of the intervention.
This stage involves the actual change from one organizational state to another. It may include installing new methods and procedures, reorganizing structures and work designs, and reinforcing new behaviours. Such actions typically cannot be implemented immediately but require a transition period as the organization moves from the present to a desired future state. Because action research is a cyclical process, data must also be gathered after the action has been taken to measure and determine the effects of the action and to feed the results back to the organization.
This, in turn, may lead to re-diagnosis and new action. The positive model focuses on what the organization is doing right. It helps members understand their organization when it is working at its best and builds off those capabilities to achieve even better results. This first phase determines the subject of change.
It emphasizes member involvement to identify the organizational issue they have the most energy to address. For example , members can choose to look for successful male-female collaboration as opposed to sexual discrimination , instances of customer satisfaction as opposed to customer dissatisfaction.
For example , If the topic is organizational innovation, then members help to develop an interview protocol that collects stories of new ideas that were developed and implemented in the organization.
For example, the stories of innovation may contain themes about how managers gave people the freedom to explore a new idea, the support organization members received from their coworkers, or how the exposure to customers sparked creative thinking. Members then examine the identified themes, challenge the status quo, and describe a compelling future. The final phase involves the design and delivery of ways to create the future.
It describes the activities and creates the plans necessary to bring about the vision. It proceeds to action and assessment phases similar to those of action research described previously. The three models of planned change suggest a general framework for planned change as shown in Figure. The framework describes the four basic activities that practitioners and organization members jointly carry out in organization development.
The first set of activities in planned change concerns entering and contracting. Those events help managers decide whether they want to engage further in a planned change program and to commit resources to such a process. In this stage of planned change, the client system is carefully studied. The diagnostic process is one of the most important activities in OD. It includes choosing an appropriate model for understanding the organization and gathering, analyzing, and feeding back information to managers and organization members about the problems or opportunities that exist.
In this stage, organization members and practitioners jointly plan and implement OD interventions. The final stage in planned change involves evaluating the effects of the intervention and managing the institutionalization of successful change programs so they persist. If necessary, a follow up should be done to determine the completion since a positive result is expected by implementing the planned change.
Organizations require change leaders to drive the change, and they may hire both external and internal change leaders for their expertise and specialization. Both of them have unique abilities and influence on the change process. The internal change leaders are at an advantage in the entering stage since they have access to the clients. This means they do not have to spend time building relations with the existing clients. They also understand the organizational goals and the problems associated and have direct access to direct information of the company, which saves their time further.
This helps them to function smoothly by increasing efficiency. On the other hand, external change leaders will need to spend more time obtaining information and data about the company, which delays their work as compared to internal change leaders. Internal change leaders will have fewer things to worry about since they are already in the organization. Things like internal contracts and ample expenses will remove their concern on such things.
On the other hand, external changes leaders do not get it so easy. They will have a formal contract and can decide whether their specialties and skills match the organizational goals agreeing to the assignment.
In this third stage, internal change leaders already have a basic level of trust with most people in the organization, but external change leaders will have to spend more time building rapport. On the other hand, external changes leaders have high status as compared to their internal counterparts.
This helps them investigate more pressing issues and provide their assessment more objectively to the company seniors. To ensure success, both internal, as well as external change leaders, should depend on valid information to make decisions. In this stage, compared to the external change leader, the internal counterpart will be more cautious because of having more robust bonds with the company.
A person in higher authority or power will be able to influence the decisions made. Still, the same person will not have a similar authority over the external change leader since he is not related to the organization. The internal change leader is present for the change as it is implemented in the organization.
This will allow the internal leaders to make minor modifications as the change progresses. On the other hand, external change leaders are not present to see long-term results.
This is because they are not available in the organization and are not internal employees to look out for the long-term results. Planned change is necessary for every organization, and the implementation of it has to be done methodically. The number of steps in planned change may vary depending on the organization and the type of industry, but organizations must be prepared for the change. Leave a Reply Cancel reply. Your email address will not be published.
Let's take a look at planned change in general. Their seminal work, " Organization Development and Change ," is an excellent primer on change management models.
Experts in organizational development and change often refer to three well-established models. The second is the so-called action research model, popular in development work. The third is the positive model with a unique focus on sufficiency rather than deficit. Fun fact: The main change models we recognize today are products of the so-called pop-management culture that took off in the s.
This culture favored step-diagrams and simple visualizations as opposed to heavy reads. For example, the now infamous BCG Matrix.
Source: Cummings and Worley In force field analysis, change-related problems are characterized by an imbalance between so-called driving forces — e. To thrive, an organization must unfreeze the driving and restraining forces, introduce an imbalance increase the drivers, reduce the restraints — or both , and, finally, refreeze the forces. This final step brings an organization back into "quasi-equilibrium. Further reading: Joe Thomas — " Force field analysis: A new way to evaluate your strategy ".
Two examples come to mind. The first is from Lippitt, Watson, and Westley The remaining stages include empowering broad-based action, generating short-term wins moving ; and consolidating gains and producing more change, and anchoring new approaches in the culture refreezing.
Also known as participatory action research, action learning, action science, or self-design model, the action research model is also prominent among organizational change specialists.
Action research activities are typically top-down and happen in iterative cycles of research and action. Consequently, they require considerable collaboration between staff and externals. A third important model is the positive model. While the three planned change models, and all their current variations, are highly informative, they also come with some critique.
First, the models look at change as a linear process. In reality, however, linearity is the exception rather than the norm.
0コメント