MU0002-Unit-01-Introduction to Management

Unit-01-Introduction to Management Structure: 1.1 Introduction Objectives 1.2 Definitions of Management 1.3 Characteristics of Management 1.4 Scope and Levels of Management 1.5 Importance of Management 1.6 Role of Management 1.7 Administration and Management Self Assessment Questions 1.8 Summary 1.9 Terminal Questions 1.10 Answers to SAQs and TQs 1.1 Introduction Management is a global need. It is essential to every individual, a family, educational institution, hospital, religious organizations, team of players, a government, military systems, cultural body, urban centers and business enterprises. No individual can satisfy all his needs by himself. Men should join together and accomplish goals through co-operation. Whenever, there is an organized group of people working towards a common goal, some type of management is needed. A business enterprise must be directed and controlled by a group of people to achieve its goals. The resources of money, manpower, material and technology will be waste unless they are out to work in a co-ordinated manner. It is the management which uses the available resources in such a manner that a business enterprise is able to earn surplus to meet the needs of growth and expansion. Management is required to plan, organize, co-

ordinate and control the affairs of a business concern. It brings together all resources and motivates people to achieve the objectives of a business enterprise. Objectives: After studying this unit, you will be able to: Define management. Explain the characteristics of management. Differentiate between management and administration. State the principles of management. Explain the roles of managers. Explain managerial skills. 1.2 Definitions of Management Management may be defined in many different ways. Many eminent authors on the subject have defined the term management. Some of these definitions are reproduced below: According to Lawerence A. Appley Management is the development of people and not the direction of things. In the words of George R. Terry Management is a distinct process consisting of planning, organizing, actuating and controlling performed to determine and accomplish the objectives by the use of people and resources. According to James L. Lundy Management is principally the task of planning, co-ordinating, motivating and controlling the efforts of others towards a specific objective. In the words of Henry Fayol To manage is to forecast and to plan, to organize, to command, to co-ordinate and to control. According to Peter F. Drucker Management is a multi-purpose organ that manages a business and managers and manages worker and work. In the words of Koontz and ODonnel Management is defined as the creation and maintenance of an internal environment in an enterprise where individuals working together in groups can perform efficiently and effectively towards the attainment of group goals.

According to Newman, Summer and Warren The job of management is to make co-operative endeavor to function properly. A Manager is one who gets things done by working with people and other resources. From the definitions quoted above, it is clear that management is a technique of extracting work from others in an integrated and co-ordinated manner for realizing the specific objectives through productive use of material resources. Mobilizing the physical, human and financial resources and planning their utilization for business operations in such a manner as to reach the defined goals can be referred to as management. If the views of the various authorities are combined, management could be defined as a distinct ongoing process of allocating inputs of an organization (human and economic resources) by typical managerial functions (planning, organizing, directing and controlling) for the purpose of achieving stated objectives, namelyoutput of goods and services desired by its customers (environment). In the process, work is performed with and through personnel of the organization in an ever-changing business environment. From the above, it is clear that management refers to the process of getting activities completed efficiently and effectively with and through other people. The process represents the functions or primary activities engaged in by managers. These functions are typically labeled planning, organizing, leading, and controlling. Efficiency is a vital part of management. It refers to the relationship between inputs and outputs. If you can get more output from the given inputs, you have increased efficiency. Similarly, if you can get the same output from less input, you also have increased efficiency. Since managers deal with input resources that are scarce-mainly people, money and equipment-they are concerned with the efficient use of these resources. Management, therefore, is concerned with minimizing resource costs. Efficiency is often referred to as doing things right. However, it is not enough simply to be efficient. Management is also concerned with getting activities completed; i.e. it seeks effectiveness. When managers achieve their organizations goals, we say they are effective. Effectiveness can be described as doing the right things. So efficiency is concerned with means and effectiveness with ends. Efficiency and effectiveness are interrelated. For instance, it is easier to be effective if one ignores efficiency. Timex could produce more accurate and attractive watches if it disregarded labour and material input costs. Some federal government agencies have been criticized regularly on the grounds that they are reasonably effective but extremely inefficient; that is, they get their jobs done but at a very high cost. Management is concerned, then, not only with getting activities completed (effectiveness), but also with doing so as efficiently as possible. Can organization be efficient and yet not effective? Yes, by doing the wrong things well. Many colleges have become highly efficient in processing students. By using computer-assisted learning, large lecture classes, and heavy reliance on part-time faculty, administrators have significantly cut the cost of educating each student. Yet students, alumni, and accrediting agencies have criticized some of these colleges for failing to educate their students properly. Of

course, high efficiency is associated more typically with high effectiveness. And poor management is most often due to both inefficiency and ineffectiveness or to effectiveness achieved through inefficiency. 1.3 Characteristics of Management Management is a distinct activity having the following salient features or characteristics: 1. Goal-oriented: Management is a purposeful activity. It co-ordinates the efforts of workers to achieve the goals of the organization. The success of management is measured by the extent to which the organizational goals are achieved. It is imperative that the organizational goals must be well-defined and properly understood by the mangers at various levels. 2. Economic Resource: Management is one of the factors of production together with land, labour and capital. It is the most critical input in the success of any organized group activity. It is the force which assembles and integrates other resources, namely, labour, capital and materials. These factors do not by themselves ensure production, they require the catalyst of management to produce goods and services required by the society. Thus, management is an essential ingredient of an organization. 3. Distinct Process: Management is a distinct process consisting of such functions as planning, organizing, staffing, directing and controlling. These functions are so interwoven that it is not possible to lay down exactly the sequence of various functions or their relative significance. In essence, the process of management involves decision-making and putting of decisions into practice. 4. Integrative Force: The essence of management is integration of human and other resources to achieve the desired objectives. All these resources are made available to those who manage. Managers apply knowledge, experience and management principles for getting the results from the workers by the use of non-human resources. Managers also seek to harmonize the individuals goals with the organizational goals for the smooth working of the organization. 5. Intangible Force: Management has been called an unseen force. Its presence is evidenced by the result of its efforts-orderliness, informed employees, buoyant spirit and adequate work output. Thus, feeling of management is result-oriented. One may not see with the naked eyes the functioning of management but its results are apparently known. People often remark of the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of management on the basis of the end results, although they cant observe it during operation. 6. Results through Others: The managers cannot do everything themselves. They must have the necessary ability and skills to get work accomplished through the efforts of others. They must motivate the subordinates for the accomplishment of the tasks assigned to them.

7. A Science and an Art: Management has an organized body of knowledge consisting of welldefined concepts, principles and techniques which have wide applications. So it is treated as a science. The application of these concepts, principles and techniques requires specialized knowledge and skills on the part of the manager. Since the skills acquired by a manager are his personal possession, management is viewed as an art. 8. System of Authority: Management as a team of managers represents a system of authority, a hierarchy of command and control. Managers at different levels possess varying degrees of authority. Generally, as we move down in the managerial hierarchy, the degree of authority gets gradually reduced. Authority enables the managers to perform their functions effectively. 9. Multi-disciplinary Subject: Management has grown as a field of study (i.e. discipline) taking the help of so many other disciplines such as Engineering, Anthropology, Sociology and Psychology. Much of the management literature is the result of association of these disciplines. For instance, productivity orientation drew its inspiration from Industrial Engineering and human relations orientation from Psychology. Similarly, Sociology and Operations Research have also contributed to the development of management science. 10. Universal Application: Management is universal in character. The principles and techniques of management are equally applicable in the fields of business, education, military, government and hospital. Henri Fayol suggested that principles of management would apply more or less in every situation. The principles are working guidelines which are flexible and capable of adaptation to every organization where the efforts of human beings are to be co-ordinated. 1.4 Scope of Management The scope of management is very wide. Basically, it refers to three distinct ideas. According to Herbision and Myers, management may be understood as (i) an economic resource, (ii) a system of authority, and (iii) a class or elite. Management as an economic resource Management is one of the factors of production along with land, labour and capital. In modern organizations, the effective use of the five Ms of management (money, materials, manpower, machinery and methods or ways of doing things) depends to a great extent on the quality of management. In other words, how effectively and economically the five Ms are combined together to produce desired results. According to Newman, management is required to covert the disorganized resources of men, materials, money and machines into a productive, useful, on-going concern. Management as a system of authority According to Herbison and Myers, management is the rule-making and rule-enforcing body. It is bound together by a web of relationships between superiors and subordinates, that is, people

are bound by authority relationships. Managers working at top levels enjoy more authority than people working at lower levels. Top management determines objectives and provides direction to enterprise activities. Middle management (departmental heads like work manage, finance manager, personnel manager etc.) interprets and explains the policies framed by the top management. They transmit orders. Instructions and decisions downward and carry the problem and suggestions upward. Lower management (first line supervisors) is concerned with routine, day-to-day matters. Management as a class or elite Sociologists view management as a distinct class in society having its own value system. The managerial class has become very important in modern organizations owing to its contribution to business success. As a separate group, the term management refers to the group of individuals occupying managerial positions. All the managers form the chief executive to the first line supervisors are collectively addressed as Management which refers to the group. Levels of Management An enterprise may have different levels of management. Levels of management refer to a line of demarcation between various managerial positions in an enterprise. The levels of management depend upon its size, technical facilities, and the range of production. We generally come across two broad levels of management, viz. (i) administrative management (i.e., the upper level of management) and (ii) operating management (i.e., the lower level of management). Administrative management is concerned with thinking functions such as laying down policy, planning and setting up of standards. Operative management is concerned with the doing function such as implementation of policies, and directing the operations to attain the objectives of the enterprise. But in actual practice, it is difficult of draw any clear-cut demarcation between thinking function and doing function as the basic/fundamental managerial functions are performed by all managers irrespective of their levels, or, ranks. For instance, wage and salary director of a company may assist in fixing wages and salary structure as a member of the Board of Directors, but as head of wages and salary department, his job is to see that the decisions are implemented. The real significance of levels is that they explain authority relationships in an organization. Considering the hierarchy of authority and responsibility, one can identify three levels of management namely: i) Top management of a company consists of owners/shareholders, Board of Directors, its Chairman, Managing Director, or the Chief Executive, or the General Manager or Executive Committee having key officers.

ii) Middle management of a company consists of heads of functional departments namely, Purchase Manager, Production Manager, Marketing Manager, Financial Controller, etc., and Divisional Sectional Officers working under these Functional Heads. iii) Lower level or operative management of a company consists of Superintendents, Foremen, Supervisors, etc. 1. Top management: Top management is the ultimate source of authority and it lays down goals, policies and plans for the enterprise. It devotes more time on planning and co-ordinating functions. It is accountable to the owners of the business of the overall management. It is also described as the policy-making group responsible for the overall direction and success of all company activities. The important functions of top management include: a) To establish the objectives or goals of the enterprise. b) To make policies and frame plans to attain the objectives laid. c) To set up an organizational framework to conduct the operations as per plans. d) To assemble the resources of money, men, materials, machines and methods to put the plans into action. e) To exercise effective control of the operations. f) To provide overall leadership to the enterprise. 2. Middle management: The job of middle management is to implement the policies and plans framed by the top management. It serves as an essential link between the top management and the lower level or operative management. They are responsible to the top management for the functioning of their department. They devote more time on the organization and motivation functions of management. They provide the guidance and the structure for a purposeful enterprise. Without them the top managements plans and ambitious expectations will not be fruitfully realized. The following are the main functions of middle management: a) To establish the objective or goals of the enterprise. b) To interpret the policies chalked out by top management. c) To prepare the organizational set up in their own departments for fulfilling the objectives implied in various business policies. d) To recruit and select suitable operative and supervisory staff. e) To assign activities, duties and responsibilities for timely implementation of the plans.

f) To compile all the instructions and issue them to supervisors under their control. g) To motivate personnel to attain higher productivity and to reward them properly. h) To co-operate with the other departments for ensuring a smooth functioning of the entire organization. i) To collect reports and information on performance in their departments. j) To report to top management. k) To make suitable recommendations to the top management for the better execution of plans and policies. 3. Lower or operative management: It is placed at the bottom of the hierarchy of management, and actual operations are the responsibility of this level of management. It consists of foreman, supervisors, sales officers, accounts officers and so on. They are in direct touch with the rank and file or workers. Their authority and responsibility is limited. They pass on the instructions of the middle management to workers. They interpret and divide the plans of the management into short-range operating plans. They are also involved in the process of decisions-making. They have to get the work done through the workers. They allot various jobs to the workers, evaluate their performance and report to the middle level management. They are concerned with direction and control functions of management. They devote more time in the supervision of the workers. 1.5 Importance of Management According to Drucker, management is the dynamic lift-giving element in every organization. It is the activating force that gets things done through people. Without management, an organization is merely a collection of men, machines, money and material. In its absence, the resources of production remain resources and never become production. The importance of management can be understood from the following points. (i) Optimum use of resources: Management ensures optimum utilization of resources by attempting to avoid wastage of all kinds. It helps in putting the resources to the best advantage within the limitations set by the organization and its environment. A right climate is created for workers to put in their best and show superior performance. (ii) Effective leadership and motivation: In the absence of management, the working of an enterprise will become random and haphazard in nature. Employees feel a sense of security when they find a body of individuals working day and night for the continued growth of an organization. Management makes group effort more effective. It enables employees to move cooperatively and achieve goals in a coordinated manner. Management creates teamwork and

motivates employees to work harder and better by providing necessary guidance, counseling and effective leadership. (iii) Establishers sound industrial relations: Management minimizes industrial disputes and contributes to sound industrial relations in an undertaking. Industrial peace is an essential requirement for increasing productivity. To this end, manager tries to strike a happy balance between the demands of employees and organizational requirements. They initiate prompt actions whenever workers express dissatisfaction over organizational rules, methods, procedures and reward systems. (iv) Achievement of goals: Management plays an important role in the achievement of objectives of an organization. Objective can be achieved only when the human and non-human resources are combined in a proper way. Management is goal-oriented. With a view to realize the predetermined goals-managers plan carefully. Organize the resources properly; hire competent people and provide necessary guidance. They try to put everything on the right tract. Thus unnecessary deviations. Overlapping efforts and waste motions are avoided. In the final analysis, all these help in realizing goals with maximum efficiency. (v) Change and growth: Changes in technology, government policy, competition, etc., often threaten the survival of a firm. Failure to take note of customers needs regarding full efficiently has spelt doom for Ideal java in the two-wheeler market in India. An enterprise has to take note of these changes and adapt itself quickly. Managers help an organization by anticipating these changes (carefull planning, forecasting combined with efficient use of resources) and taking appropriate steps. Successful managers are the ones who anticipate and adjust to changing circumstances rather than being passively swept along or caught unprepared. (vi) Improves standard of living : Management improves the standard of living of people by (a) using scarce resources efficiently and turning out profits. (b) Ensuring the survival of the firm in the face of continued changes. (c) Exploiting new ideas for the benefit of society as a whole and (d) developing employee talents and capabilities while at work and prompting them to show peak performance. Management as a profession By a professional manager, we generally mean a manager who undertakes management as a career and is not interested in acquiring ownership share in the enterprise which he manages. According to McFarland, a profession possesses the following characteristics: i) A body of principles, techniques, skills, and specialized knowledge; ii) Formalized methods of acquiring training and experience; iii) The establishment of a representative organization with professiona-lizing as its goal.

iv) The formation of ethical codes for the guidance of conduct; and v) The charging of fees based on the nature of services. Management is a profession to the extent it fulfils the above conditions. It is a profession in the sense that there is a systematized body of management, and it is distinct, identifiable discipline. It has also developed a vast number of tools and techniques. But unlike medicine or law, a management degree is not a pre-requisite to become a manager. Management is also a profession in the sense that formalized methods of training is available to those who desire to be managers. We have a number of institutes of management and university departments of management which provide formal education in this field. Training facilities are provided in most companies by their training divisions. A number of organizations such as the Administrative Staff College of India, the Indian Institute of Management, Management Development Institute, the All India Management Association, and the university departments of management offer a variety of short-term management training programmes. Management partially fulfils the third characteristic of profession. There are a number of representative organizations of management practitioners almost in all countries such as the All India Management Association in India, the American Management Association in U.S.A., etc. However, none of them has the professionalizing of the management as its goal. Management does not fulfill the last two requirements of a profession. There is no ethical code of conduct for managers as for doctors and lawyers. Some individual business organizations, however, try to develop a code of conduct for their own managers but there is no general and uniform code of conduct for all managers. In fact, bribing public officials to gain favours, sabotaging trade unions, manipulating prices and markets are by no means uncommon management practices. Furthermore, managers in general, do not seem to adhere to the principle of service above self. However, little regard is paid to the elevation of service over the desire for monetary compensation is evident by switching of jobs by managers. Indeed such mobile managers are regarded as more progressive and modern than others. It may be concluded from the above discussion that management is a science, an art as well as a profession. As a social science, management is not as exact as natural sciences, and it is not as fully a profession as medicine and law. 1.6 Role of Management In the late 1960s, Henry Mintzberg did a careful study of five chief executives at work. What he discovered challenged several long-held notions about the managers job. For instance, in contrast to the predominant views at the time that managers were reflective thinkers who carefully and systematically processed information before making decisions, Mintberz found that his managers engaged in a large number of varied, unpatterned, and short-duration activities. There was little time for reflective thinking because the managers encountered

constant interruptions. Half of these managers activities lasted less than nine minutes each. But in addition to these insights, Mintzberg provided a categorization scheme for defining what managers do based on actual managers on the job. Mintzberg concluded that managers perform ten different but highly interrelated roles. The term management roles refers to specific categories of managerial behaviour. These ten roles can be grouped as those primarily concerned with interpersonal relationships, the transfer of information, and decision-making. Interpersonal Roles: All managers are required to perform duties that are ceremonial and symbolic in nature interpersonal roles. When the president of a college hands out diplomas at commencement or a factory supervisor gives a group of high school students a tour of the plant, he or she is acting in a figurehead role. All managers have a role as a leader. This role includes hiring, training, motivating, and disciplining employees. The third role within the interpersonal grouping is the liaison role. Mintzberg described this activity as contacting external sources who provide the manager with information. These sources are individuals or groups outside the managers unit, and may be inside or outside the organization. The sales manager who obtains information from the human resources manager in his or her same company has an internal liaison relationship. When that sales manager confers with other sales executives through a marketing trade association, he or she has an outside liaison relationship. Informational Roles: All managers, to some degree, fulfill informational roles-receiving and collecting information from organizations and institutions outside their own. Typically, they do so by reading magazines and talking with others to learn of changes in the publics tastes, what competitors may be planning, and the like. Mintzberg called this the monitor role. Managers also act as a conduit to transmit information to organizational members. This is the disseminator role. When they represent the organisation to outsiders, manages also perform a spokesperson role. Table 1.1: Mintzbergs Managerial Roles Role Interpersonal Figurehead Description Identifiable Activities

Leader

Symbolic head; obliged to Greeting visitors; signing perform a number of routine legal documents. duties of a legal or social nature. Responsible for the motivation Performing virtually all and activation of subordinates; activities that involve responsible for staffing, subordinates. training, and associated duties.

Liaison

Maintains self-developed Acknowledging mail; network of outside contacts doing external board and informers who provide work; performing other favors and information. activities that involve outsiders. Seeks and receives wide variety Reading periodicals and of special information (much of reports; maintaining it current) to develop thorough personal contacts. understanding of organization and environment; emerges as nerve center of internal and external information about the organization. Transmits information received Holding informational from outsides or from other meetings; making phone subordinates to members of calls to relay information. the organization some information is factual, some involves interpretation and integration of diverse value positions of organizational influencers. Transmits information to Holding board meetings; outsiders on organizations giving information of the plans, policies, actions, results, media. etc.; serves as expert on organizations industry. Searches organization and its Organizing strategy and environment for opportunities review sessions to and initiates improvement develop new programs. projects to bring about change; supervises design of certain projects as well. Responsible for corrective Organizing strategy and action when organization faces review sessions that important, unexpected involve disturbances and disturbances crises Responsible for the allocation Scheduling; requesting of organizational resources of authorization; performing all kinds in effect, the making any activity that involves or approval of all significant budgeting and the

Informational Monitor

Disseminator

Spokesperson

Decisional Entrepreneur

Disturbance handler

Resource allocator

organizational decisions. Negotiator

programming of subordinates work. Responsible for representing Participating in union the organization at major contract negotiations. negotiations.

Source: Henry Mintzberg, The Nature of Managerial Work (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), pp 93-94 Copyright 1973 by Hency Mintzberg, Reprinted by permission of Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. Decisional Roles: Finally, Mintzberg identified four decisional roles which revolve around the making of choices. As entrepreneurs, managers initiate and oversee new projects that will improve their organizations performance. As disturbance handlers, managers take corrective action in response to previously unforeseen problems. As resource allocators, managers are responsible for allocating human, physical and monetary resources. Last, managers perform as negotiators when they discuss and bargain with other groups to gain advantages for their own units. An Evaluation: A number of follow-up studies have tested the validity of Mintzbergs role categories across different types of organizations and at different levels within given organizations. The evidence generally supports the idea that managers regardless of the type of organization or level in the organization-perform similar roles. However, the emphasis that managers give to the various roles seems to change with hierarchical level. Specifically, the roles of disseminator, figurehead, negotiator, liaison, and spokesperson are more important at the higher levels of the organization than at the lower ones. Conversely, the leader role is more important for lowerlevel managers than it is for either middle-or-top-level managers. Managerial Skills As you can see from the preceding discussion, a managers job is varied and complex. Managers need certain skills to perform the duties and activities associated with being a manager. During the early 1970, research by Robert L. Katz found that managers need three essential skills or competencies: technical, human, and conceptual. He also found that the relative importance of these skills varied according to the managers level within the organization. Technical Skills: First-line managers, as well as many middle managers, are heavily involved in technical aspects of the organizations operations. Technical skills include knowledge of and proficiency in a certain specialized field, such as engineering, computers, finance, or manufacturing. For example, an accounts payable manager must be proficient in accounting rules and standardized

forms so that she can resolve problems and answer questions that her accounts payable clerks might encounter. Although technical skills become less important as manager moves into higher levels of management, even top managers need some proficiency in the organizations speciality. Human Skills: The ability to work well with other people both individually and in a group is a human skill. Since managers deal directly with people, this skill is crucial. In fact, it remains just as important at the top levels of management as it is at the lower levels. Managers with good human skills can get the best out of their people. They know how to communicate, motivate, lead, and inspire enthusiasm and trust. Conceptual Skills: Managers also must have the ability to think and to conceptualize about abstract situations. They must be able to see the organization as a whole and the relationships among its various subunits and to visualize how the organization fits into its broader environment. These abilities are essential to effective decision-making, and all managers are involved in making decisions. These types of conceptual skills are needed by all managers at all levels but become more important as they move up the organizational hierarchy. 1.7 Administration and Management The use of two terms management and administration has been a controversial issue in the management literature. Some writers do not see any difference between the two terms, while others maintain that administration and management are two different functions. Those who held management and administration distinct include Oliver Sheldon, Floerence and Tead, Spriegal and Lansburg, etc. According to them, management is a lower-level function and is concerned primarily with the execution of policies laid down by administration. But some English authors like Brech are of the opinion that management is a wider term including administration. This controversy is discussed as under in three heads: i) Administration is concerned with the determination of policies and management with the implementation of policies. Thus, administration is a higher level function. ii) Management is a generic term and includes administration. iii) There is no distinction between the terms management and administration and they are used interchangeably. Administration is a higher level function:

Administration refers to policy-making, whereas management refers to execution of policies laid down by administration. This view is held by Tead, Spriegel and Walter. Administration is the phase of business enterprise that concerns itself with the overall determination of institutional objectives and the policies necessary to be followed in achieving those objectives. Administration is a determinative function; on the other hand, management as an executive function which is primarily concerned with carrying out of the broad policies laid down by the administration. Thus, administration involves broad policy-making and management involves the execution of policies laid down by the administration. Table 1.2: Distinction between Administration and Management: Basic 1. Meaning Administration Management Administration is concerned Management means with the formulation of getting the work done objectives, plans and policies through and with others. of the organisation. 2. Nature Administration relates to the Management relates to decision-making. It is a execution of decisions. It thinking function. is a doing function. 3. Scope It is concerned with It is concerned with the determination of major implementation of objectives and policies. policies. Managers are Administrators are basically concerned mainly with concerned with planning and organisation and direction control. of human resources. 4. Decision- Administration determines Management decides who Making what is to be done and when shall implement the it is to be done. administrative decisions. 5. Direction of It is concerned with leading It is concerned with Human Resources and motivation of middle leading and motivation of level executives. operative workforce for the execution of plans. 6. Environment Administration has direct Management is mainly interaction with external concerned with internal environment of business and forces, i.e., objectives, making strategic plans to deal plans and policies of the effectively with the organisation. environmental forces. 7. Status Administration refers to Management is relevant higher levels of management. at lower levels of management. 8. Usage of Term The term administration is The term management is often associated with widely used in business

government offices, public organisations sector and non-business private sector. organisations. Self Assessment Questions

in

the

1. __________is principally the task of planning, co-ordinating, motivating and controlling the efforts of others towards a specific objective. 2. Five Ms of management (________, ___________, _________, machinery and methods or ways of doing things) depends to a great extent on the quality of management. 3. Management creates ________ and motivates employees to work harder and better by providing necessary guidance, counseling and effective leadership. 1.8 Summary Management is concerned with getting things done through other people. It is the management which transforms physical resources of an organization into productive resources. Management is largely found at the middle and lower levels and administration is found at the higher levels. Still management is not completely a profession. There are three levels of management-top, middle and lower. Managers perform different roles to discharge their responsibilities. Lower level managers require and use a greater degree of technical skill and managers at higher levels use a greater degree of conceptual skill. Human skills are important at all managerial levels. 1.9 Terminal Questions 1. Define management. Explain its characteristics. 2. Discuss the importance of management. 3. Bring out the difference between Administration and Management. 1.10 Answers to SAQs and TQs SAQs: 1. Management 2. Money, materials, manpower 3. teamwork

Answers to TQs: 1. Refer section 1.2,1.3 2. Refer section 1.5 3. Refer section 1.7 Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University .

MU0004-Unit-02-Management Process
Unit-02-Management Process Structure: 2.1 Introduction Objectives 2.2 Process of Management 2.3 Planning 2.4 Organizing 2.5 Staffing 2.6 Directing 2.7 Motivating Self Assessment Questions 2.8 Summary 2.9 Terminal Questions 2.10 Answers to SAQs and TQs

2.1 Introduction Follett (1933) defined management as "the art of getting things done through people. One can also think of management functionally, as the action of measuring a quantity on a regular basis and of adjusting some initial plan. Management functions are as follows (Fayol, 1949): 1. Planning 2. Organizing 3. Commanding 4. Coordinating 5. Controlling However, in recent time, management functions have been regrouped into four categories, since the managerial tasks have become highly challenging a fluid in nature making distinctions redundant to certain extent. Objectives: After this studying this unit, you will be able to: Define Management process. Explain different functions of management Process. Explain Planning, Organizing, Staffing, Directing, Motivating. 2.2 Management Process Peter Drucker said: Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things. Through leadership and management often overlap; the two are not quite the same. Management is about accomplishing a goal efficiently; leadership is about setting the desirable goals. Policy Formulation We have noted earlier that all organizations have well-defined goals and objectives. You might well ask what the need for a policy is when objectives are already defined. It is difficult to say where objectives end and policies begin. There is a degree of overlap between the two. Even

so, it would be correct to assume that an objective is what you want to accomplish, or where you want go to, while a policy, thus, is an enduring decision which holds good on a continuing basis to guide the members of the organization in doing what they are called upon to do, what distinguishers policies form objectives is that you first decide the objective, and then set out the method for achieving it. Objectives are the ends; policies are the means to achieve those ends. Decision Making Taking decisions is a process, a process in which one chooses a course which one thinks is the best. In the football field, kicking the ball with the left foot or right foot is a reflex action; it is not a decision in which any process is involved. However, the decision to change the design of a product, say a passenger car, should precede a good deal of research involving market surveys, studies on passenger comfort, fuel and machine efficiency, driving comfort, cost structure and so on. 2.3 Planning It involves the process of defining goals, establishing strategies for achieving these goals, and developing plans to integrate and coordinate activities. Every organization needs to plan for change in order to reach its set goal. Effective planning enables an organization adapt to change by identifying opportunities and avoiding problems. It provides the direction for the other functions of management and for effective teamwork. Planning also enhances the decisionmaking process. All levels of management engage in planning in their own way for achieving their preset goals. Planning in order to be useful must be linked to the strategic intent of an organization. Therefore, planning is often referred to as strategic in nature and also termed as strategic planning. Strategic Planning: Top level managers engage chiefly in strategic planning or long range planning Strategic planning is the process of developing and analyzing the organizations mission, overall goals, general strategies, and allocating resources. The tasks of the strategic planning process include the following steps: Define the mission: A mission is the purpose of the organization. Thus, planning begins with clearly defining the mission of the organization. The mission statement is broad, summarizing what the organization does. A mission statement should be short and should be easily understood and every employee should ideally be able to narrate it from memory. An explicit mission guides employees to work independently and yet collectively toward the realization of the organizations potential. The mission statement may be accompanied by an overarching

statement of philosophy or strategic purpose designed to convey a vision for the future as envisaged by top management. Conduct a situational or SWOT analysis A situation or SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis is vital for the creation of any strategic plan. The SWOT analysis begins with a scan of the external environment. Organizations need to examine their business situation in order to map out the opportunities and threats present in their environments. Sources of information may include stakeholders like, customers (internal and external), suppliers, governments (local, state, federal, international), professional or trade associations (conventions and exhibitions), journals and reports (scientific, professional, and trade). SWOT analysis provides the assumptions and facts on which a plan will be based. Analyzing strengths and weaknesses comprises the internal assessment of the organization. For assessing the strengths of the organization the following questions are important: 1. What makes the organization distinctive? 2. How efficient is our manufacturing? 3. How skilled is our workforce? 4. What is our market share? 5. What financing is available? 6. Do we have a superior reputation? For assessing the weaknesses of the organization the following questions are important: 1. What are the vulnerable areas of the organization that could be exploited? 2. Are the facilities outdated? 3. Is research and development adequate? 4. Are the technologies obsolete? For identifying opportunities the following elements need to be looked at: 1. In which areas is the competition not meeting customer needs? 2. What are the possible new markets?

3. What is the strength of the economy? 4. Are our rivals weak? 5. What are the emerging technologies? 6. Is there a possibility of growth of existing market?) Identifying threats involves the following: 1. In which areas does the competition meet customer needs more effectively? 2. Are there new competitors? 3. Is there a shortage of resources? 4. Are market tastes changing? 5. What are the new regulations? 6. What substitute products exist? In general terms, the best strategy is one that fits the organizations strengths to opportunities in the environment. The SWOT analysis is used as a baseline for future improvement, as well as gap analysis. Comparing the organization to external benchmarks (the best practices) is used to assess current capabilities. Benchmarking systematically compares performance measures such as efficiency, effectiveness, or outcomes of an organization against similar measures from other internal or external organizations. Set goals and objectives Strategic goals and objectives are developed to fill the gap between current capability and the mission. They are aligned with the mission and form the basis for the action plans of an organization. Objectives are also called performance goals. Generally, organizations have longterm objectives for factors such as, return on investment, earnings per share, etc. It also helps in setting minimum acceptable standards or common-sense minimums. Develop related strategies (tactical and operational) Tactical plans are based on the organizations strategic plan. In turn, operational plans are based on the organizations tactical plans. These are specific plans that are needed for each task or supportive activity comprising the whole. Strategic, tactical, and operational planning

must be accompanied by controls to ensure proper implantation of the plans, necessary to maintain competitive advantage in the said market. Monitor the plan A systematic method of monitoring the environment must be adopted to continuously improve the strategic planning process. To develop an environmental monitoring procedure, short-term standards for key variables that will tend to validate and support the long-range estimates must be established. Feedback is encouraged and incorporated to determine if goals and objectives are feasible. This review is used for the next planning cycle and review. 2.4 Organizing It involves designing, structuring, and coordinating the work components to achieve organizational goal. It is the process of determining what tasks are to be done, who is to do, how the tasks are to be grouped, who reports to whom, and where decisions are to be made. A key issue in accomplishing the goals identified in the planning process is structuring the work of the organization. Organizations are groups of people, with ideas and resources, working toward common goals. The purpose of the organizing function is to make the best use of the organizations resources to achieve organizational goals. Organizational structure is the formal decision-making framework by which job tasks are divided, grouped, and coordinated. Formalization is an important aspect of structure. It is the extent to which the units of the organization are explicitly defined and its policies, procedures, and goals are clearly stated. It is the official organizational structure conceived and built by top management. The formal organization can be seen and represented in chart form. An organization chart displays the organizational structure and shows job titles, lines of authority, and relationships between departments. The steps in the organizing process include: 1. Review plans 2. List all tasks to be accomplished 3. Divide tasks into groups one person can accomplish a job 4. Group related jobs together in a logical and efficient manner 5. Assign work to individuals 6. Delegate authority to establish relationships between jobs and groups of jobs. 2.5 Staffing

It is not the machines, money, materials, transport system and other physical resources that make the organization to achieve its goals but it is the competency and efficiency of the people who handle resources contributes for the accomplishment of objectives of the enterprise. Therefore it is the responsibility of the management to secure and maintain competent and dedicated workforce including managers and operatives. This task has been referred to as staffing. Staffing refers to the managerial function of determining and improving the manpower requirements of an enterprise. It involves many sub-functions such as manpower planning, recruitment, performance appraisal etc. Definition: 1. Koontz, ODonnell & Weihrich have defined staffing as filling positions in the organization structure through identifying work force requirements, inventorying the people available, selection, placement, promotion, appraisal, compensation and training of needed people. 2. Theo Haimann Concerned with the placement, growth and development of all those members of the organization whose function is to get things done through the efforts of other individuals. 3. Curther Geelick Cyndall Urwick Staffing is the whole personnel function of brining in and training the staff and marinating of favorable conditions of work Features of Staffing The analysis of the above definitions highlights the following features: 1. Deals with people: Staffing is a separate managerial function which deals with people in the organization. 2. It has many sub-functions: Staffing involves determination of the manpower requirement, recruitment, selection, placement, training, development, transfer and appraisal of personnel to fill the organizational positions. 3. It aims at right man at right position: Staffing aims at selection of right person for right place at right time and retaining them in the organization. 4. Pervasiveness of Staffing: Effective execution of staffing function is the responsibility of all managers in the organization. Managers of the concerned departments are responsible for the selection and development of qualified people for their department and maintain them in their department.

5. It deals with future requirements: Staffing deals with current and future personnel requirements. Present positions must be filled keeping in mind the future requirements. Thus staffing deals with the future requirements also. 6. It is a continuous function: With the growth and expansion of business additional manpower is needed, vacancies arise out of retirement, promotion, resignation, etc. Thus staffing is an ongoing process through out the life of an organization. 7. It is a process: it is a process having a logical sequence i.e. identifying the manpower requirements, recruitment, selection, induction, training development and maintenance of personnel. 8. Personnel policies and programs must be formulated as guides to perform the staffing function effectively. 2.6 Directing Direction is one of the functions of management. It is an important managerial function. It is a continuing function. Definition According to Koontz and ODonnel, directing is the interpersonal aspect of managing by which subordinates are led to understand and co-ordinate effectively and efficiently to the attainment of enterprises goals. It is instructing people as to what to do, how to do and telling them to do to the best of their ability. Direction is the managerial function of guiding, overseeing and leading people. Characteristics of Direction The characteristic features of direction are as follow: 1. Direction is an important managerial function. Through direction, management initiates actions in the organization, 2. Direction function is performed at every level of management. It is performed in the context of superior-subordinate relationship and every manager in the organization performs his duties both as a superior and subordinate. 3. Direction is continuous process and it continues throughout the life-time of the organization. A manger needs to give orders to his subordinates, motivate them, lead them and guide them on a continuous basis.

4. Direction imitates at the top level in the organization and follows to bottom through the hierarchy. It emphasizes that a subordinate is to be directed by his own superior only. 5. Direction has dual objectives. On the one hand, it aims at getting things done by subordinates and, on the other, to provide superiors opportunities for some more important work which their subordinates cannot do. Nature of Directing The nature of directing can be discussed under the following: 1. It is an important function of management: Directing is an important management function which provides a connecting link between planning, organizing and staffing on one hand and controlling on the other. Directing is the process around which all performances revolve. 2. Continuous function: Directing is a continuous process. The manager never ceases to direct, guide, teach, coach and supervise his subordinates. 3. Pervasive function: Directing is a managerial function performed by all mangers at all levels of the organization. The amount of time and effort an executive spends in directing however, will vary depending upon his level, the number of subordinate he has and the other duties he is expected to perform. 4. Essence of performance: Directing is the process around which all performances revolve. As Theo Haimann puts it, without the issuance of directives, without guiding and overseeing subordinates, nothing or at the best very little would be accomplished. 2.7 Motivating Motivating In the 1950s three specific theories were formulated and are the best known: Hierarchy of Needs theory, Theories X and Y, and the Two-Factor theory. Maslows Hierarchy of Needs Theory According to this theory, proposed by Maslow (1943), human beings have wants and desires which influence their behaviour; only unsatisfied needs can influence behavior, satisfied needs cannot. The needs are arranged in order of importance, from the basic to the complex. The person advances to the next level of needs only after the lower level need is at least minimally satisfied. The further they progress up the hierarchy, the more individuality, humanness and psychological health a person will show. The five needs are: Physiological: Includes hunger, thirst, shelter, sex, and other bodily needs

 Safety: Includes security and protection from physical and emotional harm Social: Includes affection, belongingness, acceptance, and friendship Esteem: Includes internal esteem factors, such as, self-respect, autonomy, and achievement; and external esteem factors, such as, status, recognition, and attention Self-actualization: The drive to become what one is capable of becoming; includes growth, achieving ones potential, and self-fulfillment Maslow separated the five needs into higher and lower orders. Physiological and safety needs are described as lower-order. Social, esteem, and self-actualization are classified as higherorder needs. Higher-order needs are satisfied internally, whereas, Lower-order needs are predominantly satisfied, externally. Theory X and Theory Y Douglas McGregor argued that a managers view of the nature of human beings is based on a certain grouping of assumptions and he or she tends to mould his or her behavior toward employees according to these assumptions. Theory X In this theory management assumes employees are inherently lazy and will avoid work, if they can. Workers need to be closely supervised and a comprehensive system of controls and a hierarchical structure is needed to supervise the workers closely. It is also assumed that workers generally place security above all other factors and will display little ambition. Theory Y In this theory management assumes employees may be ambitious, self-motivated, anxious to accept greater responsibility, and exercise self-control, self-direction, autonomy and empowerment. It is believed that employees enjoy their mental and physical work duties. It is also believed that, if given the chance employees have the desire to be creative and forward thinking in the workplace. There is a chance for greater productivity by giving employees the freedom to perform to the best of their abilities without being bogged down by rules. From the above, it is clear that Theory X assumes that lower-order needs dominate individuals. Theory Y assumes that higher-order needs dominate individuals. Herzbergs Two Factor Theory

Herzberg (1959) constructed a two-dimensional paradigm of factors affecting peoples attitudes about work. These two factors are motivators and hygiene factors and this theory is also called motivation-hygiene theory. Motivators are intrinsic factors, such as, advancement, recognition, responsibility, and achievement. Presence of these factors ensure job satisfaction. Extrinsic factors, such as, company policy, supervision, interpersonal relations, working conditions, and salary are hygiene factors. The absence of hygiene factors can create job dissatisfaction, but their presence does not motivate or create satisfaction. In summary, motivators describe a persons relationship with what she or he does, many related to the tasks being performed. Hygiene factors on the other hand, have to do with a persons relationship to the context or environment in which she or he performs the job. The satisfiers relate to what a person does while the dissatisfiers relate to the situation in which the person does what he or she does. Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job does not necessarily make the job satisfying. Job satisfaction factors are separate and distinct from job dissatisfaction factors. When hygiene factors are adequate, people will not be dissatisfied; neither will they be satisfied. To motivate people, emphasize factors intrinsically rewarding that are associated with the work itself or to outcomes directly derived from it. Self Assessment Questions 1. ____defined management as the art of getting things done through people. 2. The _____analysis begins with a scan of the external environment. 3. _______refers to the managerial function of determining and improving the manpower requirements of an enterprise. 2.8 Summary Management is the art of getting things done through people. Planning involves the process of defining goals, establishing strategies for achieving these goals, and developing plans to integrate and coordinate activities. Every organization needs to plan for change in order to reach its set goal. Organization involves designing, structuring, and coordinating the work components to achieve organizational goal. It is the process of determining what tasks are to be done, who is to do, how the tasks are to be grouped, who reports to whom, and where decisions are to be made. Staffing refers to the managerial function of determining and improving the manpower requirements of an enterprise. It involves many sub-functions such as manpower planning, recruitment, performance appraisal etc. Directing is the interpersonal aspect of managing by which subordinates are led to understand and co-ordinate effectively and efficiently to the attainment of enterprises goals.

2.9 Terminal Questions 1. What is planning? 2. Explain Staffing in detail 3. Write a short not on directing. 2.10 Answers to SAQs and TQs SAQs: 1. Follett 2. SWOT 3. Staffing Answers to TQs: 1. Reference 2.3 2. Reference 2.5 3. Reference 2.6 Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University .

MU0002-Unit-03-Organization Development: A Need

Unit-03-Organization Development: A Need Structure: 3.1 Introduction Objectives

3.2 Definitions 3.3 Characteristics of OD 3.4 Categories of OD 3.5 Goals of OD 3.6 OD and Management Development 3.7 Role of OD 3.8 Problems in OD Self Assessment Questions 3.9 Summary 3.10 Terminal Questions 3.11 Answers to SAQs and TQs 3.1 Introduction Organization development is the applied behavioural science discipline dedicated to improving organizations and the people in them through the use of the theory and practice of planned change. Organizations face multiple challenges and threats today threats to effectiveness, efficiency, and profitability; challenges from turbulent environments, increased competition, and changing customer demands; and the constant challenge to maintain congruence among organizational dimensions such as technology, strategy, culture, and processes. Keeping organizations healthy and viable in todays world is a daunting task. Individuals in organizations likewise face multiple challenges finding satisfaction in and through work, fighting obsolescence of ones knowledge and skills, maintaining dignity and purpose in pursuit of organizational goals, and achieving human connectedness and community in the workplace. Simple survival continuing to have an adequate job is a major challenge today in the light of constant layoffs and cutbacks. Although new jobs are being created at record rates, old jobs are being destroyed at an accelerating pace. Knowledge work is replacing muscle work. In summary, organizations and the individuals in them face an enormously demanding present and future. Are any strategies available to help people and organizations cope, adapt, survive, and even prosper in these vexing times? Fortunately, the answer is yes. A variety of solutions exists. And organization development (OD) is one of them. Basically, organization development is a

process of teaching people how to solve problems, take advantage of opportunities, and learn how to do that better and better over time. OD focuses on issues related to the human side of organizations by finding ways to increase the effectiveness of individuals, teams, and the organizations human and social processes. Organization development is a relatively recent invention. It started in the late 1950s when behavioural scientists steeped in the lore and technology of group dynamics attempted to apply that knowledge to improve team functioning and inter-group relations in organizations. Early returns were encouraging, and attention was soon directed toward other human and social processes in organizations such as the design of work tasks, organization structure, conflict resolution, strategy formulation and implementation, and the like. The field of OD grew rapidly in the 1970s and the 1980s with thousands of organizations in the private and public sectors using the theory and methods of OD with great success. Today, organization development represents one of the best strategies for coping with the rampant changes occurring in the marketplace and society. We predict that organization development will be preferred improvement strategy in future. Objectives: After studying this unit, you will be able to: Define organization development. Explain the characteristics of OD. Discuss the categories of OD programme. State the goals of OD. Distinguish between OD and Management Development Explore the problems in OD. 3.2 Definitions Organization Development (OD) is a response to change, a complex educational strategy intended to change the beliefs, attitudes, values and structure of organization so that they can better adapt to new technologies, markets, and challenges, and the dizzying rate of change itself. (Bennis, 1969). OD can be defined as a planned and sustained effort to apply behavioural science for system improvement, using reflexive, self-analytic methods. (Schmuck and Miles, 1971)

Organizational development is a process of planned change- change of an organizations culture from one which avoids an examination of social processes (especially decision making, planning and communication) to one which institutionalizes and legitimizes this examination. (Burke and Hornstein, 1972) The aims of OD are: 1) Enhancing congruence between organizational structure, processes, strategy, people, and culture; 2) Developing new and creative organizational solutions; and 3) Developing the organizations self-renewing capacity (Beer, 1980). Organization development is an organizational process for understanding and improving any and all substantive processes an organization may develop for performing any task and pursuing any objectives. A process for improving processes that is what OD has basically sought to be for approximately 25 years (Vaill, 1989) Organizational development is a set of behavioural science-based theories, values, strategies, and techniques aimed at the planned change of the organizational work setting for the purpose of enhancing individual development and improving organizational performance, through the alteration of organizational members on-the-job behaviours. (Porras and Robertson, 1992) OD is a systematic application of behavioral science knowledge to the planned development and reinforcement of organizational strategies, structure, and processes for improving an organizations effectiveness. (Cummings and Worley, 1993) Organization development is a planned process of change in an organizations culture through the utilization of behavioural science technologies, research, and theory. (Burke, 1994) As you can see, these definitions overlap a great deal (thats encouraging), and contain several unique insights (thats enlightening). All authors agree that OD applies behavioural science to achieve planned change. Likewise, they agree that the target of change is the total organization or system and that the goals are increased organizational effectiveness and individual development. Collectively, these definitions convey a sense of what organization development is and does. They describe in broad outline the nature and methods of OD. There is no set definition of OD and no agreement on the boundaries of the field, that is, what practices should be included and excluded. But these are not serious constraints given that the field is still evolving, and that practitioners share a central core of understanding as shown in the preceding definitions.

Now lets turn to our definition of organization development. We do not propose it as the right definition, but as one that includes characteristics we think are important for the present and future of the field. Organization development is a long-term effort, led and supported by top management, to improve an organizations visioning, empowerment, learning, and problem-solving processes, through an ongoing, collaborative management of organization culture-with special emphasis on the culture of intact work teams and other team configurations-using the consultantfacilitator role and the theory and technology of applied behavioural science, including action research. This definition is lengthy, but it includes a number of components that we consider essential. We will explain this definition in some detail. By long-term effort, we mean that organizational change and development takes time- several years in most cases. There is no quick fix when it comes to lasting organizational improvement. In fact, it is more accurate to describe improvement as a never-ending journey of continuous change. One program or initiative moves the organization to a higher plateau; then another moves it to yet a higher plateau of effectiveness. The phrase led and supported by top management states an imperative: Top management must lead and actively encourage the change effort. Organizational change is hard, serious business; it includes pain and setbacks as well as success. Top management must initiate the improvement journey and be committed to seeing it through. Most OD programs that fail do so because top management was ambivalent, lost its commitment, or became distracted with other duties. By visioning processes, we mean those processes through which organization members develop a viable, coherent, and shared picture of the nature of the products and services the organization offers, the ways those goods will be produced and delivered to customers, and what the organization and its members can expect from each other. Visioning means creating a picture of the desired future that includes salient features of the human side of the organization and then working together to make that picture a reality. By empowerment processes, we mean those leadership behaviours and human resource practices that enable organization members to develop and use their talents as fully as possible toward individual growth and organizational success. By empowerment, we mean involving large numbers of people in building the vision of tomorrow, developing the strategy for getting there, and making it happen. For empowerment to become fact of life, it must be built into the very fabric of the organization-its strategy, structure, processes, and culture. By learning processes, we mean those interacting, listening, and self-examining processes that facilitate individual, team, and organizational learning. Peter Senge describes learning organizations as organizations where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where

collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together. Problem-solving processes refer to the ways organization members diagnose situations, solve problems, make decisions, and take actions on problems, opportunities, and challenges in the organizations environment and its internal functioning. Michael Beers definition called for developing new and creative organizational solutions. We believe solutions to problems are enhanced by tapping deeply into the creativity, commitment, vitality, and common purposes of all members of the organization, in contrast to having only a select few involved. We further believe that having compelling, widely shared vision of a desired future creates the best climate for effective problem-solving by all the organizations members. Empowerment means involving people in problems and decisions and letting them be responsible for results. By ongoing collaborative management of the organizations culture, we mean, first, that one of the most important things to manage in organizations is the culture: the prevailing pattern of values, attitudes, beliefs, assumptions, expectations, activities, interactions, norms, sentiments, and artifacts. And second, managing the culture should be a collaborative business, one of wide-spread participation in creating and managing a culture that satisfies that wants and needs of individuals at the same time that it fosters the organizations purposes. Collaborative management of the culture means that everyone, not just a small group, has a stake in making the organization work. Just as visioning, empowerment, learning, and problem-solving processes are opportunities for collaboration in organization development, so is managing the culture. By including culture so prominently in our definition, we affirm our belief that culture is the bedrock of behaviour in organizations. The reciprocal influence among culture, strategy, structure, and processes makes each important, and each influences the others. Still, culture is of primary importance. Edgar Schein clarifies the nature and power of culture in his definition: Culture can now be defined as (a) a pattern of basic assumptions, (b) invented, discovered, or developed by a given group, (c) as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, (d) that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore (e) is to be taught to new members as the (f) correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems. So culture consists of basic assumptions, values, and norms of behaviour that are viewed as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel-that is why culture change is necessary for true organizational improvement. Our definition also places considerable weight on organizational processes. Processes are how things get done, and we highlight the importance of visioning, empowerment, learning, and problem-solving processes. Processes are relatively easy to change, so they are the place OD programs often begin getting people to stop doing things one way and start doing them a different way. But change becomes permanent when the culture changes and people accept the new ways as the right ways. We believe that when the culture promotes collaboration, empowerment, and continuous learning the organization is bound to succeed.

By intact work teams and other configurations, we recognize that teams are central to accomplishing work in organizations. We think teams are the basic building blocks of organizations. When teams function well, individuals and the organization function well. Further, team culture can be collaboratively managed to ensure effectiveness. The most prevalent form of teams in organizations is intact work teams consisting of superior and subordinates with a specific job to perform. Team building and role and goal clarification interventions are standard activities in OD programs directed toward intact work teams. But in many organizations today, intact work teams do not have a boss in the traditional sense-the teams manage themselves. These self-directed teams assume complete responsibility for planning and executing work assignments. In addition to team building and role and goal clarification, members are trained in competencies such as planning, maintaining quality control, and using management information. Over time, self-directed teams control performance appraisals, hiring, firing, and training. The results are usually highly gratifying both for the team members and for the organization. Todays organizations increasingly use ad hoc teams that perform a specific task and disband when the task is completed. The current method for getting complex tasks done in organizations is to assemble a cross-functional team comprised of members from all the functional specialities required to get the job done, such as design, engineering, manufacturing, and procurement. The old method was to have functional specialists work on the problem sequentially. When one function finished with its part of the project, the process threw the results over the wall to the next functional unit. This method resulted in loss of synergy, wasted time, much rework, and considerable antagonism among the separate functional specialists. In Liberation Management, Tom Peters predicts that the work of tomorrow (most of which will be brain work) will be done by ad hoc teams brought together to accomplish a task, and then disbanded with the people going on to new tasks. He uses the terms multifunctional projectization and horizontal systems to describe these teams and their work. Temporary, multifunctional, constantly shifting teams will be the dominant configuration for getting work done, according to Peters. The thesis of Liberation Management is that contemporary bureaucratic structures with their functional specialties and rigid hierarchies are all wrong for the demands of todays fast-paced market place. The definition we have just analyzed contains the elements we believe are important for OD. To summarize, here are the primary distinguishing characteristics of organization development: 1. OD focuses on culture and processes. 2. Specifically, OD encourages collaboration between organization leaders and members in managing culture and processes.

3. Teams of all kinds are particularly important for accomplishing tasks and are targets for OD activities. 4. OD focuses on the human and social side of the organization and in so doing also intervenes in the technological and structural sides. 5. Participation and involvement in problem-solving and decision-making by all levels of the organization are hallmarks of OD. 6. OD focuses on total system change and views organizations as complex social systems. 7. OD practitioners are facilitators, collaborators, and co-learners with the client system. 8. An overarching goal is to make the client system able to solve its problems on its own by teaching the skills and knowledge of continuous learning through self-analytical methods. OD views organization improvement as an ongoing process in the context of a constantly changing environment. 9. OD relies on an action research model with extensive participation by client system members. 10. OD takes a developmental view that seeks the betterment of both individuals and the organization. Attempting to create win-win solutions is standard practice in OD programs. 3.3 Characteristics of OD 1. Planned Change: OD is a strategy of planned change for organizational improvement. This planned emphasis separates OD efforts from other kinds of more haphazard changes that are frequently undertaken by organizations. 2. Comprehensive Change: OD efforts focus on comprehensive change in the organization, rather than focusing attention on individuals, so that change is easily observed. The concept of comprehensive change is based on the systems concept-open, dynamic and adaptive system. OD efforts take an organization as an interrelated whole and no part of it can be changed meaningfully without making corresponding changes in other parts. 3. Long-range Change: OD efforts are not meant for solving short-term; temporary, or isolated problems. Rather, OD focuses on the elevation of an organization to a higher level of functioning by improving the performance and satisfaction. 4. Dynamic Process: OD is a dynamic process and includes the efforts to guide and direct changes as well as to cope with or adapt changes imposed. It recognizes that organizational goals change, so the methods of attaining these goals should also change. Thus, OD efforts are not one-shot actions; rather, they are ongoing, interactive, and cyclic processes.

5. Participation of Change Agent: Most OD experts emphasize the need for an outside, third party change agent, or catalyst. They discourage do it yourself approach. There is a close working relationship between the change agent and the target organizational members to be changed. The relationship involves mutual trust, joint goals and means, and mutual influence. The change agent is a humanist seeking to get a humanistic philosophy in the organization. He shares a social philosophy about human values. 6. Emphasis on Intervention and Action Research: OD approach results in an active intervention in the ongoing activities of the organization. Action research is the basis for such intervention. A change agent in OD process does not just introspect the people and introduce changes, rather, he conducts surveys, collects relevant data, evaluates these data, and then, takes actions for intervention. He designs intervention strategies based on these data. 7. Normative Educational Process: OD is based on the principle that norms form the basis for behaviour and change is a re-educative process of replacing old norms by new ones. This is done to arrive at certain desirable outcomes that may be in the form of increased effectiveness, problem-solving, and adaptability for the organization as a whole. At the individual level, OD attempts to provide opportunities to be human and to increase awareness, participation, and integrate individual and organizational goals. 3.4 Categories of OD Programmes In general, all types of experience requiring Organization Development efforts may be grouped into three categories: (a) Problems of destiny, growth, identity, and revitalization, (b) Problems of human satisfaction and development, and (c) Problems of organizational effectiveness. Organization Development is inextricably linked with action, further more, it is a programme with a purpose that is to guide present and future action. Key areas are the normative type of model, the importance and centrality of goals and objectives and the different role requirements of the consultant change agent vis--vis the clients. Two important elements of Organization Development are, first, the element which links Organization Development with the scientific method of inquiry and, second, the collaborative relationships between the scientists, practitioners and the client laymen. Although Organization Development Programmes vary, yet following features are common to most of the programmes: (a) The client is a total system or major subunit of total system. (b) The interventions are primarily directed towards problems and issues identified by the client group,

(c) The interventions are directed towards problem-solving and improved functioning for the client system, and (d) The interventions are based on behavioural science theory and technology. We need to examine carefully the techniques of Organization Development, its underlying theory and assumptions and some of the pitfall and challenges in attempting to improve organizations through behavioural science. This Organization Development progrmmes, like other normative re-educative programmes, should begin with a clear-cut statement of specific objectives and criteria for determining if these objectives have been met from the stand point of the employee/employees simply as team member or for the total group. 3.5 Goals of Organization Development Following are the generally accepted goals of OD: (a) To create an open, problem solving climate throughout an organization. (b) To supplement the authority associated with role or status, with the authority of knowledge and competence. (c) To locate decision making and problem-solving responsibilities as close to sources of information as possible. (d) To build trust among persons and groups throughout an organization. (e) To make competition more relevant to work goals and to maximize collaborative efforts. (f) To develop a reward system which recognizes both the achievement of the organizations goals (profit or service) and development of people. (g) To increase the sense of ownership or organizations objectives throughout the work force. (h) To help managers to manage according to relevant objectives rather than according to past practices or according to objectives which do not make sense for ones area of responsibility. (i) To increase self-control and self-direction for people within the organization. (j) To improve effectiveness of the organization. 3.6 OD and Management Development

At this stage, it is beneficial to make a comparison between OD and Management Development (MD) as both have some common objectives that betterment of an organization; and techniques adopted in both may overlap to some extent. Before making a comparison between the two, let us define management development as we have seen the definition of OD. The term development refers broadly to the nature and direction of change induced in personnel through the process of training and education. Based on this, management development has been defined as follows: Management development is all those activities and programmes when recognized and controlled, have substantial influence in changing the capacity of the individual to perform his assignment better and in so doing are likely to increase his potential for future management assignment. Organization development differs from management development. While the latter aims at developing the mangers individually for the accomplishment of better performance in organizational setting, the former goes one step further and purports to change the entire organizational climate where the mangers work. Miner has drawn difference between two processes. According to him, there are four attributes of effective managers in large organization. These are: (i) a positive attitude towards authority, (ii) competitiveness, (iii) assertiveness, and (iv) a sense of responsibility. He feels that management development reinforces the above four qualities and helps managers cultivate and develop the will to manage, whereas OD efforts within organizations may cause confusion and chaos for incoming human resources if the organization is underplayed and the humanistic dimension alone is emphasized. If OD efforts train people towards anti-authority value, more attention to peer-groups, less individual competitiveness, and greater display of feelings and emotions, then would the results be functional for managing organization activity in a competitive world? Thus, according to him, OD tries to fit the organization to the men, MD tries to fit the men to the organization, with their existing objectives and structure. However, he appears to be biased against OD and the real distinction between OD and MD lies in between these two extremes. Burke and Schmidt have made this difference more clear which is presented in the following table. Difference between Management Development and OD Factors Objectives Management Development Organization Development Increasing managers Changing the nature of the contributions to goal organization. accomplishments. Train and equip employees Focus on design, not on the and managers to perform managers; focus on achieving better in existing improvement in design. organization.

Focus

Approach Time

Educative and training Short-range.

Problem-solving approach. Long-range strategy for organizational innovation and renewal. Trained specialists required.

Specialist

No special requirement.

3.7 Role of Organization Development Organization development, as a long-term strategy for organizational change, plays key role in organizational improvement. The basic problem in a change effort which is not comprehensive is that it does not work properly unless there is a proper change in the internal environment of the organization in which people work. Since OD attempts to bring comprehensive change in the organization, it is quite suitable for improving organizational performance on long-term basis. Thus, OD can be utilized for the following results in the organization: 1. To place emphasis on humanistic values and goals consistent with these vales; 2. To treat each human being as a complex person with a complex set of needs important in his work and his life; 3. To increase the level of trust and mutual emotional support among all organization members; 4. To increase the level of enthusiasms and personal satisfaction at all levels of the organization; 5. To increase the level of self and group responsibility in planning and its implementation; 6. To increase the openness of communications in all directions-vertically, horizontally, and laterally; 7. To create an environment in which authority of assigned role is augmented by authority based on knowledge and skills. 3.8 Problems in Organization Development Organization development, however, has invited sharp criticism as a strategy to increase organizational viability and effectiveness because many OD programmes have failed. Much of the enthusiasm created at the beginning of OD programmes vanished over the period of time. In early 60s, OD became quite successful with many professional consultants offering high services and programmes to various organizations. By 70s, however, substantial disenchantment with OD became evident because of many controversial OD techniques like sensitivity training, confrontation techniques, etc. Research studies have also failed to conclude

significant contributions of OD in all organizations, particularly in bottom-line ones. Therefore, OD can not be taken as panacea for curing all organizational problems. In general, OD is criticized on the following lines: 1. There is discrepancy between ideal and real situations. OD tries to achieve ideal without taking into account real. 2. OD makes people unfit for the real organizations world because no organization can fully adopt open system concept. 3. Resistance to change is a natural phenomenon and OD puts undue pressure to change. Hence, it fails even as a long-term strategy. 4. OD fails to motivate people with low level of achievement needs. If an organization is laden with these people, it is useless to try OD. 5. OD programmes are often quite costly, and only large organizations can afford this luxury without any guarantee of positive outcome. It can be seen that many of these criticisms are based on reality and experience. People realized its dysfunctional aspects only when many OD efforts failed. However, it may be emphasized that OD programmes are likely to fail when these are not programmes and hence failure. For example, Evans has identified three factors which have been responsible for the failure of OD programmes: (i) failure of the management consultant group to correctly tailor the programme to actual needs of the organization; and (ii) failure to correctly model appropriate personnel behaviour in the programme; and (iii) failure to increase employee motivation through participation and development of personal growth and self-esteem. Thus, it can be visualized that OD itself may not be dysfunctional but application may be. Therefore, in order to make best use of OD efforts, some specific efforts are required. Some of these efforts are as follows: 1. There should be genuine support of OD programme from top management. 2. Organization must formulate the objectives of OD programme very clearly and specifically. 3. Enough time should be allowed so that the effects of OD programme are realized. 4. There should be proper use of OD interventions. These should be based on the specific needs of the organization. 5. Only fully competent OD consultant should be pressed for the service and he should develop understanding with internal change agents.

Self Assessment Questions 1. Organization development should be led and supported by . 2. is associated with Liberation Management. 3. is a process which includes leadership behaviours and human resource practices. 4. Who is associated with the Learning Organizations? 5. _____________is a short-term strategy. 3.9 Summary The definitions clarify the distinctive features of OD and suggest why it is such a powerful change strategy. There is no quick fix to organizations problems. OD is the ultimate remedy for organizational improvements and developments. OD focuses on culture and processes. It focuses on the human and social side of the organization and in so doing also intervenes in the technological and structural sides. Management development aims at developing the managers individually. But OD aims at changing the entire organizational climate where the managers work. The participative, collaborative, problem-focused nature of OD marshals the experience and expertise of organization members for problem-solving and capitalizes the opportunities in the organization. 3.10 Terminal Questions 1. Define OD. Explain its salient features. 2. Explain the various characteristics of OD. 3. Distinguish between organizational development and management development. 4. State the various roles of OD. 5. What are the problems involved in the implementation of OD? 3.11 Answers to SAQs and TQs SAQs: 1. Top management 2. Tom Peters 3. Empowerment

4. Peter Senge 5. Management development Answers to TQs: 1. Refer section 3.2 2. Refer section 3.3 3. Refer section 3.6 4. Refer section 3.7 5. Refer section 3.8 Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University .

MU0002-Unit-04- Organization Development Interventions

Unit-04- Organization Development Interventions Structure: 4.1 Introduction Objectives 4.2 Survey Feedback 4.3 Process Consultation 4.4 Grid Training 4.5 Leadership Development 4.6 Team-building

4.7 Inter Group Development 4.8 Change Agents 4.9 Role of Change Agents Self Assessment Questions 4.10 Summary 4.11 Terminal Questions 4.12 Answers to SAQs and TQs 4.1 Introduction OD interventions refer to various activities which a consultant and client organization perform for improving organizational performance through enabling organizational members better manage their behaviour, work group, and organizational culture. French and Bell have defined OD intervention as: Sets of structured activities in which selected organizational units (target groups or individuals) engage with a task or a sequence of tasks where the task goals are related directly or indirectly to organizational improvement. Interventions constitute the action thrust of organization development; they make things happen. There are various OD interventions and they are classified in different ways. Further, various consultants and practitioners have different opinions about the activities which can be included in interventions. For example, many of them visualize data gathering as an intervention whereas it is treated as only preparatory work for OD by others. Therefore, the classification of OD interventions shows variation. French and Bell have suggested twelve families of OD interventions: diagnostic, team-building, inter-group activities, survey feedback, education and training, techno-structural activities, process consultation, management grid, mediation and negotiation activities. This classification of OD interventions is very comprehensive and many activities do not strictly form the part of OD as process of organizational improvement but other methods of improving the performance of the organization. A meaningful classification of OD interventions may be based on the improvement in the behaviour of people in the organization as OD is basically a behavioural approach. Peoples behaviour may be relevant to understand at individual level, interpersonal level, group level, inter-group level, and organizational level. Thus, interventions may be required to change people at all these levels. However, such a classification of interventions may not put them into mutually exclusive categories as a particular intervention may be applied at more than one level. Nevertheless, the classification appears to be more relevant because it may specify the

range of change that an organization requires. Historically, OD efforts were attempted through sensitivity training, grid training, and survey feedback method. Subsequently, other techniques like process consultation, team- building, and participative goal-setting which has become more popular as management by objectives, have been added. Our further discussion follows this development. Objectives: After studying this unit, you will be able to: Describe survey feedback. Explain grid training. Describe process consultation. Realize the importance of team-building. Role of change agents. 4.2 Survey Feedback Besides laboratory training (sensitivity and grid), the other major thrust in the development of OD has come from survey research and feedback of data. Though some type of survey method was prevalent in various organizations earlier, Institute for Social Research (ISR) of University of Michigan, USA developed a comprehensive questionnaire for conducting survey in different aspects of an organization. The basic objectives of survey feedback are as follows: 1. To assist the organization in diagnosing its problems and developing action plan for problemsolving. 2. To assist the group members to improve the relationships through discussion of common problems. Process of Survey Feedback Survey feedback usually proceeds with sequential activities involving data collection, feedback of information, developing action plans based on feedback, and follow up. 1. Data Collection: The first step in survey feedback is data collection usually by a consultant based on a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire may include different aspects of organizational functioning. ISR has prepared a questionnaire which includes questions on leadership managerial support, managerial goal emphasis, managerial work facilitation, peer support, peer goal emphasis, peer work facilitation, and peer interaction facilitation,

organizational climate-communication with the company, motivation, decision-making, control within the company, co-ordination between departments, and general management, and satisfaction-satisfaction with the company, satisfaction with the supervisor, satisfaction with the job, satisfaction with the pay, and satisfaction with the work group. The questionnaire is administered personally either by the members of consulting firm or by organizations personnel. After the questionnaires are completed, data are classified, tabulated, and analysis is made to arrive at some meaningful conclusions. 2. Feedback of Information: After the data are analyzed, feedback is given to the persons who have participated in the fulfilling up of questionnaire. The feedback may be given either orally or in a written form. In oral system of feedback, it is provided through group discussion or problem-solving sessions conducted by the consultant. Alternatively, feedback may be given in the form of a written summary of findings. Whatever the method of giving feedback is adopted, it should be constructive and suggestive, rather, threatening and emotion-hurting as survey feedback is aimed at identifying weaknesses which must be overcome through follow-up actions and not the fault-finding technique for criticism. 3. Follow-up Action: Survey feedback programme is not meaningful unless some follow-up action is taken based on the data collected. One such follow-up action may be to advise the participants to develop their own action plans to overcome the problems revealed through a feedback or as is more commonly the case, follow-up action may be in the form of developing some specific OD interventions particularly process consultation and team-building, by the consultant. Evaluation of Survey Feedback Survey feedback provides a base for many managerial actions which has been confirmed by various research studies. In particular, survey feedback contributes in the following manner: 1. It is cost-effective means of implementing a comprehensive OD programme making it a highly desirable technique. 2. It generates great amount of information efficiently and quickly which can be used in solving problems faced by the organization and its members. 3. Decision-making and problem-solving abilities of organization can be improved tremendously because this approach applies the competence and knowledge throughout the organization and the problems faced by it. However, effectiveness of survey feedback depends on two factors. First, questionnaire used and method adopted for its administration should be reliable and valid. If it is biased, all attempts to diagnose the problems will be abortive and futile. Second, even if valid and reliable information is collected, it is of no use unless follow-up action is taken based on the

information. A survey feedback is not a technique in itself for change; it provides base for action for change. 4.3 Process Consultation Process Consultation (P.C) is a technique for intervening in an ongoing system. The basic content of P.C is that the consultant works with individuals and groups in the organization to help them learn about human and social processes and to solve problems that stem from process events. Edgar Schein, the leading writer and consultant on P.C has defined it as follows: The set of activities on the part of the consultant which help the client to perceive, understand, and act upon the process events which occur in the clients environment. The basic objectives of P.C are as follows: 1. To bring desired change in the various organizational processes like leadership, communication, roles and functions of group members, group decision-making and problemsolving, group norms, and inter-group co-operation and conflicts. 2. To understand how various organizational processes can be linked to objective achievement in the organization. Steps in Process Consultation Schein has suggested following specific steps which the consultant would follow in a P.C programme of OD. 1. Initiate Contact: This is beginning stage of P.C in which the client makes initial contact with the consultant with a view to solve the problems faced by the organization which cannot be solved by existing processes or resources. 2. Define the Relationship: At this stage, client and consultant enter into agreement covering various aspects of consultancy services like fees, and spelling out services, time, etc. At this stage, the clients expectations and hoped-for results are also decided. 3. Select the Setting and the Method: It involves a clear-cut understanding of where and how the consultant will do the job that is required. At this stage, the consultant is introduced to the organizational members and basic objectives of the P.C are communicated to them with a view that they co-operate with the consultant. 4. Gather Data and Make a Diagnosis: Information is collected from various sources thorough the use of questionnaires, observations, and interview about the problems, spelled out at the initial stage. This data gathering occurs simultaneously with the entire consultative process. Information collected is processed to diagnose the problems and their underlying causes.

5. Intervene: At this stage, the consultant intervenes in the organizational processes by using different interventions like agenda-setting, feedback, coaching, and/or structural change. 6. Reduce Involvement and Terminate: When the work of P.C is completed, the consultant disengages from the client organization by mutual agreement but leaves the door open for future involvement. Evaluation of Process Consultation: Process consultation is quite in-depth activity of OD in which the consultant plays a major role. Though he is involved only in suggesting the various changes in the processes, he assists the organizational members to incorporate those changes. From this point of view, P.C is very effective intervention for organizational improvement. However, like other OD intervention techniques, P.C is also not free from criticisms. In the review of various P.C programmes, significant correlation between the outcomes has not been found. One basic reason for this phenomenon may be the consultants inability to steer the organization out of troubles. Another problem may emerge at the level of the organization and its members in terms of how they inculcate the new processes and culture as suggested by the consultant. However, both these problems may be overcome by engaging a suitable consultant and developing willingness among the members for change. 4.4 Grid Training Grid training is basically based on grid organization development developed by Blake and Mouton. It is a comprehensive and systematic OD programme which aims at individuals, groups, and the organization as a whole. It utilizes a considerable number of instruments, enabling individuals and groups to assess their own strengths and weaknesses; focuses on skills, knowledge, and processes necessary for effectiveness at the individual, group, inter-group, and total organizational levels. Its specific objectives are as follows: 1. To study the organization as an interactive system and apply techniques of analysis in diagnosing its problems. 2. To understand the importance and rationale of systematic change. 3. To evaluate the styles of leadership and techniques of participation to produce desirable results. Process of Grid Training The basic content of grid organization development is managerial grid as discussed. The whole orientation is to develop managerial style through the application of behavioural science knowledge. The grid organization development consists of six phases.

1. Managerial grid: It covers various aspects of assessing managerial styles, problem-solving, communication skills, and teamwork. The individuals try to learn to become managers by practice. 2. Teamwork Development: The focus in this stage is to develop teamwork by analyzing team culture, traditions, and alike. The skills relating to planning, objective-setting, and problemsolving are also developed. 3. Inter-group Development: At this phase, the focus is on inter-group behaviour and relations. The thrust is on moving groups from conflict to co-operation. Each group separately analyses the ideal inter-group relations. Action steps to move towards the ideal are developed and assigned to individuals who may be engaged in building co-operative inter-group relationships. 4. Developing Ideal Strategic Corporate Model: At this stage, the focus shifts to the total organization and to develop skills necessary for organizational excellence. The action is designed to identify the characteristics of the ideal organization. The members of the organization are trained for achieving this excellence. 5. Implementing the Ideal Strategic Model: The implementation stage includes the building of the organization on the model of ideal organization on the basis of concepts developed under stage 4. Each group may be given assignment to evolve strategy for making ideal organization with the help of the consultant. The strategy is then implemented. 6. Systematic Critique: In this stage, the various efforts from phase 1 to phase 5 are evaluated and critical analysis is made. The analysis will bring out the shortcomings that may be there. In this light, the various programmes may be redesigned. Evaluation of Grid Training Most of the support of grid training has come from its originators-Blake and Mouton. They have maintained that managerial and team effectiveness can be taught to managers with outside assistance. Furthermore, it appears that this type of educational strategy can help to make significant contributions to organizational effectiveness. In a later work, they maintained the same stand. Though research studies on the application of grid training are not many, some of them have not supported the claims made by Blake and Mouton. Grid training programme is criticized on the basis that it lacks contingency approach and, therefore, it discounts reality. Further, grid training is a non-rigorous method, in spite of these criticisms; grid training has some positive contributions for organizational effectiveness. 4.5 Leadership Development

When change is imposed (as in downsizing scenarios), clearly the most important determinant of "getting through the swamp", is the ability of leadership towell, lead. The literature on the subject indicates that the nature of the change is secondary to the perceptions that employees have regarding the ability, competence, and credibility of senior and middle management. If you are to manage change effectively, you need to be aware that there are three distinct times zones where leadership is important. We can call these Preparing For the Journey, Slogging Through The Swamp, and After Arrival. We will look more carefully at each of these. The Role of Leadership In an organization where there is faith in the abilities of formal leaders, employees will look towards the leaders for a number of things. During drastic change times, employees will expect effective and sensible planning, confident and effective decision-making, and regular, complete communication that is timely. Also during these times of change, employees will perceive leadership as supportive, concerned and committed to their welfare, while at the same time recognizing that tough decisions need to be made. The best way to summarize is that there is a climate of trust between leader and the rest of the team. The existence of this trust, brings hope for better times in the future, and that makes coping with drastic change much easier. In organizations characterized by poor leadership, employees expect nothing positive. In a climate of distrust, employees learn that leaders will act in indecipherable ways and in ways that do not seem to be in anyones best interests. Poor leadership means an absence of hope, which, if allowed to go on for too long, results in an organization becoming completely nonfunctioning. The organization must deal with the practical impact of unpleasant change, but more importantly, must labor under the weight of employees who have given up, have no faith in the system or in the ability of leaders to turn the organization around. Leadership before, during and after change implementation is THE key to getting through the swamp. Unfortunately, if havent established a track record of effective leadership, by the time you have to deal with difficult changes, it may be too late. 4.6 Team-building Various OD interventions discussed so far have their specific implications for OD and, therefore, are closely associated with a very few advocates and practitioners. As against these, teambuilding is the most important, widely accepted, and applied OD intervention for organizational improvement. For example, French and Bell have opined that probably the most important single group of interventions in the OD are the team-building activities the goals of which are the improvement and increased effectiveness of various teams within the organization. A possible reason for this phenomenon is that people in the organization work in groups (teams) and the effectiveness of these groups ultimately determine organizational effectiveness. Before going through how team-building exercise can be undertaken to develop effective teams, let us consider the life cycle of a team, how synergy is generated through team-work, problems in

team-work, and features of effective team so that team-building exercises focus more sharply on developing effective team. Life Cycle of a Team When a number of individuals begin to work at interdependent jobs, they often pass through several stages as they learn to work together as a team. These stages are: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning as shown below:

Fig. 4.1: Life Cycle of a Team Though these are not followed rigidly, they do represent a broad pattern that may be observed and predicted in many settings across teams time together. These stages are the result of a variety of questions and issues that team members face such as who will be members of the team? Who will perform what functions? Who will contribute what? What rules will be followed? How can conflicts among members be resolved? and so on. These typical stages of life cycle of a team are described below: 1. Forming: At the first stage of the life cycle, team members get introduced to each other if they have not interacted earlier. They share personal information, start to accept others, and begin to turn their attention to the group tasks. At this stage, interaction among team members is often cautious especially when they are new to one another. 2. Storming: After the forming stage which is mostly related to perceiving and assessing each other, members start interaction among themselves in the form of competing for status, jockeying for relative control, and arguing for appropriate strategies to be adopted for achieving teams goals, because of individual differences, different members may experience varying degree of tension and anxiety out of this interaction pattern. 3. Norming: After storming stage, team members start settling. The team begins to move in a co-operative fashion and a tentative balance among competing forces too is struck. At this stage, group norms emerge to guide individual behaviour which form the basis for co-operative feelings and behaviour among members. 4. Performing: When team members interact among themselves on the basis of norms that have emerged in the team, they learn to handle complex problems that come before the team. Functional roles are performed and exchanged as needed, and tasks are accompanied efficiently. 5. Adjourning: Adjourning is the end phase of cycle of a team. Sooner or later, each team has to be adjourned, even the most successful teams as they have completed their mission. The

adjournment phase takes place in the case of those teams which are created for some special purposes like task force, committee, etc. Other types of team like a department in an organization run on the basis of some permanency though there may be changes in team members. After the adjournment of the team, intense social relationship among members comes to an end. It is not necessary that all teams follow the rigid pattern prescribed here and the similar problems they face at each stage because each team is different in some respect based on the type of members and problems and functions assigned. However, concept of stages is significant in the context of the nature of problem which team members are likely to face in team-work. Synergy in Team-work Another important feature of a team is the concept of synergy which generates in team-work and the understanding of which helps in developing effective team. The concept of synergy is quite popular in strategic management and it is defined as follows: Synergy is the process of putting two or more elements together to achieve a sum total greater than the sum total of individual elements separately. This effect can be described as 2+2=5 effect. Thus, synergistic effect is not automatic but depends on the complementarity of different elements that are put together and the way they interact among themselves, that is, how a particular element affects another and is affected by it. Putting the concept of synergy in teamwork means members of the team are complementary to each other and they contribute positively to one another. In fact, a team is created to undertake a task which requires a variety of skills and single individual cannot perform that task alone. To the extent, the complementarity among members is achieved; the team would be effective, other factors remaining the same. Social Loafing Social loafing is antithesis of synergy in team-work which suggests that people working together on a common task may actually decrease their individual efforts; team-work does not necessarily spurt group efforts. A simple phenomenon of social loafing may be observed in a group assignment to students during their study. In such an assignment, students find that one or two students do not put their weight for the completion of the project. These students may be called loafers (not attaching the same connotation which is attached with the term loafer in our social phenomenon) who frequently miss the project groups meetings, fail to perform their assigned tasks, and so on. They rely on the fact the more reliable members will complete the project without their help, and still expect to share the credit and obtain the same marks from the professor since he will be concerned with determining who worked and who did not. This phenomenon may happen in teams in work organizations too. For example, in one experiment,

it was found that individuals total efforts were much higher than the group efforts. Individuals were asked to pull alone as hard as possible on a rope attached to a strain gauge. They averaged 138.6 pound of pressure while tugging on the rope. When the same individuals pulled on the rope of groups of three, group of eight, the individual average dropped down still lower68.2 pounds. Dropping of average output in group efforts indicates that some members of the group were not contributing as much as they did individually. The possibility of occurring of social loafing in a team-work increases because of the following reasons: 1. When the division of work cannot be accomplished properly and individual efforts are hard to determine, group efforts tend to slacken. 2. When the group is not cohesive with high output norms, individual members do not contribute to the fullest extent. A group is not merely an assemblage of individuals but there should be a feeling that they are members of the group and share common interests, goals, and attitudes. The phenomenon of social loafing can be minimized by constituting effective team for group performance. Effective Team An effective team is one which contributes to the achievement of organizational objectives by performing the task assigned to it and providing satisfaction to its members. In the above paragraph, we have mentioned that team effectiveness depends on the complementarity of team members, other factors remaining the same. From this statement, it appears that there are many factors in an effective team. These factors are skills and role clarity, supportive environment, super-ordinate goals and team rewards. Let us see how these factors make a team effective. 1. Skills and Role Clarity: For an effective team, two things are required from its members; skills which are complementary to the team requirement and understanding of ones own role as well as roles of other members. While skills are relevant for job performance, understanding of roles helps members to meet the requirement of one another thereby solving the problems which the team faces. Thus, team members may tend to contribute positively to the teamwork. Even if one member lacks behind, he may tend to affect others because of chain reaction just like a rotten apple injures its companions. 2. Supportive Environment: A team loaded with skilled members cannot perform well if the organizational climate is not supportive for that. If the organizational climate is not in tune with high achievement, team members may not show high degree of enthusiasm and they will use only a part of their skills in performing the jobs. Therefore, managers at higher levels particularly at the top level should set organizational climate and culture which enthuse team members to put their best.

3. Super-ordinate Goals: Super-ordinate goals are those which are above the goals of a single team or a single individual. An individual works better if he is able to link how his goal attainment leads to the attainment of a higher-level goal. These super-ordinate goals, then, serve to focus attention, unify efforts, and stimulate more cohesive team efforts. 4. Team Rewards: Team performance depends on how reward is linked to team performance and how members perceive this linkage. If team members perceive that reward to contingent on team performance, they will put their maximum. Rewards of both types- financial and nonfinancial-should be taken into consideration. Further, organizations need to achieve a careful balance between encouraging and rewarding individual initiative and growth and stimulating full contributions to team success. Innovative non-financial team rewards for responsible behaviour may include the authority to select new members of the group, make recommendations regarding a new supervisor, or propose discipline for team members. The positive aspect of all these factors leads to team effectiveness and team members share common values regarding product quality, customer satisfaction, and share the responsibility for completing a project on schedule. Katzenbatch and Smith, management consultants, have suggested the concept of real team and they feel that this concept is relatively unexploited despite its capacity to outperform other groups and individuals. They define four characteristics of real teams: small size; complementary skills; common purpose, goals, and working approach: and willingness to be held mutually accountable. Real teams can be created and sustained by: 1. Selecting members for their complementary skills and potentials; 2. Developing clear rules of conduct and challenging performance goals; 3. Establishing a sense of urgency right from the first meeting. 4. Providing substantial time together in which new information is constantly shared; and 5. Providing positive feedback, recognition, and rewards. Team-building Process: Team-building attempts to improve effectiveness of the team by having team members to concentrate on: 1. Setting goals and priorities for the team. 2. Analyzing how teams goals and priorities are linked to those of the organization. 3. Analyzing how the work is performed. 4. Analyzing how the team is working, and

5. Analyzing the relationships among the members who are performing the job. For achieving these, the team-building exercise proceeds in a particular way as shown in figure.

Fig. 4.2: Process of Team-building Various steps of team-building process are not one-shot action, rather, they are repetitive and cyclical as indicated by arrows in the figure. 1. Problem-sensing: There are a number of ways in which problems of a team can be obtained. Often the team itself defines which aspects of team-building it wishes to work on. This problem can better be identified in terms of what is hindering group effectiveness. At this stage, generally most of the members come forward with their arguments as to what the real problems are. The view may be quite different ranging from the organizational problem, group problems to even personal problem. In problem identification, the emphasis should be on consensus. The consensus-seeking part of the process necessitates that each person becomes thoroughly aware and understand clearly the basic concepts of team-development. Much of the problems may be solved through effective communication and training sessions. 2. Examining Differences: The perception of people on an issue differs because of their differing backgrounds, such as, their value systems, personality and attitudes. The perception may be brought to conformity through the process of exercise on perception which involves a number of psychological exercises particularly on perceptual differences. The role of communication is important in this context because it will help in clarifying the actual problems to the members. 3. Giving and Receiving Feedback: The step of perceiving things and listening to each other may be relayed back to the members as there is a possibility that such processes may create tense situation in the group. Often, members report about the painful feelings that they have at the time of evaluation of their feelings. The discussion should continue until all members of the team have commented. The feedback should be given to the members about their feelings, about the issue, the way people talk about the issue, the stying with the topic or going off on tangents, who was talking more or who was talking less, who was trying to resolve the differences, etc. Such feedback generally provides members to evaluate the values but at the same time, also provides opportunity to understand themselves. The concept of Johari Window may also be applied. This suggests that even people are not fully aware of themselves. 4. Developing Interactive Skills: The basic objective of this process is to increase the ability among the people as to how they should interact with others and engage in constructive behaviour. Following are the examples of constructive and negative behaviours:

Constructive Behaviour: (i) Building: developing and expanding the ideas of others. (ii) Bringing in: harmonizing, encouraging others to participate. (iii) Clarifying: resting, ensuring, understanding, seeking relevant information. (iv) Innovative: bringing in new relevant ideas, information, feelings, etc.
Negative Behaviour

(i) Over talk: interrupting, talking together with speaker. (ii) Attacking: deriding, belittling, criticizing person. (iii) Negative: cooling, cynicism, undermining morale. At the time of discussion of feedback, people themselves take assignments to increase specific constructive behaviours and decrease specific negative behaviours. If this process is adopted several times, there is a strong possibility that members may learn constructive behaviours and leave negative behaviours. This is quite helpful in developing teamwork. 5. Follow-up Action: This is the final stage in team-building. At this stage, the total team is convened to review what has been learned and to identify what the next step should be. Follow-up action also helps in overcoming the drawback involved at the initial stages of teambuilding. It involves deciding who will take care of each area of the teams responsibilities, and who will be responsible for team projects in a group that has not developed a satisfactory division of responsibility; clarifying and setting differences in perception concerning responsibility and authority in the team, with complex division of responsibility and authority among members. These attempts bring co-operative and supportive feelings among people involved in the team functioning. When this exercise is undertaken at the initial stage, it contributes positively towards the feelings of the people. However, to encourage and sustain such feelings, management should take such actions at regular intervals so that members feel reinforced and sustain their positive behaviour. Such actions will go a long way in shaping the organizational climate quite conducive to members for their efficient working. Evaluation of Team-building As mentioned earlier, team-building as an OD intervention has attracted maximum attention. Many research studies have also confirmed the positive contributions of team-building on the

organizations outcomes, though, in different degrees. In general, team-building contributes to the organizational performance in the following manner: 1. It improves the organizations problem-solving and decision-making ability. 2. It helps in developing effective interpersonal relationships by stimulating the group members for that. 3. It helps developing communication within the group and inter-group and overcoming many psychological barriers that block communication flow. However, team-building has been termed as one-sided effort and it suffers from the following limitations: 1. It focuses only on work groups and other major organizational variables such as technology, structure, etc., are not given adequate attention. 2. Team-building becomes a complicated exercise when there is frequent change in team members. New member may find it difficult to adjust with the team because of his confusion over his roles in terms of task performance and building good relationships. In spite of these problems, team-building has a positive outlook. However, it is not that effective in isolation. Therefore, there have been calls for combining team-building with organization behaviour modification approaches. One such suggestion is to use a task hierarchy to reinforce the team as it progresses up a behaviour skill hierarchy (for example, listening, communicating, monitoring, and feedback skills). 4.7 Inter-group Development A major area of concern is OD is the dysfunctional conflict that exists between groups. As a result, this has been a subject to which change efforts have been directed. It seeks to change to attitudes, stereotypes, and perceptions that groups have of each other. Although there are several approaches for improving intergroup relations, one of the more Popular methods emphasize problem solving. In this method, each group meets independently to develop lists of its perception of itself, the other group, and how it believes the other group perceivers it. The groups then share their lists, after which similarities and differences are discussed. Differences are clearly articulate, and the groups look for the causes of the disparities. Once the causes of the difficulty have been identified, the groups can move to the integration phase working to develop solutions that will improve relations.

Subgroups, with members from each of the conflicting groups, can now be created for further diagnosis and to begin to formulate possible alternative actions that will improve relations. 4.8 Change Agents Change agents: Can be managers or nonmanagers, employees of the organization, or outside consultants. For major change efforts, internal management often will hire the services or outside consultants to provide advice and assistance. Because they are from the outside these individuals an offer can offer an objective perspective often unavailable to insiders. Outside consultants, however, are disadvantaged because they usually have an inadequate understanding of the organizations history, culture, operating procedures, and personnel. Outside consultants also may be prone to initiating more drastic changes which can be benefit or a disadvantage because they dont have to live with the repercussions after the change is implemented. In contrast, internal staff specialists or managers when acting as change agents, may be more thoughtful (and possibly cautious) because they to live with the consequences of their actions. 4.9 Role of Change Agents The change agent may play different roles according to the need of organization development .These three roles are having been brief described below: Consultant A consultant is a professional (internal or external) who applies behavioral Science knowledge in an ongoing organization (or client system) with clear objectives of managing change and improving effectiveness. According to Curtis Mial: The Consultant may serve as the exhaust value, enabling the client to let off steam: as the ignition to spark action; as the accelerator to build up momentum; as the break for too quick action; as the radiator absorbing some of the heat of the controversy; as the shock absorber when the going is rough; or as fog lamp when the future is hazy. The consultant may fulfill a variety of functions, but one thing he/she is not the driver. Trainer A change agent needs to be a trainer and educator. He has to educate people on the need and importance o change using a variety of methodologies lectures, presentations, films, group discussions, role-plays and instruments, cases and experiential learning etc. The trainer role is most widely and intensively used at all stages of a change project: unfreezing, changing (intervening) and refreezing.

Training is required for enhancing knowledge, skills and change in behavior, attitudes and beliefs. Training is used both in content orientation and process orientation. Researcher A change agent has to carry out some research activities for the purpose of generating valid information prior to and during the change process. Data collection, diagnosis, generation of new behavioral science knowledge, evolving best strategies for change by assessing alternatives and the important stages in a change project where the change agent has to be a Researcher. Useful hypothesis are to be formulated and tested. Self Assessment Questions 1. The first step in survey feedback is ______ usually by a consultant based on a structured questionnaire. 2. Grid Training was developed by 3. ________is antithesis of synergy in team-work which suggests that people working together on a common task may actually decrease their individual efforts; team-work does not necessarily spurt group efforts 4.10 Summary OD intervention strategies are various activities which a consultant and client organization performs for improving organizational performance. Sensitivity training focuses on small group ranging from ten to twelve. Grid training focuses on individuals and groups to assess their own strengths and weaknesses. It focuses on skills, knowledge and processes necessary for effectiveness at the individual, group, inter-group and total organization levels. Survey feedback usually proceeds with sequential activities involving data collection, feedback of information, developing action plans based on feedback and follow-up. In process consultation, the consultant works with individuals and groups in the organization to help them learn about human and social processes and to solve problems that stem from process events. Teambuilding is most important, widely accepted and applied OD intervention for organizational improvement. 4.11 Terminal Questions 1. What is Grid Training? How does it help in improving individual performance in an organization? 2. What is survey feedback as an intervention of OD? How does it provide base for other OD interventions?

3. What is team-building? What are the stages of life cycle of a team? 4. Explain Change agents and discuss the role of change agents in detail. 4.12 Answers to SAQs and TQs SAQs: 1. Data collection 2. Blake and Mouton. 3. Social loafing Answers to TQs: 1. Refer section 4.4 2. Refer section 4.2 3. Refer section 4.6 4. Refer section 4.8 Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University
.

MU0002-Unit-05-Values, Assumptions, Beliefs in Organization Development

Unit-05-Values, Assumptions, and Beliefs in Organization Development Structure: 5.1 Introduction Objectives 5.2 Definitions

and

5.3 Chronology of Events in Management and Organization Thought 5.4 Early Statements of OD Values and Assumptions 5.5 Implications of OD Values and Assumptions 5.5.1 Implications for Dealing with Individuals 5.5.2 Implications for Dealing with Groups 5.5.3 Implications for Designing and Running Organizations 5.6 Summary Self Assessment Questions 5.7 Terminal Questions 5.8 Answers to SAQs and TQs 5.1 Introduction A set of values, assumptions, and beliefs constitutes an integral part of organization development, shaping the goals and methods of the field and distinguishing OD from other improvement strategies. Most of these beliefs were formulated early in the development of the field, and they continue to evolve as the field itself evolves. These values and assumptions have developed from research and theory by behavioural scientists and from the experiences and observations of practicing managers. Objectives: After studying this unit, you will be able to: Explain the meaning of values, beliefs and assumptions. List the chronology of events of values, beliefs and assumptions. Give the statement of OD values and assumptions. State the implications of OD values and assumptions. 5.2 Definitions A belief is a proposition about how the world works that the individual accepts as true; it is a cognitive fact for the person.

Values are also beliefs and are defined as: "Beliefs about what is desirable or good (e.g., free speech) and what is undesirable or bad (e.g., dishonesty)." Assumptions are beliefs that are regarded as so valuable and obviously correct that they are taken for granted and rarely examined or questioned. Thus, values, assumptions, and beliefs are all cognitive facts or propositions, with values being beliefs about good and bad, and assumptions being, strongly held, relatively unexamined beliefs accepted as the truth. Values, assumptions, and beliefs provide structure and stability for people as they attempt to understand the world around them. OD values tend to be humanistic, optimistic, and democratic. Humanistic values proclaim the importance of the individual: respect the whole person, treat people with respect and dignity, assume that everyone has intrinsic worth, view all people as having the potential for growth and development. Optimistic values posit that people are basically good, that progress is possible and desirable in human affairs, and that rationality, reason, and goodwill are the tools for making progress. Democratic values assert the sanctity of the individual, the right of people to be free from arbitrary misuse of power, the importance of fair and equitable treatment for all, and the need for justice through the rule of law and due process. Evidence for the validity of these values and their supporting assumptions comes from many sources the Hawthorne studies, the human relations movement, the laboratory training movement, the clash between fascism and democracy in World War II, increasing awareness of the dysfunctions of bureaucracies, research on the effects of different leadership styles, greater understanding of individual motivation and group dynamics, and the like. Values and assumptions do not spring full grown from individuals or societies they are formed from the collective beliefs of an era-the zeitgeist, or spirit of the time. Major ingredients of the zeitgeist that influenced OD values and assumptions are presented here in a brief chronology. As these ingredients accumulated, they were fashioned into a coherent value foundation for the theory and practice of organization development. 5.3 Chronology of Events in Management and Organization Thought

Frederick Winslow Taylors The Principles of Scientific Management (1911) launched the scientific management movement with its emphasis on time and motion studies and breaking jobs into small, repetitive tasks in an attempt to find "the one best way" to do each job. Expert engineers and supervisors designed each task and ensured it was done correctly. Piece-rate pay systems were designed to increase motivation and to prevent "soldiering," or slacking off. Simple, repetitive tasks minimized the skills required to do the job. Taylors methods quickly swept the country and the world as the way to organize work.

The great German sociologist Max Weber (1922) introduced the concept of bureaucracy as the best, most efficient way to organize people. A strong hierarchy of authority, extensive division of labor, impersonal rules, and rigid procedures would create a well-oiled human machine called the organization. Scientific management as the way to organize work and bureaucracy as the way to organize people were the prevailing paradigms for organizations in the early 1900s. These approaches possessed many desirable features, but also contained serious flaws that led to unintended consequences. In a sense, much of the research, theory, and practice since the late 1920s have focused on the shortcomings of these two paradigms and how to overcome the limitations. Mary Parker Follett (1926), a management theorist and astute observer of labourmanagement relations, wrote an article on The Giving of Orders advocating participative leadership and joint problem-solving by labour and management. Much of her career was devoted to finding ways to reduce adversarial relationships between workers and management. The Famous Hawthorne Studies (1927 to 1932) were conducted at the Hawthorne plant of Western Electric Company. Reports on these studies by Mayo in 1933 and 1945, by Roethlisberger and Dickson in 1939, and by Homans in 1950 profoundly and irreversibly affected peoples beliefs about organizational behaviour. The research demonstrated the primacy of social factors on productivity and morale. People came to work as whole people; their feelings and attitudes about the work, the work environment, and the supervisor determined their performance. Their simple, repetitive jobs left them feeling alienated and dispirited. Group norms had more powerful effects on productivity than economic incentives. People were not cogs; organizations were not machines. The Functions of the Executive by Chester 1. Barnard (1938) presented insights from his experiences as President of the New Jersey Bell Telephone Company. Barnard viewed organizations as social systems that must be effective (achieve goals) and efficient (satisfy the needs of employees). His acceptance theory of authority proposed that authority derives from the willingness of subordinates to comply with directions rather than from position power. Research by Lewin, Lippitt (1939), and White demonstrated that democratic leadership was superior to authoritarian leadership and laissez-faire leadership in affecting group climate and group performance. Democratic leadership seemed to bring out the best in the groups; authoritarian leadership caused dependency, apathy, aggressiveness and poor performance. Group Dynamics (1940) The scientific study of groups using experimental research methods-was launched by Kurt Lewin and his students. Some early experiments were conducted in the late 1930s.

The Hawthorne Studies (1940s to 1960) spawned the human relations movement that was in full flower from the 1930s to the 1960s. The human relations movement advocated participative management, greater attention to workers social needs, training in interpersonal skills for supervisors, and a general humanizing of the workplace. These years witnessed the beginnings of the laboratory training movement (1946 and 1947), a direct precursor of OD. Laboratory training taught people how to improve interpersonal relations, increase self-understanding, and understand group dynamics. Humanistic and democratic values suffused the movement. Ken Benne and Paul Sheats (1948), pioneers in laboratory training, proposed that the leadership functions of a group should be shared between the leader and group members and showed how that could be done. Lester Coch and John R. P. Frenchs (1948) article, Overcoming Resistance to Change, reported that resistance to change could be minimized by communicating the need for change and allowing the people affected by the change to participate in planning it. Carl Rogers Client-Centered Therapy (1951) demonstrated the efficacy of non-directive psychotherapy, which holds that individuals have within themselves the capacity to assume responsibility for their behaviour and mental health when provided with a supportive, caring social climate. Rogers focus on effective interpersonal communications was applicable to superior-subordinate relations. Eric Trist and Ken Bamforth of the Tavistock Clinic (1951) published the results of their work in British coal mines. This article introduced the concept of organizations as sociotechnical systems, which postulates that organizations are comprised of a social system and a technological system and that changes in one system will produce changes in the other system. Motivation and Personality by Abraham Maslow (1954) presented a new view of human motivation. Maslow suggested that human motivation is arranged in a hierarchy of needs from lower-level needs such as physiological and survival needs to higher-level needs such as esteem and self-actualization. The theory postulated that when lowerlevel needs are satisfied, higher-level needs become dominant. Chris Argyrifs Personality and Organization (1957) was the first of several books in which he stated that there is an inherent conflict between the needs of organizations and the needs of mature, healthy adults. Douglas McGregor wrote The Human Side of Enterprise (1960) in which he described his famous Theory X and Theory Y assumptions. Those who subscribe to Theory X assume that people are lazy, lack ambition, dislike responsibility, are self-centered,

indifferent to the organizations needs, resist change, and need to be led. Those who subscribe to Theory Y assume that people have the potential to develop, to assume responsibility, and to pursue organizational goals if given the chance and the social environment to do so. The task of management is to change organizational structures, management practices, and human resource practices to allow individual potential to be released. In addition to presenting Theory X and Y, this book popularized Maslows motivation theory, and introduced practicing managers to the concepts of need hierarchy and self-actualization.

Burns and Stalker (1961) described two very different forms of organization structuremechanistic and organic. In an environment of slow change, a mechanistic organization structure may be appropriate; in an environment of high change, an organic organization form is preferred. Organic structures encourage decentralized decision making and authority, open communications, and greater individual autonomy. Rensis Likerts New Patterns of Management (1961) presented data and theory showing the overwhelming superiority of a democratic leadership style in which the leader is group oriented, goal-oriented, and shares decision-making with the work group. This leadership style was contrasted with an authoritarian, one-on-one leadership style. The Social Psychology of Organizations by Daniel Katz and Robert L. Kahn (1966) presented the first comprehensive exposition of organizations as open systems. The Addison-Wesley Publishing Company OD Six-Pack, (1969) a set of six little books on OD by prominent practitioners, summarized the state of organization development a decade or so after its inception. These six books presented the theory, practice, and values of the field.

This chronology captures most of the significant influences from research, theory, and observations utilized by OD practitioners. To summarize the intellectual climate of this period, the initial enthusiasm for scientific management, bureaucracy, and authoritarian leadership gave way to increasing doubts about these organizational practices as theory and research pointed up their limitations, dysfunctions, and negative consequences. Out of this zeitgeist, organization development practitioners formulated a set of values and assumptions regarding people, groups, and organizations that is, as we have said, humanistic, optimistic, and democratic. Values have always been an integral part of OD. 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 for functional groups to work more competently. 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 labour 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." He then went on to state what he believed to be the central value underlying organization development theory and practice: The basic value underlying all organization development theory and practice is that of choice. Through focused attention and through the collection and feedback of relevant data to relevant people, more choices become available and hence better decisions are made. Another major player in the field was Richard Beckhard. In his 1969 book 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 relevant change goal 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, sub-units 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 participation and a sense of ownership in the planning and conduct of the change. Robert Tannenbaum, a professor and Sheldon Davis, director of organization development, presented their view of OD values in a 1969 article. 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 expression of feelings toward making possible both appropriate expression and effective use. Away from maskmanship and game-playing toward authentic behaviour. 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 co-operation, appropriate uses of power, authentic interpersonal relations, and so forth were seldom espoused and rarely implemented in the vast majority of organizations at that time. We think most organization development practitioners held these humanistic and democratic values with their implications for different and "better" ways to run organizations and deal with people. The democratic values prompted a critique of 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. 5.5 Implications of OD Values and Assumptions Let us examine specific assumptions and their implications for organization leaders and members. We answer the question: What are some of the implications of OD assumptions and values for dealing with individuals, groups, and organizations? 5.5.1 Implications for Dealing with Individuals Two basic assumptions about individuals in organizations pervade organization development. The first assumption is that most individuals have drives toward personal growth and development if provided an environment that is both supportive and challenging. Most people want to develop their potential. The second assumption is that most people desire to make, and are capable of making, a greater contribution to attaining organization goals than most organizational environments permit. A tremendous amount of constructive energy can be tapped if organizations realize and act on these assumptions. The people doing the work are generally experts on how to do it and how to do it better. The implications of these two assumptions are straightforward: Ask, listen, support, challenge, encourage risk-taking, permit failure, remove obstacles and barriers, give autonomy, give responsibility, set high standards, and reward success. 5.5.2 Implications for Dealing with Groups

Several assumptions relate to the importance of work teams and the collaborative management of team culture. First, one of the most psychologically relevant reference groups for most people is the work group, including peers and boss. What occurs in the work group, at both the formal and informal levels, greatly influences feelings of satisfaction and competence. Second, most people wish to be accepted and to interact co-operatively with at least one small reference group, and usually with more than one group, such as a work group, the family, a church or club group, and so on. Third, most people are capable of making greater contributions to a groups effectiveness and development. Implications of these assumptions are several. Let teams flourish because they are often the best way to get work done and, in addition, are the best way to satisfy social and emotional needs at work. Also, leaders should invest in groups: Invest the time required for group development, invest training time and money to increase group members skills, invest energy and intelligence in creating a positive climate. It is especially important that leaders adopt a team leadership style, not a one-on-one leadership style. To do this, leaders need to give important work to teams, not individuals. Another assumption is that the formal leader cannot perform all the leadership and maintenance functions required for a group to optimize its effectiveness. Hence, group members should assist the leader with the multiple roles required for group effectiveness. One implication is that group members should receive training in group effectiveness skills such as group problem-solving and decision-making, conflict management, facilitation, and interpersonal communication. And because suppressed feelings and attitudes adversely affect problem-solving, personal growth, and job satisfaction, group members should be encouraged to learn to deal effectively with positive and negative feelings. This skill is a trainable one. Dealing appropriately with feelings and attitudes increases the level of interpersonal trust, support, and co-operation within the group. Finally, the assumption is that many attitudinal and motivational problems in organizations require interactive and transactional solutions. Such problems have the greatest chance of constructive solution if all parties in the system alter their mutual relationships. The question becomes not how A can get B to perform better, but how A and B can work together to modify their interactions toward the goal of B becoming more effective and A and B becoming more mutually effective. Frequently the challenge is broader, including how persons C, D, and E can support these changes. By implication, this group perspective requires a shift from viewing problems as "within the problem person" to viewing problems and solutions as transactional and as embedded in a system. 5.5.3 Implications for Designing and Running Organizations Clearly, traditional hierarchical forms of organization-fairly steep pyramid, emphasis on topdown directives, grouping by specialized function, adherence to the chain of command, formalized cross-functional communication, and so on-are obsolete. They cannot meet the demands of the marketplace. Therefore, experimenting with new organization structures and new forms of authority is imperative. In addition, a growing awareness that win-lose organizational situations, in which one side wins and the other side loses, are dysfunctional

over the long run and highlight the need for a win win attitude. Creating co-operative rather than competitive organizational dynamics is a primary task of the organizations leaders. A key assumption in organization development is that the needs and aspirations of human beings are the reasons for organized effort in society. This notion suggests it is good to have a developmental outlook and seek opportunities in which people can experience personal and professional growth. Such an orientation creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. The belief that people are important tends to result in their being important. The belief that people can grow and develop in terms of personal and organizational competency tends to produce that result. By implication, an optimistic, developmental set of assumptions about people is likely to reap rewards beneficial to both the organization and its members. Finally, it is possible to create organizations that on the one hand are humane, developmental, and empowering, and on the other hand are high performing in terms of productivity, quality of output, and profitability. Evidence for this assumption comes from numerous examples where putting people first paid off handsomely in profits and performance. The implication is that people are an organizations most important resource; they are the source of productivity and profits and should be treated with care. Still, values are never static; they change over time. The rapid technological, societal, and organizational changes taking place assure that tomorrow will bring new definitions of what is "true" and new beliefs about what is "good," as behavioural scientists and managers continue to develop better understanding of authority structures, organizing structures, and ways to optimize human potential. Concluding Comment: The field of organization development rests on a foundation of values and assumptions about people and organizations. These beliefs help to define what OD is and guide its implementation. This discussion was intended to articulate an appreciation of OD values and explain where they came from. These OD values were considered revolutionary when they emerged in the 1950s, but are widely accepted today. 5.6 Summary The field of OD rests on a foundation of values and assumptions about people and organizations. Values, beliefs and assumptions are cognitive facts. A belief is a proposition about how the world works that the individual accepts as true. Values are also beliefs. OD values tend to be humanistic, optimistic and democratic. Chronology of events in management and OD tremendously influenced OD practitioners. Values, assumptions and beliefs help to define what OD is and guide its implementation. Self Assessment Questions

1. Values, beliefs, and assumptions are all facts. 2. __________ is associated with scientific management. 3. The concept of was introduced by MaxWeber. 4. The outcome of was that people were not cogs and organizations were not machines. 5. _______________ gave theory X and theory Y. 5.7 Terminal Questions 1. Define concepts, values, beliefs and assumptions. 2. Write a note about F.W. Taylors principles of scientific management. 3. What was the outcome of Hawthorne Experiments? 4. State the assumptions of Theory X and Theory Y. 5. What are values and assumptions developed by Richard Bechard in the field of organizational development? 5.8 Answers to SAQs and TQs SAQs: 1. Cognitive 2. F. W. Taylor 3. Bureaucracy 4. Hawthorne experiments 5. Douglas McGregor Answers to TQs: 1. Refer section 5.2 2. Refer section 5.3 3. Refer section 5.3

4. Refer section 5.3 5. Refer section 5.3 Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University .

MU0002-Unit-06-Foundations of Organization Development

Unit-06-Foundations of Organization Development Structure: 6.1 Introduction Objectives 6.2 Models and Theories of Planned Change 6.2.1 Kurt Lewin and Friends 6.2.2 Beyond the Quick Fix 6.2.3 The Burke-Litwin Model of Organizational Change 6.2.4 Porras and Robertson Model of Organizational Change 6.3 Systems Theory 6.3.1 The Nature of Systems 6.3.2 Congruence among System Elements 6.3.3 Socio-technical Theory and Open Systems Planning 6.3.4 Open Systems Thinking 6.4 Participation and Empowerment

6.5 Teams and Teamwork 6.6 Parallel Learning Structures 6.7 A Normative Re-educative Strategy of Changing 6.8 Applied Behavioural Science 6.9 Action Research Self Assessment Questions 6.10 Summary 6.11 Terminal Questions 6.12 Answers to SAQs and TQs 6.1 Introduction This unit describes the foundations of organization development theory and practice, art and science which form the knowledge base upon which OD is constructed. Leaders and OD practitioners use this knowledge base to plan and implement effective change programs. In this discussion, you will learn what OD practitioners think and how they think as they engage in the complicated task of improving organizational functioning. Objectives: After studying this unit, you will be able to: Explain various models and theories of planned change. Explain systems theory. Explain the terms participation and empowerment. Realize the importance of teams and teamwork. Describe the parallel learning structures. Explain normative-re-educative strategy of changing The knowledge base of OD is extensive and is constantly growing. Here we describe what we believe are the most important underpinnings for the field. We will examine the following concepts:

 Models and theories of planned change Systems theory Participation and empowerment Teams and teamwork Parallel and learning structures A normative-re-educative strategy of changing Action research 6.2 Models and Theories of Planned Change Organization development is planned change in an organizational context. The development of models of planned change facilitated the development of OD. Models and theories depict, in words or pictures, the important features of some phenomenon, describe those features as variables, and specify the relationships among the variables. Planned change theories are rudimentary as far as explaining relationships among variables, but pretty good for identifying the important variables involved. Several recent theories show great promise for increasing our understanding of what happens and how it happens in planned change. Here we provide a framework for thinking about planned change by exploring several models from the literature. 6.2.1 Kurt Lewin and Friends Kurt Lewin introduced two ideas about change that have been influential since the 1940s. The first idea states that what is occurring at any point in time is a resultant in a field of opposing forces. That is, the status quo-whatever is happening right now-is the result of forces pushing in opposing directions. For example, we can think of the production level of a manufacturing plant as a resultant equilibrium point in a field of forces, with some forces pushing toward higher levels of production and some forces pushing toward lower levels of production. The production level tends to remain fairly constant because the field of forces remains fairly constant. Likewise, we can think of the level of morale in that plant as a resultant equilibrium point. Although morale may get a little better or a little worse on occasion, it generally hovers around some equilibrium point that is the resultant in a field of forces, some forces pushing toward higher morale and some pushing toward lower morale. With a technique called the force-field analysis, we can identify the major forces that make up the field of forces and then develop action plans for moving the equilibrium point in one direction or the other. This concept is useful for thinking about the dynamics of change situations. Lewins second idea was a model of the change process itself. He suggested that change is a three-stage process:

Unfreezing the old behaviour (or situation), moving to new level of behaviour. Refreezing the behaviour at the new level. Change entails moving from one equilibrium point to another. Take the example of a man who smokes cigarettes and wants to quit. The three-stage model says he must first unfreeze the old behaviour of smoking, that is, believe that cigarette smoking is bad for him and that he should stop smoking. Next, he must move, that is, change his behaviour from being a smoker to being a non-smoker. Finally, the non-smoking behaviour must become permanent- non-smoking becomes the new equilibrium point. Refreezing the desired behaviour requires establishing a new field of forces to support the new behaviour. Lewins three-stage model is a powerful tool for understanding change situations. Edgar Schein took this excellent idea and improved it by specifying the psychological mechanisms involved in each stage. A Three-Stage Model of the Change Process: Stage 1: Unfreezing: Creating motivation and readiness to change through a. Disconfirmation or lack of confirmation b. Creation of guilt or anxiety c. Provision of psychological safety Stage 2: Changing through Cognitive Restructuring: Helping the client to see things, judge things, feel things, and react to things differently based on a new point of view obtained through a. Identifying with a new role model, mentor, etc. b. Scanning the environment for new relevant information Stage 3: Refreezing: Helping the client to integrate the new point of view into a. The total personality and self-concept. b. Significant relationships. In stage 1, unfreezing, disconfirmation creates pain and discomfort, which cause guilt and anxiety, which motivate the person to change. But unless the person feels comfortable with dropping the old behaviours and acquiring new ones, change will not occur. That is, the person must develop a sense of psychological safety in order to replace the old behaviours with new behaviours.

In stage 2, moving, the person undergoes cognitive restructuring. The person acquires information and evidence showing that the change is desirable and possible. This motivating evidence is gained by, for example, identifying with ex-smokers and learning about the health risks of smoking. The primary task in stage 3, refreezing, is to integrate the new behaviours into the persons personality, and attitudes. That is, stabilizing the changes requires testing to see if they fit-fit with the individual, and fit with the individuals social surroundings. The phrase significant relationships refer to important people in the persons social environment-do these significant others approve of the changes? Another modification of Lewins model was proposed by Ronald Lippitt, Jeanne Watson, and Bruce Westley. They expanded the three-stage model into a seven-stage model representing the consulting process. Their seven stages are as follows: Phase 1: Developing a need for change. This phase corresponds to Lewins unfreezing phase. Phase 2: Establishing a change relationship. In this phase a client system in need of help and a change agent from outside the system establish a working relationship. Phase 3: Clarifying or diagnosing the client systems problem. Phase 4: Examining alternative routes and goals; establishing goals and intentions of action. Phase 5: Transforming intentions into actual change efforts. Phases 3, 4, and 5 correspond ro Lewins moving phase. Phase 6: Generalizing and stabilizing change. This phase corresponds to Lewins refreezing phase. Phase 7: Achieving a terminal relationship, that is, terminating the client-consultant relationship. This seven-stage model lays out the logical steps involved in OD consulting. Similar models have been developed by Kolb and Frohman and by Burke. These "road maps" are useful for thinking about change. 6.2.2 Beyond the Quick Fix A comprehensive change model by Ralph Kilmann specifies the critical leverage points for organizational change. This model has five sequential stages: 1) Initiating the program,

2) Diagnosing the problems, 3) Scheduling the "tracks", 4) Implementing the "tracks" 5) Evaluating the results. Change programs take from one to five years to complete. Initiating the program entails securing commitment from top management. Diagnosing the problems requires a thorough analysis of the problems and opportunities facing the organization. These problems and opportunities will be the targets of later interventions. Scheduling and implementing the "tracks" involve intervening in five critical leverage points, called "tracks," that, when functioning properly, cause the organization to be successful. Kilmanns five tracks are: 1) The culture track, 2) The management skills track, 3) The team-building track, 4) The strategy-structure track, and 5) The reward system track. Interventions include training programs, problem-solving sessions, critique practices and procedures, and so forth. Kilmann describes the five tracks: What does each track do for the organization? The culture track enhances trust, communication, information sharing, and willingness to change among members the conditions that must exist before any other improvement effort can succeed. The management-skills track provides all management personnel with new ways of coping with complex problems and hidden assumptions. The team-building track infuses the new culture and updated management skills into each work unit thereby instilling co-operation organization-wide so that complex problems can be addressed with all the expertise and information available.

The strategy-structure track develops either a completely new or a revised strategic plan for the firm and then aligns divisions, departments, work groups, jobs, and all resources with the new strategic direction. The reward-system track establishes a performance-based reward system that sustains all improvements by officially sanctioning the new culture, the use of updated management skills, and co-operative team efforts within and among all work groups. An OD consultant implements the tracks in a phased sequence, beginning with the culture track, then moving to the management skills track, then moving to the team-building track, and so forth. Kilmann has tested his model at AT&T, Eastman Kodak, Ford General Electric, General Foods, TRW, Westinghouse, and Xerox with good results. One likes this model because of its comprehensive nature, its identification of the five tracks as critical leverage points, and its holistic view of organization change and development. 6.2.3 The Burke-Litwin Model of Organizational Change The next model to be examined is the Burke-Litwin model of individual and organizational performance, developed by Warner Burke and George Litwin. This model shows how to create first-order and second-order change (which the authors call transactional change and transformational change). In first-order change, some features of the organization change but the fundamental nature of the organization remains the same. First-order change goes by many different labels: transactional, evolutionary, adaptive, incremental, or continuous change. In second-order change, the nature of the organization is fundamentally and substantially altered the organization is transformed. Second-order change goes by many different labels: transformational, revolutionary, radical, or discontinuous change. OD programs are directed toward both first- and second-order change, with an increasing emphasis on second-order transformational change. The model distinguishes between organizational climate and organizational culture. Organizational climate is defined as peoples perceptions and attitudes about the organizationwhether it is a good or bad place to work, friendly or unfriendly, hard-working or easy-going, and so forth. These perceptions are relatively easy to change because they are built on employees reactions to current managerial and organization practices. On the other hand, organizational culture is defined as deep-seated assumptions, values, and beliefs that are enduring, often unconscious, and difficult to change. Changing culture is much more difficult than changing climate. The premise of the BurkeLitwin model is this: OD interventions directed toward structure, management practices, and

systems (policies and procedures) result in first-order change; interventions directed toward mission and strategy, leadership, and organization culture result in second-order change. The model also makes a distinction between transactional and transformational leadership styles. These two concepts come from leadership research which found that some leaders are capable of obtaining extraordinary performance from followers while other leaders are not. Transformational leaders are "leaders who inspire followers to transcend their own self-interest for the good of the organization and who are capable of having a profound and extraordinary effect on their followers." Transformational leadership embodies inspiration which leads to new heights of performance. Transactional leaders are "leaders who guide or motivate their followers in the direction of established goals by clarifying role and task requirements." Transactional leadership embodies a fair exchange between leader and follower that leads to "normal" performance. Transactional leadership is sufficient for causing first-order change. Transformational leadership is required for causing second-order change. Now let us look at the Burke-Litwin model. We will do so in several steps. Following figure shows the factors involved in first-order (transactional) change. Changing structure, management practices, and systems cause changes in work unit climate, which change motivation and, in turn, individual and organizational performance. Transactional leadership is required to make this change in organizational climate.

Fig. 6.1: The Transactional Factors Involved in First Order Change

Fig. 6.2: The Transformational Factors Involved in Second Order Change On the other hand, if we want to cause second-order (transformational) change, we must change mission and strategy, leadership styles, and organization culture, as shown in the above figure. Interventions directed toward these factors transform the organization and cause a permanent change in organization culture, which produces changes in individual and organizational performance. The above two figures together yield the full Burke-Litwin model shown in the following figure. The top half of figure displays the factors involved in transformational change. These factors are powerful enough to change the culture fundamentally. The bottom half of figure displays the factors involved in transactional change. These factors are able to change the climate. To summarize, Burke and Litwin propose that interventions directed toward leadership, mission and strategy, and organization culture produce transformational change or fundamental change in the organizations culture. Interventions directed toward management practices, structure, and systems produce transactional change or change in organizational climate. Burke says: Thus there are two distinct sets of organizational dynamics. One set primarily is associated with the transactional level of human behaviour or the everyday interactions and exchanges that create the climate. The second set of dynamics is concerned with processes of human transformation; that is, sudden "leaps" in behaviour; these transformational processes are required for genuine change in the culture of an organization. We consider the Burke-Litwin model to be a significant advance in thinking about planned change. The OD practitioner sizes up the change situation, determines the kind of change required (transactional or transformational), and then targets interventions toward factors of the organization that produce the desired change. Research by Burke and his students suggests the model performs as intended.

Fig. 6.3: The Burke Litwin Model of Organizational Performance and Change 6.2.4 Porras and Robertson Model of Organizational Change Jerry Porras and his associates developed a model of how organization development works; it is described in a discussion by Porras and Peter Robertson. The basic premise is that OD interventions alter features of the work setting causing changes in individuals behaviours, which in turn lead to individual and organizational improvements. Organizational change occurs only when individuals change their behaviour, and these behaviour changes occur when elements of the work setting have been modified by OD interventions. The work setting plays a central role in this model and consists of four factors: organizing arrangements, social factors, physical setting, and technology. This model shows how OD interventions can be linked to factors in the work setting. For example, OD interventions that focus on goals, strategies, and rewards will affect organizing arrangements. Interventions that focus on culture, management style, and interaction processes will affect social factors. Interventions that focus on job design and work flow design will affect technology. Following figure shows the work setting in the larger organizational framework. The premise modeled here is that work setting factors influence organizational members cognitions (they learn what is expected, required, rewarded), which influence on-the job behaviours, which determine organizational performance and individual development. It is how OD works, according to Porras and Robertson.

Fig. 6.4: Organizational Work-Setting Factors This model is extremely useful for OD practitioners and organizational leaders. Keep this framework in mind as you read the units on OD interventions because all interventions target one or more factors shown in figures.

Fig. 6.5: A Change-based Organizational Framework 6.3 Systems Theory A second foundation of organization development is systems theory, which views organizations as open systems in active exchange with their environment. This section explains systems theory, describes the characteristics of systems, and shows how systems theory enhances the practice of OD. Ludwig Von Bertalanffy first articulated the principles of general systems theory in 1950, and Katz and Kahn were the first to apply open systems theory to organizations in 1966. Systems theory is one of the most powerful conceptual tools available for understanding the dynamics of organizations and organizational change. Fagen defines system as "a set of objects together with relationships between the objects and between their attributes." Von Bertalanffy refers to a system as a set of "elements standing in interaction." Kast and Rosenzweig define system as "an organized, unitary whole composed of two or more interdependent parts, components, or subsystems, and delineated by identifiable boundaries from its environmental supra- system." Hanna says: "A system is an arrangement of interrelated parts. The words arrangement and interrelated describe interdependent elements forming an entity, that is the system. Thus, when taking a systems approach, one begins by identifying the individual parts and then seeks to understand the nature of their collective interaction." To summarize, system denotes interdependency, interconnectedness, and interrelatedness among elements in a set that constitutes an identifiable whole or gestalt.

6.3.1 The Nature of Systems The nature, dynamics, and characteristics of open systems are well-known. Organizations are open systems. Therefore, studying open systems leads to a good understanding of organizations. Here, we examine the characteristics of open systems drawing OD expositions by Katz and Kahn and Hanna. All open systems are input-throughput-output mechanisms. Systems take inputs from the environment in the form of energy, information, money, people, raw material and so on. They do something to the inputs via throughput, conversion, or transformation processes that change the inputs; and they export products to the environment in the form of outputs. Each of these three system processes must work well if the system is to be effective and survive. Every system is delineated by a boundary. What is inside the boundary is the system, and what is outside the boundary is the environment. A good rule of thumb for drawing the boundary is that more energy exchange occurs within the boundary than across the boundary. Boundaries of open systems are permeable, in that they permit exchange of information, resources, and energy between system and environment. Open systems have purposes and goals, the reasons for their existence. These purposes must align with purposes or needs in the environment. For example, the organizations purposes will be reflected in its outputs, and if the environment does not want these outputs, the organization will cease to exist.

Fig. 6.6: A System in Interaction with its Environment The law of entropy states that all systems run down and disintegrate unless they reverse the entropic process by importing more energy than they use. Organizations achieve negative entropy when they are able to exchange their outputs for enough inputs to keep the system from running down.

Information is important to systems in several ways. Feedback is information from the environment about system performance. Systems require two kinds of feedback, negative and positive. Negative feedback measures whether or not the output is on course with the purpose and goals. It is also known as deviation-correcting feedback. Positive feedback measures whether or not the purpose and goals are aligned with environmental needs. It is sometimes called deviation-amplifying feed back. For example, if a rocket ship traveling to the moon strays off its trajectory, it receives information to that effect in the form of negative feedback, and makes a course correction. If the mission (target) changes, however, that information is called positive feedback, and the system adjusts to a new goal, say, "return to earth." Here is another example of negative and positive feedback. Say your company makes buggy whips, and the production plan calls for 100 buggy whips per month. Negative feedback tells you if you are on track with your scheduled production output. Positive feedback comes from the environment; it will signal whether the environment needs and/or wants buggy whips. The usefulness of the two concepts is that they demonstrate that it is not enough to merely measure our outputs versus the intended targets. Survival of the system is equally influenced by whether or not the targets themselves are appropriate. Systems are bombarded by all kinds of information: some are useful, but most are not useful. Systems "code" useful information and incorporate it, while screening out other information. For example, organizations in the fast-food industry pay a lot of attention to information about their industry-nutrition, eating fads, competitors, and the like. By the same token, they usually ignore information about other industries such as electronics, mining, aerospace, and so on. Another characteristic of open systems is steady state or dynamic homeostasis. Systems achieve a steady state or equilibrium point and seek to maintain this equilibrium against disruptive forces, either internal or external. As Katz and Kahn say: The basic principle is the preservation of the character of the system. Also, systems tend to get more elaborated, differentiated, specialized, and complex over time; this process is called differentiation. With increased differentiation, increased integration and co-ordination are necessary. Another characteristic of systems is equifinality, the principle that there are multiple ways to arrive at a particular outcome or state systems have multiple paths to goals. Subsystems exist within larger systems. These subsystems can be arranged into a hierarchy of systems moving from less important to more important. 6.3.2 Congruence among System Elements David Nadler and associates at Delta Consulting Group developed the congruence model for understanding organizational dynamics and change. This model depicts the organization as an input-throughput-output system. The three major input factors are:

1) The environment, which imposes constraints and opportunities about what the organization can and can not do; 2) Resources available to the organization, such as capital, people, knowledge, and technology; and 3) History which consists of memories of past successes, failures, important events, and critical decisions that still influence behaviour today. Outputs are performance at the total organization level, unit/group level, and individual level. Elements of the organization per se are labeled strategy, what the organization is trying to accomplish and how it plans to do it; work, the tasks people perform to create products and service markets people, which includes skills, knowledge, perceptions, and the workforces expectations; formal organization, which includes formal structures, processes, and systems for performing the work; and informal organization, which includes the organizations culture informal rules and understandings, and how things really work (versus how they are supposed to work as defined by the formal organization).

Fig. 6.7: The Congruence Model Showing the Organization as a System The congruence models value is as an analytical tool for: 1) Assessing the characteristics and functioning of each of the elements, and 2) Evaluating the "goodness of fit" or how well the elements "go together." The premise is that alignment (harmony, fit) must be present among the systems components for the organization to produce satisfactory outputs. For example, if people dont have the skills and knowledge required to do the work, performance will suffer. If the strategy calls for entrepreneurial quickness and risk-taking and the formal organization is bureaucratic and highly centralized, performance will suffer. If the organizations culture (informal organization) praises individual accomplishments and the work requires teamwork and collaboration, performance will suffer. . You can use this model to analyze organizations with which you are familiar. In a company that is performing poorly, which components are "not functioning correctly," and which elements

are poorly aligned? In companies showing outstanding performance, what is it about each element that causes that part of the system to function well and what are the characteristics of each element that cause all of them to fit together smoothly? The congruence model is an excellent diagnostic tool. Systems models are essential for the practice of OD. 6.3.3 Socio-technical Systems Theory and Open Systems Planning Two major variations of open systems theory- socio-technical systems theory (STS) and open systems planning (OSP)-play an important role in organization development. Socio-technical systems theory was developed by Eric Trist, Fred Emery, and others at the Tavistock Institute in the 1950s. The thesis of STS is that all organizations are comprised of two interdependent systems, a social system and a technical system, and that changes in one system affect the other system. To achieve high productivity and employee satisfaction, organizations must optimize both systems. STS is the principal conceptual foundation for efforts in work redesign and organization restructuring, two active segments of OD today. A number of design principles have been developed to implement socio-technical systems theory. Principles such as optimizing the social and technical systems, forming autonomous work groups, training group members in multiple skills, giving information and feedback to the people doing the work, and identifying core tasks help STS consultants structure organizations and tasks for maximum effectiveness and efficiency. High-performance organizations almost always use principles from socio-technical systems theory, especially autonomous work groups (self-regulated teams or self-direct teams), multi-skilled teams, controlling variance at the source, and information to the point of action, that is, to the workers doing the job. Another important application of systems theory in organization development is open systems planning. Hanna writes: In the late 1960s a small team of consultants led by James Clark, Charles Krone, G.KI Jayaram, and Will McWhinney developed a technology for addressing the interface between organization and the environment. Their technology became known as Open systems Planning (OSP). It was the first attempt to help organizations methodically analyze the environmental demands and expectations placed on them and plan to successfully meet these demands and expectations. Open systems planning entails: 1) Scanning the environment to determine the expectations of external organizations and stake-holders; 2) Developing scenarios of possible futures, both realistic (likely to happen if the organization continues on its current course) and ideal (what the organization would like to see happen); and

3) Developing action plans to ensure that a desirable future occurs. Most OD practitioners engaged in redesign projects use a combination of socio-technical systems theory and open systems planning. For example, this combination is often used in designing high-performance organizations. 6.3.4 Open Systems Thinking Open systems thinking is required for creating learning organizations, according to Peter Senge. Learning organizations can cope effectively with rapidly changing environmental demands. Senge believes that five disciplines must be mastered to create a learning organization: personal mastery, mental models, building shared vision, team learning, and systems thinking. Of all these disciplines, the fifth discipline, systems thinking, is the most important. He says of systems thinking: It is the discipline that integrates the disciplines, fusing them into a coherent body of theory and practice. It keeps them from being separate gimmicks or the latest organization change fads. Without a systemic orientation, there is no motivation to look at how the disciplines interrelate. By enhancing each of the other disciplines, it continually reminds us that the whole can exceed the sum of its parts. In conclusion, systems theory pervades the theory and practice of organization development, from diagnosis to intervention to evaluation. Viewing organizations from this perspective has several consequences. First, issues, events, forces, and incidents are not viewed as isolated phenomena, but seen in relation to other issues, events and forces. Second, because most phenomena have more than one cause, a systems approach encourages analysis of events in terms of multiple causation rather than single causation. Third, changing one part of a system influences other parts; therefore, OD practitioners expect multiple effects, not single effects, from their activities. Fourth, according to field theory (Kurt Lewin), the forces in the field at the time of the event are the relevant forces for analysis. This idea moves the practitioner away from analyzing historical events and toward examining contemporary events and forces. And fifth, to change a system, one changes the system, not just its component parts. 6.4 Participation of Empowerment One of the most important foundations of organization development is a participation/ empowerment model. Participation in OD programs is not restricted to elites or the top people; it is extended broadly throughout the organization. Increased participation and empowerment

have always been central goals and fundamental values of the field. These pillars of OD practice are validated by both research and practice. Research on group dynamics began in the 1940s and achieved exponential growth in the 1950s and 1960s. This research demonstrated that most people desire increased involvement and participation. Further, involvement and participation energize greater performance, produce better solutions to problems, and greatly enhance acceptance of decisions. Researchers found that group dynamics work to overcome resistance to change, increase commitment to the organization, reduce stress levels, and generally make people feel better about themselves and their worlds. Participation is a powerful elixir-it is good for people and performance. To empower is to give someone power, which is done by giving individuals the authority to make decisions, to contribute their ideas, to exert influence, and to be responsible. Participation is an especially effective form of empowerment. Participation enhances empowerment, and empowerment in turn enhances performance and individual well-being. OD interventions are deliberately designed to increase involvement and participation by organization leaders and members. For example, autonomous work groups, quality circles, team building, survey feedback, quality of work life programs, search conferences, and the culture audit are all predicated on the belief that increased participation will lead to better solutions. Rules of thumb such as "Involve all those who are part of the problem or part of the solution," and "Have decisions made by those who are closest to the problem," direct leaders to push decision-making lower in the organization, treat those closest to the problem as the relevant experts, and give more power to more people. OD interventions are basically methods for increasing participation. The entire field of OD is about empowerment. Robert Quinn and Gretchen Spreitzer found two vastly different views of empowerment. One view, which they call "mechanistic," is a top-down delegation of decision-making with clear boundaries and strict accountability that increases managerial control. The other view, called "organic," is bottom-up and less controlling. They describe the organic view: "The other group of executives saw empowerment much differently. They believed that it was about risk-taking, growth, and change. Empowerment meant trusting people and tolerating their imperfections. The most important contrast between the two views involves the implicit but potentially volatile assumptions people make about trust and contro1." These authors believe the organic view, with its emphasis on risk-taking, personal initiative, and growth, is the more useful perspective. But both views contain valid ideas: for example, the organic approach unleashes talent and energy in people that are best channeled by providing clear guidelines and boundaries. Quinn and Spreitzer conclude: Empowerment, then, is not something that management does to employees, but rather a mind-set that employees have about their roles in the organization. While management can create a context that is more empowering, employees must choose to be empowered. They must see themselves as having freedom and discretion; they must if personally connected to

the organization, confident about their abilities, and capable of having an impact on the system in which they are embedded. 6.5 Team and Teamwork A fundamental belief in organization development is that work teams are the building blocks of organizations. A second fundamental belief is that teams must manage their culture, processes, systems, and relationships if they are to be effective. Theory, research, and practice attest to the central role teams play in organizational success. Teams and teamwork are part of the foundation of organization development. The previous discussion focused on empowerment and concluded that the act of empowering individuals greatly increased their performance and satisfaction. The message of this section is that putting those empowered individuals into teams creates extraordinary effects on performance and satisfaction. Teams and teamwork are among the "hottest" things happening in organizations today gurus extol the virtues of teams; the noun team has become a verb, teaming; and team-related acronyms abound-SDTs (self-directed teams), QCs (quality circles), HPOs (high-performance organizations), HPWSs (high-performance work systems), STS (socio-technical systems), to name just a few. Teams at Motorola produced its bestselling cellular phones; Team Taurus developed Fords best-selling automobile; Team Saturn produced the Saturn automobile; teams at 3M generate the hundreds of innovations that keep 3M ahead of its competition; crossfunctional "design-build" teams developed the Boeing 777. Teams and teamwork are "in. "The evidence is abundantly clear: Effective teams produce results far beyond the performance of unrelated individuals. Teams are important for a number of reasons: First, much individual behaviour is rooted in the socio-cultural norms and values of the work team. If the team, as a team, changes those norms and values, the effects on individual behaviour are immediate and lasting. Second, many tasks are so complex they cannot be performed by individuals; people must work together to accomplish them. Third, teams create synergy, that is, the sum of the efforts of team members is far greater than the sum of the individual efforts of people working alone. Synergy is a principal reason teams are so important. Fourth, teams satisfy peoples needs for social interaction, status, recognition, and respectteams nurture human nature. In this section, we examine the potential of teams and teamwork, and explore ways to realize that potential. A number of OD interventions are specifically designed to improve team performance. Examples are team-building, inter-group team-building, process consultation, quality circles,

parallel learning structures, socio-technical systems programs, Grid OD and techniques such as role analysis technique, role negotiation technique, and responsibility charting. These interventions apply to formal work teams as well as startup teams, cross-functional teams, temporary teams, and the like. Team-building activities are now a way of life for many organizations. Teams periodically hold team-building meetings, people are trained in group dynamics and group problem-solving skills, and individuals are trained as group leaders and group facilitators. Organizations using autonomous work groups or self-directed teams devote considerable time and effort to ensure that team members possess the skills to be effective groups. The net effect is that teams perform at increasingly higher levels, that they achieve synergy, and that teamwork becomes more satisfying for team members. Investigators are discovering why some teams are successful while others are not. Larson and LaFasto studied a number of high-performance teams, including collegiate football national champions, heart transplant surgical teams, the crew of the USS Kitty Hawk, and others, to determine the characteristics that make them successful. Larson and LaFasto found eight characteristics always present: 1) A clear, elevating goal 2) A results-driven structure 3) Competent team members 4) Unified commitment 5) A collaborative climate 6) Standards of excellence 7) External support and recognition Principled leadership. All these characteristics are required for superior team performance. When any one feature is lost, team performance declines. High-performance teams regulate the behaviour of team members, help each other, find innovative ways around barriers, and set ever-higher goals. Larson and LaFasto also discovered that the most frequent cause of team failure was letting personal or political agendas take precedence over the clear and elevating team goal. Tom Peters asserts in Liberation Management that cross-functional, autonomous, empowered teams are what the best organizations are using right now to outdistance the competition. He uses examples from EDS (Electronic Data Systems), Union Pacific Railroad, Asea Brown Boveri,

Titeflex, and countless other organizations to demonstrate the ability of small project teams to produce high quality, superior customer service, flexible response, and continuous learning. High responsibility, clear objectives, and high accountability drive these project teams to outperform traditional organization structures on every measurable dimension. Projects are the work of the future; projects will be performed by teams. Interestingly, normal hierarchical considerations become obsolete for these project teams-you could be the boss of one team, and report to one of your subordinates on another team. 6.6 Parallel Learning Structures Parallel learning structures, specially created organizational structures for planning and guiding change programs, constitute another important foundation of organization development. Dale had introduced this concept in 1974 under the label collateral organization and defined it as a supplemental organization coexisting with the usual formal organization. The purpose of the collateral organization is to deal with "ill-structured" problems the formal organization is unable to resolve. Considerable experimentation with collateral organizations occurred in the 1970s and 1980s. In essence, parallel structures are a vehicle for learning how to change the system, and then leading the process. The charge to members of the parallel learning structure is to think and behave in ways that are different from the normal roles and rules of the organization. Bushe and Shani say: The key thing about parallel structures is that they create a bounded space and time for thinking, talking, deciding, and acting differently than normally takes place at work. If you dont implement different norms and procedures, you dont have a parallel structure. The most important and difficult task for the people creating the parallel learning structure is to create a different culture within it. It isnt the supplemental structure thats important. Whats important is that people act in a way that promotes learning and adaptation. Parallel structures help people break free of the normal constraints imposed by the organization, engage in genuine inquiry and experimentation, and initiate needed changes. Parallel learning structures are a foundation of OD because they are prevalent in so many different OD programs. The quality of work life programs of the 1970s and 1980s used parallel structures composed of union leaders, managers, and employees. Most socio-technical systems redesign efforts and open systems planning programs use parallel structures. High-performance organizations often use parallel structures to co-ordinate self-directed teams. At Ford Motor Company, a steering committee and working groups were used to co-ordinate the employee involvement teams. Parallel learning structures are often the best way to initiate change in large bureaucratic organizations, especially when the change involves a fundamental shift in the organizations methods of work and/or culture. 6.7 A Normative Re-educative Strategy of Changing

Organization development involves change, and it rests on a particular strategy for change that has implications for practitioners and organization members alike. Chin and Benne describe three types of strategies for changing. The first type is empirical rational strategies, based on the assumptions that people are rational, will follow their rational self-interest, and will change if and when they come to realize change is advantageous to them. The second group of strategies is normative-re-educative strategies, based on the assumptions that norms form the basis for behaviour, and change comes through re-education in which old norms are discarded and supplanted by new ones. The third set of strategies is the power-coercive strategies, based on the assumption that change is compliance of those who have less power with the desires of those who have are power. Evaluated against these three change strategies, OD clearly falls within the normativere-educative category, although often OD represents a combination of the normative-reeductive and the empirical-rational strategies. Chin and Benne indicate the nature of the normative-reductive strategy as follows: A second group of strategies we call normative-re-educative. These strategies build upon assumptions about human motivation different from those underlying the first. The rationality and intelligence of men are not denied. Patterns of action and practice are supported by socio-cultural norms and by commitments on the part of the individuals to these norms. Sociocultural norms are supported by the attitude and value systems of individuals-normative outlooks which undergird their commitments. Change in a pattern of practice or action, according to this view, will occur only as the persons involved are brought to change their normative orientations to old patterns and develop commitments to new ones. And changes in normative orientations involve changes in attitudes, values, skills, and significant relationships, not just changes in knowledge, information, or intellectual rationales for action and practice. The point here is that different strategies are available for effecting change, and OD is based primarily on a normative-re-educative strategy and secondarily on a rational-empirical strategy. Chin and Benne suggest that a normative-re-educative, strategy has the following implications for the practice of OD. The client system members define what changes and improvements they want to make, rather than the OD practitioner; the practitioner intervenes in a collaborative way with the clients, and together they define problems and seek solutions. Anything hindering effective problem solving is brought to light and publicly examined; that is, doubts, anxieties, and negative feelings are surfaced for "working through." Solutions to problems are not a priori assigned to greater technical information but may reside in values, attitudes, relationships and customary ways of doing things. The norms to be changed and the form of re-education are decided by the client system members. These implications give clients considerable control over the situation; they impel a collaborative effort rather than a "doing something to" effort, and they give more options to both the clients and the practitioner.

Because norms are socially accepted beliefs held by groups about appropriate and inappropriate behaviours, norms can best be changed by focusing on the group, not the individual. Burke writes: If one attempts to change an attitude or the behaviour of an individual without attempting to change the same attitude or behaviour in the group to which the individual belongs, then the individual will be a deviate and either will come under pressure from the group to get back into line or will be rejected entirely. Thus, the major leverage point for change is at the group level; for example, by modifying a group norm or standards. Norms help determine individual behaviour and a normative-re-educative strategy of changing pervades the practice of OD. 6.8 Applied Behavioural Science This foundation of OD relates to the primary knowledge base of the field, behavioural science knowledge. OD is the application of behavioural science knowledge, practices, and skills in ongoing systems in collaboration with system members. Although human behaviour in organizations is far from an exact science, lawful patterns of events produce effectiveness and ineffectiveness. OD practitioners know about these patterns through research and theory. The aim of this discussion is to look briefly at how behavioural science knowledge becomes applied behavioural science knowledge. A conventional distinction is made between (1) "pure" or basic science, the object of which is knowledge for its own sake, and (2) "technology," applied science, or practice, the object of which is knowledge to solve practical, pressing problems. OD emphasizes the latter, applied science or practice. Greenwood discusses the activities of the practitioner as follows: "The problem that confronts a practitioner is customarily a state of disequilibrium that requires rectification. The practitioner examines the problem situation, on the basis of which he or she prescribes a solution that, hopefully, re-establishes the equilibrium, thereby solving the problem. This process is customarily referred to as diagnosis and treatment." Both diagnosis and treatment consist of observing a situation and, on the basis of selected variables, placing it in a classification scheme or typology. The diagnostic typology allows the practitioner to know what category of situation he or she has examined; the treatment typology allows the practitioner to know what remedial efforts to apply to correct the problem. On this point, Greenwood states: The diagnostic and treatment typologies are employed together. Each type description of the diagnostic typology contains implications for a certain type of treatment. The practitioner uses treatment as the empirical test of his diagnosis, success corroborating the diagnosis, failure negating it and thus requiring re-diagnosis. The principles of diagnosis and of treatment constitute the principles of practice, i.e., with their elaborations and implications constitute practice theory.

From this "practice theory," the OD practitioner works: first diagnosing the situation, then selecting and implementing treatments based on the diagnosis, and finally evaluating the effects of the treatments.

Fig. 6.8: Composition of Applied Behavioural Science Organization development is both a result of applied behavioural science and a, form of applied behavioural science; perhaps more accurately, it is a program of applying behavioural science to organizations. The two bottom inputs, behavioural science research and two behavioural science theory, represent contributions from pure or basic science; the two top in puts, practice research and practice theory, represent contributions from applied science. 6.9 Action Research The action research model a data-based, problem-solving method that replicates the steps involved in the scientific method of inquiry underlies most OD activities. Action research involves three processes: data collection, feedback of the data to the client system members, and action planning based on the data. Action research is especially well-suited for planned change programs. Action research is a method that combines learning and doing learning about the dynamics of organizational change, and doing or implementing change efforts. Kurt Lewin, who developed the concept of action research, had this to say about it: The research needed for social practice can best be characterized as research for social management or social engineering. It is a type of action-research, a comparative search on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action, and research leading to social action This by no means implies that the research needed is in any respect less scientific or "lower" than what would be required for pure science in the field of social events. I am inclined to hold the opposite to be true. Concluding Comments:

These foundations of organization development form the theoretical and practice underpinnings of the field. Taken separately, each is a powerful conceptual tool for thinking out and implementing change. Taken collectively, they constitute the beginning of a theory of organization development and change that has enormous potential for improving organizational performance and individual development. Self Assessment Questions 1. means moving to new level of behaviour. 2. gave the model Beyond the Quick Fix. 3. Firstorder change is also called ___________. 4. A _____________ is defined as a set of elements standing in interaction. 5. _____________ means sum of the efforts of team members is far greater than the sum of individual efforts of members. 6.10 Summary The foundations of organizational development form the theoretical and practice underpinnings of the field. Kurt Lewin introduced two ideas about change the first idea states that what is occurring at any point in time is a resultant in a field of opposing forces and the second is the model of the change process. Ralph Kilmann specified the critical leverage points for organizational change. The Burke-Litwin model emphasized on first-order and second-order change. OD interventions alter features of the work setting causing changes in individuals behaviours, which in turn lead to individual and organizational improvements is the principle of Porras and Robertson model organizational change. Systems theory views organizations as open systems in active exchange with their environment. A fundamental belief in OD is that work teams are the building blocks of organizations. In parallel learning structures members have to think and behave in ways that are different from the normal roles and rules of the organization. Action research model combines learning and doing. 6.11 Terminal Questions 1. Explain Kurt Lewins models and theories of planned organizational change. 2. Bring out the essence of managing beyond the quick fix model of organizational development. 3. What are first-order and second order change according to Burke-Litwin Model of organizational change? Explain.

4. What are the features of systems theory of organizational development? 5. Work teams are building blocks of organizational development. Comment on this statement. 6.12 Answers to SAQs and TQs SAQs: 1. Unfreezing 2. Ralph Kilmann 3. Transactional change 4. System 5. Synergy Answers to TQs: 1. Refer section 6.2.1 2. Refer section 6.2.2 3. Refer section 6.2.3 4. Refer section 6.3 5.Refer section 6.5 Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University .

MU0002-Unit-07-Organization Climate
Unit-07-Organization Culture and Climate Structure: 7.1 Introduction Objectives 7.2 Characteristics of Organization Culture

Culture

and

7.3 Types of Organization Culture. 7.4 Organization Culture and Effectiveness 7.5 Developing and changing Organization Culture Self Assessment Questions 7.6 Summary 7.7 Terminal Questions 7.8 Answers to SAQs and TQs 7.1 Introduction Basically, organizational culture is the personality of the organization. Culture is comprised of the assumptions, values, norms and tangible signs (artifacts) of organization members and their behaviors. Members of an organization soon come to sense the particular culture of an organization. Culture is one of those terms thats difficult to express distinctly, but everyone knows it when they sense it. For example, the culture of a large, for-profit corporation is quite different than that of a hospital which is quite different than that of a university. You can tell the culture of an organization by looking at the arrangement of furniture, what they brag about, what members wear, etc. similar to what you can use to get a feeling about someones personality. The concept of culture is particularly important when attempting to manage organization-wide change. Practitioners are coming to realize that, despite the best-laid plans, organizational change must include not only changing structures and processes, but also changing the corporate culture as well. Comprehensively organization culture is the pattern of basic assumptions that is invented, discovered, or developed by an organization as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, and validated enough to be taught to new members as the correct ways of perceiving, thinking, and feeling in relation to these problems (Schein, Martin and Meyerson, 1986). Objectives: After studying this unit, you will be able to: Understand Organization Culture. Describe different types of Organization Culture Explain organization culture and effectiveness.

 Discuss about developing and changing organization culture. 7.2 Characteristics of Organization Culture Organizational culture has a number of important characteristics. Some of the most readily agreed upon are the following: 1. Observed behavioral regularities. When organizational participants interact with one another, they use common language, terminology, and rituals related to deference and demeanor. 2. Norms. Standards of behavior exist, including guidelines on how much work to do. Which in many organizations come down to Do not do too much; do not do too little? 3. Dominate value: These are major values that the organization advocates and expects the participants to share. Typical examples are high product quality. Low absenteeism and high efficiency. 4. Philosophy: These are policies that set forth the organizations beliefs about how employees and/or customers are to be treated. 5. Rules: There are strict guidelines related to getting along in the organization. New-comers must learn those ropes in order to be accepted as full-fledged members of the group. 6. Organizational climate: This is an overall feeling that is conveyed by the physical layout, the way participants interact, and the way members of the organization conduct themselves with customers or other outsiders. 7.3 Types of Organization Culture Hierarchy The hierarchy has a traditional approach to structure and control that flows from a strict chain of command as in Max Webers original view of bureaucracy. For many years, this was considered the only effective way of organizing and is still a basic element of the vast majority of organizations. Hierarchies have respect for position and power. They often have well-defined policies, processes and procedures. Hierarchical leaders are typically coordinators and organizers who keep a close eye on what is happening. Market The Market organization also seeks control but does so by looking outward, and in particular taking note of transaction cost. Note that the Market organization is not one which is focused just on marketing, but one where all transactions, internal and external are viewed in market

terms. Transactions are exchanges of value. In an efficient market organization, value flows between people and stakeholders with minimal cost and delay. Market cultures are outward looking, are particularly driven by results and are often very competitive. Leaders in market cultures are often hard-driving competitors who seek always to deliver the goods. Clan The Clan organization has less focus on structure and control and a greater concern for flexibility. Rather than strict rules and procedures, people are driven through vision, shared goals, outputs and outcomes. In contrast to Hierarchies, clans often have flat organizations and people and teams act more autonomousl. It has an inward focus and a sense of family and people work well together, strongly driven by loyalty to one another and the shared cause. Rules, although not necessarily documented, do still exist and are often communicated and inculcated socially. Clan leaders act in a facilitative, supportive way and may take on a parental role. Adhocracy The Adhocracy has even greater independence and flexibility than the Clan, which is necessary in a rapidly changing business climate. Where market success goes to those with greatest speed and adaptability, the adhocracy will rapidly form teams to face new challenges. It will use prototyping and experimenting rather than long, big-bang projects and development. Leaders in an adhocracy are visionary, innovative entrepreneurs who take calculated risks to make significant gains. 7.4 Organization Culture and Effectiveness It is reflected in how things are done (Flanagan, 1995) and how problems are solved in an organization. It may be defined as the ethos of a company (as US firms do) or the shared value and team sprit (as European firms prefer to define it). In biological terms, culture is like the DNA of an organization, invisible to the naked eye, but critical to shaping its behavior. One culture could be distinguished from another in terms of how some commonly shared human problems are addressed and the specific solutions that one sought (Trompenaars, 1993), affecting the performance of every-one within the culture in positive or negative ways. Comprehensively organization culture is the pattern of basic assumptions that is invented, discovered, or developed by an organization as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, and validated enough to be taught to new members as the correct ways of

perceiving, thinking, and feeling in relation to these problems (Schein, Martin and Meyerson, 1986). The set of basic assumptions evolve into values artifacts and norms in terms of which an organization culture may be examined and understood. Artifacts: The visible manifestations of culture as seen in the physical and social environment of the organization such as: Its structure, systems and subsystems, symbols, plaques, etc. Public documents it releases and media reports and stories about it. Its rituals, norms, rules, and procedures. The observable behavior of its members (the way they talk, the jargon they use, the way they dress etc. Values: These are the social principles, goals, or standards held by members of an organization, individually and collectively. Values evolve out of the basic assumption and form the core (or heart) of the culture, reflecting what is important in the organization and determining how the organization ought to be (the ethos, the personality of the organization). Though an organization espouses a series of values, its core value are limited to a few in number. These are the essential and enduring tenets of an organization. They are reflected in the core capabilities of a company, from the basis of its policies and action, and are generally not compromised for short-term benefits or financial gains. Identifying, communicating, and shaping organization values is difficult as values relate more to employee emotions and feeling (affective dimension) than to their rational thinking (cognitive dimension) Norms: These are a significant element of the organizations social environment and evolve of behavior- the informal rules of the fame 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. Organization Effectiveness Organizational effectiveness, also called as organizational success or growth, is defined and conceptualized in different ways, and no unanimity is found in different approaches. Though a large volume of literature is available on the concept and working of organizational effectiveness, there is often contradiction in various approaches. The various approaches are judgmental and open to question. Thus, various terms such as efficiency, productivity,

profitability, organizational growth, are often used interchangeably, to denote organizational effectiveness. Whatever the criteria adopted for organizational effectiveness, the organizational analysis is incomplete for a practicing manager unless the factors underlying effectiveness are identifying. Though each individuals effectiveness is significant but perhaps the most important aspect of effectiveness is its relationship to the entire organization. From this point of view, there are numerous variables. These variables have been classified by Likert into three groups-causal, intervening and end result- which are useful in discussing organizational effectiveness over time. Grouping variables into these categories aids greatly in the correct interpretation of the data and their use for diagnostic and other purposes. 1. Causal Variables: Causal variables are those factors that influence the course of development within an organization and its results or accomplishment. Likert states that causal variables are independent variables which determine the course of developments within an organization and the results achieved by the organization. These causal variables include only those independent variables which can be altered or changed by the organization and its management. Causal variables include the structure of the organization and its management. Causal variables include the structure of the organization and managements policies, decisions, business and leadership strategies, skills, and behaviour. 2. Intervening Variables: Intervening variables are those factors which are reflected as the internal state of organization. Many of these variables are caused by causal variables. Likert states that the intervening variables reflect the internal state and health of the organization, e.g., the loyalties, attitudes, motivations, performance goals, and perceptions of all members and their collective capacity for effective interaction, communication, and decision-making. The intervening variables may be divided into two broad categories: (i) the intervening attitudinal, motivational, and perceptual cluster, and (ii) the intervening behavioral cluster. Intervening variables are concerned with building and developing the organization, and they tend to be long-term goals. This is one part of effectiveness that many managers overlook because it emphasis long-term potential as well as short-term performance. 3. End result Variables: End-result variable are those factors which are caused by causal and intervening variable and are often in terms of the factors in which managers are interested or measure their effectiveness. According to Likert, end-result variables are the dependent variables which reflect the achievements in the organization such as its productivity, costs, scrap loss, and earnings. 7.5 Developing and Changing Organization Culture How Organizational Cultures Start Although organizational cultures can develop in a number of different ways, the process usually involves some version of the following steps:

1. A single person (founder) has an idea for a new enterprise. 2. The founder brings in one or more other key people and creates a core group that shares a common vision with the founder. That is, all in this core group believe that the idea is a good one, is workable, is worth running some risks for, and is worth the investment of time, money, and energy that will be required. 3. The founding core group beings to act in concert to create an organization by raising funds, obtaining patents, incorporating, locating space, building, and so on. 4. At this point, others are brought into the organization, and a common history begins to be built. Changing Organizational Culture Sometimes an organization determines that its culture has to be changed. For example, the current environmental context has undergone drastic change and either the organization must adapt to these new conditions or it may not survive. New product development and information technology is changing so rapidly that any example would be soon out-of date. However, if the appropriate organization culture is in place, then such rapid change can be welcomed and accommodated with as little disruption and as few problems as possible. Even through some firms have had a culture in place to anticipate change, moving to a new culture or changing old cultures can be quite difficult: a case can even be made that it really cant be done successfully?. Predictable obstacles include entrenched skills. Staffs, relationships, roles, and structures that work together to reinforce traditional cultural patterns. In addition, powerful stakeholders such as unions, management, or even customers may support the existing culture. The case of Mergers and Acquisitions The clash between the two cultures in a merger or acquisition can be focused into three major areas: 1. Structure. These factors from the two cultures include the size, age, and history of two firms; the industry in which the partners come from and now reside; the geographic location; and whether products and/or services are involved. 2. Politics. Where does the power and managerial decision making really reside? Corporate cultures range from autocratic extremes to total employee empowerment, and how this plays out among the partners will be important to cultural compatibility.

3. Emotions. The personal feelings, the culture contract that individuals have bought into to guide their day-to-day thoughts, habits, attitudes, commitment, and patterns of daily behavior. These emotions will be a major input into the clash or compatibility of the two cultures. Guidelines for change Despite the significant barriers and resistance to change, organizational cultures can be managed and changed over time. This attempt to change culture can take many different forms. Simple guidelines such as the following can be helpful. 1. Assess the current culture. 2. Set realistic goals that impact on the bottom line. 3. Recruit outside personnel with industry experience, so that they are able to interact well with the organizational personnel. 4. Make changes from the top down, so that a consistent message is delivered from all management team members. 5. Include employees in the culture change process, especially when making changes in rules and processes. 6. Take out all trappings that remind the personnel of the previous culture. 7. Expect to have some problems and find people who would rather move than change with the culture and, if possible, take these losses early. 8. Move quickly and decisively to build momentum and to defuse resistance to the new culture. 9. Stay the course by being persistent. Self Assessment Questions 1. _____are the visible manifestations of culture as seen in the physical and social environment of the organization. 2. ________cultures are outward looking, are particularly driven by results and are often very competitive. 3. ___________are those factors that influence the course of development within an organization and its results or accomplishment. 7.6 Summary

Organizational effectiveness is the degree to which organization is successful in accomplishing its goals. Organizations to be successful must be efficient and effective. Organizational effectiveness can be measured through various approaches- goal approach, behavioural approach, system-resource approach, and strategic constituencies approach. Effectiveness of an organization can be increased through economic man approach and administrative man approach. Factors in organizational effectiveness include casual variables, intervening variables and end-result variables and there exists interrelationship among these variables. Finally, effectiveness through adaptive-coping cycle has been discussed. 7.7 Terminal Questions 1. Explain the characteristics of organization culture. 2. Briefly explain different types of organizational culture. 3. Discuss the development and change of organizational development. 7.8 Answers to SAQs and TQs SAQs: 1. Artifacts 2. Market 3. Causal variables Answers to TQs: 1. Refer section 7.2 2. Refer section 7.3 3. Refer section 7.5 Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University .

MU0002-Unit-08Power, Organization Development

Unit-08- Power, Politics and Organization Development Structure: 8.1 Introduction Objectives 8.2 Power Defined and Explored 8.3 Two Faces of Power 8.4 Theories about the Sources of Social Power 8.5 Organizational Politics Defined and Explored 8.6 The Role of Power and Politics in the Practice of OD 8.7 Operating in a Political Environment 8.8 Acquiring and using Power Skills Self Assessment Questions 8.9 Summary 8.10 Terminal Questions 8.11 Answers to SAQs and TQs 8.1 Introduction

Politics

and

Power and politics, indisputable facts of organizational life, must be understood if one is to be effective in organizations. In this unit, we examine power and politics in relation to organization development. The OD practitioner needs both knowledge and skill in the arenas of organizational power and politics. As Warner Burke observes: "Organization development signifies change, and for change to occur in an organization, power must be exercised. Organization development has been criticized for not taking into account power in organizations. That criticism was essentially correct for many years although it is less valid

today. Recent years have seen a sizable outpouring of theory and research on power and politics from which OD practitioners have derived implications and applications for the field but we are still in the early stages of knowing how power and organization development should be related. One goal of this unit is to advance our understanding of the role of power in OD and the role of OD in a power setting. Objectives: After this studying this unit, you will be able to: Define power and politics in organizations. Explain theories about the sources of power. Explain the role of power and politics in the practice of OD. Acquire skills to handle power and politics in organizations. 8.2 Power Defined and Explored "Power is the intentional influence over the beliefs, emotions, and behaviours of people. Potential power is the capacity to do so, but kinetic power is the act of doing so. One person exerts power over another to the degree that he is able to exact compliance as desired. A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something that B would otherwise not do." Power is the ability of those who possess power to bring about the outcomes they desire." "Power is defined in this unit simply as the capacity to effect (or affect) organizational outcomes. The French word pouvoir stands for both the noun power and the verb to be able. To have power is to be able to get desired things done, to effect outcomes- actions and the decisions that precede them." Analyzing these definitions shows some common elements: effectance-getting ones way; the necessity of social interaction between two or more parties; the act or ability of influencing others; and outcomes favoring one party over the other. We therefore define interpersonal power as the ability to get ones way in a social situation. The phenomenon of power is ubiquitous. Without influence (power) people would have no cooperation and no society. Without leadership (power) in medical, political, technological, financial, spiritual, and organizational activities, humankind would not have the standard of living it does today. Without leadership (power) directed toward warfare, confiscation, and repression, humankind would not have much of the misery it does today. Power-in-action may

take many forms, both positive and negative. Leading, influencing, selling, persuading-these are examples of positive uses of power. Crushing, forcing, hurting, coercing-these are examples of negative uses of power. Power per se is probably neither good nor bad although Lord Acton observed that "power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely." A moments reflection, however, suggests that many problems with power stem from the goals of persons with power and the means they use, not the possession of power as such. 8.3 Two Faces of Power David McClelland proposed an important distinction when he identified "two faces of power" positive and negative. McClelland observed that while power has a negative connotation for most people, it is through the use of power that things get done in the world. According to him, the negative face of power is characterized by a primitive, unsocialized need to dominate others. The positive face of power is characterized by a socialized need to initiate, influence, and lead. This positive face of power enables others to reach their goals as well as lets the person exercising power reach his or her goals. The negative face of power seeks to dominate and control others; the positive face of power seeks to empower self and others. We think this distinction provides a good insight into the concept of power. In most organizations the positive face of power is much more prevalent than the negative face of power. Patchen studied organizational decision making and found that coercive tactics were "noticeable chiefly by their absence" while problem solving and consensus seeking were much more prevalent. Roberts came to a similar conclusion in her study of "collective power" and "competitive power." Her research in four organizations showed both kinds of power, being exercised, with collective, or positive, power being the predominant mode. 8.4 Theories about the Sources of Social Power Power exists in virtually all social situations. It is especially salient in coordinated activities such as those found in organizations. In fact, for organizations to function, an authority or power dimension is required. How do some people come to possess power? How is power generated, bestowed, or acquired? In this unit, we will examine four different views about who gets power and how: Emersons "Power-Dependence theory," French and Ravens "Bases of Social Power," Salancik and Pfeffers "Strategic-Contingency Model of Power," Mintzbergs Observations on the Genesis of Power in Organizations.

Power-dependence theory states that power is inherent in any social relationship in which one person is dependent on another. The sociologist, Richard Emerson states that "the dependence of Actor A upon Actor B is (1) directly proportional to As motivational investment in the goals mediated by B, and (2) inversely proportional to the availability of those goals to A outside of the A-B relation." In other words, if a person has something we want badly and we cannot get it any other place, that person has power over us. The components of this theory are a social relation between two parties and resources (commodities, goals, rewards) that are controlled by one party, and desired by the other. Power-dependence theory is related to a broader framework of social interaction called social exchange theory, which posits that what goes on between persons is an exchange of social commodities: love, hate, respect, power, influence, information, praise, blame, attraction, rejection, and so forth. We enter into and continue in exchange relationships when what we receive from others is equivalent to or in excess of what we must give to others. When the net balance for us is positive, we will continue the exchange relationship; when the net balance for us is negative, we will terminate or alter the relationship. Social interaction represents an exchange of social goods and services. Viewed in this light, giving someone power over us is the commodity we exchange when we are dependent on that person for something we want. Closely related to these ideas is the classic statement by John R. P. French and Bertram Raven on "the bases of social power." These authors suggested five sources, or bases, of social power as follows: 1. Reward power power based on the ability of the powerholder to reward another, that is, to give something valued by the other. 2. Coercive power power based on the ability of the powerholder to punish another, that is, to give something negatively valued by the other. 3. Legitimate power power based on everyones belief that the powerholder has a legitimate right to exert influence and that the power-receiver has a legitimate obligation to accept the influence. 4. Referent power power based on the power-receiver having an identification with (attraction to, or feeling of oneness with) the power holder. 5. Expert power power based on the powerholder possessing expert knowledge or expertise needed by the other. Informational power is a form of expert power where the powerholder possesses important facts or information needed by the other. In this theory, power belongs to those persons who control or mediate desired commodities. Exchange theory and power-dependence theory are quite compatible with the ideas proposed by French and Raven.

The strategic-contingency model of power asserts that power in organizations accrues to the subunits (individuals, units, or departments) most important for solving the organizations most critical problems. These critical problems are generally "uncertainties" posed by the environment. This theory, like the ones discussed previously, supports the notion that those who have something highly valued by- others-in this case, the special expertise needed for the organizations survival-have power. Salancik and Pfeffer further suggest how power is used: "Power is used by subunits, indeed, used by all who have it, to enhance their own survival through control of scarce critical resources, through the placement of allies in key positions, and through the definition of organizational problems and policies." These authors view organizational power as a good thing, for power in the hands of the critical problem solvers helps the organization cope with the various realities it faces. Henry Mintzberg has developed a theory of organizational power drawn from the organization theory literature and his own creative synthesis abilities. This theory, "is built on the premise that organizational behavior is a power game in which various players, called influencers, seek to control the organizations decisions and actions." The three basic conditions for the exercise of power are 1) Some source or basis of power, coupled with 2) The expenditure of energy in a 3) Politically skillful way. According to Mintzberg, the five possible bases of power are, first, control of a resource; second, control of a technical skill; and, third, control of a body of knowledge. All of these must be critical to the organization. The fourth basis is legal prerogatives-being given exclusive rights to impose choices. A fifth basis of power is access to those who have power based on the first four bases. In addition to a base of power, the influencer must have both the "will" and the "skill" to use it. An organization has many potential influencers, such as the board of directors, the managers, the top executives, the employees, the unions, suppliers, customers, regulators, and so forth. The important aspects of Mintzbergs theory are that the sources of power derive from possession of a commodity desired by others, that power-in-action requires will and skill, and that the organization is the context for the exercise of power. In summary, these four views of the sources of power are remarkably similar power stems from possession of or mediation of desired resources. The resources may be ability to reward and punish, being in control of critical skills, knowledge, or information, the ability to solve critical problems or exigencies-anything that creates dependence of one actor or set of actors on another.

8.5 Organizational Politics Defined and Explored Harold Lasswell defined politics simply as the study of who gets what, when, and how. Organizational politics involve those activities taken within organizations to acquire, develop and use power and other resources to obtain ones preferred outcomes in a situation in which there is uncertainty about choices. Organizational politics involve intentional acts of influence to enhance or protect the selfinterest of individuals or groups. Organizational politics is the management of influence to obtain ends not sanctioned by the organization or to obtain ends through non-sanctioned influence means. Thus, we view politics as a subset of power, treating it as informal power, illegitimate in nature. Likewise we also treat authority as a subset of power, but in this sense, formal power, the power vested in office, the capacity to get things done by virtue of the position held. Analyzing these definitions suggests that the concepts of power and politics are similar. Both relate to getting ones way-effectance. Both relate to pursuit of self-interest and overcoming the resistance of others. For our purposes, organizational politics is power-in-action in organizations; it is engaging in activities to get ones way. One important feature in these definitions should be examined further. The first three definitions treat politics as a neutral set of activities; the last two definitions view politics as illegitimate or unsanctioned activities. We are inclined to consider politics as neither good nor bad per se but believe that politics, like power, has two faces. The negative face of politics is characterized by extreme pursuit of self-interest; unsocialized needs to dominate others; a tendency to view situations in win-lose terms-what I win, you must lose-rather than win-win terms; and predominant use of the tactics of fighting-secrecy, surprise, holding hidden agendas, withholding information, deceiving. The positive face is characterized by a balanced pursuit of self-interest and the interests of others; viewing situations in win-win terms as much as possible; engaging in open problem solving followed by action and influencing; a relative absence of the tactics of fighting; and a socialized need to lead, initiate, and influence others. Organizational politics tend to be associated with decision-making, resource allocation, and conflict resolution processes. These key areas are the battlefields where actors win and lose; they are where the "goods" are distributed and the goals decided. In fact, one gains a quick understanding of the overall "political climate" of an organization by studying its methods of resource allocation, conflict resolution, and choosing among alternative means and goals. 8.6 The Role of Power and Politics in the Practice OD

We have discussed a number of ideas concerning power and politics. In this section we will attempt to integrate those concepts with organization development and offer advice to the OD practitioner for dealing with the political realities found in organizations. Virtually, all OD interventions promote problem-solving, not politics, as a preferred way to get things accomplished. OD interventions increase problem-solving, collaboration, co-operation, fact-finding, and effective pursuit of goals while decreasing reliance on the negative faces of power and politics. We know of no OD interventions designed to increase coercion or unilateral power. For example, OD interventions typically generate valid, public data about the organizations culture, processes, strengths, and weaknesses. Valid, public data are indispensable-for problem solving but anathema for organizational politics. OD interventions do not deny or attempt to abolish the reality of power in organizations; rather, they enhance the positive face of power, thereby making the negative face of power less prevalent and/or necessary. Not only is organization development not a power/political intervention strategy, it is instead a rational problem-solving approach that is incompatible with extreme poweroriented situations. OD values are consistent with the positive face of power, but not with the negative face of power. Values such as trust, openness, collaboration, individual dignity, and promoting individual and organizational competence are part of the foundation of organization development. These values are congruent with rational problem solving and incongruent with extremely political modes of operating. "Power equalization" has long been described as one of the values of organization development. Emphasis on power equalization stems from two beliefs: first, problem solving is usually superior to power coercion as a way to find solutions to problematic situations; second, power equalization, being one aspect of the positive face of power, increases the amount of power available to organization members, and by so doing adds power to the organization. The role of the OD practitioner is that of a facilitator, catalyst, problem solver, and educator. The practitioner is not a political activist or power broker. According to Chris Argyris, the "interventionist" has three primary tasks: (1) to generate valid useful information, (2) to promote free, informed choice, and (3) to promote the clients internal commitment to the choices made. The practitioner works to strengthen skills and knowledge in the organization. But organization members are free to accept or reject the practitioner, his or her program, and his or her values, methods, and expertise. The OD consultant, like all consultants, provides a service that the organization is free to "buy" or "not buy." The facilitator or educator role is incompatible with a political activist role because cooperation requires one set of behaviors and competition requires a different set of behaviors, as we discussed earlier. Cobb and Margulies caution that OD practitioners can get into trouble if they move from a facilitator role to a political role. In summary, organization development represents an approach and method to enable organization members to go beyond the negative face of power and politics. This major

strength of OD derives from the strategy of change, the technology, the values, and the roles of OD practitioners. 8.7 Operating in a Political Environment We will present some general observations on operating in a political environment, followed by some rules of thumb for the OD practitioner. First, organization development practitioners operate from a potentially strong power base they can use to advantage. According to the framework of French and Raven, the OD consultant possesses power from the following bases: legitimate power (the OD program and consultant are authorized by the organizations decision makers); expert power (the consultant possesses expert knowledge); informational power (the consultant has a wealth of information about the strengths and weaknesses of the organization); and possibly referent power (others may identify with and be attracted to the consultant). These sources of influence produce a substantial power base that will enhance the likelihood of success. Michael Beer has identified additional means by which an OD group can gain and wield power in organizations: 1. Competence: Demonstrated competence is the most important source of power, acceptability, and ability to gain organizational support. 2. Political access and sensitivity: Cultivating and nurturing multiple relationships with key power figures in the organization will ensure timely information and multiple sources of support. 3. Sponsorship: "Organization development groups will gain power to the extent that they have sponsorship, preferably multiple sponsorship, in powerful places."34 This maxim has been recognized for years under the heading of "get top-level support for the program." 4. Stature and credibility: Beer notes that power accrues to those who have been successful and effective. Success leads to credibility and stature. Early success in the OD program and its usefulness to key managers of the organization helps promote this reputation. 5. Resource management: Power accrues to those who control resources-in this case, the resources of OD expertise and ability to help organizational subunits solve their pressing problems. 6. Group support: If the OD group is strong internally, it will be strong externally. If the OD group is cohesive and free of internal dissention, it will gain more power. Paying attention to these sources of power will enhance the likelihood of success of OD programs.

What advice is available for OD practitioners who want to operate more effectively in a political environment? Several rules of thumb are implied by the fact that power accrues to persons who control valued resources or commodities. Rule One: Become a desired commodity, both as a person and as a professional. Becoming a desired commodity as a person means being interpersonally competent and trustworthy. OD practitioners are likely to have high interpersonal competence by virtue of their training, experience, and expertise. Skills such as listening, communicating, problem solving, coaching, counseling, and showing appreciation for the strengths of others are components of interpersonal competence. Good OD practitioners will have learned and practiced these skills. Rule Two: Make the OD program itself a desired commodity. OD programs become desired commodities when they are instruments that allow individuals and organizations to reach their goals. OD programs should be results-oriented. Another way the OD program becomes a desired commodity is by focusing on important issues, those issues vital to the organizations success. Rule Three: Make the OD program a valued commodity for multiple powerful people in the organization. When the OD program serves the needs of top executives, it gains an aura of respect and protection that sets it above most political entanglements. Being of value to multiple powerholders rather than a single one both increases support and reduces the likelihood that the program will become the target of political activities. Rule Four: Create win-win solutions. The nature of organizations and the nature of organization development suggest this rule. Organizations are social systems in which members have both a history and a future of interacting, and effective conflict management techniques are required to enhance stable, constructive social relationships. Many OD interventions promote win-win solutions for conflict situations. OD professionals who are skilled in conflict management techniques and OD programs that encompass conflict resolution activities become valued commodities. The preceding rules of thumb describe ways to increase or solidify ones power base. The following rules describe ways to avoid becoming involved in ones own or in others political struggles. Each is derived from one general principle: Mind your own business. Rule Five: Mind your own business, which is to help someone else solve his or her major problems. Sometimes OD practitioners overlook that they are hired by others, usually managers, to help them achieve their goals and solve their problems. OD consultants have a formal or informal contractual agreement with managers to help them do what they are trying to do-better. The role of the OD consultant is to help others upon request. Beer and Walton argue that organization development should move from being practitioner centered to being manager-centered. The OD program belongs to the manager, not the OD consultant. A valuable by-product of this fact is that if the program runs into political turbulence, the manager will vigorously defend it.

Rule Six: Mind your own business, which is to be an expert on process, not content. Organizational politics revolve around decisions: Should we seek Goal A or Goal B? Should we use Means X or Means Y? Should we promote Mary or John? The proper role of OD consultants is to help decision makers by providing them with good decision-making processes, not by getting involved in the answers. Abiding by this rule keeps the consultant from becoming entangled in politics, while at the same time increasing his or her usefulness to the organizations powerholders. The principle is simple but powerful: know your legitimate business and stick to it. Rule Seven: Mind your own business because to do otherwise is to invite political trouble. A subtle phenomenon is involved here: when people engage in illegitimate behavior, such behavior is often interpreted as politically motivated. Illegitimate behavior encroaches on others legitimate "turf," which arouses defensive actions. Illegitimate behavior causes others to try to exert greater control over the situation. We believe the legitimate role of the OD practitioner is that of facilitator, catalyst, problem solver, and educator, not power activist or power broker. We could propose more rules of thumb, but these give the flavor of the issues one must consider when operating in a political environment. Attention to these rules can save OD practitioners time and energy that can be more profitably invested in the OD program. 8.8 Acquiring and Using Power Skills The OD practitioner is neither power activist nor power broker, but that does not mean practitioners must be naive or incompetent in the political arena. Earlier we stated that the OD practitioner should learn as much as possible about bargaining, negotiations the nature of power and politics, the strategy and tactics of influence, and the characteristics and behaviors of powerholders. As shown in the figure, individual power derives from knowledge, others support, and personality characteristics. Three successful power strategies are "playing it straight," "using social networks," and "going around the formal system." OD practitioners have typically pursued a "playing it straight" strategy as their sole means of exerting power. The authors propose adding the "using social networks" strategy to their repertoires, thereby greatly expanding practitioner influence. One carries out such a strategy by participating in alliances and coalitions, dealing directly with powerholders and decision makers, and using contacts for information. Networking is recognized as a potent, viable, yet legitimate means of acquiring power. Table 8.1: Power Base and Power Strategy Connection Individual Power Bases Knowledge Strategies for Success Playing It Straight

 Expertise Information Tradition Others Support

Use data to convince Focus on target group Be persistent Using Social Networks Alliances and coalitions Deal with decision maker Contacts for information Going Around Formal System Work around roadblocks (Dont) use organization rules

Political access Staff support

Personality

Charisma Reputation Professional credibility

Finally, the authors propose a four-stage model for using the OD process to help the power elite transform the organization in ways beneficial for all concerned. The four stages are: Phase I Consolidating Power to Prepare for Change Phase ll Focusing Power on Strategic Consensus Phase Ill Aligning Power with Structure and People Phase IV Realizing Power through leadership and Collaboration These stages are the means the OD consultant uses to "take the high road" mentioned in the previous quotation-build a power base, influence key powerholders to accept the OD program, then utilize a facilitative OD process in which the powerholders work on strategic business issues using consensus decision making to develop a corporate strategy. The power structure will realize that collaborative power is preferable to manipulation and deception, which in turn will protect the interests of all concerned, even those of little power. This practical, how-to book on power and organization development is well worth studying. Whetton and Camerons model is shown in following figure. In this model, a persons power comes from two main sources, personal power and position power. Personal power, in turn, arises from expertise, personal attraction, effort, and legitimacy. (Legitimacy refers to abiding by and promoting the values of the organization.) Position power derives from five sources: Centrality-access to information in a communication network; criticality-how important ones job is flexibility-the amount of discretion in the job; visibility-how much ones work is seen by

influential people; and relevance-how important ones task is in relation to organizational priorities. One of the most important ways of gaining power in an organization is by establishing a broad network of task and interpersonal relationships. Networks are critical to effective performance for one compelling reason: Except for routine jobs, no one has the necessary information and resources to accomplish whats expected of them. Indeed, one investigation of the determinants of effective management performance concluded that a key factor distinguishing high and low performers was the ability to establish informal relationships via networks.

Fig. 8.1: Model of Power and Influence Networking is used to increase both personal power and position power. Having power is one thing; actually using it to get things done is another. According to these authors, power-in-use is called influence. They write: "Influence entails actually securing the consent of others to work with you in accomplishing an objective." And, "Power is converted into influence when the target individual consents to behave according to the desires of the power holder." Three things are involved in converting power into influence: (1) resisting other peoples inappropriate influence attempts, (2) selecting the proper influence strategy, and (3) empowering others. Three influence strategies can be used to influence others-reason, reciprocity, and retribution. Reason refers to persuasion by facts. Reciprocity refers to exchange of favors. Retribution refers to coercion and threats. Usually reason is the preferred strategy, and reciprocity can be useful when reason fails. Retribution is not recommended except in unusual cases. Whetton and Cameron suggest

several means of resisting others influence attempts such as confrontation and using countervailing power. Methods for empowering others are the following: (1) involve subordinates in assigning work, (2) provide a positive, collaborative work environment, (3) reward and encourage others in visible and personal ways, (4) express confidence (5) foster initiative and responsibility, and (6) build on success. Concluding Comments: In this unit, we have examined power and politics with the goals of understanding the phenomena and deriving implications for OD practitioners. Power and politics are similar in nature, arise from known conditions, and are amenable to positive control. Our suggestions for using power to operate effectively in organizations may help practitioner avoid the perils and pitfalls of power that "go with the territory" of organizational change. Self Assessment Questions 1. is the intentional influence over the beliefs, emotions or behaviour of people. 2. _____________ has identified two faces of power. 3. Power based on the power-receiver having identification with the power holder is called - . 4. defined politics as the study of who gets what, when and how. 5. is made up of Charisma, reputation and professional credibility. 8.9 Summary Power and politics are inseparable facts of organizational life. The OD practitioner needs both knowledge and skill in the arenas of organizational power and politics. Organizational power is the ability of those who possess power to bring about the outcomes they desire. Power can be either positive or negative. Power-dependence theory states that power is inherent in any social relationship in which one person is dependent on another. Strategic-contingency model of power asserts that power that accrues to the individuals, units or departments is most important in solving organizational problems. Organizational politics is defined as the study of who gets what, when, and how. Organizational politics involve intentional acts of influence to enhance or protect the self-interest of individuals or groups. Power and politics are similar in nature, arise from known conditions, and are amenable to positive control. 8.10 Terminal Questions 1. Define power in an organizational context and explain types of power.

2. Describe briefly various theories of power. 3. Define organization politics. 4. Explain the role of power and politics in the practice of OD. 5. Identify the bases of individual power and the respective strategies for their success. 8.11 Answers to SAQs and TQs SAQs: 1. Power 2. McClelland 3. Referent power 4. Harold Lasswell 5. Personality Answers to TQs: 1. Refer section 8.2 2. Refer section 8.4 3. Refer section 8.5 4. Refer section 8.6 5.Refer section 8.8 Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University .

MU0002-Unit-09-Structural Interventions and Applicability of Organization Development

Unit-09-Structural Interventions and Applicability of Organization Development Structure: 9.1 Introduction

Objectives 9.2 Meaning and Definitions 9.3 Socio Technical Systems 9.4 Management By Objectives 9.5 Quality Circles 9.6 Quality of Work Life Projects 9.7 Parallel Learning Structures 9.8 Total Quality Management 9.9 Reengineering Self Assessment Questions 9.10 Summary 9.11 Terminal Questions 9.12 Answers to SAQs and TQs 9.1 Introduction Organizations are increasingly realizing the fact that change is the price of the survival. Nothing is permanent except change because change is permanently changing. In this dynamic and fluid environment, organizational problems may repeat, but solutions to the same problems which worked out very well in the past may not be of any use to tackle the same problems at present or in the foreseeable future. An organization development intervention is a sequence of activities, actions, events intended to help an organization improve its performance and effectiveness. These programs are derived from careful diagnosis. These interventions vary from standardized program that have been developed and sometimes tailored program. One important intervention technique is Technostructural interventions because these are related to technical and structural issues such as how to divide labour and how to coordinate department which is related to Restructuring organization; how to produce product or service which is related to Employee involvement approaches and how to design work is related to Work design. These methods are receiving increasing attention in Organization Development. Objectives:

After studying this unit, you will be able to: Explain the Socio technical change. Discuss the Management By Objectives Explain the Quality Circles. Discuss the parallel Learning Structures. Explain Total Quality Management. Explain Reengineering. 9.2 Meaning and Definitions Structural Intervention is related to the changes that relate elements of organization to one another, includes removing or adding layers to hierarchy. Downsizing associated with restructuring. Changes can involve decentralization and centralization. Advantages of Structural Interventions There are a number of reasons why a consultant should consider employing a structural intervention. From a benefit cost analysis, structural Interventions compare quite favorably with all other alternatives. In addition, their attractiveness is also increased by the following advantages: 1. Rapidity of change. Once diagnosed and an appropriate correction developed, change can be introduced relatively rapidly by top management. Weeks and months of group effort are saved. 2. Greater Predictability. Basic reinforcement theories, organization theory, and OD practice enables the change agent to estimate the probable consequences of the change. 3. Organization Acceptance of Change. Managers and administrators are notoriously pragmatic. Structural changes are consistent with their operating styles and are generally understood by practitioners. 4. Succession Doesnt Destroy Change Effort. One problem with behavioral/ group interventions is the tendency for new managers or employees to discount or fail to continue the change program. Structure changes are normally institutionalized and less subject to this problem. 5. Cost is Low. The cost of structural change is generally front-end loaded, meaning the major costs are associated with analysis and design of change. This normally is a reasonable, and more

critically, a predictable cost Implementation of group strategies involves significant long-term man-hour and consultant costs. 9.3 Socio Technical Systems Socio-technical systems design is better suited to meet the requirements of a changing external environment in comparison with traditional designs. It endeavors to re-design the organizations structure, processes and functions to create a balance between the organization and its changing external environment. It could involve the following steps (Foster, 1967; Cummings, 1976; Pasmore, 1988): Determining the environmental demands Creating a vision statement Educating organizational members Creating the change structure Conducting socio-technical analysis Formulating re-design proposals Defining the scope of the system to be re-designed Implementing recommended changes Evaluating changes 9.4 Management by Objectives Management by objectives (MBO), though not strictly an OD intervention in the sense in which other interventions have been discussed so far, is a technique and system which helps in improving organizational performance. Its basic idea has been derived from the concept of participative goal setting as a technique of OD. The term MBO was coined by Drucker in 1964 when he emphasized the concept of managing by results. Since then, many business and nonbusiness organizations have adopted this in some form or the other. Though there are some variations in the practices of MBO and, therefore, its definitional aspect, it has been defined as follows: MBO is a comprehensive managerial system that integrates many key managerial activities in a systematic manner, consciously directed towards the effective and efficient achievement of organizational objectives.

The integration of individual and organizational objectives through MBO has been emphasized by Chakravarty when he has defined MBO as follows: MBO is a result-centered, non-specialist, operational managerial process for the effective utilization of material, physical, and human resources of the organization by integrating the individual with organization and organization with the environment. Based on the definition of MBO, its features can be identified as follows: 1. MBO is an approach and philosophy to management and not merely a technique. A management technique can be applied in selected parts of the organization and will have limited implications for its other parts. On the other hand, MBO is likely to affect every management practice in the organization. MBO employs several techniques but it is not merely the sum total of all these techniques. It is a particular way of thinking about management. 2. As an approach to management, with objective orientation as its essence, MBO is bound to have some relationship with every management technique. Certain degree of overlapping is there. In fact, often MBO provides the stimulus for the introduction of new techniques of management and enhances the relevance and utility of the existing ones. MBO is the joint application of a number of principles and techniques. It works as an integrating device. 3. The basic emphasis of MBO is on objectives. Whereas the various techniques of management help in measurement of results in resources, MBO is also concerned with determining what these results and resources should be. This is possible because MBO tries to match objectives and resources. Objectives are established for all the levels of the organization, including the corporate level, all the units or departments and individual manager. Objectives provide the means for integrating the organization with its environment, its subsystems and people. 4. The MBO is characterized by the participation of concerned managers in objective setting and performance reviews. Therefore, each manager takes active part in setting objectives for himself and also in evaluating his performance as to how he is performing. The total management process revolves round the objectives set jointly by the superior and the subordinate. Therefore, managers have the opportunities for clarifying their job relationships with peers, superiors and subordinates. This process clarifies the role very sharply in terms of what one is expected to achieve. 5. Periodic review of performance is an important feature of MBO. The performance review is held regularly, normally once a year. It emphasises initiative and active role by the manger who is responsible for achieving objectives. The review is future-oriented because it provides basis for planning and corrective actions. 6. Objectives in MBO provide guidelines for appropriate system and procedures. Resource allocation, delegation of authority, etc., are determined on the basis of objectives. Similarly, reward and punishment system is attached with the achievement of the objectives.

Process of MBO MBO is a system for achieving organizational objectives, enhancement of employee commitment and participation. Therefore, its process should facilitate translation of basic concepts into management practice. The MBO process is characterized by the emphasis on the rigorous analysis, the clarity and balance of objectives, and participation of the managers with accountability for results. The MBO process is not as simple as it appears to be. Managers need training and experience for developing the required skills. 1. Setting of Organizational Purpose and Objectives: The first step in MBO is the definition of organizational purpose and objectives. Questions, such as, why does the organization exist?. What business are we in? and what should be our business? provide guidelines for the statement of purpose. This, in interaction with external factors, then determines the long-range strategic objectives like (i) whether to achieve growth through expansion in the same line of business or diversity: (ii) what should be blending of trading and manufacturing activities; (iii) what should be the degree of vertical integration and so on. Usually the objective setting starts at the top level of the organization and moves downward to the lowest managerial levels. This will go in a sequence like this (i) defining the purpose of the organization, (ii) long-range and strategic objectives, (iii) short-term organizational objectives, (iv) divisional/departmental/sectional objectives, (v) individual managers objectives. 2. Key Result Areas: Organizational objective and planning premises together provide the basis for the identification of key result areas (KRAs). It may be emphasized that KRAs are derived from the expectations of various stakeholders and indicate the priorities for organizational performance. KRAs also indicate the present state of an organizations health and the top management perspective for the future. Examples of KRAs applicable to most of the business organizations are (i) profitability, (ii) market standing, (iii) innovation, (iv) productivity, (v) worker performance, (vi) financial and physical resources, (vii) manager performance, and (viii) public responsibility. Even though KRAs are most durable, the list of KRAs gets considerably changed over the period in response to new needs and opportunities. Sometimes, the achievement in a particular KRA also provides the impetus for a new KRA in future. 3. Setting Subordinates Objectives: The organizational objectives are achieved through individuals. Therefore, each individual manager must know in advance what he is expected to achieve. Every manager in the managerial hierarchy is both superior and subordinate except the person at the top level and lowest level. Therefore, there is a series of superior and subordinate relationships. The process of objective setting begins with superiors proposed recommendations for his subordinates objectives. In turn, the subordinate states his own objectives as perceived by him. Thereafter, the final objectives for the subordinate are set by the mutual negotiation between superior and subordinate. In the beginning of MBO process in an organization, there may be wide gap between the recommended objectives by the superior and subordinates stated objectives because the latter may like to put lesser burden on him by

setting easily achievable objectives. However, with the experience gained over the period of time, this gap narrows because of narrowing down of perception of superior and subordinate about what can be done at a particular level. 4. Matching Resources with Objectives: When objectives are set carefully, they also indicate the resource requirement. In fact, resource availability becomes an important aspect of objective setting because it is the proper application of resources which ensures objective achievement. Therefore, there should be matching between objectives and resources. By relating these to objectives, a superior manager is better able to set the need and economy of allocating resources. By relating these to objectives, a superior manger is better able to see the need and economy of allocating resources. The allocation and movement of resources should be done in consultation with the subordinate manager. 5. Appraisal: Appraisal aspect of MBO tries to measure whether the subordinate is achieving his objective or not. If not, what are the problems and how these problems can be overcome? Appraisal is undertaken as an ongoing process with a view to find out deficiency in the working and also to remove it promptly. It is not taken merely to punish the non-performer or to reward the performer. It is taken as a matter of system to ensure that everything is going as planned and the organization is able to achieve its objectives. 6. Recycling: Though appraisal is the last aspect of MBO process, it is used as an input for recycling objectives and other actions. Objectives are neither set at the top and communicated to the bottom nor are they set at the bottom and go up. Objective setting is a joint process through interaction between superior and subordinate. Therefore, what happens at each level may affect other levels also. The outcome of appraisal at one level is recycled to see if the objectives have been set properly at the level concerned and also at the next higher level. 9.5 Quality Circles Quality circle is one of the most popular methods in the USA which was originally developed in Japan in 1950s.Quality circle represents a participative approach to employee involvement in problem solving and productivity improvement. It consists of small group of employees who meet voluntarily to identify and solve productivity problems. Quality circle requires a managerial philosophy and culture that promotes sharing power, information, knowledge, and rewards. Quality circle program consists of several circles, each having three to fifteen members. The original idea of quality circles involved small groups of volunteers meeting on a regular basis, but in its contemporary form, quality groups are often compulsory and organized around specific work teams. Some organizations have even gone as far as setting targets for the number of suggestions quality groups are expected to come up with. 9.6 Quality of Work Life Based on the research of Eric Trist et al. at the Tavistcock Institute of Human Relations in London, this approach looked both at technical and human sides of organizations and how they

are interrelated. QWL programs, in general, require joint participation by union and management in the process of work-designing, which consequently result into high level of task variety, appropriate feedback and employee discretion. The most distinguishing feature of QWL program is the development of self-managing work groups which consist of multi-skilled workers. 9.7 Parallel Learning Structures Parallel Learning Structures (also known as Communities of Practice) promote innovation and change in large bureaucratic organizations while retaining the advantages of bureaucratic design. Groups representing various levels and functions work to open new channels of communication outside of and parallel to the normal, hierarchical structure. Parallel Learning Structures may be a form of Knowledge Management. Knowledge Management involves capturing the organizations collective expertise wherever it resides (in databases, on paper, or in peoples heads) and distributing it to the people who need it in a timely and efficient way. It Consists of a steering committee and a number of working groups that: Study what changes are needed in the organization, Make recommendations for improvement, and Then monitor the resulting change efforts. 9.8 Total Quality Management It is a long term effort that orients all of an organizations activities around the concept of quality. It is very popular in USA in 1990s.TQM pushes decision making power downwards in the organization, provides relevant information to all employees, ties reward to performance and increase workers knowledge and skills through extensive training. It is also called continuous quality improvement. A combination of a number of organization improvement techniques and approaches, including the use of quality circles, statistical quality control, statistical process control, self-managed teams and task forces, and extensive use of employee participation. Features that characterize TQM: Primary emphasis on customers. Daily operational use of the concept of internal customers. An emphasis on measurement using both statistical quality control and statistical process control techniques.

 Competitive benchmarking. Continuous search for sources of defects with a goal of eliminating them entirely. Participative management. An emphasis on teams and teamwork. A major emphasis on continuous learning. Top management support on an ongoing basis. 9.9 Reengineering It is the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical, contemporary measures of performance, such as cost, quality, service, and speed. Reengineering focuses on visualizing and streamlining any or all business processes in the organization. It seeks to make such processes more efficient by combining, eliminating, or restructuring activities without regard to present hierarchical or control procedures. Reengineering is a top-down process; assumes neither an upward flow of involvement nor that consensus decision making. Self Assessment Questions 1. An organization development __________ is a sequence of activities, actions, events intended to help an organization improve its performance and effectiveness. 2. The term MBO was coined by _________ in 1964. 3. __________ represents a participative approach to employee involvement in problem solving and productivity improvement. 9.10 Summary An organization development intervention is a sequence of activities, actions, events intended to help an organization improve its performance and effectiveness. There are a number of reasons why a consultant should consider employing a structural intervention. From a benefit cost analysis, structural Interventions compare quite favorably with all other alternatives. Sociotechnical systems design is better suited to meet the requirements of a changing external environment in comparison with traditional designs. MBO is a comprehensive managerial system that integrates many key managerial activities in a systematic manner, consciously directed towards the effective and efficient achievement of organizational objectives. Quality

circle represents a participative approach to employee involvement in problem solving and productivity improvement. It consists of small group of employees who meet voluntarily to identify and solve productivity problems. TQM pushes decision making power downwards in the organization, provides relevant information to all employees, ties reward to performance and increase workers knowledge and skills through extensive training. It is also called continuous quality improvement. 9.11 Terminal Questions 1. Discuss Socio Technical Systems? 2. What are the advantages of structural interventions? 3. Explain Management By Objectives? 4. Write a short note on Total Quality Management. 9.12 Answers to SAQs and TQS SAQs: 1. Intervention 2. Drucker 3. Quality circle Answers to TQs: 1. Refer section 9.3 2. Refer section 9.2 3. Refer section 9.5 4.Refer section 9.8 Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University .

MU0002-Unit-10-Managing Organization Development

Unit-10-Managing Change in Organization Development Structure: 10.1 Introduction Objectives 10.2 Nature of Change 10.3 Resistance to Change 10.4 Causes for Resistance to Change. 10.5 Impact of Change on the Future Manager 10.6 Methods of Reducing Resistance to Change. Self Assessment Questions 10.7 Summary 10.8 Terminal Questions 10.9 Answers to SAQs and TQs 10.1 Introduction

Change

in

Organizations are increasingly realizing the fact that change is the price of the survival. Nothing is permanent except change because change is permanently changing. In this dynamic and fluid environment, organizational problems may repeat, but solutions to the same problems which worked out very well in the past may not be of any use to tackle the same problems at present or in the foreseeable future. Hence, the mangers and other employees must be able to practically anticipate the changes (planned and unprecedented), cope with the ongoing changes successfully in the first instance, and initiate new change so as to overtake the competitors one the one hand and delight the customers on the other. Objectives:

After studying this unit, you will be able to: Explain the meaning of organization change. Discuss the nature of change Explain resistance to change and the factors which resist change. Impact of change on future managers. State the methods of reducing resistance to change. 10.2 Nature of Change The term change refers to an alteration in a system- whether physical, biological, or social. Thus, organizational change is the alteration of work environment in an organization. It implies a new equilibrium between different components of the organization technology, structural arrangement, job design and people. Thus, organizational change may have the following features: 1. When change occurs in any part of the organization, it disturbs the old equilibrium necessitating the development of a new equilibrium. The type of new equilibrium depends on the degree of change and its impact on the organization. 2. Any change may effect the whole organization; some parts of organization may be affected more, and others, less; some parts may be affected directly, and others, indirectly. 3. Organizational change is a continuous process. However, some changes which are of minor type may be absorbed by the existing equilibrium; others, which are major ones, may require special change efforts. Newstrom and Davis have explained the impact of a change in any part of the organization on the total organization. They have illustrated it by comparing an organization to an air-filled balloon. When a finger (which represents external force) is forced against a point on the balloon (which represents the organization), the contour of the balloon visibly changes; it becomes indented at the point of contact. However, if we look minutely, we find that the shape of the entire balloon has changed; it has stretched slightly. Thus, they have concluded that the whole organization tends to be affected by change in any part of it. However, the change in organization does not occur purely on mechanical relationship. While managers as change agents want to bring changes in the organization, employees want to maintain a status quo. Though this phenomenon will be taken later, what is important at this point is that a change in any part affects the entire organization and subsequent changes are required in other parts.

10.3 Resistance to Change In the management of change effectively, the managers face the problem of resistance to change. People tend to resist many types of changes because new habits or sacrifices are required. Similarly, social systems tend to resist change because of homeostasis. Homeostasis implies self-correcting characteristics of organism to maintain equilibrium as a result of change, that is, people act to establish a steady state of need fulfillment and to secure themselves from disturbance of that balance. When change is minor and within the scope of correcting programme, adjustment is fairly routine, but when a change is major or unusual, more serious upsets may occur. This leads to general proposition that people and their social systems will often resist change in organizations. In fact, fear of change can be as significantly disrupting as change itself, because it produces identical symptoms. Before we trace out the reasons for rsistance to change, let us discuss whether resistance is always bad as it is generally perceived to be. In fact, there are two sides of resistance- as cost and as benefit. Resistance as Cost: Since all changes have some cost, so is the resistance to change. If people resist to change, the organizational may not be able to introduce new phenomena in order to adapt environmental requirement, and its basic survival may be jeopardized. In fact, many organizations have been forced to abandon change programmes because of resistance to such programmes, or they have been forced to adopt alternative strategies, like shifting of the manufacturing plants at new locations. Many companies have been forced to do so in the past. One example of Bajaj Auto Limited is relevant here. In order to increase its manufacturing capacity of two-wheelers, the company procured land near its old plant site but later shifted the new plant site away from the old plant because of resisting work culture of the old plant which was expected to percolate to the new plant also. On this phenomenon, Madhur Bajaj, Managing Director of Bajaj Auto, commented, The Pune plant is fully saturated. We wanted a new culture and new layout. We saw resistance to change at the existing plant. We shall take new workers at the new place. Resistance as Benefit: On the one hand, resistance to change is costly affair, and on the other, it provides some benefits to the organization as its change agent. Resistance by some members of the organization provides an opportunity to the change agents to weigh the pros and cons of introducing change more carefully. While on negative side, the reality lies in between. Resistance to change forces management to find out this reality which helps in managing change more effectively. Thus, resistance to change provides help in managing change in two ways:

1. It may signal the need for more effective communication about the meaning and purpose of a change or need to rethink precisely how a proposed change will affect the organization and its members. 2. It also highlights real inadequacies in the proposed change and suggests better ways for developing and introducing changes. Factors in Resistance to Change People tend to evaluate the effect of change individually but they express it through group in collective form. Therefore, the reasons underlying resistance to change may be identified at these two levels: Individual Resistance There are many factors operating at the individual level which are responsible for resistance. Degree of force in resistance depends on how people feel about change. These feeling may be based either on reality or there may be emotional feeling towards the change. These feelings, either real or emotional, may be seen in the context of three types of factors: economic, psychological and social. Economic Factors People feel attached to the organization for satisfying their needs and economic needsphysiological, job security etc. precede over other needs. People may perceive that they will be adversely affected by the change in terms of their needs satisfaction in the following ways: 1. Skill Obsolescence: A change is generally meant for better methods of working which may involve new techniques, technology, etc., whenever people sense that new machinery (change) poses a threat of replacing or degrading them, they simply resist such a change. When computer was introduced in the business sector in India, it attracted a lot of resistance because of this reason. 2. Fear of Economic Loss: A change may create fear of economic loss in the sense that it may affect economic compensation adversely, reduce job options, and turn into technological unemployment. This feeling is created because people feel that those who can match the new requirements will be better off than those who cannot match. 3. Reduced Opportunities for Incentives: Employees are generally offered incentives linked to their output in the form of incentive schemes, bonus, etc. All these are well-established in the old system. Whenever there is change, people may feel that in the new system, they will have lower opportunity to earn incentives and bonus as the new system requires additional skills. Psychological Factors

Psychological factors are based on peoples emotions, sentiments and attitudes towards change. These are qualitative and, therefore, may be logical from peoples point of view but may be illogical from the change agents point of view. Major psychological factors responsible for resistance are: ego defensiveness, status quo, lack of trust in change agent, low tolerance for change, and fear of unknown. 1. Ego Defensiveness: A change may affect the ego of the people affected by the change and in order to defend their ego, people resist change. A change in itself suggests that everything is not right at a particular level. Thus, the change may be perceived as an instrument for exposing the weakness of the people. 2. Status Quo: People want status quo. i.e. they do not want any disturbance in their existing equilibrium of life and work pattern. The change initiated by the organization disturbs such equilibrium and people have to obtain another equilibrium which is a painful exercise. Therefore, everyone tries to avoid it. 3. Low Tolerance for Change: In the context of maintaining status quo, people may differ. Some people have very low level of tolerance for change and ambiguity as compared to others. Therefore, these people resist any new idea. 4. Lack of Trust in Change Agent: The effect of change is perceived in the context of change agent, that is, the person who initiates change. If people have low degree of confidence in the change agent, they show resistance to change efforts. This is the reason why labour union resists changes initiated by management because of the feeling that labour and management are two different interest groups in the organization. 5. Fear of Unknown: A change may be perceived as entering into unchartered area which is unknown. The change will bring results in future, which is always uncertain. This lack of certainty creates anxiety and stress in the minds of people and they want to avoid it. The lack of adequate information about the likely impact of change further complicates the problems. Social Factors People derive need satisfaction, particularly social needs, through their mutual compatible interactions. They form their own social groups at the work place for the satisfaction of their social needs. To the extent the satisfaction of these needs is affected by a change, people resist it. The major factors causing resistance to change are: desire to retain existing social interaction and feeling of outside interference. 1. Desire to Maintain Existing Social Interaction: People desire to maintain existing social interaction since it is a satisfying one. When there is any change, their existing social interactions are likely to be changed, which people do not want. Therefore, they resist change.

2. Feeling of Outside Interference: A change brought about by the change agent is considered to be interference in the working of people. This phenomenon is heightened if the change agent belongs to another social class, e.g., change initiated by managers affecting workers. The latter my feel that managers try to make workers an instrument for higher productivity but the outcome of this productivity will be retained by them. Organizational Resistance to Change: Not only individuals and groups within an organization resist change, even the organization itself resists many changes because of certain reasons. Many organizations are designed to be innovation-resisting. Many powerful organizations of the past have failed to change and they have developed into routines. For example, Sumantra Ghoshal, a professor of strategic leadership who is considered to be a management Guru, has commented as follows: Nothing fails like success; nothing fails as spectacularly as spectacular success. Whether it is IBM, Digital Equipment Corporation, Caterpillar, Zerox or nearer home-TI cycles, all these companies have been victims of corporate disease. It is called The Failure of Success. Strategies, values, resources and processes of the most successful companies have in the past ossified into clichs, dogmas, millstones and routines. This statement suggests that organizations tend to stabilize at a particular level and if the change efforts are not brought, these organizations start falling. The major reasons for organizational failure to change are: counting past successes, stability of systems, resource limitations, sunk cost, and inter-organizational agreement. Some of these reasons are basic while others are by-products of those. For example, first two reasons are basic and others are by-products of the first two. 1. Counting Past Successes: A major problem before the organizations which have past success stories is how to face challenges of the changing environment. Since these organizations have achieved success by following a particular set of management practices, they become too rigid to change and they hide their failure to change in the guise of past successes. This is the reason why many old industrial houses are languishing far behind and their places are being taken away by newer organizations. 2. Stability of Systems: The organization may design a system through which it may derive many benefits. The system is stabilized and any change may be perceived as a threat by the organization itself. For example, a bureaucratic organization has certain fixed rules, prescribes rigid authority relationships, and institutes reward and punishment system. All these work in some circumstances. It a change is required in these aspects, the organization may not bring it easily because it is accustomed to a particular system. 3. Resource Limitations: No doubt, an organization has to adapt to its environment but the adaptation has its own cost. If the organization is not fully equipped for meeting such demands, it may not be possible for the organization to bring necessary change. For example, if new

technology is adopted, it will require resources to procure machine, building and training for its personnel, and commensurate expenses on other items also. 4. Sunk Cost: Most of the organizations have sunk cost involved in various assets. Once the assets are acquired, these can be used for specific period. Now, if the change is required, what will happen to these assets? Naturally, the organization will like to make a comparison between the outcomes of changed programme and continuing with old programme in the light of this sunk cost. Sunk cost cannot be only in terms of various physical things. This can be in the form of people also. It an individual is not making commensurate contribution, it is not necessary that his services are done away with. In such a case, organization has to pay for his services though these may not be as useful. 5. Inter-organizational Agreements: The organization interacts with its environment. In this interaction process, it may enter into agreement with other organizations over certain aspects of working. Thus, if any change is to be incorporated, the organization has to take into consideration the wishes of other organizations too. It is necessary too that other organizations also agree to the change proposal. For example, the organization may enter into agreement with labour union about not bringing any technological change. It depends more on the style of top management. If it is risk-taking, forward-looking, innovative, and has zeal for progress, the organization may take change programmes much more frequently. Let us see what someone has said long back: There are three types of companies: those who make things happen; those who watch things happen; those who wonder what happened. This is the true reflection of difference between change-initiating companies and changeresisting companies. Based on the aggressiveness which various companies show in changing themselves, Miles and Snow have classified them into four categories- defenders, prospectors, analyzers, and reactors. 1. Defenders: These are the firms which penetrate in a narrow market product domain and guard it. They emphasize more on cost-effectiveness, centralized control, intensive planning, and put less emphasis on environmental scanning. 2. Prospectors: These firms use broad planning approaches, broad environmental scanning, decentralized controls, and reserve some resources unutilized for future use. They go on searching new products/markets on regular basis. 3. Analyzers: Above two are the extreme cases of choice-making modes in between the analyzers and reactors. Analyzers act sometimes as defenders and sometimes as prospectors. 4. Reactors: These organizations realize that their specific environment is changing but fail to relate themselves with the changing environment. Therefore, they have to behave in one of the above three ways. Otherwise, they cannot survive.

10.4 Cause for Resistance to Change Resistance to change doesnt necessarily surface in standardized ways. Resistance can be overt, implicit, immediate, or deferred. It is easiest for management to deal with resistance when it is overt and immediate. For instance, a change is proposed and employees quickly respond by voicing complaints, engaging in a work showdown, threatening to go on strike, or the like. Lets look at the sources of resistance. For analytical purpose, weve categorized them by individual and organizational sources. Habit Every day, when you go to work or school, do you continually use the same route and streets? Probably if youre like most people, you find a single route and you use it regularly. As human beings, were creatures of habit. Life is complex enough; we dont need to consider the full range of options for the hundreds of decisions we have to make every day. To cope with this complexity, we all rely on habits, or programmed responses. When we are confronted with change, this tendency to respond in our accustomed ways becomes a source of resistance. So when your department is moved to a new office building across town, it means youre likely to have to change many habits: waking up 10 minutes earlier, taking a new set of streets to work, finding a new parking place, adjusting to the new office layout, developing a new lunchtime routine, and so on. Security: People who have a high need for security are likely to resist change because it threatens their feeling of safety. When Boeing announces its laying off 10,000 people or Ford introduces new robotic equipment, many employees at these firms may fear that their jobs are in jeopardy. Economic Factors: Another source of individual resistance is concern that changes will lower ones income. Changes in job tasks or established work routines also can arouse economic fear if people are concerned they wont be able to perform the new tasks or routines to their previous standards, especially when pay is closely tied to productivity. Fear of the Unknown: Change substitute ambiguity and uncertainty for the known. And people in general dont like the unknown. The same applies to employee. If for example, the introduction of a quality management program requires that production workers learn statistical process control techniques, some may fear theyll be unable to do so. They may, therefore, develop a negative attitude towards quality management or behave dysfunctionally if required to use statistical techniques. Organizational resistance Structural Inertia: Organizations have built-in mechanisms to produce stability. For example, the selection process systematically selects certain people in and certain people out. Training

and other socialization techniques reinforce specific role requirements and skills. Formalization provides job description, rules and procedures for employees to follow. Limited Focus of Change: Organization is made up of interdependent subsystems. You cant change one without affecting the others. For example, if management changes the technological processes without simultaneously modifying the organizations structure to match, the change in technology is not likely to be accepted. So limited changes in subsystems tend to get nullified by the larger system. Group Inertia: Even if individuals want to change their behavior, group norms may act as a constraint. An individual union member, for instance, may be willing to accept changes in his job suggested by management. But if union norms dictate resisting any unilateral change made by management, hes likely to resist. Threat to Expertise: Changes in organizational patterns may threaten the expertise of specialized groups. The recent move by some companies to outsource many of their human resource activities such as training, development of pay plans, and benefits administration has been resisted by many human resource departments. Why? Because this outsourcing is a threat to the specialized skills held by people in HR departments. Thereat to Established Power Relationships: Any redistribution of decision-making authority can threaten long-established power relationship within the organization. Introduction of participative decision making or self-managed work teams are examples of changes that often are seen as threats to the power of supervisors and middle managers. Threat to Established Resource Allocations: the groups in the organization that control sizable resources often see change as a threat. They tend to be content with the way things are. Will the change, for instance, mean a reduction in their budgets or a cut in their staff size? Those who most benefit from the current allocation of resources are often threatened by change that may affect future allocations. 10.5 Impact of Change on Future Manager Organizations are changing nearly daily. The only constant in organizational life today appears to be the presence of continuous change. One area of organizations that continues its metamorphosis is the design itself. That is, the way in which companies are configured today is changing. Changing Skill Sets More organizations are utilizing cross functional teams. These teams are comprised of people from various areas within the company. For example, accountants work with marketers, human resource people with engineers and finance individuals with operations employees. People from one functional department are placed on terms with people from other functional areas.

The ultimate goal is to improve organizational performance by cutting production time or time to market. More fluid structures require that managers improve their strategic orientation. As organizations must be better equipped to respond to change in their external environment, managers must be more skilled at reading the environment and grasping the big picture. They need to be adept at reading the trends in the environment and then determining what they mean specifically for their own organization. In addition, strategic directions for the company must be identified in light of these changes. Stephen Robbins suggests that managers in virtual structures spend most of their time coordinating and controlling external relations, typically by way of computer network links. The newer organizational structures use term problem solving. This requires that managers think differently and teach employees to think differently. Problem solving now involves the people who are experts in the issue not necessarily those in high positions in the organization. Decision making is becoming more and more comfortable for those throughout the organization as the need to make decisions is distributed more evenly across all organizational levels. 10.6 Methods of Reducing Resistance to Change One of the basic problems in managing change is to overcome peoples resistance to change successfully. Unless this problem is overcome properly, the effect of the change may not be as functional as envisaged by the management. In many cases, even the impact of change may be dysfunctional if change is imposed upon the people by the use of formal authority. Therefore, the role of formal authority in implementing a change may not be effective all the times; it can make effectively by managing resistance effectively. For example, Locavini observes that the secret of real success is effective management of the emotional vulnerability that accompanies organizational change. Problem of overcoming resistance to change can be handled at two levels; at the level of individual and at the level of group, that is, through group dynamics. Both these attempts are complementary and sometimes these efforts may be overlapping because every individual is a member of some of the groups, both at the formal and informal levels. Efforts at Individual Level A change is likely to affect some people in some way. It may affect only a few while others may not be affected. When the resistance comes from the people at individual levels, the problems can be solved at the same level. For this purpose, the following efforts can be taken: 1. Involvement: Involvement is a process through which those who are affected by the change are brought to understand the change. However, this is not a one-time action, rather should be looked upon as a dialogue which continues over a period of time. It implies explanation and

then discussion of the proposed changes. It includes finding out from the members how they interpret the proposed changes and what they think about them. The fundamental idea in this process is to encourage the person to say something about any aspect of the change. People always have some ideas and opinions about what is going on in the world and more specially if touches them personally. Getting opinions out in the open, so that they are looked at and evaluated, is an important trust-building task. As this process goes, the level of resistance to change tends to decrease, understanding of change increases and personal involvement in the change increases. 2. Obtaining Commitment: Commitment is an agreement to take an active part in the actual mechanics of the change. Commitment to take part in the change programme can be obtained in private from each individual. However, sometimes, getting a man to commit himself in private to change programme may yield fewer results than if he voluntarily and publicly gives his commitment to an idea of change. The decision to commit oneself is a dynamic process. It grows slowly along with relationship. 3. Leadership: The role of leadership in getting acceptance for a change is very important as a capable leader reinforces a climate of psychological support for change. A manager as weak leader presents change on the basis of the impersonal requirements of the situation, but a transformational leader can use personal reasons for change without arousing resistance. An effective leader tries to time a change to fit the psychological needs of his followers. Thus, most of the times, either the subordinates do not resist or if they resist, the leader tries to overcome this resistance by leadership process. 4. Training and Psychological Counseling: The management can change the basic values of the people by training and psychological counseling. People should be educated to become familiar with change, its process and working. They must be taught new skills, helped to change attitudes, and indoctrinated in new relationships. Such educational process can be aided by training classes, meetings, and conferences. However, to become effective, education must be a part of the managers everyday activity on the job. This helps in creating receptive environment in the organization. Efforts at Group Level Although agreement to a change can be obtained individually, it is more meaningful if it is done through group. Usually, more than one person is involved in the change. Though each person interprets the change individually often, he expresses it through a group. Thus, instead of solving the problem at the individual level, it is desirable at the group level to get better acceptability of change. Group dynamics offers some basic help in this regard. For using group as a means of overcoming resistance to change, its basic nature, as discussed earlier, must be understood so that its effective use can be made. Based on these characteristics of group as a means of change, the manager can form strategies for overcoming resistance in the following manner:

1. Group Contact: Any effect to change is likely to succeed if the group accepts that change. For this purpose, the group itself should be the point of contact. The group contact offers some specific advantages: (i) Through groups, one can communicate with more people per unit of time. (ii) In group, there may be some person who may communicate to the same group. (iii) Group can get at the basic problem very rapidly as compared to a single individual. The same is true of problem-solving. Through the group contact, many things about change can be made clear- such aspects as the reasons for change, benefits of change, and how the benefits of the meaningful and continuous dialogue are necessary. Free flow of information helps people to understand the real picture of the change and many misunderstandings may be avoided. Even if only some of the members are affected by the change, taking whole of the group into confidence helps in maintaining a cooperative attitude. Research studies also support this aspect. 2. Participation: Participation helps to give people involved in the organizational change and inculcate a feeling of importance. It makes people feel that the organization needs their opinions and ideas and is unwilling to go ahead without taking them into account. Those people who are directly affected by the change should be given opportunity to participate in that change before the final decisions are reached. However, mere participation may not help. The organization must regard the participation as meaningful and share the results of the change with its members. This is more important in the case of workers who themselves treat a separate group and do not identify with the management. It would be prudent for management to take labour representatives into confidence before implementing any change. They must be made a party to the change rather than an agent for resistance to change. 3. Group Dynamics Training for Change: Group dynamics also helps in providing various training programmes for accepting and implementing change. The laboratory method provides a setting where group processes can be studied intensively. It purports how the results are, and how members contribute. Such training techniques include role playing, psychodrama, and sensitivity or T-group training. Such training techniques provide understanding of behaviour, thereby the people can build up the climate based on mutual trust and understanding which are essential for bringing organizational changes successfully. Self Assessment Questions 1. _________ is the alteration of work environment in an organization. It implies a new equilibrium between different components of the organization technology, structural arrangement, job design and people. 2. __________ are based on peoples emotions, sentiments and attitudes towards change. 3. _________ helps to give people involved in the organizational change and inculcate a feeling of importance.

10.7 Summary Change is inevitable. Organizational change is the alteration of work environment in an organization. It implies a new equilibrium between different components of the organization. Changes may be influenced by external and internal factors. Economic factors, psychological factors, social factors, group resistance and vested interests. People tend to resist many types of changes because new habits or sacrifices are required. Resistance can be overt, implicit, immediate, or deferred. It is easiest for management to deal with resistance when it is overt and immediate. For instance, a change is proposed and employees quickly respond by voicing complaints, engaging in a work showdown, threatening to go on strike, or the like. Problem of overcoming resistance to change can be handled at two levels; at the level of individual and at the level of group, that is, through group dynamics. Both these attempts are complementary and sometimes these efforts may be overlapping because every individual is a member of some of the groups, both at the formal and informal levels. 10.8 Terminal Questions 1. Explain the nature of change? 2. Why do organizations resist change? 3. Discuss the methods of reducing resistance to change. 10.9 Answers to SAQs and TQS SAQs: 1. Organizational change 2. Psychological factors 3. Participation Answers to TQs: 1. Refer section 10.2 2. Refer section 10.4 3. Refer section 10.6. Reference:

 Wendell L. French and Cecil H. Bell, Jr, Organization Development, Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited, New Delhi. Cummings & Worley, Organization Development & Change, eighth edition, Thomson Daft Richard L., Organization Theory and Design, Thomson South Western. Harigopal K.,management of Organization Change,Response Books, New Delhi. J. N. Jain, P. P.Singh, Modern Organization Development and Change, Principles and Practices, Regal Publications New Delhi. James A. F. Stoner and R. Edward Freeman, Management, Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi. Laxmi Devi, Organizational Development, Anmol Publications Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi. L. M. Prasad, Organizational Behaviour, Sultan Chand & Sons, Educatiional Publishers, New Delhi. T. N. Chhabra, Principles & Practice of Management, Dhanpat Rai & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Stephen P. Robbbins, Management, Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi. Stephens P. Robbins, Organizational Behaviour, 12th edition, Prentice-Hall India. E References

http://fds.oup.com/www.oup.co.uk/pdf/bt/fincham/Chapter15.pdf http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/cameronk/CULTURE%20BOOK-CHAPTER%201.pdf http://www.wdi.umich.edu/files/Publications/WorkingPapers/wp598.pdf http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~kyodo/kokyuroku/contents/pdf/1461-15.pdf http://www.lib.umd.edu/groups/learning/wp8.html http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/portal_libraries_and_the_academy/v005/5.1lowry.pdf www.work911.com/articles/leadchange.htm www.managementtoday.co.uk/search/article/634958/the-ceos-role-managing-change/ http://www.fao.org/docrep/w7503e/w7503e05.htm#TopOfPage http://www.humtech.com/opm/grtl/OLS/ols6.cfm http://www.managementhelp.org/org_chng/org_chng.htm#anchor73776

Copyright 2009 SMU Powered by Sikkim Manipal University .