1

Developing Effective Organizations

Student Name:

Student ID:
 2

Table of Contents

1 Introduction and background ............................................................................................. 3

2 Organization development theories................................................................................... 4
2.1 Tuckman’s model of team development .................................................................... 4
2.2 Appreciative inquiry model ......................................................................................... 5
2.3 Hackman’s multileveled perspective .......................................................................... 6
2 Team Development ............................................................................................................ 7
4 Reflection on Team ............................................................................................................. 8
5 Conclusion and Recommendations .................................................................................... 9
References ............................................................................................................................... 11
 3

1 Introduction and background

The definition of organizational development (OD) presented by Beckhard states that OD is a
systematic planned effort made by the senior management and the leaders of the company.
The organizational development is conducted because of enhancing the overall health and
efficiency and effectiveness of the planned processed for OD as well as with the
implementation of behavioral sciences (Asumeng & Osae-Larbi, 2015). The organizational
development can also be defined as the systematic process and consistent effects made by
the senior management of the organization in order to enhance the vision and mission of the
company (Anderson, 2015). These two definitions present the idea of the organizational
development process and the components of OD. In my opinion, the definition presented by
Beckhard is more concise and comprehensive because it gives the details of the processes
and components involved in the OD process.

This report presents the analysis of theories and models of the organization and team
development. It evaluates the importance and role of effective team building in the success
and growth of the organizations. It also presents the evaluation of the strengths and
weaknesses of my team and the most suitable model for team building.

1.1 Background

The concept of organization development has its roots from the early 1920s and the major
contributions were made by Kurt Lewin and Richard Beckhard as fathers and founders of the
concept of organization development. However, it is hard to give one rigid definition for the
organization development (OD) because of the complex and multiple ranges of processes and
concepts invoked in this phenomenon (Asumeng & Osae-Larbi, 2015).
 4

Figure 1: Organizational development

Source: (Beard, 2000)

2 Organization development theories

There are various models and theories of organizational development and some of which
are identified as follows:

2.1 Tuckman’s model of team development

Bruce Tuckman presented his model of team development in the year 1965 which he
developed after the analysis of some fifty group studies. This model is considered to be one
of the most frequently used and discussed the model of team development (Egan, 2001). The
four stages of team development ion this model are described as follows:

 Forming

Forming is the first stage of team development where group members are unaware of each
other, as well as the new members, who are also not familiar with the tasks and activities
(Rothwell & Sullivan, 2005).

 Storming

This is the second stage of team development where the members begin to get to know each
other after working for some time. They learn about the tasks and activities and as well as the
structure and work environment (Cheung-Judge & Holbeche, 2015).

 Norming
 5

At this stage, the group members begin to understand the team activities as well as the
members. It is the stage where understanding is developed regarding the activities of the task
(Business, 2018).

 Performing

At this stage, the groups resolve their issues and reach a conclusion, here the goals and
objectives of the group are clear. Here the team begins to perform and the common
characteristics include the creativity, performance, initiatives, flexibility and open
relationships with the group members, pride and achievement of the desired goals (Egan,
2001)

Figure 2: Tuckman’s Model of team development

Source: (Smith, 2001)

2.2 Appreciative inquiry model

The theory of appreciative inquiry was introduced by Cooperrider (2000). This model suggests
that the most suitable way of organizational development and successful team development
is through diversity. It suggests forming people with diversified background characteristics.
Which will enable the organizations to appreciate the strengths of the teams rather than
focusing on the problems? The model suggests that organizations must appreciate the
existing strengths and determine ways to improve and enhance what is achieved so far. The
 6

action inquiry that consists of four stages that can be described as Appreciate, Imagine,
Determine, Create (Cheung-Judge & Holbeche, 2015).

2.3 Hackman’s multileveled perspective

The key feature of Hackman’s multileveled model is that unlike other models it focuses on all
three levels of the group or team development that include individual level, group level and
organizational level (Hackman, 2003). Hackman’s multileveled perspective model can be
explained by the following three levels:

Micro (individual level): This level refers to the personal characteristics of the individuals

Mesco (group level): This level is referred to the characteristics and features of the group of
individuals for the team.

Macro (organization level): This level describes the characteristics of the group as well as the
surroundings of the group such as organization or society.

Selected OD theory

The theories of organizational and team development discussed in this report presents a
number of ways through which companies can develop the excising teams to enhance
performance and growth. In my opinion, Hackman’s multilevel perspective is one of the most
comprehensive and profound approaches for team development. The Hackman’s model
covers the multiple levels and layers which not only focus on the individual strengths and
weaknesses but also cover the organization as a whole as well as the groups or teams in which
the individuals perform (Egan, 2001). Tuckman’s model and the punctuated model cover the
aspects that are limited to the extent of problem-solving and focusing on improving the
shortcomings within the teams does cover the broader aspect and does not focus on the
organizational development aspect (Business, 2018). Hackman’s model suggests that a group
of team development and success can be best understood when all three levels (mesco,
micro, and macro) are taken into account. Another strong argument for selecting Hackman’s
model is that it provides five key areas that organizations should focus for team development
which is as follows: all the team members must be realistic, teams must have well-defined
goals, team members should be supportive of each other, teams must have support from the
organizations, teams must be provided with the ample material resources (Hackman, 2003).
 7

Therefore I consider Hackman’s model as the most appropriate model for my team for the
overall growth and success. One of the world renown organization FedEx has also applied the
Hackman’s model for effective organization and ram development that resulted in
remarkable results and increased performance (Mendoza, 2007).

2 Team Development
Over the years several studies have been conducted on the concept and importance of
successful team development. It is considered to be the building unit or microcosm of the
overall organization development process (Cheung-Judge & Holbeche, 2015). There are
several factors that strongly emphasize the concept of team development such as conflicts,
poor performance, lack of commitment and involvement, decreased quality in performance,
reduced motivation and innovation as well decreased the productivity of the employees
(Anderson, 2015). It is believed that teams are more effective and efficient when they are
formed by the people who have mutual interests and common goals that derive them to
achieve the aims and objectives people work together and strive for the common goals.
Several studies of group dynamics and team development have been development and a
number of models and theories have been presented that focus on the development and
success of the teams (Fapohunda, 2013).

Strength-based theory

In recent years strength-based theories have been in the subject of research in the field of
organization and team development. The concept of strength-based strategy was initially
introduced by Donald Clifton who proposed that strength is the ability of any individual to
consistently and continuously work to produce the results. Clifton argues that strength is the
result of the knowledge, skills, and experience of the individuals that reflect in their tasks
performed (Gallup, 2017). Another theory of strength was proposed by Linley (2008) which
states that strengths are the inherent capabilities if an individual in order to feel or think in a
certain way that presents the emotional and mental strength of the individual which supports
him to perform better in any situation. On contrary to this Peterson and Seligman in 2004
represent the strength as the reflection of the virtues possessed by the individuals (Asumeng
& Osae-Larbi, 2015).
 8

After comparing the theories of strength I believe the theory of Clifton is the strongest among
all because it not only rely on the inherent abilities of feelings and emotions or display of the
virtues possessed by the individuals it focuses on several areas that reflect upon the strength
of the individuals such as knowledge, expertise, talents, skills, and experience (Hodges, 2012).
I would prefer to apply Clifton’s strength-based theory on my team development.

4 Clifton Strength Test

The Gallop Clifton strength test was applied to find out the strengths and weaknesses of my
team. This test enables to examine the four different strength areas of an individual that
categorized as execution, relationship building, strategic thinking, and influencing. According
to this test, every individual possesses different strength sets however they usually belong to
the same strength group (Hodges, 2012). The results of the test showed an ascending order
of strength group which is relationship building, strategic thinking, execution, and influencing.
The results of the test indicate that our team highly focuses on the relationship-building as
well it is strong at strategic thinking, this shows that team is strong at all the sociable tasks
and performs well in the external environment (Gallup, 2017)t. The team has also a strong
point of strategic thinking that leads to best decision making. It is extremely important for the
teams to be heard and must have the leadership qualities to inspire and influence as well as
it is extremely important to implement the plans and activities. The team shows weaknesses
in action and implementation as well as leadership qualities.

Figure 2: Strength-based test

 9

Strengths:
The key strengths of my team are relationship building and strategic thinking
Weaknesses:

As per the strength, the weaknesses of my team are influencing and execution

5 Conclusion and Recommendations

The following conclusions can be derived from the strength-based test for my team:

Conclusion 1: the above test results of the Clifton strength tests suggest that the team
strongly lacks the strength group of influencing. The lowest rank achieved was for influencing.
This result depicts that our team strongly lacks the leadership qualities and abilities to
influence the others around them and make them heard. It also reflects that our team does
not have the convincing power for conveying out decisions and ideas. In this way, the team
will be more vulnerable and will be a poor performer at the sociable tasks. This means that
team is weak at influencing and persuading others as well as to perform in the social tasks. In
order to enhance the influencing factor it is important that leadership skills must be
developed among the team members, as well as they also need to be more confident about
their own tasks and activities to influence and convince others (Smith, 2001). Strong
leadership skills will enable the individuals as well as the team as whole to influence others
around them.
Conclusion 2: the results of the tests suggest that the team also lacks the strength group of
execution. This means that our team is weak at taking action and implementing the ideas. Any
organization or team cannot be successful without implementing the ideas. It is extremely
important to make timely decisions in order to be successful and perform. Planning and ideas
are important but it is not possible to achieve success without executing the plans and taking
actions. The teams can be made to improve the execution strength group be developing
strong decision-making skills (Wheelan, Davidson, & Tilin, 2003).

Conclusion 3: it can be inferred from the results of the Clifton test that our team possesses
strong relationship building and strategic thinking skills. That might help us to overcome the
problem of influencing skills. Although team is strong at strategic thinking it is not practically
possible to implement the ideas without execution (McLean, 2005). Therefore the team needs
to focus on building the execution skills as well.
 10

Recommendations:

Based on the conclusion and analysis of the test results it is best suited that the most
appropriate theory of team development is applied in order to enhance the performance and
growth of the team. I have proposed the application of Hackman’s model which suggests t a
number of areas to cover in order to make a team successful. In order to overcome the
problem of influencing I have made the following recommendations to improve this skill over
the period of next 4 weeks:

Communication:

It is recommended that all the team members to enhance the influencing and execution skills
over the period of the next four weeks the team members will have a weekly meeting for
effective communication and leadership skills. Each team member will their own ideas and
present in front of the other team members in this way the most influencing or convincing
idea will be selected and will be followed throughout the week. This will enable the members
to enhance their influencing as well as the execution skills.

Justification

This communication strategy will be highly effective for the team members to overcome their
weaknesses because it is SMART goal and can be achieved within the time frame of the next
four weeks, This strategy will enable to enhance of both influencing and execution skills.
 11

References

Anderson, D. (2015). Organization development: The process of leading organizational

Change. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Asumeng, M. A., & Osae-Larbi, J. A. (2015). Organization Development Models: A Critical
Review and Implications for Creating Learning Organizations. European Journal of
Training and Development Studies, 2(3), 29-43.
Beard, M. (2000). Organizational Development: An EAP Approach . Employee Assistance
Quarterly, 16(1).
Cheung-Judge, M. y., & Holbeche, L. (2015). Organisational development: A practitioner's
guide for OD and HR. London: Kogan Page.
Egan, T. (2001). Organization development: An examination of definitions and dependent
variables. Human Resource Development Research Center, University of Minnesota.
Gallup. (2017). CliftonStrengths for Students: Your Strengths Journey Begins Here . New York:
Gallup Press.
Gigch, J. (1978). Applied General Systems Theory . New York: Harper & Row.
Hackman, J. (2003). Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 24(8), 905-909.
Hodges, T. D. (2012). Strengths-based Development in Practice.
doi:10.1002/9780470939338.ch16
Karakas, F. (2009). New Paradigms in Organization Development: Positivity, Spirituality, and
Complexity. Organization Development Journal, 27(1).
Kenis, P. (2010). A Review of: “Organization Development: Principles, Processes,
Performance by Gary N. McLean. International Public Management Journal , 13(2),
206-209.
McLean, G. N. (2005). Organization Development Principles, Processes, Performance .
Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Mendoza, E. A. (2007). Chapter 8. Motivation: From Concept to Applications. New York.
Rothwell, W., & Sullivan, R. (2005). Practicing organizational development: A guide for
consultants. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Smith, G. (2001). Group development: A review of the literature and a commentary on
future research. directions. Group Facilitation, 3(1), 14-45.
 12

Taute, W., & Taute, F. (2012). Organizational Development: A Supplement for the Effective
Organization. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 27, 63-78.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2012.666461
Theodore, J. (2013). Organizational Development Interventions In Learning Organizations.
International Journal of Management & Information Systems, 17(1), 65-70.
doi:https://doi.org/10.19030/ijmis.v17i1.7591
Wheelan, S., Davidson, B., & Tilin, F. (2003). Group development across time: Reality or
illusion? Small group research, 34(2), 223-245.