Central Luzon State University

Science City of Muñoz 3120

Nueva Ecija, Philippines

Instructional Module for the Course

MNGT 3120: Organizational Development

Module 4

DIAGNOSTIC PHASE

In this module, we will understand the unique nature and

circumstances of the client system. To have data to understand the issues affecting
the system and to guide you and your clients to calibrate the best way to work with
the situation is very important.

Objectives:
1. Understand the definition and importance of diagnosis in OD;
2. Determine the Diagnostic Phase in the OD cycle;
3. Assess the political considerations inside the organization;
4. Recognize the people to engage, data to collect, and methodologies to
use in the Diagnostic Phase.

A. DIAGNOSIS IN OD
The primary aim of diagnosis is to gather sufficient, robust and representative data that will give
both the organization and you not only a clearer picture of how to proceed but also a strong base
for decisions about what to do in the intervention phase. If this diagnostic phase is well planned, the
process will help you to gain momentum to achieve the change objectives more quickly. Therefore,
it is important to bear in mind the wider aims of diagnosis as you set up your process. These are:
1. Focus on how people will react during the diagnostic phase. In all OD diagnostic processes
you need to focus on how people react to the diagnostic process itself. Burke once
suggested that diagnosis is like a child throwing a rock into a pond. Our job as OD
practitioners is to watch the ripples that the rock has created as well as where the rock ends
up. The ripples may offer some unexpected data that may require early adjustment of the
contract.
2. In the diagnostic stage, one must secure engagement from various people for greater
ownership of the change agenda. The whole diagnostic process must be designed to gain
the engagement and involvement of those key stakeholders (individuals and groups) whose
support at the implementation stage is essential to the success of the project. However, to
gain their commitment, a sense-making journey must be designed, relevant data must be
offered to them to ponder and act upon, diverse views must be brought to the surface, and
people must be helped to voluntarily re-examine their own mental models, so that common
 ground can be found. It is preparing these various groups to find collective and
implementable solutions that is critical in the diagnostic stage. At the end of the diagnostic
process, we know it has been successful if people feel more engaged with the change
agenda and are ready to move towards the next stage with greater ownership and
commitment.
3. Connect the system to itself. The diagnostic process should also aim to increase the
connectivity between different stakeholders so that diverse views within the organization
will be exchanged. Hopefully, through a meaningful dialogical process, members from
different parts of the organization will get to know each other, be willing to work together
on real issues, and in the process get to know and respect each other’s views in a power
equalization process. When all the voices from different parts of the system are heard,
people will begin to see beyond their part to the whole.

B. THE DIAGNOSTIC PHASE

Diagnosis covers four of the phases in the OD consultancy cycle: data collection, data analysis,
data feedback and action planning. It is a vital phase in any change and development program for
the following reasons:
a. Without proper understanding of the nature of the situation and the issues involved, any
planned intervention will miss more than it will hit.
b. The person or the group that initiates the program tends to have a view about the issues
from their professional, divisional and personal perspective. So the data they offer, while it
may be valid from their perspective, is seldom fully representative of the whole system.
c. You, the consultant, will also have a view about the issues from the type of portfolio history
you have had and the sector with which you are most familiar. This, together with who you
are, your values and your mental models, will color your perspective, so some safeguards
are needed to prevent all of the above from shaping your diagnosis of the change process.
d. The diagnostic activities set the stage to shift people’s view of the issues at hand; therefore,
what you look for and how you look will either set the organization in motion or entrench it
deeper in its old ways. Since diagnosis is itself an intervention activity, designing the right
process will help to set the pace of change in the next phase.

C. POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN MANAGING THE DIAGNOSTIC PHASE

The first task of the diagnostic phase for the OD practitioner is to collect ‘political’ data.
Without the political data, it will be like conducting the orchestra without the score. All
organizations have different political landscapes where formal and informal power bases and
alliances, covert decision-making processes, back-room trading, example, take place. These political
processes impact the change processes and affect the change outcomes more than the formal
approach. Therefore, one of the first things you do when planning diagnosis is to think about the
‘end game’ – ask yourself, ‘In order for the change implementation to be successful, who needs to
get involved, be informed and be engaged?’ So by the time you get to the implementation stage, the
energy and readiness will be there to help the organization to achieve the goal.
 From that perspective, it is never too early to map the political forces that may be blocking
the system and to attempt to shift such barriers (it will be useful to refer to Lewin’s Field theory and
group dynamics for further ideas on this). As with any planning in OD, the answers to the following
pre-diagnostic questions will help you and your team start shaping the diagnostic process. It is best
to gather your internal change team who will be working to support this process. Their views on
some of these questions are critical.

D. PEOPLE TO ENGAGE DURING THE DIAGNOSTIC PHASE

These questions are aimed at getting people engaged because they are powerful in shaping the
implementation success and/or because they have data to share:
a. Decision makers – who are the decision makers in the system? Who needs to support this
change agenda if the project is to fly?
b. Influential people to the decision makers – who has direct access to the decision makers as
well as having impact on their thinking and action?
c. Key implementers – who are the key people and groups that the system will depend on to
ensure the successful implementation of the change?
d. Influential people to the implementers – who has influence on the key implementation
groups, example their boss, their support colleagues and sometimes their trade union?
e. Key political players – who, from a political standpoint, is powerful so that you should
involve them in designing and carrying out the data collection so they will not only own the
data but help to disseminate it?
f. Key functional groups – which functional group or groups will need to carry most of the
burden of implementation? How early do you need to involve them in data collection to
ensure their professional functional thinking will be present throughout the project?

Once these different types of people are identified, how will you engage them at every step
during the diagnostic phase so that they will support the change? So, ‘HOW?’

E. OUTLINE OF THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF DATA

When talking to clients, often they are not clear what ‘data’ actually means. They equate data to
the answers that you get when you interview people, or the answers on the survey you sent out. In
reality, there is a diverse range of data you can tap into, and to increase the data reliability and
validity, you will need to tap into several sources. The range of data available includes:
a. Hard data – for example, trading figures, the ROI (return on investment), example from the
last two rounds of policy change, the turnover rate of staff talent, the benchmark statistics
in the industry, the percentage of returned goods, the change in the rate of grievances
following a development program in diversity and inclusion for middle management, the
industrial accident rate, etc. Anything that offers statistics, numbers and ratios will fall into
hard data.
b. Soft data – for example, how members of staff feel about the organization, survey findings
about their loyalty and commitment to the organization’s proposed change of direction,
pictures children draw when they leave a care home, customer feedback on quality, market
research data on brand value, etc.
 c. Energy data – people’s current feelings, energy and enthusiasm about the proposed change
agenda. How draining is it? Are some of the elements perceived as non-events? Overall
morale and attitudes, etc.
d. Readiness and capability data – whether the people who have to implement the new
agenda are both ready to shift and capable of carrying out the change. Or are they dragging
their feet?
e. Political data – whether the differences between the various power groups will support and
facilitate or block the change agenda.
f. Competency data – whether those groups that have to shift to a new way of working are
able to scale up to their new responsibilities and to sustain the change.
g. External data – the feelings and views of external bodies who have a stake in the
organization, about the change agenda; how they express their views and what types of
data they may leak to competitors, etc.
h. Competitor data – what competitors are doing in this area and how the change agenda will
help or hinder the organization in the market.
i. Professional data – depending on the focus of the change agenda, you may need to obtain
additional ‘professional’ information, example financial accounting best practices, HR
compensation and rewards best practices, etc.

F. DIFFERENT TYPES OF DATA COLLECTION METHODS

There are a range of data collection methods. The following listing is not exhaustive:
a. Existing documents on different aspects of the organization’s performance, example trading
figures, consumer feedback, delivery of strategic priorities, annual reports, regulatory
compliance reports, peer assessments, divisional directors’ reports, project success or
failure rate in the last 10 years, etc.
b. One-to-one interviews with people who have solid data on the areas you have been asked
to study, example head of consumer care, head of the annual organization review. Choose
those whose opinion will carry weight politically or professionally.
c. Single-unit focus groups to discuss the issues and/or carry out self-assessment of the
relevant topics.
d. Mixed-unit focus groups to share perspectives on how best to manage the change agenda
and facilitate cross-fertilization between units.
e. Change agenda posted online to elicit the views of people in different parts of the
organization who will be affected by the project. Their views are posted online too.
f. External visits to gather valuable information. Take a key group to visit one or more external
stakeholder organizations, then follow with diagnostic discussion – example what the
external organization has, what are its rituals, its strengths and weaknesses compared to
ours.
g. Direct observation, spending time observing how people behave within the organization,
across different departments and activities.
h. Questionnaires to allow simultaneous data collection from many people in an organization.
You could put your questions on the intranet and invite people to respond. Even though you
may not get many replies, just seeing these questions may make people think about the
issues.
i. ‘Theatre of inquiry’, asking a group of actors to act out varying scenarios that portray
different relevant features of the organization, for example, the level of energy, the
frequency of collaboration, the quality of interactions, etc. Then ask mixed groups to
confirm or disagree with what is portrayed and to offer alternative data.
j. Storyboarding, asking people to draw stories of what generally happens in selected
situations.
k. Graffiti, placing a whiteboard at the entrance to the building where people can add their
comments and pictures about the way they see relevant topics or how they feel about the
organization.
l. Storytelling, looking at the range of significant historical moments in the life of the
organization and, through the storytelling, collecting the way the organization has reacted
to past change in reference to the future change. This can be published as a ‘story book’ for
leaders to consult with their teams.
m. Culture mapping of the energy, flow of the system, especially when facing major challenges.
n. ‘High-leverage’ type of whole-system methodology. There are over 60 high leverage
methodologies listed in Holman et al’s The Change Handbook (2007). For example, running
a future search conference to look back to the past, looking at the current perception of the
system and ‘happenings’ internationally, nationally, corporately and personally. Any of the
methods can be used as a fantastic data collection method.

Remember, behind all these methods lies the core skill of crafting good questions, and the
difficulty of avoiding bias and inappropriate preconceptions. Very few questions or lines of
inquiry are neutral. The right question can stimulate openness and deep reflection.