This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
html#b Organization development (OD) is a planned, organization-wide effort to increase an organization's effectiveness and viability. Kurt Lewin (1898–1947) is widely recognized[by whom?] as the founding father of OD, although he died before the concept became current in the mid-1950s. From Lewin came the ideas of group dynamics and action research which underpin the basic OD process as well as providing its collaborative consultant/client ethos. Institutionally, Lewin founded the "Research Center for Group Dynamics" (RCGD) at MIT, which moved to Michigan after his death. RCGD colleagues were among those who founded the National Training Laboratories(NTL), from which the T-groups and group-based OD emerged. Kurt Lewin played a key role in the evolution of organization development as it is known today. As early as World War II, Lewin experimented with a collaborative change process (involving himself as consultant and a client group) based on a three-step process of planning, taking action, and measuring results. This was the forerunner of action research, an important element of OD, which will be discussed later. Lewin then participated in the beginnings of laboratory training, or T-groups, and, after his death in 1947, his close associates helped to develop survey-research methods at the University of Michigan. These procedures became important parts of OD as developments in this field continued at the National Training Laboratories and in growing numbers of universities and private consulting firms across the country. Two of the leading universities offering doctoral level degrees in OD are Benedictine University and the Fielding Graduate University.
The management theory of Rensis Likert brought a new dimension to organizational development theory. The Likert system made it possible to quantify the results of all the work various theorists had been doing with group dynamics. Likert theory also facilitated the measurement of the "soft" areas of management, such as trust and communication. Additionally, Likert delineated the characteristics of high- and low-producing organizations and identified the problems with traditional organizational structures. Rensis Likert recognized four management styles, or systems. 1. Exploitative-authoritative: The first system of Rensis Likert theory is characterized by decisionmaking in the upper echelons of the organization, with no teamwork and little communication other than threats. 2. Benevolent-authoritative: This Likert system is based on a master-servant relationship between management and employees, where rewards are the sole motivators and both teamwork and communication are minimal. 3. Consultative: In this style, managers partly trust subordinates, use both rewards and involvement to
Likert states the System 4 organization is the most open and participative and is the ideal state managers should strive to achieve. collaborative teamwork and open communication. System 1 utilizes a supervisory system based primarily on fear and punishment. His research is based on employee interviews in separate departments in many different organizations where a scale of feelings is developed.inspire motivation. System 3 organizations are more open to employee consultation regarding the managerial decision making process and overt managerial threats are avoided. the more productive it will be. However. foster a higher level of responsibility for meeting goals. the Likert scale. Participative-group: This system is based on managerial trust and confidence in employees. Likert conducted a series of empirical studies on the differences between good and bad supervisors defined on the basis of high and low productivity. and inspire a moderate amount of teamwork and some communication. Likert developed a four level managerial classification system. collectively determined. managers have the primary decision making responsibility and employees in a System 2 organization must act cautiously. In System 2 organizations rewards are used to motivate employees with some freedom being allowed to comment on organizational decisions. While being the director of the Institute of Human Relations at Ann Arbor. This was correlated with their productivity. regarding employee attitudes toward their supervisors. Based on his research. This results in an authoritarian supervisory system where employees are usually not consulted concerning major decisions. goal-based rewards. Michigan. 4. This is termed the democratic model. Likert states the more an organization's management approximates the System 4 model. a collective sense of responsibility for meeting company objectives. .
McGregor believes there are two basic kinds of managers. Mcgregor's Theory X and Y is appealing to managers and dramatically demonstrate the divergence in management viewpoints toward employees. Theory X 1. 3. 4. 3. Theory Y 1. 2. Comparable personal rewards are important for employee commitment to achieving work goals. Employees are responsible for accomplishing their own work objectives. Employees can be innovative in solving organizational problems. 5.McGregor is the other major theorist associated with the Human Relations school of management. is not ambitious. As such. Theory X. 2. directed and threatened with punishment to motivate them to work. Since employees do not like working. Theory Y. Under favorable conditions. they have to coerced. Work is as natural as play and therefore people desire to work. Most organizations utilize only a small proportion of their employees' abilities. One type of manager. needs direction and principally desires security. the average employee will seek and accept responsibility. assumes employees are trustworthy and capable of assuming responsibility having high levels of motivation. Theory X and Y . has a negative view of employees assuming they are lazy. Employees normally do not like to work and will try to avoid it. The average employee is lazy. shuns responsibility. untrustworthy and incapable of assuming responsibility while the other type of Manager. controlled. 6.
The Grid contains five styles of leadership: task master manager. impoverished manager. which he called Theory Y. these managers feel the need to put in all kinds of control systems and time clocks — all the paraphernalia of bureaucracy at its worst — and McGregor called that Theory X. tend to assume that people are lazy and unreliable. Consequently. The task master manager style is described as the very pushy and demanding leader – perhaps more accurately characterized as an autocrat. by contrast. The dampened pendulum manager can best be described as the middle-of-the- . dampened pendulum manager. Consequently. Douglas McGregor’s theory of motivation – usually called Theory X and Theory y – is one of the key theories that is part of the history of the development of scientific management theory. Today. According to McGregor's observations. Authoritarian management makes sure that employees get direction and do as they’re told.has been extremely helpful in promoting management understanding of supervisory styles and employee motivational assumptions. The impoverished manager style describes the situation where managers or leaders attempt to avoid all decision-making and responsibility assumption. and team manager. it's widely accepted that good management requires a Theory Y orientation. The country club manager refers to a leader who is more people-oriented and less task-oriented. Robert Blake and Jane Mouton – The Grid People: Robert Blake and Jane Mouton originally developed “The Managerial Grid” in 1962 as an organizational development model. people will do whatever is necessary to achieve the objectives of the job without direction and are willing and able to seek and accept responsibility. effective managers basically have an optimistic view of human nature. Ineffective managers. people have to be controlled and directed because they don’t want responsibility. Theory Y’s assumptions are that work is a natural human activity and people like to work and get things done. Theory X assumes that people have an inherent dislike of work and they will avoid it if they can. Participatory management trusts employees to make input into how the work is done and gives employees latitude in self-management to get the job done. country club manager. In today’s organizational development language the Theory X management style is usually called autocratic management as opposed to the Theory Y management style which is called participatory. Consequently.
At the other extreme compliance is reinforced by recognition and appreciation. from 1 indicating a low level of concern. but that. and has been called the "country club" style of management. The 1.9 management where the manager swings between two extremes. on the one hand.1 style of management--maximum concern for the efficient accomplishment of tasks.1 management--minimum concern for either production or people--is characterised by a desire to avoid responsibility. They built on studies conducted at Ohio State University and the University of Michigan in the 1940s which attempted to identify the behavioural characteristics of successful leaders. the team manager describes the leader who effectively integrates people around task demands. Blake and Mouton identified two fundamental drivers of managerial behaviour as concern for getting the job done. additional managerial styles combining two or more of the basic styles are identified. Finally. to 9 indicating a high level of concern. on the other hand. The bottom right corner of the grid represents a 9.1-1. They argued that. thus adversely affecting performance. Five positions on the grid represent five differing managerial behaviour patterns. focuses on human relations at the cost of efficient production. but minimum concern for human relationships. The 5.9 position at the top left.9 management. the Managerial Grid was considered useful in helping managers to understand their own behaviour patterns .5 manager attempts to maintain a balance between both concerns. There is a need to control and dominate and resistance is met with reprimand. 1. which integrates maximum attention to both people and production. in contrast. This pattern corresponds to the traditional authority-based style of command and control management. Blake and Mouton set out to apply the ideas of behavioural scientists such as Rensis Likert to the practice of management. For example.paternalism is defined as 9. As a further refinement to Grid theory. an excessive concern to avoid conflict and maintain good relationships is also detrimental to the achievement of goals and objectives. and concern for the people doing the work. and exert minimum effort.road manager. but 9. is put forward as the most effective approach. someone who alternates between handling necessary tasks and duties while remaining in tune with co-workers’ needs. an exclusive concern for production at the expense of the needs of those engaged in production leads to dissatisfaction and conflict. In order to provide a framework for describing management behaviours. They are known primarily for the development of the "Managerial Grid" as a framework for understanding managerial behaviour. the two variables of "concern for production" and "concern for people" were plotted on a grid showing nine degrees of concern for each.
Sociotechnical refers to the interrelatedness of social and technical aspects of an organization or the society as a whole. and the second of the two main principles. "Technical" is a term used to refer to structure and a broader sense of technicalities.  Sociotechnical theory therefore is about joint optimization. both types of interaction occur when socio and technical elements are put to work. proposes a number of different ways of achieving joint optimisation. Sociotechnical refers to the interrelatedness of social and technical aspects of an organization. Sociotechnical systems pertains to theory regarding the social aspects of people and society and technical aspects of organizational structure and processes. but those relationships that are injurious to the system's performance. The scientific literature shows terms like sociotechnical all one word. Whether designed or not. Ken Bamforth and Fred Emery. In this sense. are complex sociotechnical systems. sociotechnical system and sociotechnical systems theory. as distinct from sociotechnical systems. This interaction consists partly of linear"cause and effect" relationships (the relationships that are normally "designed") and partly from "non-linear". proposes a number of different ways of achieving joint optimization. The corollary of this.Sociotechnical systems (STS) in organizational development is an approach to complex organizational work design that recognizes the interaction between people and technology inworkplaces. sociotechnical theory. with a shared emphasis on achievement of both excellence in technical performance and quality in people's work lives.e. Sociotechnical theory is founded on two main principles: One is that the interaction of social and technical factors creates the conditions for successful (or unsuccessful) organizational performance. or sociotechnical with a hyphen. They are usually based on designing different kinds of organization. ones in which the relationships between socio and technical elements lead to the emergence of productivity and wellbeing. even unpredictable relationships (the good or bad relationships that are often unexpected). Sociotechnical theory. it refers to the ancient Greek term logos. The term also refers to the interaction between society's complex infrastructures and human behaviour. is that optimization of each aspect alone (socio or technical) tends to increase not only the quantity of unpredictable. society itself. Here. complex. as distinct from sociotechnical systems. and most of its substructures. Therefore sociotechnical theory is about joint optimization. All . "un-designed" relationships. The term sociotechnical systems was coined in the 1960s by Eric Trist. technical does not necessarily imply material technology. rather than the all too often case of new technology failing to meet the expectations of designers and users alike. The focus is on procedures and related knowledge. They are usually based on designing different kinds of organisation. who were working as consultants at theTavistock Institute in London. i. ones in which the relationships between socio and technical elements lead to the emergence of productivity and wellbeing. Sociotechnical theory.
Socio-technical studies approached the organization as a social system focusing wholly on group relations in depth on three levels including. The key term "sociotechnical" is something of a buzzword and its varied usage can be unpicked. "At one limit to these would be plants or equivalent self-standing workplaces. there is more to it than that. Socio-technical systems. predictably. Primary work systems consist of one or more face-to-face work units each collaborating jointly on set tasks usually with support from specialist personnel and representatives of management plus the relevant equipment and other resources while whole organization systems involve an enterprise-wide effort. Trist recognized the emergence of this concept as a new organizational paradigm. though. on the other hand." Finally. primary work systems. Socio-technical tools and techniques commonly combined comparative and . It was Trist who coined the phrase socio-technical system--the interaction of people (a social system) with tools and techniques (a technical system). Trist (1981. macrosocial systems include systems in communities and entire business sectors as well as societal institutions. thereby creating enabling constructs for shared values and collaborative decision-making. What can be said about it. The sociotechnical approach challenged the current mechanistic management paradigm where coordination and control had been externally located at the top of the organizational ladder in a hierarchical management archetype where the flow of information was situated one-way. top-down. focused on the relationship between perception and action. p. whole organization systems and macrosocial systems. The socio-technical process emphasized group-relations. empowering autonomous internal-regulation. and quite correctly. 11). is that it is most often used to simply. Operational decisions were firmly dictated by the organization's supervisors. describe any kind of organization that is composed of people and technology. But. This novel "organismic" model enabled autonomous work groups to assume responsibility for the entire work cycle. At the other they would be entire corporations or public agencies.of these terms appear ubiquitously but their actual meanings often remain unclear.
Thus. 2. learning and innovation enabling work groups to think and learn collaboratively thereby. socio-technical systems create the organizational context for knowledge sharing. institutions. All organizations comprised of two interdependent systems: 1. directed system members toward action opportunities providing feedback at all levels regarding the changes being implemented within dynamic and living organizations. explores the relationship between personality and the organisation. multi-factor analysis suggests that by maximizing the degree of self-regulation. for over fifty years. Widely considered as one of the first-generation contributors to the field of organization development. Indeed. To achieve high productivity and employee satisfaction. STS represent an interpretive process made possible by optimizing the "goodness of fit" between technology and human systems. His pioneering work in action research and . Social system Technical system 3. work group productivity and job satisfaction will be consistently higher. Today. Chris Argyris has defined and vigorously advanced theories and strategies for both individual and organizational development. organizations must optimize both systems. organizational managers who advocate socio-technical systems seek to create enabling constructs using information systems (IS). and entire communities. develop original work patterns. and suggests how these relations can best be made mutually beneficial. to accelerate communication. Changes in one system affect the other system. Argyris's contribution to research on organisational learning. An action research process also known as praxis.longitudinal evaluation with action learning. including the concepts of single and double-loop learning. learning and knowledge sharing. for instance. maintain flexibility and competitive advantage. 4.
and antagonism in employees. This iterative process of data gathering and diagnosis. make decisions. He defined valid interventions as those that generate the required information. apathy. Argyris believes the most productive business is one in which the needs and goals of employees are aligned with those of the organization. and create an internal commitment on the part of the client to the choices made. He . He developed a unique format and method of case analysis that is useful in consultant-client interaction as well as other situations involving human interaction. action planning with involvement of employees. in the early 1950’s.organizational learning has provided the base for other practitioners to theorize about long-term effectiveness in organizations. His ideas on the actual behavior of teams and its members in them (their theory-in-use) which might tend to run counter to their espoused belief system. Argyris championed the belief that people can be self-directed and creative at work if properly motivated. Chris Argyris’ more recent works focus on understanding how individuals reason. provide free. he proved that formal organization structures and rigid channels of communication tend to cause alienation. One of Argyris’ primary contributions to the field of organization development was to help define action research as a powerful approach to organizational change. Argyris examined the role of the social scientist as a researcher and interventionist. and evaluation is a important method in change efforts today. is an important tool to understand group dynamics and team conflict. and change behaviors in organizations. informed choice for the client. Applying his Immaturity-Maturity Theory. He examines the link between interpersonal competence and organizational learning.
Argyris continues to challenge management to provide a climate in which everyone can grow and mature. satisfying their own needs while working for the success of the organization Senge emerged in the 1990s as a major figure in organizational development with his book The Fifth Discipline where he developed the notion of a learning organization. In order to be a learning organization there must be two conditions present at all times. He contends that the only way to have effective. where collective aspiration is set free. Systems thinking. and where people are continually learning to see the whole together. personal level. . focuses on how the individual that is being studied interacts with the other constituents of the system. This views organizations as dynamical systems (as defined in Systemics) in a state of continuous adaptation and improvement According to Senge 'learning organizations' are those organizations where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire. Senge also believed in the theory of Systems Thinking which has sometimes been referred to as the 'Cornerstone' of the Learning Organization. Organizations that are able to do this are exemplary." He argues that only those organizations that are able to adapt quickly and effectively will be able to excel in their field or market. Rather than focusing on the individuals within an organization it prefers to look at a larger number of interactions within the organization and in between organizations as a whole. The first is the ability to design the organization to match the intended or desired outcomes and second. lasting change is at this deeper. the ability to recognize when the initial direction of the organization is different from the desired outcome and follow the necessary steps to correct this mismatch.distinguishes between two kinds of organizational learning. single and double loop. where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured.
1948). 2. 1989): 1. a pioneer in developing scientific approaches to attitude surveys (five-point Likert scale). the researchers finally agreed. In the 1950s and 1960s a new. & Huse. A workshop was developed for the leaders to learn about leadership and to discuss problems. 4. . his staff moved to the University of Michigan to join the Survey Research Center as part of the Institute for Social Research. Productivity and Quality-of-Work-Life (QWL): This was originally developed in Europe during the 1950s and is based on the work of Eric Trist and his colleagues at the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London. and total organization) to bring about planned change (Newstrom & Davis. the researchers discussed privately what behaviors and group dynamics they had observed. Survey Research Feedback: Kurt Lewin formed the Research Center for Group Dynamics at MIT in 1945. After he died in 1947. Reluctant at first. OD emerged from four major backgrounds (Cummings. Action Research: In the 1940s John Collier. while 2) researchers were able to study the process to gain new information. 1967) and Lester Coch and John French's classic research on overcoming resistance to change (Coch & French. Kurt Lewin. intergroup. It was headed by Rensis Likert. At the end of each day. 1993) Emerges From Four Backgrounds According to one theory. Thus the first T-group was formed in which people reacted to information about their own behavior. 3.Organization Development Organization Development (OD)is a process by which behavioral science knowledge and practices are used to help organizations achieve greater effectiveness. integrated approach originated known as Organization Development (OD): the systematic application of behavioral science knowledge at various levels (group. Action research has two results: 1) organizational members use research on themselves to guide action and change. Bowers & Seashore. 1989). and William Whyte discovered that research needed to be closely linked to action if organizational members were to use it to manage change. The leaders asked permission to sit in on these feedback sessions. Laboratory Training began in 1946 when Kurt Lewin and his staff at the Research Center for Group Dynamics at MIT were asked by the Connect Interracial Commission and the Committee on Community Interrelations of the American Jewish Congress for help on training community leaders. This approach examined both the technical and the human sides of organizations and how they are interrelated. Laboratory Training: The National Training laboratories (NTL) development of training groups known as sensitivity training or T-groups. including improved quality of work life and increased productivity (Cummings. Two noted action research studies was the work of Lewin and his students at the Hardwood Manufacturing Company (Marrow. & Huse.
Throughout the 1970s and 1980s organizational development became a more established field with courses and programs being offered in business. Organizational development is known as both a field of applied behavioral science focused on understanding and managing organizational change and as a field of scientific study and inquiry. psychology. education. organization-wide. Douglas McGregor's work with Union Carbide in an effort to apply some of the concepts from laboratory training (see above) to a large system. learning. an authority on organizational development and change management. RATIONALE AND IMPLEMENTATION . 3. 2. systematic process to implement effective change in an organization. and personality. and theories of motivation. job enrichment. The Survey Research Center (see above) started using attitude surveys. using behavioral-science knowledge" (Beckhard 1969). but was relatively unknown as a theory of practice and had no common definition among its practitioners. planned. defined organizational development as "an effort. team building. Richard Beckhard. to increase organization effectiveness and health through planned interventions in the organization's processes. rather than as a research group writing reports for top managers. A human relations group at the Esso Company that began to view itself as an internal consulting group offering services to field managers.Emerges From Three Backgrounds French (Varney. 1967) describes the history of OD as emerging about 1957 and having at least three origins: 1. and administration curricula. With help from Robert Blake and Herb Shepard. It is interdisciplinary in nature and draws on sociology. HISTORY OF ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT In the late 1960s organizational development was implemented in organizations via consultants. Organizational development is an ongoing. the group began to offer laboratory training in the refineries of Esso. and managed from the top. and reengineering. In the 1990s and 2000s organizational development continued to grow and evolve and its influences could be seen in theories and strategies such as total quality management (TQM).
These authors suggest that focusing on these areas will help bridge the gap between research theory . and Lewicki proposes six areas that could revitalize the field of organizational development in the future: virtual teams. nor is it a brief one. These consultants may be internal to the company or external. either at the upper management level or within the employee body. consultants with experience in organizational development and change management are often utilized. gap. The organizational development process is initiated when there is a need.Organizational development takes into consideration how the organization and its constituents or employees function together. work group effectiveness. a "soft" science. Ideally. or dissatisfaction within the organization. Is it a theory whose time has come and gone? Does its basis in behavioral science. Constant monitoring during the entire implementation effort is important for its success and acceptance. interviews. Organizational development strategies can be used to help employees become more committed and more adaptable. social network analysis. and solutions employed. THE FUTURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT There are contradictory opinions about the status and future prospects of organizational development. with evidenced support from upper management and engagement in the effort by all members from each level of the organization. Alban. the process involves the organization in its entirety. This is by no means a linear process. trust. which ultimately improves the organization as a whole. an action plan formed. Data analysis through task forces. Feedback from all constituents should be elicited throughout the process and used to make adjustments to the action plan as necessary. and intractable conflict. with the cautionary understanding that internal consultants might be too entrenched in the existing company environment to effectively coordinate and enforce the action plans and solutions required for successful change. conflict resolution. and questionnaires can illuminate likely causes for disconnects throughout an organization. To launch the process. Does the organization meet the needs of its employees? Do the employees work effectively to make the organization a success? How can the symbiotic relationship between employee satisfaction and organizational success be optimized? Organizational development places emphasis on the human factors and data inherent in the organization-employee relationship. These gaps can then be analyzed. make it unappealing? What are the challenges for the future? An article by Bunker.
To make it meaningful . according to those polled. wants. and differentiating organizational development. are: • executive coaching and development • team building and team effectiveness • facilitating strategic organizational change • systemic integration • diversity and multiculturalism. The most in-demand services. and Berr. consultants). The opinions on the future direction of the field vary among its practitioners. which refers to the variety of definitions of organizational development among practitioners and how this impacts consultants.e. Mail .. Waclawski. They list the daily challenges in the field as the need for speed.. In a survey conducted by Church.(i.I Dear Nithin.e. twenty individuals involved in the study and practice of organizational development were questioned about their perspectives and predictions on the future of the field. Getting these two groups to communicate with each other will benefit both groups and promote organizational development efforts. Please pass on to the class: I also look forward to a fruitful semester with your class. and personal satisfaction of its employees indicate that organizational development will continue to be relevant to and vital for organizational reform in the future. and the clients' needs. academics) and practice (i. resistance to change. either in its present form or through evolution into other theories and practices. clients. Nevertheless. interpersonal skills and awareness. the continuing interest in and value of optimizing an organization's needs and goals with the needs.
If anyone wants to contact me for clarifications you can call me on 98400 90978 or mail me oncvenugopal@gmail. Learning assignment for the next class: The history and development of OD in the last 60 years.This means doing the reading. what are their contributions to OD . Look forward to each of you ( including those who missed the class ) completing both of the above .com .Eric Trist.ie. (3) Also use Internet and find out about the history and development of OD .and interesting for all I look forward to wholehearted participation by all. (B) Choose any one that is meaningful for you ..Chris Argyris.etc.Explain the current state as clearly as you cangive examples if you want Explain why this is important . Some examples of projects you could take up : (1) learning a new skill (2) breaking a longstanding bad habit ( say smoking or late coming )(3) changing a behaviour ( example: procrastination) (4) improving a relationship ( with boss/spouse/friend/parent ) (5) changing a personality trait ( say loose weight) (6) conquering a fear (7) doing something you always wanted to do but not round to it etc. how is their work related Project (A)Identify a personal change project . Douglas McGregor.which if done would make a major impact on your life. It will be entirely private -no need to share with anybody else -unless you choose to share.Dev & Change: Cummings and Worley Chapter 1 .reading 2 . Suggested readings: (1) Theory of Org. It should be important for you. Robert Blake.(A) the readings and (B) identifying the change project and writing it down in a new notebook. Rensis Likert. & Robert A Zawacki .I am sure you all will join me in this learning journey enthusiastically. Cecil H Bell Jr..how making this change will be beneficial for you I want to see each ones notebook next week. write it down in a notebook called the "change notebook"..Peter Senge : find out who they are . Some of the key personalities you should read about : Kurt Lewin. participating in discussions in class and doing projects/assignments. (2) Organization Development and Transformation Wendell L French. It should be something you want to change about yourself ..
We'll have a POP quiz on the same on Monday 16th. Venugopal Mail .II Dear Nithin. I hope you have passed on the reading task to the students. I would urge all students to make sure that they do the readings and are familiar with the history of OD. By definition a POP quiz is supposed to be given without warning.Best wishes.but being the first class I am giving advance notice! .
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.