Practitioners Programs in Organization Development & Change Management

Background

We are in the fifth generation of OD practitioners. This first generation were the founders of the field including Kurt Lewin, Ron Lippit, Ken Benny, and Leland Bradford; the second generation were their students including the likes of Edie Seashore, Charlie Seashore, and Chris Argyris; the third generation included Michael Broom, Robert Marschak, Judith Katz and their contemporaries. The first generation learned the field through inventing it, the second and third generations developed their skills through being closely coached and mentored (often for years) in real-time situations. As the field grew, however, coaching and mentoring were replaced by academic programs founded and taught by second and third generation practitioners. Unfortunately, in the experi,ence of Seashore and Broom these programs are having only limited success as measured by the success as practitioners of their graduates.

What they have noticed is that many of their former students while academically sound were struggling as practitioners. Poor contracting, data gathering that was too narrowly focused, interventions deficient in systemic orientation, and limited group facilitation skills were routinely evident upon observation and in conversations about their practices. These difficulties exist in spite of the experiential emphasis of their academic training. There are graduates of these programs who have developed strikingly successful practices; however, they seem the exception, not the rule. Somehow, the academic programs on average are not succeeding in turning out success practitioners.

What makes the disciplines of organization development so difficult to impart academically? Organization development is a set of disciplines that are as behavioral as they are conceptual. It deals with focusing the tremendous variability that is a hallmark of behavior in human systems coherently toward the goals of a  particular system: a daunting task for rocket scientists and brain surgeons who prefer the relatively simple set of variables that comprise space flight and surgery. In addition, although conceptually uncomplicated, the disciplines and perspectives of OD are often counter to the organizational cultures, reflecting the larger social culture that practitioners are asked to change. That calls for a depth of personal discipline, a conscious use of self and support that goes substantially beyond that which can be garnered conceptually. Mastery of the disciplines under such circumstances is what makes organization development the most powerful technology extant for creating and managing organizational change.

To respond to this educational challenge Seashore and Broom invented the Practitioners Program in Organization Development and Change Management.

Purpose and Target Audience

The Practitioners Programs has two primary purposes:

1. Deepening of the disciplines and perspective of organization development
2. Development of the support systems needed to maintain the strength of those disciplines.

Its target audience is people who are currently working at change management either as internal, external OD practitioners or as organization leaders who have significant change projects to manage. The latter group includes many human resources executives who are being asked manage culture change projects (it is of interest that these HR folks often begin asking about degree programs in OD as they complete the program.) Graduates and advanced students of change managementñoriented academic programs are welcomed.

Enrollment is limited to ten (10) participants per program. This is in stark contrast to class sizes ranging from 25 to 35 in academia. In the initial years of the Practitioners Program, enrollment was limited to 15. Experience has shown that the program provides greater efficacy with smaller group sizes, thus the current limit of ten per program.

The Conceptual Base

Definition of Organization Development

There are many definitions of organization development in the literature. They are fairly consistent in their content. Our definition, with considerable implications for practice, is also consistent with them:

Supporting organizational leaders and their groups to create long-lasting systemic change toward improving productivity and employee satisfaction through improving the human processes through which they get their work done.

Itís implication for practice:

1. What we do: We support leaders and their groups.î The operational word here is support.î Many of our potential clients come to us with the notion that we will fix whatever their problems are for them. After all, we are the experts.î And, we are experts! We are experts who understand how to create and facilitate human processes that will support leaders in identifying and solving their own problems. That expertise says that our clients must lead their own projects in collaboration with us as process designers and facilitators.

     Maintaining these roles can be problematic. We want to show our clients that we can fix it for them. We may fear that they will throw us out on our ears if we donít do what they have asked us to do. To combat such thoughts remember that:

a. They asked us for our help in doing something they donít know how to do (whether they want to admit it or not)!

b. We are experts in the realm of organizational and human processes.

c.  We are more than powerful enough to be full, collaborative partners with the highest level muckety muck that you might encounter. They are just people!

2. The results we are after: We are after long-lasting systemic change toward improving productivity and employee satisfaction.î This is the most powerful aspect of our work. Long-lasting systemic change gets at the root cause of organizational problems that are in the way of full productivity, high levels of performance, and employee satisfaction. Human systems are not like machines. When machines malfunction, the process of choice is to locate the malfunctioning component(s), then fix or replace them. In human systems, such fault-finding processes tend to promulgate more problems, rarely solutions. In human systems a malfunctioning componentî can only exist with the support/collusion of the rest of the system. When a client suggests to me a single-point solution (such as, please train my supervisors), I respond with something likeÖ I see what youíre after. It would probably be a good idea to find out whatís going on that has so many of your supervisors demonstrating poor management skills. Things like poor hiring practices and poor accountability management are often behind such problems. If we can get at the root causes, the problem will go away forever. What do you think?î Iíve never had a client turn down such an approach (assuming, of course, that I have the right client, but thatís a topic for another time).

     The results of systemically oriented solutions are powerful, long-lasting and promote organizational well-being, including improved productivity, improved bottom lines, and improved employee satisfaction. Such results are decidedly memorable and, memorability is critical,it is the key to having a successful practice whether you are an internal or external practitioner. Clients call me back for other projects and pass my name on to others because of the quality of the results we achieve together.

3. How we do it: We do it through improving the human processes through which they (the leaders and employees in the organization) get their work done.î Any task gets done through some process, and the quality of the result is often directly related to the quality of the process used to accomplish that result. We must educate our clients in understanding that organization development is very much a task-oriented field. To be of any value we must enhance the business goals of our client organizations. That is the only reason for our existence as OD practitioners. How we enhance those business goals is through improving how the people tasked with accomplishing those goals collectively go about their work.

The beauty of OD is that we really donít need to know very much about the business that our clients are in. In fact my ignorance is my most important tool. As I ask my clients to explain to me their business and what works and doesnít work in how they get their work done, they discover the holes in their thinking and fill them in. As clients, after much coaching from me,bring everyone together to share data, ideas and knowledge they discover,through my deft facilitation,that they have collected enough good information and ideas to invent effective root-cause solutions. That is over-simplified, but still an accurate description of how OD works.

     That description of how OD works points to what sets us apart from other consulting processes that involve studying the clientís problems and then presenting expertî technical recommendations in a report that is likely to simply gather dust in some drawer. People will implement solutions that they have invented and in which they, therefore, believe. Those are the solutions that we help invent!

The Meta-Model of Planned Change

This a model of managing change in human systems based on the definition above which is a classic perspective of organizational development as developed by NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science. That perspective holds that the tasks of an organization,from planning to production,are accomplished with the highest level of productivity through processes that are highlighted by a high quality of relationship among those responsible for those tasks. With that in mind, the Meta-Model of Planned Change was developed. It is a model that believes in the empowerability of human systems and the people that live and work within them. Accordingly, the Meta-Model calls for collaborative strategies and tactics aimed at open communication, and consensual decision-making.

A model is a descriptive system of information, theories, inferences, and implications used to represent and support understanding of some phenomenon. Meta-, in the sense used here, is a context or framework. A meta-model could, then be understood as a framework or context of a model,albeit, a model of a model. A meta-model of change management, then, is a framework from which any number of more specific models of how to manage change in human systems can be understood and developed.

The model is a matrix (see Meta-Model 3D Graphic) with three axes as depicted on the graphic of the page after next. The vertical axis describes seven disciplines which, when each is consistently adhered to as disciplines, will support the success of any particular change management effort.

1. Conscious Use of Self: the ability to consciously focus, release, and manage the energy of oneís beliefs, thoughts, emotions and behavior on behalf of oneís goals rather than behaving habitually from mostly unconscious belief systems.
2. Systemic Thinking: understanding and operating from the premise that every thing and every action exists within some system of other things and actions. And, that every thing and action within a system impacts and is impacted by every other thing and action with that system.
3. Infinite Power:  understanding the power perceived from a win/win perspective in which organization energy is focused on productivity, learning, and synergy in contrast to a finite perspective in which win/lose power struggles and conformity to avoid those struggles wastes extraordinary amounts of organization energy.
4. Learning from Differences: using differences to accrue knowledge and skill rather than as the source of contention or conformity.
5. Sound and Current Data: operating from information that is accurate and up to date rather than from belief, opinion, interpretation, assumption and speculation; and the ability to discern the difference.
6. Feedback: feedback is information from our environment about how it is responding to us. It is sound and current data available to us at all times though we are often paying insufficient attention to notice it. Feedback allows us to evaluate how well the impact of our behavior is congruent with our intentions..
7. Empowerment: supporting self and others to identify and resolve their own issues and in the process self-discover their inherent excellence.
8. Support Systems: developing and using a diverse group of supporters who will contribute to the achievement of organizational goals and provide personal support as needed. As the support systems for particular change goals reach critical mass within an organization, those goals will be accomplished.

The horizontal axis describes the five iterative stages of any change management project within which each of the disciplines must be applied.

The stages are as follows:

1. Contracting: defining the change goals, roles, processes, and relationship quality for any given project
2. Data-gathering: the continual process of determining the state of the organization in relationship to the change goals
3. Intervention: the actions occur within the organization that are designed to create movement toward the change goals
4. Evaluation: determining the impact of each intervention relative to the change goals
5. Disengagement: the thoughtful process of ending the project when the change goals have been accomplished or the project is otherwise concluded

The diagonal axis describes the four levels human systems--personal, interpersonal, group, and organization or community--to which the disciplines and stages of planned change must be applied for optimal effectiveness.

"The Meta-Model of Planned Change," by Broom and Seashore offers a more in-depth description of each of the seven disciplines and five iterative stages.

Program Structure and Format

The Practitioners Program is conducted over ten months, October to July, one full day per month, generally on a Friday. This action learning model allows participants the opportunity to practice what they learn after each session with the opportunity to review the results they get with the other participants and staff for further learning and refinement at the next session. This adds considerable power to the program.

The basic content for each session is as follows:

The first half of each session is dedicated to theoretical, experiential, and introspective exploration of that day's concepts and skills. The second half of each session is devoted to direct coaching in small groups by the staff regarding application of the concepts and skills to current situations from the participants own work.

An important aspect of the program is the individual coaching sessions with the staff that are available outside of the regular sessions. This allows participants direct and confidential attention from either staff person at their request.

THE STAFF

Ms. Edith Whitfield Seashore and Dr. Michael Broom are multicultural teams who have worked together for many years. Both are psychologists and seasoned change management professionals who have worked both internally and externally. They are well known and published in the field.

Edie has been consulting for over 40 years and has been an important shaper of organization development, as we know it today. She served as the President of NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, and has been on the faculties of Johns Hopkins, Georgetown, and American Universities. She is the co-author of What Did You Say? The Art of Giving and Receiving Feedback; as well as "Breaking Sex Role Stereotypes: Power Collusion, Intimacy/Sexuality, Support." She is also co-editor of The Promise of Diversity among other publications.

Michael has been consulting internally and externally for over 25 years with all types of organizations--for profit, not for profit, and government. He has served on the Board of the NTL Institute and chaired its Transformative Social Change Committee. He has been on the faculties of Johns Hopkins, Georgetown and American Universities. He is the co-author with Don Klein of Power: The Infinite Game and sole author of The Infinite Organization published Sept. 2002.