Chapter 10

Introduction to Organization Development

Objectives

1. To understand the basic of Organizational Development

2. To know the different theories attached in Organizational Development
3. To illustrate the different models of Organizational Development

What do you consider and think about change? Why should you care and be
concerned about organization development or planning the change (OD)? What do
change management and what is organization development mean? What special terms
and of significance and importance are used in business organization change and
development? What are structure, strategy and systems thinking, and why is it
important to OD practitioners and consultants? What are the rational and philosophical
foundations of OD, and why are they so essential and important? How is OD linked and
interrelated to other HR fields?

Organization development (OD) is an interdisciplinary field with contributions from

business, industrial/organizational psychology, human resources management,
communication, sociology, and many other disciplines. Not surprisingly, for a field with
such diverse intellectual roots, there are many definitions of organiza- tion development.
Definitions can be illuminating as they point us in a direction and provide a shared
context for mutual discussion, but they can also be con- straining as certain concepts
are inevitably left out with boundaries drawn to exclude some activities. What counts as
OD thus depends on the practitioner and the definition, and these definitions have
changed over time. In a study of 27 definitions of organization development published
since 1969, Egan (2002) found that there were as many as 60 different variables listed
in those definitions. Nonetheless, there are some points on which definitions converge.

One of the most frequently cited definitions of OD comes from Richard Beckhard
(1969), an early leader in the field of OD:
Organization development is an effort (1) planned, (2) organizationwide, and (3)
managed from the top, to (4) increase organization effectiveness and health through (5)
planned interventions in the organization’s “processes,” using behavioral-science
knowledge. (p. 9)

Beckhard’s definition has many points that have survived the test of time, including his
emphasis on organizational effectiveness, the use of behavioral science knowledge,
and the inclusion of planned interventions in the organization’s functions. Some critique
this definition, however, for its emphasis on planned change (many organizational
changes, and thus OD efforts, are in response to envi- ronmental threats that are not so
neatly planned) and its emphasis on the need to drive organizational change through
top management. Many contemporary OD activities do not necessarily happen at the
top management level, as increasingly organizations are developing less hierarchical
structures.

A more recent definition comes from Burke and Bradford (2005):

Based on (1) a set of values, largely humanistic; (2) application of the behavioral
sciences; and (3) open systems theory, organization development is a systemwide
process of planned change aimed toward improving overall organization effec- tiveness
by way of enhanced congruence of such key organizational dimensions as external
environment, mission, strategy, leadership, culture, structure, infor- mation and reward
systems, and work policies and procedures.

Organization development is the process of increasing organizational effec- tiveness

and facilitating personal and organizational change through the use of interventions
driven by social and behavioral science knowledge.

These definitions include a number of consistent themes about what constitutes

organization development. They propose that an outcome of OD activities is orga-
nizational effectiveness. They also each stress the applicability of knowledge gained
through the social and behavioral sciences (such as sociology, business and man-
agement, psychology, and more) to organizational settings.
The theories, practices, and beliefs of OD have influenced organizational improvement
efforts for more than half a century. As the chapters illustrate, the field has evolved in
scope and methods in response to client needs, social changes, learning from
experience, advances in theory, and increasing complexities in the world of work. At the
same time, organization development has retained a core philosophy and logic that are
reflected in consistencies over time in OD’s change model. Central continuities in that
model include the following: 1. Change is intentional. It begins with understanding an
organization or a subsystem, which leads to identification of desired outcomes and the
development of a grounded intervention strategy. 2. Change is positive and purposive. It
is intended to improve organizational health and functioning and to enhance a system’s
overall adaptive capacities. 3. Change is data-driven. It reflects the particular
circumstances, needs, and goals of the client organization and it is the job of change
agents to investigate, understand, and pay heed to all that in their work. 4. Change is
values-centered. OD is underpinned by a deep concern for the people who make up an
organization and by a belief that organizational effectiveness, innovation, and survival
require respect for and attention to the human side of enterprise. At the same time,
however, OD is not dogmatic. It seeks to understand a client system’s organizational
culture and context and to work with the organization to see how its values, beliefs, and
norms tacitly inform its goals, strategies, and decisions. 5. Change is action oriented. It
is rooted in the art and science of planned intervention a change agent enters a social
system to initiate specific activities that enhance learning and effectiveness. Successful
interventions affect behavior, frames of reference, strategic directions, and the choices
that people make. The intervention process is iterative: cycles of active experimentation,
practice, and choice alternate with active reflection, testing, and integration. 6. Change
is based in experience, grounded in theory, and focused on learning. OD is an action
science that uses the best social and behavioral science thinking to resolve practical
problems and develop a system’s capacity for learning and renewal. In the process, the
field tests its own theories of organizing and change and generates new ones:
knowledge informs action, and action informs knowledge (John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.,2006).
 Organization development began as a field of promise and possibility. Long
before others, OD’s founders understood the inefficiencies, pain, and downsides of
organizational life, and they set out to do something about them. They brought open
minds, entrepreneurial spirits, and irrepressible optimism to the challenge, convinced
that new ways of organizing and managing were possible. They were carriers of
America’s historic faith in progress and initiative. They believed in democracy,
openness, and the worth of every individual. Above all, they believed in learning and
experimentation. They knew they did not have all the answers—or even all the
questions. But they were confident that both were waiting to be found. Their faith and
hard work spawned a revolutionary intellectual movement—a paradigm shift—and
changed forever how the world understood people, work, and organizations. Their
efforts gave rise to the organizational and applied behavioral sciences, and OD
developed a powerful array of ideas and practices for understanding and improving
organizations, many of which are discussed in this volume (John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.,2006).

According to the Greek philosopher Heraclitus, “There is nothing permanent but

change.” By that he meant that everything is always in flux and instability. Nobody can
step in the same river twice, because the river is always in motion and is therefore
always changing. We can expect more confusion in our organizations than at any other
time in history. On the positive side, nano-technology, artificial intelligence, and the
robotic world will bring advances beyond our most bodacious fantasies. The field of
organization development has a history of over forty years. OD practitioners have been
thinking about, and intervening actively, to help society make the most of the change
age. It is worth asking this question: Why should anyone care about all the organization
change occurring? To answer that question, it is worth devoting some time to reflect on
what changes are occurring, why change is occurring so fast, and what effects those
changes are having (William J. Rothwell, Roland L. Sullivan,2005).

Illustration 1 Sample Change Process

Organization development is both a professional field of social action and an area of
scientific inquiry. The practice of OD covers a wide spectrum of activities, with
seemingly endless variations upon them. Team building with top corporate
management, structural change in a municipality, and job enrichment in a
manufacturing firm are all examples of OD. Similarly, the study of OD addresses a
broad range of topics, including the effects of change, the methods of organizational
change, and the factors influencing OD success (Organization Development & Change,
9th Edition Thomas G. Cummings & Christopher G. Worley 2009, 2005).

Many different organizations have undertaken a wide variety of OD efforts. In many

cases, organizations have been at the forefront of innovating new change techniques
and methods as well as new organizational forms. Larger corporations that have
engaged in organization development include General Electric, Boeing, Texas
Instruments, American Airlines, DuPont, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft, General
Foods, Procter & Gamble, IBM, Raytheon, Wells Fargo Bank, the Hartford Financial
Services, and Limited Brands. Traditionally, much of the work was considered
confidential and was not publicized. Today, however, organizations increasingly are
going public with their OD efforts, sharing the lessons with others. OD work also is
being done in schools, communities, and local, state, and federal governments. Several
reviews of OD projects were directed primarily at OD in public administration. Extensive
OD work was done in the armed services, including the army, navy, air force, and coast
guard, although OD activity and research activities have ebbed and flowed with
changes in the size and scope of the military. Public schools began using both group
training and survey feedback relatively early in the history of OD. Usually, the projects
took place in suburban middle-class schools, where stresses and strains of an urban
environment were not prominent and ethnic and socioeconomic differences between
consultants and clients were not high. In more recent years, OD methods have been
extended to urban schools and to colleges and universities. Organization development
is increasingly international. It has been applied in nearly every country in the world.
These efforts have involved such organizations as Saab (Sweden), Imperial Chemical
Industries (England), Shell Oil Company, Orrefors (Sweden), Akzo-Nobel (The
Netherlands), the Beijing Arbitration Commission and Neusoft Corporation (China), Vitro
(Mexico)and Air New Zealand (Organization Development & Change, 9th Edition
Thomas G. Cummings & Christopher G. Worley 2009, 2005).

One study of human resource management practitioners identified six key

changes that would have the greatest impact in the workplace and workforce over the
next ten years (Rothwell, Prescott, & Taylor, 1998). The study began with an analysis of
published accounts of workplace trends. Only trends mentioned three or more times
were included on the initial list. A total of 158 trends were identified in this way. Then a
handpicked group of HR experts rated the trends for their relative importance on the
present and future workplace and workforce. The result was a narrowed-down list of six
key trends:

1. Changing technology refers to rapid advances in human know-how.

2. Increasing globalization refers to the impact of rapid transportation and global

communication on doing business.

3. Continuing cost containment refers to efforts undertaken by organizations to

address declining profit margins, wrought by the ease of price comparisons through
web-based technology, by making decided efforts to improve profits by reducing the
costs of business operations.

4. Increasing speed in market change refers to the continuing importance of

beating competitors to the punch to meet the rapidly changing tastes of consumers.

5. The growing importance of knowledge capital refers to the key value-added

capabilities of human creativity to identify new businesses, new products, new services,
and new markets. And finally, the

6. Increasing rate and magnitude of change refers to the increasing speed and
scope of changes that occur. In short, change itself is changing—and posing ever-more-
daunting challenges for business leaders to respond in real time to breaking events
(William J. Rothwell, Roland L. Sullivan,2005).

Illustration 2 Common model for a planned change

Organization development is directed at bringing about planned change to

increase an organization’s effectiveness and capability to change it. It is generally
initiated and implemented by managers, often with the help of an OD practitioner from
either inside or outside of the organization. Organizations can use planned change to
solve problems, to learn from experience, to reframe shared perceptions, to adapt to
external environmental changes, to improve performance, and to influence future
changes. All approaches to OD rely on some theory about planned change. The
theories describe the different stages through which planned change may be effected in
organizations and explain the temporal process of applying OD methods to help
organization members manage change (Organization Development & Change, 9th
Edition Thomas G. Cummings & Christopher G. Worley 2009, 2005).

Illustration 3 Changes Occurring in Business Organization

There is some merit in both indictments, but a fuller view recognizes OD as a

field whose basic aspirations and scope of work are increasingly complex and
intrinsically paradoxical. Its mystery, majesty, and challenges are in its openness to a
collaborative search for the best forms and approaches to organizing that meet a client
system’s unique circumstances. The increasing diversity of people, environments,
goals, knowledge, and organizational practices and processes reinforces OD’s core
assumption that there is no one-size-fits-all definition or path to organizational health
and effectiveness. Human contribution, creativity, and commitment are essential. But so
are the organizational efficiencies and smart strategic choices that ensure
organizational survival in an increasingly competitive work world. As OD’s founders
reminded us more than fifty years ago, individuals and organizations share a common
goal, and when both meet their needs, both benefit. OD knows something important
about the route to that shared destination (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,2006).

Time has become a key strategic resource. The challenge of the future is to help
people adapt to change, often in real time and as events unfold. Time has become
important precisely because changing technology provides many possible strategic
advantages to organizations. Today the organization that makes it to market first by
commercializing basic research results seizes market share— and is likely to keep it.
And organizations that miss technological innovations to increase production speed or
improve quality lose out to global competitors who function in a world where differences
in labor costs can easily be taken advantage of because of the relative ease of
international travel and communication. Changing technology is also a driver for the
information explosion—and vice versa. Consider the sheer magnitude and pace of the
information explosion. According to William J. Rothwell, Roland L. Sullivan,2005 and
cited in Heylighen, 1999, People have different ways of responding to information
overload and to change. One approach is to give up. Another approach, widely used, is
to try to master clever ways to do more than one thing at a time—that is, multi-tasking.
And yet, according to University of Michigan researcher David E. Meyer, efforts to cope
with the effects of change by trying to do more than one thing at a time are causing their
own problems. Multi-tasking can actually reduce productivity because it may take as
much as 50 percent longer to process two tasks performed simultaneously than it takes
to do two tasks one after the other, according to Richtel (William J. Rothwell, Roland L.
Sullivan,2005).
 Current practice in organization development is strongly influenced by these five
backgrounds as well as by the trends shaping change in organizations. The laboratory
training, action research and survey feedback, normative, and QWL roots of OD are
evident in the strong value focus that underlies its practice. The more recent influence of
the strategic change background has greatly improved the relevance and rigor of OD
practice. They have added financial and economic indicators of effectiveness to OD’s
traditional measures of work satisfaction and personal growth. All of the backgrounds
support the transfer of knowledge and skill to the client system and the building of
capacity to better manage change in the future. Today, the field is being influenced by
the globalization and information technology trends described earlier. OD is being
carried out in many more countries and in many more organizations operating on a
worldwide basis. This is generating a whole new set of interventions as well as
adaptations to traditional OD practice.42 In addition, OD must adapt its methods to the
technologies being used in organizations. As information technology continues to
influence organization environments, strategies, and structures, OD will need to
manage change processes in cyberspace as well as face-to-face. The diversity of this
evolving discipline has led to tremendous growth in the number of professional OD
practitioners, in the kinds of organizations involved with OD, and in the range of
countries within which OD is practiced (Organization Development & Change, 9th
Edition Thomas G. Cummings & Christopher G. Worley 2009, 2005).

And OD practitioners raise best to the challenge when they expand their horizons
and welcome new insights and possibilities, regardless of source, that help all do their
work better. OD, for example, has an increasingly important role to play in a world
where individuals have morphed into human capital, where “lean and mean” too often
replaces an emphasis on quality of work life, where an unrelenting focus on bottom-line
profits trumps loyalty and learning, and where ethical decision making across sectors
seems akin to standing on shifting sands. No other field is better prepared or set to
address these kinds of challenges or to understand their long-term impact on
organizational innovation, productivity, and survival. To do that well, OD needs to keep
its values straight, its resolve strong, and its eye on the prize: improved organizational
health and effectiveness (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,2006).

In addition to the growth of professional societies and educational programs in

OD, the field continues to develop new theorists, researchers, and practitioners who are
building on the work of the early pioneers and extending it to contemporary issues and
conditions. The first generation of contributors included Chris Argyris, who developed a
learning and action-science approach to OD; Warren Bennis, who tied executive
leadership to strategic change; Edie Seashore, who keeps interpersonal relationships
and diversity in the forefront of practice; Edgar Schein, who developed process
approaches to OD, including the key role of organizational culture in change
management; Richard Beckhard, who focused attention on the importance of managing
transitions; and Robert Tannenbaum, who sensitized OD to the personal dimension of
participants’ lives. Among the second generation of contributors are Warner Burke,
whose work has done much to make OD a professional field; Larry Greiner, who has
brought the ideas of power and evolution into the mainstream of OD; Edward Lawler III,
who has extended OD to reward systems and employee involvement; Anthony Raia and
Newton Margulies, who together have kept our attention on the values underlying OD
and what those mean for contemporary practice; and Peter Vaill, Craig Lundberg, Billie
Alban, Barbara Bunker, and David Jamieson, who continue to develop OD as a
practical science. Included among the newest generation of OD contributors are Dave
Brown, whose work on action research and developmental organizations has extended
OD into community and societal change; Thomas Cummings, whose work on
sociotechnical systems, self-designing organizations, and trans organizational
development has led OD beyond the boundaries of single organizations to groups of
organizations and their environments; Max Elden, whose international work in industrial
democracy draws attention to the political aspects of OD; Richard Woodman, William
Pasmore, Rami Shani, and Jerry Porras, who have done much to put OD on a sound
research and conceptual base; and Peter Block, who has focused attention on
consulting skills, empowerment processes, and reclaiming our individuality. Others
making important contributions to the field include Ken Murrell, who has focused
attention on the internationalization of OD; Sue Mohrman, who has forged a link
between organization design and OD; Chris Worley, who has pushed the integration of
OD with strategy and organization design; David Cooperrider and Jim Ludema, who
have turned our attention toward the positive aspects of organizations; and Bob
Marshak, who alerts us to the importance of symbolic and covert processes during
change. These academic contributors are joined by a large number of internal OD
practitioners and external consultants who lead organizational change (Organization
Development & Change, 9th Edition Thomas G. Cummings & Christopher G. Worley
2009, 2005).

Change Is a Constant Pressure

Perhaps the point on which most definitions agree is that the backdrop and purpose of
organization development is change. As you have no doubt personally experienced,
large-scale organizational change is rarely simple and met without skepticism. As Peter
Senge writes, “Most of us know firsthand that change programs fail. We’ve seen enough
‘flavor of the month’ programs ‘rolled out’ from top man- agement to last a lifetime”
(Senge et al., 1999, p. 6). Because of its impact on the organizational culture and
potential importance to the organization’s success, orga- nizational change has been a
frequent topic of interest to both academic and pop- ular management thinkers. With
change as the overriding context for OD work, OD practitioners develop interventions so
that change can be developed and integrated into the organization’s functioning.

To become effective, productive, and satisfying to members, organizations need to

change. It will come as no surprise to any observer of today’s organizations that change
is a significant part of organizational life. Change is required at the organi- zational level
as customers demand more, technologies are developed with a rapidly changing life
cycle (especially high-tech products; Wilhelm, Damodaran, & Li, 2003), and investors
demand results. This requires that organizations develop new strategies, economic
structures, technologies, organizational structures, and pro- cesses. As a result, change
is also required of individuals. Employees learn new skills as jobs change or are
eliminated. Organizational members are expected to quickly and flexibly adapt to the
newest direction. Best-selling business books such as Who Moved My Cheese? teach
lessons in ensuring that one’s skills are current and that being comfortable and reluctant
to adapt is a fatal flaw. For organizational members, change can be enlightening and
exciting, and it can be hurtful, stressful, and frustrating.

Whether or not we agree with the values behind “change as a constant,” it is likely to
continue for the foreseeable future. Whereas some decry an overabundance of change
in organizations (Zorn, Christensen, & Cheney, 1999), others note that it is the defining
characteristic of the current era in organizations and that becoming competent at
organizational change is a necessary and distinguishing characteristic of successful
organizations (Lawler & Worley, 2006). There are, however, more- and less-effective
ways to manage change. Creating and managing change in order to create higher
performing organizations in which individuals can grow and develop is a central theme
of the field of OD. When we speak of organization development, we are referring to the
management of certain kinds of these changes, especially how people implement and
are affected by them.

Management Consulting

OD can be distinguished from management consulting in specific functional areas such

as finance, marketing, corporate strategy, or supply chain management. It is also
distinguished from information technology applications. Yet, OD is applica- ble to any of
these areas. When organizations attempt conscious changes, whether it involves
implementing a new IT system; changes in strategy, goals, or direction; or adapting to a
new team leader, OD offers relevant processes and techniques to make the change
function effectively. An OD practitioner would not likely use expertise in one of these
content areas (for example, best practices in financial structures of sup- plier
relationships or contemporary marketing analysis) to make recommendations about
how an organization does this activity. Most management consulting also is not based
on OD’s set of foundational values (a topic that we will take up in detail in Chapter 3). In
Chapter 5 we will discuss OD consulting in particular and differ- entiate it from
management consulting activities with which you may be familiar.
Training and Development

While individual and organization learning is a part of OD and a key value we will
discuss in a later chapter, OD work is not confined to training activities. OD is not
generally the context in situations in which learning is the sole objective, such as
learning a new skill, system, or procedure. OD deals with organizational change efforts
that may or may not involve members of the organization needing to learn specific new
skills or systems. Many training and development professionals are gravitating toward
OD to enhance their skills in identifying the structural elements of organizations that
need to be changed or enhanced for training and new skills to be effective. Other
aspects of the training and development profession, however, such as needs
assessment, course development, the use of technology, or on-the-job training, are not
central to the job of the OD practitioner.

In addition, most training programs are developed for a large audience, often
independent of how the program would be applied in any given organization. While
some OD interventions do incorporate training programs and skill building, OD is more
centrally concerned with the context that would make a training program successful,
such as management support, job role clarification, process design, and more. As Burke
(2008) writes, “Individual development cannot be sep- arated from OD, but to be OD,
individual development must be in the service of or leverage for system-wide change,
an integral aspect of OD’s definition” (p. 23).

Short Term

OD is intended to address long-term change. Even in cases in which the inter- vention
is carried out over a short period (such as the several-day workshops conducted at the
cancer center described earlier), the change is intended to be a long-term or permanent
one. OD efforts are intended to develop systemic changes that are long lasting. In the
contemporary environment in which changes are constantly being made, this can be
particularly challenging.

The Application of a Toolkit

Many OD practitioners speak of the OD “toolkit.” It is true that OD does occa- sionally
involve the application of an instrumented training or standard models, but it is also
more than that. To confuse OD with a toolkit is to deny that it also has values that
complement its science. It is more than a rigid procedure for moving an organization,
team, or individual from point A to point B. It involves being attuned to the social and
personal dynamics of the client organization that usually require flexi- bility in problem
solving, not a standardized set of procedures or tools.

Characteristics of OD

The American Society for Training and Development’s OD Professional Practice Area
attempted to provide a synthesis of the various definitions by providing the key points
that it saw in the range of definitions available:

We believe the practice of organization development:

1. must be in alignment with organization and business objectives;

2. is rooted in the behavioral sciences;

3. is long range and ongoing;

4. stresses a process orientation to achieve results;

5. is based on collaboration;

6. is a systems orientation.

The following conclusions can be drawn about the core characteristics of OD:

1. OD is an interdisciplinary and primarily behavioral science approach that draws

from such fields as organization behavior, management, business, psychology,
sociology, anthropology, economics, education, counseling, and public
administration.
2. A primary, though not exclusive, goal of OD is to improve organizational
effectiveness.
3. The target of the change effort is the whole organization, departments, work
 groups, or individuals within the organization and, as mentioned earlier, may
extend to include a community, nation, or region.
4. OD recognizes the importance of top management’s commitment, support, and
involvement. It also affirms a bottom-up approach when the culture of the
organization supports such efforts to improve an organization.
5. It is a planned and long-range strategy for managing change, while also
recognizing that the dynamic environment in which we live requires the ability to
respond quickly to changing circumstances.
6. The major focus of OD is on the total system and its inter- dependent parts.
7. OD uses a collaborative approach that involves those affected by the change in
the change process.

8. It is an education-based program designed to develop values, attitudes, norms,

and management practices that result in a healthy organization climate that
rewards healthy behavior. OD is driven by humanistic values.

9. It is a data-based approach to understanding and diagnosing organizations.

10. It is guided by a change agent, change team, or line manage- ment whose
primary role is that of facilitator, teacher, and coach rather than subject matter
expert.

11. It recognizes the need for planned follow-up to maintain changes.

12. It involves planned interventions and improvements in an organization’s

processes and structures and requires skills in working with individuals, groups,
and whole organizations. It is primarily driven by action research (AR) (which
will be discussed soon).

Summary

Today’s organizations are experiencing an incredible amount of change. Organization

development is a field of academic study and professional practice that uses social and
behavioral science knowledge to develop interventions that help organizations and
individuals change successfully. It is a field practiced in almost all kinds of organizations
that you can imagine, from education to health care, from government to small and
large businesses. Changes that OD practition- ers address are diverse as well,
addressing organizational structures and strategies, team effectiveness, and much
more. OD is not management consulting or training and development, and it is neither
short term nor the mere application of a stan- dard procedure or toolkit. OD practitioners
can include many kinds of people for whom organizational change is a priority, such as
managers and executives, project managers, and organizational members in a variety
of roles.

Is OD the Same as Change Management?

In an effort to simplify an explanation of what OD is, some have suggested that OD and
change management are the same. I disagree. There are times in the life of an
organization where dramatic change is needed change that does not and cannot rely on
the use of OD. The marketplace sometimes requires that an organization take swift and
unplanned actions in order to survive. It may require outsourcing domestically or to
another country, downsizing, reductions in salaries, and increasing health care costs.
Although all of these changes may be absolutely necessary for the survival of the
organization, they do not necessarily follow the OD processes, principles, or values. An
excellent distinction between OD change and change that does not follow OD principles
is discussed in Beer and Nohria (2000). In essence, they argued that there is E change
(economic value) and O change (organization’s human capability), one of which is
planned and follows OD principles (O), while the other (E) is market driven and does not
follow OD principles; both can be included in what many people call change
management. So, it is a mistake to equate OD with change management. The business
benefits when both types of change are affirmed within an organization. While long-
term, system wide planning that results in change (the OD model) can be very beneficial
for an organization and its bottom line, failure to act quickly and to make immediate
decisions, even when those processes violate OD principles, may well result in the
demise of the organization.
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION OR SELF-REFLECTION
 1. Is the list you made of positive experiences in your selected organization while
reading this chapter longer than the negative experiences, or vice versa? What is
there about that organization that leads to this outcome?
2. Which definition of OD do you prefer? Why?
3. Do you think it makes a difference if OD is viewed as a stand- alone field or as a
subset of another field? Why?
4. Describe an example of change in an organization that does not follow OD
principles. What is it about that example that is not consistent with OD principles?
5. Pick an organization of which you are a member. Would you rather work with an
internal or an external OD consultant? Why?
6. From your perspective, is it important to have recognized credentials for OD
consultants? Why?
7. Why do you think there are so few credentialing organizations? Why is the
existing credentialing process not more rigorous?
8. Why do you think that appreciative inquiry consultants might have a difficult time
in selling the concept to clients? What arguments might be used to make the
concept acceptable?
9. How do you think the OD Principles of Practice would influence how an OD
consultant does his or her job? Discuss whether you believe that following the
OD Principles of Practice statement will add business value to an organization.

Exercises: Digest the illustrations and explain your thoughts

______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________