C H A P T E R 3 1

46

C H A P T E R 4

Action Research
The Anchor of OD Practice

Jeremy S. Lurey and Matt Griffi n

A Tale of the Oversized
File Cabinet

While working in his home offi ce on a sunny
Friday afternoon, Frank heard the doorbell ring.
He went to answer the door, and as he opened
it, he noticed Tom the carpenter standing out-
side next to a very large fi le cabinet.

Before Frank could even say hello, Tom
eagerly greeted him with a fi rm handshake and
said, “Hi Tom. I was so excited to get your call
about the fi le cabinet last week that I started
immediately. I designed a custom-made over-
sized cabinet to meet all of your current and
future business needs. You’re going to love it!”

With a perplexed look on his face, Frank
responded, “Tom, I’m not sure what you were
thinking, but my message was very clear. I
asked you to come over today so we could
have an initial discussion about the fi le cabinet
and review my specifi c requirements. I thought
we could start with the overall design of the
cabinet and then determine if you were the
right person for the job based on budget and
time constraints.”

“Yes, but I have known you for a long
time Frank, and can tell you have a bright fu-
ture as an OD consultant. I didn’t want you to
have to worry about a thing. You have enough
to worry about starting your own business,
that I thought I would just take some initia-
tive,” Tom enthusiastically explained as he ges-

tured to his master creation—a 20-foot high,
30-foot long, 10-drawer monstrosity with a
dark maple fi nish. “Besides, this cabinet is per-
fect for you. You will have enough space in this
cabinet for years of growth. You will never
need another fi le cabinet!”

At that point, Frank was very frustrated
and could feel his face burning. “Tom,” he re-
plied, “Th is simply isn’t what I asked for, and
you would have understood that if you only
waited to talk with me fi rst. “Keep in mind
that organizations are complex systems, and
using a mechanical approach to ‘fi x’ a ‘broken’
part rarely creates eff ective change.” I’m only
planning to be in my home offi ce for a year or
two before I move into more permanent work-
space with a few of my colleagues. I just need
a small cabinet to hold a few important fi les as
I get started. I’m sorry, but I can’t accept the
cabinet. It won’t even fi t in the house! I am
very disappointed Tom, and think you should
leave.” As the door closed behind him, Frank
noticed the complete bewilderment on Tom’s
face.

An OD Consulting Challenge

While this is a fi ctitious story, and an extreme
exaggeration at that, it is not inconceivable
that a carpenter would be so eager to please
the client that initiative would be taken with-
out fully understanding the scope of work.

American Management Association / www.amanet.org

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

2
0
1
3
.

A
M
A
C
O
M
.

A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t

f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 12/27/2021 6:04 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY
AN: 502103 ; OD Network.; Handbook for Strategic HR : Best Practices in Organization Development From the OD Network
Account: s3642728.main.ehost

Action Research 47

Neither is it inconceivable that a skilled crafts-
man would be so confi dent in his abilities that
he would jump right into the project without
having more direction from the client. In fact,
it even seems logical for a carpenter to take
such actions after reaching a clear agreement
with the client—especially if the busy client may
be preoccupied with higher priority activities.

Although this story chronicles the tale of
a carpenter and his client, the story speaks of
an all too common event in consulting, espe-
cially organization consulting, as well. How
often do we hear these stories:

• Clients who express a clear problem to a
consultant, and then the consultant designs
and implements his/her own solution re-
gardless of whether or not it meets the true
client need

• A consultant brings a solution to the client
before the problem is understood or even
discussed

• Situations where clients are completely dis-
satisfi ed with the performance of their con-
sultants and the results they deliver simply
because of a communication gap—one
where the consultant implements a solu-
tion without fi rst presenting it to the client
for approval or at least discussing the pos-
sible implications in advance

What these examples indicate is that the
quality and success of the project depends
upon both the client and the consultant fully
understanding the complexity of the issue. To
illustrate this understanding, it can be helpful
to think in terms of multiple levels of awareness.
Th e client experiencing pain can represent the
fi rst level of awareness, and the initial client
diagnosis the second level. Action taken on ei-
ther of these two levels is not likely to truly
address the issue. Action research is about
reaching deeper levels of awareness, and there-
by increasing the likelihood of addressing the
issue in an eff ective way.

As the story suggests, it is critical for a car-
penter, or an OD consultant, to develop and
maintain a close working relationship with his

or her client. Without this collaborative ar-
rangement, the consultant will likely deliver
an inadequate or inappropriate solution that
does not meet the client’s needs. In so doing,
the consultant runs a great risk of alienating
him or herself from the client, and more im-
portantly causing potential harm or suff ering
to the client.

Th e story is also useful in illustrating a
critical diff erence between the work of a car-
penter and the work of an OD consultant. Th e
“results” that a carpenter produces are tangible
and cannot easily be undone. A fi le cabinet
made from the wrong wood or with incorrect
dimensions is diffi cult to fi x without starting
over from scratch, whereas a consulting proj-
ect can sometimes be modifi ed, even radically,
as new information comes to the surface. Con-
sulting projects, especially those found within
the OD world, tend to be complex, subjec-
tively perceived, and fl uid. Th is makes it easy
—if anything in OD is truly easy—to misun-
derstand or miscommunicate the nature of the
project. At the same time, it also makes it eas-
ier to adapt your approach once you do gain a
proper understanding of both the situation
and the client’s expectations.

The Value of Action Research

Although the origin of action research remains
cloudy, and to some extent can be seen as an
off shoot of the scientifi c method, Kurt Lewin
is typically credited with bringing this meth-
odology to the mainstream and to organiza-
tions specifi cally. It was the belief of Lewin
and his contemporaries that in order to under-
stand and change social conditions, those in-
volved in creating those conditions must be
involved in the process. Th us, one of the main
themes of action research is enactment of so-
cial change. For this reason, action research is
at the core of the OD practice. As an approach
to organization consulting, it prescribes a posi-
tive and collaborative working relationship
between consultant and client and therefore
provides the basic foundation for the organiza-
tion change process.

American Management Association / www.amanet.org
EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:04 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Handbook for Strategic HR48

Using the action research process enables
the consultant to better understand the system
in which he/she is involved, and therefore
mitigates the risk of following in Tom the Car-
penter’s footsteps. At the same time, an action
research approach helps the clients to be more
conscious of their environment and the condi-
tions in which they live. With this heightened
awareness, the consultant and client are then
able to work together to realize the goals of the
change process by uncovering deeper levels of
awareness and understanding.

Because of the importance of client par-
ticipation, this work method requires the con-
sultant to accept more of a “facilitator” than
“expert” role. It should be noted, however,
that this is not an either/or choice. In addi-
tion, the choice need not be applied to the en-
tire course of the change process. Th e consul-
tant can act more as an expert in analyzing the
data during one phase of the project while still
being a facilitator in helping the client create
the action plan during another phase. While
there is often a delicate balance between the
changing responsibilities of being an expert
and facilitator, the process remains largely the
same. Th e consultant creates an environment
in which the client is always aware of what is
happening when following an action research
approach.

In this manner, the client actively partici-
pates in not only designing each step of the
change process but also performing many of
the required actions. One of the main reasons
for this participative role is that change is usu-
ally easier to accept when those aff ected by the
change are involved in understanding and
driving the change process. Th is point is at the
heart of action research, and therefore the cli-
ent, in most cases, is involved in every aspect
of the project, including:

• Establishing change priorities
• Collecting and interpreting data
• Analyzing and disseminating the results
• Creating action plans based on the results
• Implementing the action plans
• Evaluating the results

To help both the consultant and client
maintain focus during the course of the change
process, the action research approach consists
of a standard phased methodology. Th e seven
phases of action research are summarized below.

1. Entry—beginning to develop the client/
consultant relationship and validating the
fi t between both parties

2. Contracting—determining whether or not
to proceed with the consulting relationship
and negotiating any fi nal conditions of the
engagement “contract”

3. Data Gathering and Diagnosis—collecting
the necessary data and analyzing it

4. Feedback—presenting the fi ndings, analy-
sis, and any preliminary recommendations
to the client organization

5. Planning Change—identifying specifi c
courses of action that address the client situ-
ation and developing an action plan for
implementation

6. Intervention—applying specifi c solution
sets to the client organization

7. Evaluation—assessing project results and
determining future courses of action, rang-
ing from project closure to new contract
development activities

Action Research in Action

To illustrate the value of action research to the
practice of OD, the following section describes
a real-life case example of how the action re-
search approach can be used. Th is account de-
tails specifi c actions taken by both the client and
consultant during each of the seven phases of a
nine-month consulting engagement. Th e pri-
mary client group in this example was an IT
organization within a regional insurance agency,
and the initial presenting issue was a lack of col-
laboration and teaming across the organization.

Entry

After being presented with a viable business
lead, the consultant arranged for an initial phone
conversation with the client sponsor. While
this fi rst component of the action research ap-

American Management Association / www.amanet.org
EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:04 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Action Research 49

proach only lasted approximately forty-fi ve
minutes, the consultant successfully gained
some clarity on the presenting problems and
primary concerns of the client. To summarize,
the client suggested that there was a lack of
collaboration and teaming across the organiza-
tion. She also expressed a desire to have the
consultant further assess the situation and rec-
ommend specifi c strategies for improving this
unproductive work culture.

In conjunction with the consultant learn-
ing about the client situation, the client sponsor
also took advantage of the opportunity to ques-
tion the consultant about his professional back-
ground and relevant work experiences. Ques-
tions like “Can you give me an example of when
you worked on a similar project?” and “What
would your fi rst step be in this situation?”
helped her understand what value the consul-
tant would bring to the organization. Th e client
also gained a tremendous sense of confi dence in
the consultant’s abilities due to his strong re-
sponses. As with any relationship, this is a criti-
cal step in building a positive working relation-
ship early on in the Entry phase of the project.

While this short conference ended on a
very positive note, it took approximately six
weeks for the two individuals to speak again.
Th e delay occurred for two primary reasons:
fi rst, a change in client priorities due to com-
peting projects and second, the consultant’s on-
going commitment to another client. While
this may create some tension between client
and consultant in some engagements, it is actu-
ally quite common within an action research
framework. Both parties must be ready to move
to the next stage of the relationship before any
work can proceed, and in this case, the two
quickly confi rmed their interest in pursuing the
relationship further when they did reconnect.

Contracting

Th e Contracting phase of action research can
begin as soon as the client and consultant agree
to work together. In this case, it began as soon
as the two reconnected and discussed the ac-
tual scope of the project.

During a face-to-face meeting with the cli-
ent, the consultant asked some probing ques-
tions to better understand the client’s expecta-
tions. She repeated some of the same key
phrases he heard before, namely “to help the
group work better as a team” and “to help create
a team identity”. At this point, the consultant
began clarifying the primary target audience
and proposing some potential activities to get
the project started. Th us, the foundation of the
engagement contract included the following:

• Project objective—design and implement
customized management training and de-
velopment programs that improve manage-
ment skills and foster stronger team leaders

• Current scope—management training and
development for the seven members of the
management team only

• Potential future scope—broader training
programs for nonmanagers as well as orga-
nization realignment or business process
redesign initiatives

• Project approach—phased approach in-
cluding high-level activities, such as assess-
ment, feedback, and intervention, over a
specifi c timeline and with key project mile-
stones and deliverables; requires active par-
ticipation and involvement from key mem-
bers of the client organization, including
the client sponsor, each of the seven man-
agers, and many of the employees during
the data gathering and evaluation phases
specifi cally

After this information was clearly docu-
mented, the consultant presented it to the cli-
ent for review and approval. With a shared
understanding of the project confi rmed, the
client then signed off on the contract. Th e im-
portance of this action cannot be emphasized
enough if you plan to follow an action research
approach.

Data Gathering and Diagnosis

Having defi ned the scope of the project dur-
ing Contracting, the consultant and client

American Management Association / www.amanet.org
EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:04 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Handbook for Strategic HR50

sponsor were now prepared to begin gathering
data. In true action research form, both parties
played an active role in completing this task.
Th e client sponsor provided key organization
data to the consultant to help him understand
the environment, and then the consultant ini-
tiated more targeted data gathering activities.

Many members of the client organization
participated in the process. All of the managers
completed two diff erent personality invento-
ries, including the Myers-Briggs Type Indica-
tor, and participated in a 360-degree feedback
process. Th ey also participated in one-on-one
interviews with the consultant so he could
learn more about their personal strengths,
areas for improvements, and their beliefs about
the work condition. In addition, many of the
employees participated in focus group sessions
to share their feelings about the organization
and complete a leadership eff ectiveness survey.

After completing these activities, the con-
sultant assumed more of an “expert” role dur-
ing the diagnosis part of this phase. Th ere were
two primary reasons for this decision: fi rst, the
client sponsor and her direct reports were all
extremely busy with other project commit-
ments, and second, the consultant had more
experience with performing such analysis, and
especially with using the diagnostic tools.

Feedback

When the diagnosis was complete, the consul-
tant actively engaged the client, and the entire
management team, in the feedback process.
For the change to be successful, it is vital to
share these fi ndings with the client and guide
them in determining the next steps, as op-
posed to deciding for them. Th ey must direct
the process if they are ever going to accept the
change.

Th us, the consultant presented a summa-
ry report of the fi ndings as well as his conclu-
sions and recommendations for moving for-
ward. In general, the fi ndings did support the
original contention that there was a lack of
collaboration and team identity within the
organization. More specifi cally, employees in-
dicated that there was very little teamwork

within or between units and that there was
no reason to develop stronger team relations
since the individual projects were so diverse
in scope. One person actually stated, “I have
no team . . . [Th is organization] is a series of
fi efdoms.”

Once presented with these fi ndings, all of
the managers contributed to an open dialogue
about the information and possible strategies
to address the situation. For the most part,
the managers reacted positively, voicing their
agreement with the results as if they were al-
most expected. Some managers, however, did
react a bit more defensively and questioned
whether or not specifi c fi ndings were truly in-
dicative of their units or if they were more a
generalization of the rest of the organization.

For example, one manager felt that she
did seek input from her employees and includ-
ed them in the decision-making process. Th e
summary results for the entire organization,
however, did not suggest that employees felt
they were able to contribute in such a manner.
Instead, they expressed a concern that they
had very limited knowledge of the long-term
vision for the organization and were some-
what unclear of how their individual projects
supported the future direction of the group. In
the end, each of the managers agreed on the
next steps of the engagement and suggested
several potential activities that would address
the specifi c areas for improvement discussed in
the meeting.

In parallel to this work, the consultant
also shared the results of the personal assess-
ments with each of the managers during indi-
vidual feedback sessions. Th e individual results,
similar to the team fi ndings, suggested that the
majority of the managers did not openly com-
municate about the organization’s future di-
rection or inspire commitment to a shared
vision, that they did not inform employees of
how their work contributed to the organiza-
tion’s goals. Th e results also indicated that the
managers were very weak in the areas of per-
formance evaluation and performance man-
agement, that they did not encourage perfor-
mance discussions with their employees or
provide any regular feedback regarding work

American Management Association / www.amanet.org
EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:04 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Action Research 51

performance. Again, the collaborative relation-
ship between client and consultant becomes
critical if the individual managers were going
to take any responsibility in addressing these
concerns or promoting their own personal
development.

Planning Change

Th e goal of the Planning Change phase is to
create an action plan that will guide the next
phase of the process, intervention. For this
reason, planning change is not about imple-
menting the solutions being discussed. In-
stead, it is an opportunity to explore the po-
tential solutions further and determine exactly
how the intervention will proceed.

In this case, the management team identi-
fi ed two levels of intervention: one focused on
the management team and the other focused
on the individuals within that team. Th e team-
based intervention was a management train-
ing program that involved a comprehensive
curriculum of courses to address their specifi c
developmental needs. Th e key aspects of plan-
ning this type of change, then, were to defi ne
the curriculum and coordinate all of the logis-
tics for delivering the training, including
preparing instructor and participant training
materials, scheduling the training sessions,
and ultimately facilitating the training.

Th e second intervention was aimed more
directly at the individual managers and was in-
tended to support the team training experience.
Towards this end, the consultant co-developed
personal action plans that focused on one or
two critical leadership skills with each manager.
While these plans varied from individual to
individual, many focused on addressing the
concerns with performance evaluation and per-
formance management and all specifi ed certain
developmental activities, target completion dates,
as well as any resources that may be required to
achieve the developmental goal.

Intervention

Th e Intervention phase is where the plan is
executed and the solution is actually imple-
mented within the client organization. Un-

like the Diagnosis phase where the consul-
tant often accepts responsibility as the expert,
this is one time in the engagement where the
consultant can take more of a “facilitator”
role. It is the consultant’s goal to support the
client’s development, but the client must be
accountable. Th e client organization is what
must change, and only actual members of
this organization (i.e., the client) can be “ex-
perts” of this environment.

During the intervention, the consultant
facilitated several sessions to encourage the
learning process. Topics ranged from recogniz-
ing great leadership to understanding how to
become a more eff ective leader and were in-
tended to help each of the managers improve
in the key areas agreed to during the feedback
process. As the consultant presented strategies
for:

• Being a positive role model for others
• Being a coach and mentor to those you

manage
• Providing the right mix of tools and resourc-

es to enable the team to achieve its goals the
managers actively discussed how to apply
these strategies to their organization.

Beyond the management team training, the
consultant also continued to work with the indi-
vidual managers on their personal development
plans. Similar to the roles during training, the
consultant merely supported the managers’ ac-
tions, but the managers were responsible for tak-
ing the action. To understand the importance of
this balanced relationship, consider those man-
agers who did not actively pursue their plans—
they did not require dedicated support from the
consultant. Th is proves the point that both par-
ties play a critical role in the process, otherwise
the arrangement will not work.

Evaluation

In an informal manner, evaluation occurred
during every phase of work during this en-
gagement. For example, the consultant and
client co-evaluated the results of the Contract-
ing phase before moving on to Data Gathering

American Management Association / www.amanet.org
EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:04 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Handbook for Strategic HR52

and Diagnosis. Does the contract clearly de-
fi ne the scope of the project? If so, are there
shared expectations between both parties as to
how best to perform the work? If simple ques-
tions such as these are not adequately answered,
then the individual parties must reconsider
whether or not they are ready to move forward.

In addition, the consultant also per-
formed a more formal review of the project.
Th e consultant developed a standard protocol
for measuring the success of each activity and
then interviewed each of the managers to
gather their thoughts and perceptions. Based
on these responses, the consultant synthesized
the data and presented it back to the client for
review. Th e consultant also presented some ba-
sic recommendations for prioritizing future
activities based on not only the achievement of
previous goals but also the development of a
more capable management team. Future scope
activities may include developing a training
strategy for non-managers or creating a more
formal communications plan to share infor-
mation more regularly across the organization.
In essence, this evaluation, then, actually serves
to start another iteration of the consulting
process, one that begins with more advanced
client problems now that the original concerns
have been addressed.

Conclusions on an Iterative
Process

As the “Tale of the Oversized File Cabinet” al-
luded, the process an OD consultant follows
can be very similar to the process that a master
carpenter goes through before taking hammer
in hand. First, there are customer desires to be
considered, then measurements to be taken,
plans to be drafted and revised, and fi nally
wood to be studied and prepared before any
true action is ever taken. Th e consultant
who is an “expert” in a particular technique is
like the carpenter who can make beautiful and
elaborate fi le cabinets. Both can provide value

to the client, but what happens when the cli-
ent thinks he or she needs a customized fi le
cabinet (or can be convinced that a custom-
ized fi le cabinet would solve his or problems)
when what is really needed is a standard desk?

Th is issue gets to the core of both action
research and OD. Action research and OD are
about understanding the real issues and iden-
tifying what really needs to be changed. Ac-
tion research and OD are about providing so-
lutions that address the contributing factors of
a problem, not simply providing a solution to
the presenting problem, which may or may
not be at the core.

Keep in mind that organizations are com-
plex systems, and using a mechanical approach
to “fi x” a “broken” part rarely creates eff ective
change. In this context, organizations can be
thought of as a web of interacting forces, inter-
acting individually and as a whole to produce
certain outcomes. Th us, eff ective change en-
tails exploring these forces and their inter-
actions. Within a single action research cycle
(Entry to Evaluation), multiple levels of aware-
ness can and will probably be uncovered.
However, it is not uncommon that there are
levels of awareness that will only be uncovered
in subsequent cycles, as the client’s self-aware-
ness increases and the ability to self-refl ect and
change develops. Th us, action research is most
helpful as an iterative process, not as an event.

Action research can be a rather diffi cult
and frustrating process to understand and use
eff ectively. “Yes, I know about action research,
but what do I do?” can be a common question
for new practitioners. Understanding the pro-
cess of and assumptions behind action research
can make the diff erence between being a prac-
titioner of OD and being someone who sim-
ply uses typical OD interventions without
using the other parts of the process that make
up OD. Or, to put it another way, it is like
the diff erence between being a carpenter and
being someone who knows how to swing a
hammer.

American Management Association / www.amanet.org
EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:04 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

1
What Is Organization Development?

CHAPTER OUTLINE

Definitions of an Organization

Defining OD

Who Is an OD Professional?

Models for Doing OD

Roots and History of OD

When and Why Should an Organization Use OD?

A Values-Based Field

Chapter Summary

Questions for Discussion or Self-Reflection

1

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

2
0
0
6
.

B
e
r
r
e
t
t
–
K
o
e
h
l
e
r

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
s
.

A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t

f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY
AN: 290846 ; McLean, Gary N..; Organization Development : Principles, Processes, Performance
Account: s3642728.main.ehost

OVERVIEW This chapter presents the definitional issues, the business
case for OD, two primary models with their strengths and weaknesses
(action research, appreciative inquiry), and the importance of organiza-
tional context. It also contains the historical roots of the field, as well as
its values and principles. Concepts of organizational culture and change
management are also explored briefly.

Welcome to the world of organization development (OD)! Everyreader of this book comes with multiple experiences in organiza-
tions—from your family to your schools; churches, synagogues, tem-
ples, and mosques; workplaces; charitable organizations; government
agencies; sports teams; social clubs; labor unions; and so on. Some of
these experiences have probably been positive, while some have proba-
bly been negative. That’s the nature of the world in which we live. In
this book, you will learn some of the approaches that professionals in
the field of OD use to turn negative experiences into positive ones, and
how good OD practice that relies on solid OD theory can help organi-
zations to be more productive, more satisfying, and more effective and
efficient.

DEFINITIONS OF AN ORGANIZATION

The dictionary provides the following formal definition of an organization:

a) the act or process of organizing; the state or manner of being
organized: a high degree of organization; b) something that has
been organized or made into an ordered whole; c) something made
up of elements with varied functions that contribute to the whole
and to collective functions; an organism; d) a group of persons
organized for a particular purpose; an association: a benevolent
organization; e) a structure through which individuals cooperate
systematically to conduct business; the administrative personnel
of such a structure. (American Heritage Dictionary of the English
Language, 2000)

A more informal definition can include any situation in which two or
more persons are involved in a common pursuit or objective. Given the
broad-ranging and all-encompassing definitions of organization, it is

2

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

easy to understand the complexity of OD and the large number of situ-
ations in which it can be applied.

Now, as you begin to think about your experience in past and cur-
rent organizations, quickly jot down some of the positive and negative
experiences you have encountered. Use two columns, with the positive
in one and the negative in the other. By doing this, you are already
using the early stages of one of the tools of OD, called a force field
analysis. You’ll hear more about this tool in a later chapter. An OD
professional, along with others in the same organization, might use a
list like this to determine how people in that organization feel about
what is and what is not going well. This, too, is a part of the OD
process of doing an organizational analysis or a needs assessment. The
OD professional might use such lists to work with the organization in
finding ways to build on the positives and to overcome the negatives.

The field of OD is not regulated, except through ethics statements
developed by professional organizations (more on this later, too). As a
result, anyone interested can practice what he or she might label as OD,
even though the field might take exception to the accuracy of such a
statement. But there is no recourse. Thus, one of the real challenges of
the field is that some people who call themselves OD consultants or
professionals (these terms are often used interchangeably and do not
indicate whether the person is employed by the organization or is a self-
employed person or a person employed by a consulting firm) is that
they operate with a narrowly defined “toolbox”—a set of so-called
solutions that they apply to every situation. Thus, we experience the
“flavor of the month,” a situation in which the latest fad is offered to
organizations as the solution to all of their problems. Given the ambi-
guity of OD practice, having a strong theoretical background and func-
tioning with proven models, therefore, become critical for successful
and ethical OD practice.

DEFINING OD

As indicated earlier in this chapter, there is no standard definition of
OD, and what may be considered as legitimate OD practice by some may
equally be perceived by others, legitimately, as being outside the scope
of OD. Here is your first challenge of ambiguity. How does the field
continue to exist and thrive when we cannot agree on its definition?

3

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

What Can OD Address?

The field of OD is very large and complex; as such, OD professionals
will find themselves in many different contexts using a wide range of
methods and processes to bring about desired outcomes in organiza-
tions. This question will be answered more fully later in this chapter.
For now, let me share a few situations in which I have been involved as
an indication of the wide range in which one might practice OD.

As our children were growing up, we used the tools of OD in our
parenting. We held weekly family meetings with rotating facili-
tators (even the young children!) at which any grievances against
each other or against parents could be voiced and (hopefully)
managed, if not resolved. When it came to planning vacations,
we used brainstorming to create a Likert-type survey to which
everyone had equal input. The only differential role that we had
as parents was in setting the budget. And whatever came out on
top, that’s what we did! With a family of six children (four are
adopted Koreans), Lynn and I recognized how easy it would be
for the individual child to be lost in the crowd. Thus, we created a
system of providing each child with a “special day” once a month
when each child could pick one parent and one activity that
would be just for him or her. We used dialogue processes when
there was conflict. We used storytelling to instill our values. Not
only did OD serve us well as a family, but it also helped the
children to develop some of the OD skills themselves.

I have just finished a 3.5-year project sponsored by the U.S. State
Department in which I worked with colleagues in Kyrgyzstan, a
former soviet republic in Central Asia, to work on major initiatives
to change the educational system by reinstituting free kindergarten,
establishing graduate degrees for school administrators, instituting
requirements for persons to become school administrators, estab-
lishing a professional organization for teachers, requiring trans-
parency in the finances of schools and universities, and many
other outcomes. One of my colleagues wrote to me shortly after
the peaceful overthrow of the corrupt president indicating that the

4 ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

work we had done set the stage for the democratic processes that
resulted in a peaceful transition of governments.

I received an urgent telephone call from Saudi Arabia requesting
my immediate assistance. There had been a serious refinery ac-
cident in which one person was killed and several other workers
were injured. The company wanted me to do an assessment to
determine why the accident had occurred and what changes the
organization needed to make to reduce the risk of future problems
in safety. This task required an exhaustive review of risk policies,
safety training, the role of the corporate risk office in refineries, a
review of the processes, and so on. Two of the major findings were
that contract employees, who outnumbered regular employees
2:1, received no safety training, and the corporate risk office was
viewed as an auditor rather than as a support system. No sub-
sequent accidents have occurred since this project.

Rather than going into detail on other projects, let me provide a
sampling of others in which I have been involved:

■ I have worked with a state agency to help it institute total
quality management, with a specific goal of reducing roadside
construction site accidents.

■ I have worked as a coach to the CEO of a large consulting firm
to provide him with feedback on his decision making and
processes, and to serve as a foil for his ideas.

■ I have worked with many organizations in helping approach a
move into another part of the world.

■ I have worked with several organizations immediately after a
merger or acquisition to help create a common culture and to
bring personnel, processes, and policies together.

■ I assist organizations in conducting qualitative feedback to
employees on their performance.

■ I work with organizations to help them manage conflict when it
has become destructive to the organization.

■ I have provided support at the ministry level and research in
the use of organization development principles and processes

What Is Organization Development? 5

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

to improve the national situation in Kenya and the Republic
of Korea. This emphasis is continuing and expanding
globally.

This is not an exhaustive listing of the OD work that I do, and it is
not even close to exhaustive of the work that can be done under the
guise of organization development. I hope, however, that it will give the
reader some sense of the scope and power of OD work.

Sample Definitions

Egan (2002) explored the range of definitions for OD. While not a com-
prehensive review, he did identify 27 definitions between 1969 and 2003.
Providing all 27 definitions here probably serves no useful purpose.
Thus, this section will present a few definitions that express consider-
ably different perspectives. Change, whether planned or unplanned, is
often associated with people’s understanding of OD. Planned change
was incorporated into what was perhaps the first formal definition for OD,
that of Richard Beckhard (1969), though many such definitions emerged
in that year. Beckhard defined OD as “an effort [that is] (1) planned,
(2) organization-wide, 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).

Some within the field are now critical of this definition, asserting
that the world in which we live is too complex to plan change. Change,
both positive and negative, imposes itself on us from many sources,
most of which are beyond our control. Others argue that management
from the top is hierarchical, a concept that is acceptable in some cul-
tures but not in others, including, to some extent, the United States. On
the other hand, if desired change is not supported by top management,
can that change ever really occur or be sustained?

Another criticism of this definition is the use of a medical model
and the reference to “health.” At the same time, just as medical models
are rapidly shifting from remediation to prevention, so also do we see
this shift in OD. The final phrase of this definition, referencing the
“behavioral sciences,” underscores the multidisciplinary nature of the

6 ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

field. Many of the behavioral sciences are core to the practice of OD,
including psychology, sociology, economics, and anthropology, among
others.

Warren Bennis’s (1969) definition positions OD as reactive to
change, rather than proactive, as was the case in Beckhard’s definition.
Bennis also introduced the concept that is still core to our understand-
ing of OD today—namely, organizational culture: “Organization devel-
opment is a response to change, a complex educational strategy
intended to change beliefs, attitudes, values, and structures of organiza-
tions so that they can better adapt to new technologies, markets, and
challenges, and the dizzying rate of change itself” (p. 2). Bennis used
four words that are seen today as key components of organizational
culture: beliefs, attitudes, values, and structures. This view was later
expanded by Edgar Schein (1980), who developed the idea of a cultural
iceberg (see Figures 1.1 and 1.2).

These diagrams illustrate that change in an organization can occur
at many levels. As behaviors and their associated artifacts are readily
visible to others, OD can effect change in these relatively easily. How-
ever, when organizational change needs to penetrate the underlying

What Is Organization Development? 7

Artifacts and Creations
Technology
Art
Visible and audible behavior patterns

Values
Testable in the physical environment
Testable only by social consensus

Basic Assumptions
Relationship to environment
Nature of reality, time, and space
Nature of human nature
Nature of human activity
Nature of human relationships

Visible but often
not decipherable

Greater level
of awareness

Taken for granted
Invisible

Preconscious

Figure 1.1 Levels of Cultures and Their Interactions (adapted from
Schein, 1980, p. 4)

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

beliefs, values, and, ultimately, the unconscious assumptions made in the
organization, change is much more difficult. As illustrated in his metaphor
of the iceberg, Schein indicated how difficult it is to “see” the assump-
tions that underlie our behaviors. Another metaphor used by Schein was
the peeling of an onion. We can easily see the outside skin of the onion
(behaviors), but, without peeling away the layers between the external
skin and the core of the onion (the assumptions), we cannot really
understand the onion (the people in the organization). This is the chal-
lenge that faces OD professionals—how do we peel away the layers of
the onion or get to the bottom of the iceberg as we work in an organiza-
tion? At the same time, because of its greater ease and efficient use of
time, efforts to bring about change through OD should not attempt to go
deeper than necessary to accomplish the objective (Harrison, 1970). If
changes in behaviors or artifacts are sufficient (i.e., at the tip of the ice-
berg or the outer layer of the onion), then no further effort is necessary.

8 ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT

Figure 1.2 Schein’s Cultural Iceberg

■ Behaviors, Norms, Artifacts

■ Stated Beliefs, Values

■ Assumptions

Ph
ot

om
on

ta
ge

b
y

U
w

e
K
ils

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Moving forward, McLagan (1989), about whom you will hear
more later in this chapter, also provided a definition:

Organization development focuses on assuring healthy inter- and
intra-unit relationships and helping groups initiate and manage
change. Organization development’s primary emphasis is on rela-
tionships and processes between and among individuals and
groups. Its primary intervention is influence on the relationship
of individuals and groups to effect an impact on the organization
as a system. (p. 7)

Moving to a more current definition, Cummings and Worley (2005)
proposed the following definition: “Organization development is a system
wide application and transfer of behavioral science knowledge to the
planned development, improvement, and reinforcement of strategies,
structures, and processes that lead to organization effectiveness” (p. 1).

For the purposes of this book, I am proposing the following broad
definition for organization development, based on a previous definition
of global human resource development (McLean & McLean, 2001).
The evolution of this definition is presented in Chapter 11.

Organization development is any process or activity, based on the
behavioral sciences, that, either initially or over the long term, has
the potential to develop in an organizational setting enhanced
knowledge, expertise, productivity, satisfaction, income, interper-
sonal relationships, and other desired outcomes, whether for
personal or group/team gain, or for the benefit of an organization,
community, nation, region, or, ultimately, the whole of humanity.

Egan (2002), using a card-sorting process based on the 27 OD defini-
tions, identified 10 clusters of dependent variables (or desired out-
comes) contained in the definitions:

■ Advance organizational renewal
■ Engage organization culture change
■ Enhance profitability and competitiveness
■ Ensure health and well-being of organizations and employees
■ Facilitate learning and development
■ Improve problem solving

What Is Organization Development? 9

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

■ Increase effectiveness
■ Initiate and/or manage change
■ Strengthen system and process improvement
■ Support adaptation to change (p. 67)

Such a broad set of desired outcomes adds to the complexity of the field
of OD, impacting the expectations of OD by organizations and practi-
tioners, which makes for a very challenging environment in which to do
OD work.

A Separate Field or a Subset of Another Field?

Here is another piece of ambiguity: The answer to this question, as to
much of OD work, itself, is “It depends!” The two professional organi-
zations that exclusively represent OD professionals—OD Network and
The OD Institute—have argued that OD is a field separate unto itself.
Recently, however, the Journal of Organization Development, the jour-
nal of The OD Institute, has used OD along with the field of human
resource development (HRD). In addition, many other professional
organizations see OD as a subset of that field:

■ Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD)
■ Academy of Human Resource Development (India) (AHRD)
■ Korean Academy of Human Resource Development (KAHRD)
■ Academy of Management (AOM) (especially, the ODC—

Organization Development and Change—Division)
■ American Society for Training and Development (ASTD)
■ Euresform
■ Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) (with

several affiliated groups, such as the Arabian Society for HRM,
the Japanese Society for HRM, etc.)

■ Society for Industrial and Organizational Development (SIOP)
■ University Forum of Human Resource Development (UFHRD)

It is interesting to note the number of global organizations that rec-
ognize OD as part of a larger field. Perhaps the most well-known of
these inclusive models was developed by McLagan (1989) for ASTD.

10 ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Her research identified 11 functional areas within the larger field of
human resources; this model is referred to as the human resources
wheel, because it is often illustrated in a pie chart format. These func-
tions were then grouped into two clusters: human resource develop-
ment (HRD) and human resource management (HRM). Four of the 11
functions overlapped the two clusters, as shown in Table 1.1.

Note that OD is listed as one of three functions exclusively assigned
to HRD. While McLagan has orally expressed some doubts about her
model, this model is clearly embedded in the literature of HRD that is
utilized around the world.

Exploring definitions of HRD globally led to the following definition:

Human Resource Development is any process or activity that,
either initially or over the long term, has the potential to develop . . .
work-based knowledge, expertise, productivity and satisfaction,
whether for personal or group/team gain, or for the benefit of an
organization, community, nation, or ultimately, the whole of
humanity. (McLean & McLean, 2001, p. 322)

It is easy to see from this definition, if accepted, how OD fits within the
broader context of HRD globally.

What Is Organization Development? 11

TABLE 1.1 Assignment of 11 Human Resource Functions to HRD and HRM

HUMAN RESOURCE HUMAN RESOURCE
DEVELOPMENT (HRD) MANAGEMENT (HRM)

■ Training and development ■ HR research and infor-
■ Organization development mation systems
■ Career development ■ Union/labor relations
■ Organization/job design ■ Employee assistance
■ Human resource planning ■ Compensation/benefits
■ Performance management ■ Organization/job design

systems ■ Human resource planning
■ Selection and staffing ■ Performance management

systems
■ Selection and staffing

Note: Boldfaced items belong exclusively to that column. Nonboldfaced items are
shared.
Source: Adapted from McLagan (1989).

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

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:
■ must be in alignment with organization and business objectives;
■ is rooted in the behavioral sciences;
■ is long range and ongoing;
■ stresses a process orientation to achieve results;
■ is based on collaboration;
■ is a systems orientation.

The following conclusions can be drawn about the core character-
istics of OD:

■ 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.

■ A primary, though not exclusive, goal of OD is to improve
organizational effectiveness.

■ The target of the change effort is the whole organization,
departments, work groups, or individuals within the organi-
zation and, as mentioned earlier, may extend to include a
community, nation, or region.

■ OD recognizes the importance of top management’s commit-
ment, support, and involvement. It also affirms a bottom-up
approach when the culture of the organization supports such
efforts to improve an organization.

■ 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.

■ The major focus of OD is on the total system and its inter-
dependent parts.

■ OD uses a collaborative approach that involves those affected
by the change in the change process.

12 ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

■ 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.

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

■ 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.

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

■ 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).

Is OD the Same as Change Management?

In an effort to simplify an explanation of what OD is, some have sug-
gested 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 (organi-
zation’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 manage-
ment. The business benefits when both types of change are affirmed

What Is Organization Development? 13

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

within an organization. While long-term, systemwide planning that
results in change (the OD model) can be very beneficial for an organi-
zation 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.

WHO IS AN OD PROFESSIONAL?

There are many ways to answer this question. We will answer it first by
looking at where OD professionals are primarily employed, and then
we will explore the qualifications for doing OD work. Finally, we will
look at how OD consultants differ from management consultants or
consultants in other fields of endeavor.

Internal versus External

OD professionals or consultants can be employed by the organization
or can be hired on a contract basis. Regardless of whether they are
internal or external to the organization, the term consultant is still com-
monly used. There is no right answer for whether an internal consultant
is better than an external consultant, or vice versa (more ambiguity!).
Table 1.2 outlines the advantages of each.

Because both internal and external OD consultants have advan-
tages, it makes considerable sense for a partnership between an internal
and an external consultant, so that the best of both can be available to
the organization. For this same reason, it also makes sense to establish
a partnership based on differences in demographics (e.g., gender, eth-
nicity, age) in order to capture fully the perspectives of varying views.
What one might see, the other might not see or might see differently
based on different socializing experiences. Thus, using a partnership
approach can strengthen the ultimate outcomes from OD work.

OD work does not necessarily need to be performed by a profes-
sional serving in such a designated position. Increasingly, OD is per-
formed by persons in other positions who have OD expertise. Thus, a
line manager or a staff person in some other functional area who has been
trained in OD can (and probably should) apply OD principles in his or
her ongoing work. The more widely understood OD principles are in

14 ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT

EBSCOhost – printed on 12/27/2021 6:14 PM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

What Is Organization Development? 15

TABLE 1.2 Advantages of Using Each Type of Consultant—Internal and
External

INTERNAL EXTERNAL

■ Already has familiarity with the ■ Does not have preknowledge of
organization and how it works the organizational culture, so

■ Knows the organizational does not enter the process with
culture better than any external any preconceived notions
can ever know it ■ Often given more respect by

■ Has relationships established insiders because he or she is
that can get cooperation more not known except by reputation
quickly ■ More freedom to “say it like it

■ Has a trust level already is” because he or she has less
established at risk politically

■ Lower cost by project because ■ Organization makes less long-
of organization’s long-term term commitment for pay and
commitment to …