Editorial

Citation

Gimson, A. (2013), "Editorial", Development and Learning in Organizations, Vol. 27 No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-08-2013-0055

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: Development and Learning in Organizations, Volume 27, Issue 6

Disruptive change is the order of the day, whether looking at global markets, national economies or individual organisations. However, despite billions of dollars spent on reengineering or improving processes, systems and structures, we know the statistics – 70-80 per cent of change programs fail to deliver.

So, this Special Issue for 2013 on Organizational Development (OD) is perhaps timely – but where to start? All too often, among practitioners and academics, there is an argument around what is and is not OD. There are many and varied answers – just one study (Egan, 2002) identified 27 different definitions between 1969 and 2003. I decided not to rerun that debate here, but instead, as he is widely reported to have coined the original term, to offer a starting point from Beckhard (1969):

an effort that is planned, organization-wide and managed from the top to increase organization effectiveness and health through planned interventions in the organization’s processes using behavioural-science knowledge (p. 9).

You will find our expert contributors in the following pages resonate with different aspects of this definition and also offer you a variety of examples, processes and perspectives.

Our Viewpoint, from Ian Cunningham, kicks things off with a well-deserved swipe at individualistic talent management processes and team building. His argument that such processes contributed to the 2008 banking crisis, is well made. And his examples of more holistic and systemic OD interventions are well worth consideration.

Carrie Foster also refers to the banking crisis, but goes even further, to call “… for debate regarding the flaws of our dominant capitalist economic agenda … ”. Her erudite proposal is that OD methodology, with its socio-human values, is uniquely placed to enable leaders of organisations to refocus on a more sustainable agenda that values long-term, contribution to society as highly as short-term economic performance. In my view, a debate long overdue.

Also calling for sustainable enterprises, Roland Sullivan, William Rothwell and Mary Jane Balasi provide us with a glimpse of their ten practices for Whole System Transformation. Drawn from their work with over 1,000 organisations, they rightly flag the need for any OD interventions to facilitate organisational agility. While of necessity a brief synopsis of each of the ten aspects, I am sure this summary of their approach will whet your appetite for more.

So, if we have established that OD is at least organisation-wide and that it requires a systemic approach, leading global change must add further layers of complexity? Looking at these challenges from a senior executive’s perspective, Bob Tobin shares nine rules for leaders to follow in any OD initiative. Unsurprisingly, most of these rules focus on the executives’ own behaviour and provide useful ideas for both leaders themselves and/or anyone holding responsibility for leadership development.

People, including two of our contributing authors, differ in their view on whether or not OD interventions should (or even can) be measured. But all would agree, I think, that it is a difficult and tricky thing to accomplish. Alexis Assimacopoulos shares progress so far in his work on developing a technological solution that aims to make change visible. As organisations are currently “live testing” the platform, we will be treated to an update on progress in a future issue.

Moving on to our review articles, “Taking a stand on misuse of power” looks at the perceptions of OD practitioners and how their views have both changed, and in some aspects stayed the same, over the past 20 years. You might find the five main conclusions illuminating. Following on from these experts’ views, “Change seen through younger eyes” draws out the opinions of young professionals in Australia. The study paints a picture of a more resilient and flexible generation now joining the workforce. However, there are still features of change programs that, when badly managed, relate to poor well-being outcomes, and therefore reduced performance among this population.

Finally, “HR’s strategic role in India shake-up” summarises an interesting qualitative analysis of organisational change in the utilities sector in India. The interchangeable use of terms such as “organisational change” and “organisational development” brings us right back round to our initial question; what is and is not OD? I hope we have gone some way to adding to and enriching how you might answer that question for yourselves.

Wishing you all a great end to 2013, and a healthy and prosperous New Year when it arrives.

Anne Gimson
based at Strategic Developments International, UK. E-mail: anne@stratdevint.com

References

Beckhard, R. (1969), Organization development: Strategies and Models, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

Egan, T.M. (2002), “Organization Development: an examination of definitions and dependent variables”, Organization Development Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 59–70