An enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence
Good day writer,
Please see the assignment instructions in the attachments. If anything additional is needed, please let me know.
Core Values:
Integrity, Respect, Teamwork, Open-Mindedness.
Chapter 3: Core Values and Ethics in Organization Development
1
What Are Values? (1 of 2)
“An enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence.” (Rokeach, 1973, p. 5)
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
2
2
What Are Values? (2 of 2)
“OD is value-based and more importantly its core values provide the guiding light for both the OD process and its technology. The very identity of the field is reflected in the existence and application of the values it advocates. Without them, OD represents nothing more than a set of techniques.” (Margulies & Raia, 1990, p. 39)
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
3
3
Why Are OD Values Important? (1 of 2)
They guide choices about how to proceed.
They provide a larger vision that extends. beyond any individual intervention or project.
They distinguish OD from other methods of consulting and change.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
4
4
Why Are OD Values Important? (2 of 2)
They can help to prompt dialogue and clarify positions.
They can help us evaluate how we did.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
5
5
Core Values of Organization Development
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
6
| Away From . . . | Toward . . . |
| A view of people as essentially bad | A view of people as essentially good |
| Avoidance of negative evaluation of individuals | Confirming them as human beings |
| Seeing individuals as fixed | Seeing them as being in process |
| Resisting and fearing individual differences | Accepting and utilizing them |
| Utilizing an individual primarily with reference to his or her job description | Viewing him or her as a whole person |
| Walling-off the expression of feelings | Making possible both appropriate expression and effective use |
| Game-playing | Authentic behavior |
| Use of status for maintaining power and personal prestige | Use of status for organizationally relevant purposes |
| Distrusting people | Trusting them |
| Avoiding facing others with relevant data | Making appropriate confrontation |
| Avoidance of risk taking | Willingness to risk |
| View of process work as being unproductive effort | Seeing process work as essential to effective task accomplishment |
| Primary emphasis on competition | Greater emphasis on collaboration |
Table 3.1 Organization Development Values
Source: Tannenbaum, R., & Davis, S. A. (1969). Values, man, and organizations. Industrial Management Review, 10(2), 67–86.
© 1969 from MIT Sloan Management Review/Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Table 3.1: Organization Development Values
6
Values, Assumptions, Beliefs of OD (1 of 3)
Participation:
Involvement, leadership style.
Groups and teams:
Value of teams; let teams flourish.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
7
7
Values, Assumptions, Beliefs of OD (2 of 3)
Growth, development, and learning:
People, groups, and organizations are “in process.”
Fulfill human potential.
Whole person.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
8
8
Values, Assumptions, Beliefs of OD (3 of 3)
Dialogue and collaboration:
Create cooperative, rather than competitive, systems.
Traditional hierarchy is obsolete.
Win-win is possible.
Authenticity, openness, trust:
Keys to healthy collaboration.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
9
9
Challenges to OD Values (1 of 2)
Financial and economic tensions:
Practitioners may accept projects or actions for a paying client.
The push to see OD as technology/tools:
Practitioners may be pressured to implement fad or quick fix techniques.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
10
10
Challenges to OD Values (2 of 2)
Management culture and expectations:
A push for speed may result in skipping data gathering; appearing out of touch when discussing values.
Research:
Academic research that seeks to evaluate outcomes sees OD as a set of techniques rather than being values-based.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020.
11
11
,
Chapter 4: Foundations of Organizational Change
Levels and Characteristics of Organizational Change
Changes occur at many levels.
Changes vary in several ways.
Planning.
Magnitude.
Continuity.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
2
Changes occur at many levels: Changes can occur at the individual level when people learn new skills or develop new ways of working through mentoring, coaching, or education and training. Changes can occur at the group or team level as teams develop new ways of working with one another, define their goals and objectives, and learn ways of addressing conflict. Changes occur at the organizational level through the development of new strategies and processes, visions for a new desired future, and major system practices that affect all organizational members. Changes can also occur at suprasystem levels, where multiple organizations are implicated.
Changes vary in several ways: Practitioners and scholars have noticed that organizational changes differ on a number of dimensions.
Planning: Organizational change can be planned or unplanned. Organizational members can be conscious and intentional about the changes that they want to make, often due to environmental factors, strategic or market needs, or other influences. Changes can also be unplanned, perhaps in response to an immediate threat or crisis.
Magnitude: First-order changes tend to be alterations or changes to existing practices rather than a rethinking or reinvention of the practice. First-order change reflects an evolution of existing definitions rather than a revolution or redefinition. Rethinking how the entire organization used the computer system, including redefining roles, processes, values, and implicit meanings, would be considered second-order change. Others refer to differences in magnitude of organizational change by the labels transactional or transformational, evolutionary or revolutionary, and incremental or transformational.
Continuity: Episodic change is defined as distinct periods of change, usually infrequent and explicitly defined. When seen in this way, episodic change is usually framed as a response to a stable condition in which adverse conditions are present that force a change. Continuous change, on the other hand, reflects the idea that the organization is never truly out of a state of change, and that even in minute ways, change is always occurring.
2
Organizations as Systems (1 of 21)
First lens to look at organization.
Living organisms and environment.
Subparts related to one another.
Perspective to organizational theory.
Open versus closed systems.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
3
First lens to look at organization: Systems theory can be traced to an Austrian biologist, Ludwig von Bertlanffy, who wrote a series of books and articles beginning in the 1940s about the systemic interconnections of the natural world.
Living organisms and environment: General systems theory, according to Bertlanffy, was about understanding the characteristics of natural systems and the underlying laws that defined their interconnections.
Subparts related to one another: Rather than investigate only the subparts of these organisms in isolation from one another, general systems theory tried to understand how the subparts related to one another.
Perspective to organizational theory: Katz and Kahn (1966) were among the first to adapt this perspective to organizational theory. “All social systems, including organizations,” they wrote, “consist of the patterned activities of a number of individuals.”
Open versus closed systems: Systems theorists refer to these systems as “open” versus “closed” because the system is interconnected with its environment. Most theorists emphasize, however, that the natural system metaphor for organizations can be taken too far, since “social structures are essentially contrived systems.”
3
Organizations as Systems (2 of 21)
System maintains equilibrium.
Roles and procedures for proper functioning.
Open systems thinking.
Systems theory is popular approach.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
4
System maintains equilibrium: Systems theorists call this property of systems “negative entropy,” meaning the system needs to cope with expended energy without any incoming energy to assist the system in surviving. Moreover, all of these parts and functions are internally interdependent, so that changes in one part of the system will result in changes in other parts of the system.
Roles and procedures for proper functioning: Within these systems, certain functional specialized roles and procedures exist to aid the system in functioning properly. Procedures help the system to reproduce its processes in standardized ways. The overall organizational system also consists of a variety of interconnected subsystems that depend on one another.
Open systems thinking: Process of considering how people, processes, structures, and policies all exist in an interconnected web of relationships. Whereas events are single occurrences of an episode, patterns are the multiple and repetitive “archetypes” that allow events to happen in the same way time after time. These patterns exist in structures that support and reinforce them. Systems thinking consists of seeing the interrelationship of structures and components rather than simple and “linear cause-effect chains.” Correcting organizational problems requires systems thinking rather than simple linear thinking (A caused B to happen) in order to solve the root of the problem rather than correcting the immediate, surface-level symptoms of the problem (asking questions such as “What caused A? Are there other causes?”). In other words, it requires analyzing structures and patterns rather than isolated events.
Systems theory is popular approach: Systems theory has been a popular approach in organizational studies because it resonates with how we understand organizations to work at the most general level. Changes in the environment, such as legislative or regulatory changes, cause organizations to adapt to new rules. Poor quality inputs lead to problems in transformation processes and result in poor quality outputs. Erroneous information in the feedback process creates unnecessary or problematic changes in the system. Aspects of the system are interdependent on one another, and problems in one part of the system create problems in other parts of the system.
4
Organizations as Systems (3 of 21)
The Value of Systems Theory for OD Practitioners
Systems theory offers benefits.
Attention on training was common error.
Causes of problems and interconnections.
Taking systemic issues into account.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
5
Systems theory offers benefits: First, it can offer useful explanations for human behavior in organizations with attention to roles and structures rather than individual idiosyncrasies. Instead of seeing individual differences, OD practitioners can note where systems may encourage certain behavior patterns, usually subtly and without conscious decision. The systems theory perspective helps us see role-based interactional patterns rather than isolated actions of single individuals. Second, understanding the system and its dynamics gives OD practitioners a more appropriate place to begin interventions for change, since the object of change is often best directed at the system level rather than the individual level. Third, because changing one part of the system also results in changes to another part of the system, OD practitioners can be more deliberate about changes that are being proposed, and possible negative results can be predicted.
Attention on training was common error: Katz and Kahn (1966) wrote that this attention on training was a common error in organizations—and little change results from it: It is common practice to pull foremen or officials out of their organizational roles and give them training in human relations. Then they return to their customary positions with the same role expectations from their subordinates, the same pressures from their superiors, and the same functions to perform as before their special training.
Causes of problems and interconnections: OD practitioners can delve more deeply into the causes of problems and interconnections among groups, looking at systemic problems rather than at individuals or individual components of the system as the primary sources of error. This can lead to more fruitful targets for change.
Taking systemic issues into account: It may mean a more successful organizational change, as undesirable or “downstream” outcomes can be predicted and addressed before they become problems of their own. The organization as a whole can be internally consistent about the changes it wants to make.
5
Organizations as Systems (4 of 21)
Models of Organizational Change Consistent With a Systems Theory Approach
Predominant approaches.
Patterns and their relationships.
Possible areas for change.
Models are like colored lenses.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
6
Predominant approaches: As might be expected given its popularity as a theoretical model for organizations, models of organizational change consistent with a systems theory approach predominate.
Patterns and their relationships: They can help us see possible relationships that we may have missed, and they can help us see missing pieces that we might have expected to see but did not.
Possible areas for change: The model may point out the influence of one area on another that may prompt us to note that we devote too much attention to the first topic and not enough to the latter.
Models are like colored lenses: They highlight some aspects of the terrain while they may obscure others, but in any case, they will help us see new things that we may not have seen before.
6
Organizations as Systems (5 of 21)
Models of Organizational Change Consistent With a Systems Theory Approach: Lewin’s Three-Phase Model of Change and Force Field Analysis
Unfreezing, moving, and refreezing.
Forces promoting change and status quo.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
7
Unfreezing, moving, and refreezing: Kurt Lewin (1951) offered a three-phase model of organizational change in which he described change as a process of (1) unfreezing, (2) moving, and (3) refreezing. Current organizational practices need to be released (or unfrozen) to be changed. Once they are changed, they need to be refrozen as newly adopted regular practices.
Forces promoting change and status quo: Change can occur only when forces of change are greater than forces maintaining the status quo. This can happen in two ways: if forces promoting change are increased or if forces maintaining the status quo are decreased.
7
Organizations as Systems (6 of 21)
Models of Organizational Change Consistent With a Systems Theory Approach: Lewin’s Three-Phase Model of Change and Force Field Analysis
Easily grasped description of change.
Concept of force field analysis.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
8
Easily grasped description of change: The organization must be freed from prior practices and must work to sustain the change when it is implemented. The model also reminds us that organizational members must be prepared for a change, and that levels of resistance can mean that the organization remains in a frozen state until we work to unfreeze it. A popular adaptation of Lewin’s model refers to an organization’s current state, a transition state, and a desired state. Despite its popularity among practitioners, many scholars have noted that an “organization-as-ice-cube” model is, however, an oversimplification of a much more complex process, particularly since organizational practices are never exactly frozen.
Concept of force field analysis: The tool can help organizational members understand what factors would support a given change effort and what resistance might prevent the change from being adopted. Some practitioners use the model as a formal assessment, asking team members to rate the strength of the forces for and against change on a scale from 1 to 5 to prioritize actions where energy should be directed.
8
Organizations as Systems (7 of 21)
Kurt Lewin’s Force Field Analysis
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
9
Lewin’s model points out that change will not occur if the training, cost, and resistance are greater than the benefits that the system offers.
9
Organizations as Systems (8 of 21)
Models of Organizational Change Consistent With a Systems Theory Approach: The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model
Useful for organizational change.
Interaction between components or parts.
Congruence model of organizational behavior.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
10
Useful for organizational change: Nadler (1981) also explains that this model is particularly useful for organizational change. The premise behind the model is this: The model puts its greatest emphasis on the transformation process and in particular reflects the critical system property of interdependence.
Interaction between components or parts: These components exist in states of relative balance, consistency, or “fit” with each other. The different parts of an organization can fit well together and thus function effectively, or fit poorly, thus leading to problems, dysfunctions, or performance below potential.
Congruence model of organizational behavior: Given the central nature of these “fits” among components in the model, we will talk about it as a congruence model of organizational behavior, since effectiveness is a function of the congruence among the various components. Together, these four elements are defined as the primary components of the organization. They interact together in more or less consistent ways as the organization produces its outputs. Nadler (1981) writes about a fundamental notion of the congruence model: At the core of this systems-based perspective is the assumption that the interaction among the organizational components is perhaps more critical than the characteristics of the components themselves, and that as systems, organizations fundamentally work better when the pieces fit together.
10
Organizations as Systems (9 of 21)
Models of Organizational Change Consistent With a Systems Theory Approach: The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model
Congruence hypothesis.
Other parts noted and controlled.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
11
Congruence hypothesis: Nadler and Tushman refer to this as the “congruence hypothesis,” or the idea that the better the congruence between components, the more effective the organization. When an organization has a market demand to produce a new product (new input and new output), that demand requires a specific task to produce the output. If the task’s demands require skills and knowledge that individuals do not possess, then there will be a congruence gap (or low “fit”) between task and individuals. Organizational effectiveness can be achieved only if the fit is increased.
Other parts noted and controlled: The model points to areas that affect one another so that changes in other parts of the system can be noted and controlled. Nadler (1981) explains that when parts of a system are changed, they may increase or decrease the “fit” or congruence with other parts of the system. When change happens, other components of the organization may resist the change and encourage regression to the prior state. Nadler points to the need to motivate change (the individual component), manage transitions, and pay attention to political dynamics of change as well.
11
Organizations as Systems (10 of 21)
The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
12
Noting that systems theory is “too abstract to be used for day-to-day organizational behavior-problem analysis,” Nadler and Tushman have offered an expanded version of systems theory that contains additional concepts intended to be more useful to practitioners.
Like the traditional model of systems theory described earlier, notice that inputs, transformation processes, outputs, and feedback are also included as part of the congruence model. Each of these has been expanded in this model.
Inputs include environment, resources, and history, and are merged with organizational strategy to influence transformation processes. Market demands, human resources, technology, capital, information, and prior patterns all comprise the organization’s inputs. Strategy is included in the congruence model as it determines what the organization will work on and how the organization must work to achieve its outputs. Outputs are now more specifically defined not only as the “tangible” product of the organization’s processes, but outputs also consist of organizational, group, and individual performance. Nadler and Tushman include job satisfaction, stress, and other individual outputs as products of the work environment as well. Transformation processes have been expanded in the congruence model to include four important elements that relate to one another: task, individual, formal organizational arrangements, and informal organization.
The task component encompasses the work to be done, but also the skills and knowledge required to do it and the degree of independence or judgment required. The individual component includes employees’ knowledge and skills, engagement and motivation, preferences and attitudes, and other influences on individual behavior. Formal organizational arrangements include explicitly defined processes and organizational structures, job definition, metrics, the physical layout and environment, and other officially specified aspects of the work. Informal organization is defined as the less explicitly defined or tacit understandings, processes, methods, and norms that comprise how work is actually done.
SOURCE: Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (1997). Competing by Design. Oxford, p. 38.
12
Organizations as Systems (11 of 21)
Models of Organizational Change Consistent With a Systems Theory Approach: The Burke-Litwin Model of Organizational Performance and Change
Intended to follow basic tenets.
Observers remark its complexity.
External environment.
Anderson, Organizational Development, Fifth Edition. © SAGE Publications, 2020
13
Intended to follow basic tenets: Some prior models could not, however, predict the impact of an organizational change with certainty on other elements of the organization, and other models lacked empirical testing. Burke’s and Litwin’s is explicitly a model of organizational change based in systems theory that is intended to follow from its basic tenets.
Observers remark its complexity: Burke and Litwin acknowledge that the
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
All Rights Reserved Terms and Conditions
College pals.com Privacy Policy 2010-2018