Organization Development
Lecture 12
OD Practitioner Skills and Activities
Much of the literature about the competencies of an effective OD practitioner reveals a mixture
of personality traits, experiences, knowledge, and skills presumed to lead to effective practice.
For example, research on the characteristics of successful change practitioners yields the
following list of attributes and abilities: diagnostic ability, basic knowledge of behavioral
science techniques, empathy, knowledge of the theories and methods within the consultant's
own discipline, goal-setting ability, problem-solving ability, and ability to perform selfassessment, ability to see things objectively, imagination, flexibility, honesty, consistency, and
trust. Although these qualities and skills are laudable, there has been relatively little con-sensus
about their importance to effective OD practice.
Two ongoing projects are attempting to define and categorize the skills and knowledge
required of OD practitioners. In the first effort, fifty well-known practitioners and researchers
annually update a list of professional competencies. The most recent list has grown to 187
statements in nine areas of OD practice, including entry, start-up, assessment and feedback,
action planning, intervention, evaluation, adoption, separation, and general competencies. The
statements range from "staying centered in the present, focusing on the ongoing process" and
"understanding and explaining how diversity will affect the diagnosis of the culture" to "basing
change on business strategy and business needs" and "being comfortable with quantum leaps,
radical shifts, and paradigm changes." The discussion is currently considering additional items
related to international OD, large-group interventions, and trans-organizational skills.
The second project, sponsored by the Organization Development and Change Division of the
Academy of Management, seeks to develop a list of competencies to guide curriculum
development in graduate OD programs. So far, more than forty OD practitioners have worked
to develop the two competency lists. First, foundation competencies are oriented toward
descriptions of an existing system. They include knowledge from organization behavior,
psychology, group dynamics, management and organization theory, research methods, and
business practices. Second, core competencies are aimed at how systems change over time.
1
They include knowledge of organization design, organization research, system dynamics, OD
history, and theories and models for change; they also involve the skills needed to manage the
consulting process, to analyze and diagnose systems, to design and choose interventions, to
facilitate processes, to develop clients' capability to manage their own change, and to evaluate
organization change.
The information in Table.1 applies primarily to people specializing in OD as a profession. For
them, possessing the listed knowledge and skills seems reasonable, especially in light of the
growing diversity and complexity of interventions in OD. Gaining competence in those areas
may take considerable time and effort, and it is questionable whether the other two types of OD
practitioners—managers and specialists in related fields—also need that full range of skills and
knowledge. It seems more reasonable to suggest, whether they are OD professionals,
managers, or related specialists. Those items would constitute the practitioner's basic skills and
knowledge. Beyond that background, the three types of OD practitioners likely would differ in
areas of concentration. OD professionals would extend their breadth of skills across the
remaining categories.
Based on the studies available, all OD practitioners should have the following basic skills and
knowledge to be effective:
1. Intrapersonal skills. Despite the growing knowledge base and sophistication of the field,
organization development is still a human craft. As the primary instrument of diagnosis and
change, practitioners often must process complex, ambiguous information and make informed
judgments about its relevance to organizational issues. Practitioners must have the personal
centering to know their own values, feelings, and purposes as well as the integrity to behave
responsibly in a helping relationship with others. Because OD is a highly uncertain process
requiring constant adjustment and innovation, practitioners must have active learning skills and
a reasonable balance between their rational and emotional sides. Finally, OD practice can be
highly stressful and can lead to early burnout, so practitioners need to know how to manage
their own stress.
2. Interpersonal skills. Practitioners must create and maintain effective relationships with
individuals and groups within the organization and help them gain the competence necessary to
solve their own problems. Group dynamics, comparative cultural perspectives, and business
functions are considered to be the foundation knowledge, and managing the consulting process
and facilitation as core skills.
2
All of these interpersonal competencies promote effective helping relationships. Such
relationships start with a grasp of the organization's perspective and require listening to
members' perceptions and feelings to understand how they see themselves and the
organization. This understanding provides a starting point for joint diagnosis and problem
solving. Practitioners must establish trust and rapport with organization members so that they
can share pertinent information and work effectively together. This requires being able to
converse in members' own language and to give and receive feedback about how the
relationship is progressing.
To help members learn new skills and behaviors, practitioners must serve as concrete role
models of what is expected. They must act in ways that are credible to organization members
and provide them with the counseling and coaching necessary to develop and change. Because
the helping relationship is jointly determined, practitioners need to be able to negotiate an
acceptable role and to manage changing expectations and demands.
3. General consultation skills. OD starts with diagnosing an organization or department to
understand its current functioning and to discover areas for further development. OD
practitioners need to know how to carry out an effective diagnosis, at least at a rudimentary
level. They should know how to engage organization members in diagnosis, how to help them
ask the right questions, and how to collect and analyze information. A manager, for example,
should be able to work with subordinates to determine jointly the organization's or
department's strengths or problems. The manager should know basic diagnostic questions some
methods for gathering information, such as interviews or surveys, and some techniques for
analyzing it, such as force-field analysis or statistical means and distributions.
In addition to diagnosis, OD practitioners should know how to design and execute an
intervention. They need to be able to define an action plan and to gain commitment to the
program. They also need to know how to tailor the intervention to the situation, using
information about how the change is progressing to guide implementation. For example,
managers should be able to develop action steps for an intervention with subordinates. They
should be able to gain their commitment to the program (usually through participation), sit
down with them and assess how it is progressing, and make modifications if necessary.
4. Organization development theory. The last basic tool OD practitioners should have is a
general knowledge of organization development. They should have some appreciation for
planned change, the ac-tion research model, and contemporary approaches to managing
change.
3
They should be familiar with the range of available interventions and the need for evaluating
and institutionalizing change programs. Perhaps most important is that OD practitioners should
understand their own role in the emerging field of organization development, whether it is as
an OD professional, a manager, or a specialist in a related area.
The role of the OD practitioner is changing and becoming more complex, Ellen Fagenson and
W. Warner Burke found that the most practiced OD skill or activity was team development,
whereas the least employed was the integration of technology (see Table 1).
The results of this study reinforce what other theorists have also suggested. The OD
practitioners of today are no longer just process facilitators, but are expected to know
something about strategy, structure, reward systems, corporate culture, leadership, human
resource development and the client organization's business. As a result, the role of the OD
practitioner today is more challenging and more in the mainstream of the client organization
than in the past.
Table 1: OD Practitioner Skills and Activities
Susan Gebelein lists six key skill areas that are critical to the success of the internal
practitioner. These are shown in Figure15. The relative emphasis on each type of skill will
depend upon the situation, but all are vital in achieving OD program goals. The skills that
focus on the people-oriented nature of the OD practitioner include:
•
Leadership. Leaders keep members focused on key company values and on
opportunities and need for improvement. A leader's job is to recognize when a company
is headed in the wrong direction and to get it back on the right track.
•
Project Management. This means involving all the right people and department to
keep the change program on track.
•
Communication. It is vital to communicate the key values to everyone in the
organization.
4
•
Problem-Solving. The real challenge is to implement a solution to an organizational
problem. Forget about today's problems: focus constantly on the next set of problems.
•
Interpersonal. The number-one priority is to give everybody in the organization the
tools and the confidence to be involved in the change process. This includes facilitating,
building relationships, and process skills.
•
Personal. The confidence to help the organization make tough decisions, introduce new
techniques, try something new, and see if it works.
Figure 15: Practitioner Skills Profile
The OD practitioner's role is to help employees create their own solutions, systems, and
concepts. When the practitioner uses the above-listed skills to accomplish these goals, the
employees will work hard to make them succeed, because they are the owners of the change
programs,
Consultant’s Abilities:
Ten primary abilities are key to an OD consultant’s effectiveness. Most of these abilities can be
learned, but because of individual differences in personality or basic temperament, some of
them would be easier for some to learn than for others.
1. The ability to tolerate ambiguity. Every organization is different, and what worked
before may not work now; every OD effort starts from scratch, and it is best to enter
with few preconceived notions other than with the general characteristics that we know
about social systems.
5
2. The ability to influence. Unless the OD consultant enjoys power and has some talent
for persuasion, he or she is likely to succeed in only minor ways in OD.
3. The ability to confront difficult issues. Much of OD work consists of exposing issues
that organization members are reluctant to face.
4. The ability to support and nurture others. This ability is particularly important in
times of conflict and stress; it is also critical just before and during a manager’s first
experience with team building.
5. The ability to listen well and empathize. This is especially important during
interviews, in conflict situations, and when client stress is high.
6. The ability to recognize one’s feelings and intuition quickly. It is important to be able
to distinguish one’s own perceptions from those of the client and also be able to use
these feelings and intuitions as interventions when appropriate and timely.
7. The ability to conceptualize. It is necessary to think and express in understandable
words certain relationships, such as the cause-and-effect and if-then linkages that exist
within the systemic context of the client organization.
8. The ability to discover and mobilize human energy, both within oneself and within
the client organization. There is energy in resistance, for example, and the consultant’s
interventions are likely to be most effective when they tap existing energy within the
organization and provide direction for the productive use of the energy.
9. The ability to teach or to create learning opportunities. This ability should not be
reserved for classroom activities but should be utilized on the job, during meetings, and
within the mainstream of the overall change effort.
10. The ability to maintain a sense of humor, both on the client’s behalf and to help
sustain perspective: Humor can be useful for reducing tension. It is also useful for the
consultant to be able to laugh at himself or herself; not taking oneself too seriously is
critical for maintaining perspective about an OD effort, especially since nothing ever
goes exactly according to plan, even though OD is supposed to be a planned change
effort.
6
Role of Organization Development Professionals
Position: Position:
Organization development professionals have positions that are either internal or external to
the organization. Internal consultants are members of the organization and often are located in
the human resources department. They may perform the OD role exclusively, or they may
combine it with other tasks, such as compensation practices, training, or labor relations. Many
large organizations, such as Intel, Merck, Abitibi Consolidated, BHP, Philip Morris, Levi
Strauss, Procter & Gamble, Weyerhaeuser; GTE, and Citigroup, have created specialized OD
consulting groups. These internal consultants typically have a variety of clients within the
organization, serving both line and staff departments.
External consultants are not members of the client organization; they typically work for a
consulting firm, a university, or themselves. Organizations generally hire external consultants
to provide a particular expertise that is unavailable internally and to bring a different and
potentially more objective perspective into the organization development process. Table.2
describes the differences between these two roles at each stage of the action research process.
During the entry process, internal consultants have clear advantages. They have ready access to
and relationships with clients, know the language of the organization, and have insights about
the root cause of many of its problems. This allows internal consultants to save time in
identifying the organization's culture, informal practices, and sources of power. They have
access to a variety of information, including rumors, company reports, and direct observations.
In addition, entry is more efficient and congenial, and their pay is not at risk. External
consultants, however, have the advantage of being able to select the clients they want to work
with according to their own criteria. The contracting phase is less formal for internal
consultants and there is less worry about expenses, but there is less choice about whether to
complete the assignment. Both types of consultants must address issues of confidentiality, risk
project termination (and other negative consequences) by the client, and fill a third-party role.
During the diagnosis process, internal consultants already know most organization members
and enjoy a basic level of rapport and trust. But external consultants often have higher status
than internal consultants, which allows them to probe difficult issues and assess the
organization more objectively.
7
In the intervention phase, both types of consultants must rely on valid information, free and
informed choice, and internal commitment for their success, However, an internal consultant's
strong ties to the organization may make him or her overly cautious particularly when powerful
others can affect a career. Internal consultants also may lack certain skills and experience in
facilitating organizational change. Inside he may have some small advantages in being able to
move around the system and cross key organizational boundaries. Finally, the measures of
success and reward differ from those of the external practitioner in the evaluation process.
A promising approach to having the advantages of both internal and external OD consultants is
to include them both as members of an internal-external consulting team. External consultants
can combine their special expertise and objectivity with the inside knowledge and acceptance
of internal consultants. The two parties can use complementary consulting skills while sharing
the workload and possibly accomplishing more than either would by operating alone. Internal
consultants, for example, can provide almost continuous contact with the client, and their
external counterparts can provide specialized services periodically, such as two or three days
each month. External consultants also can help train their organization partners, thus
transferring OD skills and knowledge to the organization.
Although little has been written on internal-external consulting teams, recent studies suggest
that the effectiveness of such teams depends on members developing strong, supportive,
collegial relationships. They need to take time to develop the consulting team; confronting
individual differences and establishing appropriate roles and exchanges, member’s need to
provide each other with continuous feedback and make a commitment to learning from each
other. In the absence of these team-building and learning activities, internal-external
consulting teams can be more troublesome and less effective than consultants working alone.
8
The difference between External and Internal Consulting
Stage of change
External consultant
Internal consultant
Ready access to
Entering
Source clients
clients
Build relationships
Ready relationships
Knows company
Learn company jargon
jargon
Understands root
“presenting problem” challenge
causes
Time
Contracting
Time consuming
efficient
Stressful phase
Congenial phase
Select project/client according to own
Obligated to work with
criteria
everyone
Unpredictable outcome
Steady pay
Formal documents
Informal agreements
Must complete projects
Can terminate project at will
assigned
No out-of-pocket
Guard against out-of-pocket expenses
expenses
Information confidential
Information can be open or
Loss of contract at stake
confidential
Risk of client retaliation and
Maintain third-party role
loss
of job at
state
Act as third party, driver
(on
behalf of client or pair of
hands)
Meet most organization members for the
Diagnosing
first
time
Has relationships with many
organization
9
members
Prestige determined by job
Prestige from being external
Build trust quickly
rank
and client stature
Sustain reputation as
Confidential data can increase political trustworthy
sensitivities
over time
Data openly shared can reduce
political intrigue
Intervening
Insist on valid information, free and
Insist on valid information,
informed
free
and informed choice and
choice, and internal commitment
internal
Confine activities within boundaries of
commitmen
client
t
Run interference for client
organization
across
organization
al
lines to
align
support
Evaluating
Rely on repeat business and customer
Rely on repeat business, pay
referral as
raise
and promotion as key
key measures of project success
measures
Seldom see long-term results
of success
Can
see
change
become
institutionalized
Little recognition for job
well
don
e
10
Marginality:
A promising line of research on the professional OD role centers on the issue of marginality.
The marginal person is one who successfully straddles the boundary between two or more
groups with differing goals, value systems, and behavior patterns. Whereas in the past, the
marginal role always was seen as dysfunctional, marginality now is seen in a more positive
light. There are many examples of marginal roles in organizations: the salesperson, the
buyer, the first-line supervisor, the integrator and the project manager. Evidence is mounting
that some people are better at taking marginal roles than are others. Those who are good at it
seem to have personal qualities of low dogmatism, neutrality, open-mindedness, objectivity,
flexibility, and adaptable information- processing ability. Rather than being upset by
conflict, ambiguity, and stress, they thrive on it. Individuals with marginal orientations are
more likely than others to develop integrative decisions that bring together and reconcile
viewpoints among opposing organizational groups and are more likely to remain neutral in
controversial situations. Thus, the research suggests that the
marginal role can have positive effects when it is filled by a person with a marginal orientation.
Such a person can be more objective and better able to perform successfully in linking,
integrative, or conflict-laden roles,
There are two other boundaries: the activities boundary and the membership boundary. For
both, the OD consultant should operate at the boundary, in a marginal capacity.
With respect to change activities, particularly implementation, the consultant must help but not
be directly involved. Suppose an off-site team-building session, for a manger and his
subordinates, he would help the manager with the design and process of the meeting but would
not lead.
With respect to membership, the OD consultant is never quite in nor quite out. Although the
consultant must be involved, he or she cannot be a member of the client organization. Being a
member means that there is vested interest, a relative lack of objectivity. Being totally removed
means, he cannot sense, cannot be empathetic, and cannot use his or her feelings. Being
marginal means that the consultant becomes involved enough to understand client’s feelings
and perceptions yet distant enough to be able to see these feelings and perceptions for what
they are.
Being marginal is critical for both an external consultant and an internal consultant. The major
concern regarding the internal OD practitioner’s role is that he or she can never be a consultant
to his or her own group.
11
If the group is an OD department, a member of this department, no matter how skilled, cannot
be an affective consultant to it. It is also difficult for an internal OD practitioner to be a
consultant to any group that is within the same vertical path or chain of the managerial
hierarchy as he or she may be. Since the OD function is often a part of corporate personnel or
the human resource function, it would be difficult for the internal OD consultant to play a
marginal role in consulting with any of the groups within the corporate function, because the
consultant would be a primary organization member of that function. Consulting with
marketing, R&D or manufacturing within one’s organization, for example, would be far more
feasible and appropriate, since the OD consultant could more easily maintain a marginal role.
Figure 16: Use of Consultant’s Versus Client’s Knowledge and Experience
With the recent proliferation of OD interventions in the structural, human resource
management, and strategy areas that limited definition of the professional OD role has
expanded to include the consultant-centered end of the continuum. In many of the newer
approaches, the consultant may have to take on a modified role of expert, with the consent and
collaboration of organization members. For example, if a consultant and managers were to try
to bring about a major structural redesign, managers may not have the appropriate knowledge
12
and expertise to create and manage the change.
The consultant's role might be to present the basic concepts and ideas and then to struggle
jointly with the managers to select an approach that might be useful to the organization and to
decide how it ' might best be implemented. In this situation, the OD professional recommends
or prescribes particular changes and is active in planning how to implement them. This
expertise, however, is always shared rather than imposed.
With the development of new and varied intervention approaches, the OD professional's role
needs to be seen as falling along the entire continuum from client-centered to consultantcentered. At times, the consultant will rely mainly on organization members' knowledge and
experiences to identify and solve problems. At other times, it will be more appropriate to take
on the role of expert, withdrawing from that role as managers gain more knowledge and
experience.
Emotional Demands:
The OD practitioner role is emotionally demanding. Research and practice support the
importance of understanding emotions and their impact on the practitioner's effectiveness. The
research on emotional intelligence in organizations suggests a set of abilities that can aid OD
practitioners in conducting successful change efforts. Emotional intelligence refers to the
ability to recognize and express emotions appropriately, to use emotions in thought and
decisions, and to regulate emotion in oneself and in others. It is, therefore, a different kind of
intelligence from problem-solving ability, engineering aptitude, or the knowledge of concepts.
In tandem with traditional knowledge and skill, emotional intelligence affects and supplements
rational thought; emotions help prioritize thinking by directing attention to important
information not addressed in models and theories. In That sense, some researchers argue that
emotional intelligence is as important as cognitive intelligence.
Reports from OD practitioners support the importance of emotional intelligence in practice. At
each stage of planned change, they must relate to and help organization members adapt to
resistance, commitment, and ambiguity. Facing those important and difficult issues raises
emotions such as the fear of failure or rejection. As the client and others encounter these kinds
of emotions, OD practitioners must have a clear sense of emotional effects, including their own
internal emotions. Ambiguity or denial of emotions can lead to inaccurate and untimely
interventions.
13
For example, a practitioner who is uncomfortable with conflict may intervene to diffuse
conflict because of the discomfort he or she feels, not because the conflict is destructive. In
such a case, the practitioner is acting to address a personal need rather than intervening to
improve the system's effectiveness.
Evidence suggests that emotional intelligence increases with age and experience. In addition, it
can be developed through personal growth processes such as sensitivity training, counseling,
and therapy. It seems reasonable to suggest that professional OD practitioners dedicate
themselves to a long-term regimen of development that includes acquiring both cognitive
learning and emotional intelligence.
Use of Knowledge and Experience:
The professional OD role has been described in terms of a continuum ranging from clientcentered (using the client's knowledge and experience) to consultant-centered (using the
consultant's knowledge and experience, as shown in Figure 16), Traditionally, OD consultants
have worked at the client-centered end of the continuum. Organization development
professionals, relying mainly on sensitivity training, process consultation, and team building,
have been expected to remain neutral, refusing to offer expert advice on organizational
problems. Rather than contracting to solve specific problems, the consultant has tended to work
with organization members to identify problems and potential solutions, to help them study
what they are doing now and consider alternative behaviors and solutions, and to help them
discover whether, in fact, the consultant and they can learn to do things better. In doing that the
OD professional has generally listened and reflected upon members' perceptions and ideas and
helped clarify and interpret their communications and behaviors.
14
15