ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Organization Development in the Public Sector
Richard H. Carson
Washington State University
Author Note
Richard H. Carson, is an Individual Interdisciplinary Doctorate Program (IIDP) student at
Washington State University. This research was conducted with the assistance of Dr. Lee
Bolman, Dr. David G. Carnevale, Dr. Thomas G. Cummings, Dr. Jerry D. Goodstein, Caryn A.
Tilton, and Dr. Christopher G. Worley. Thanks to everyone for the assistance.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Richard Carson, 12920
NE 227th Avenue, Brush Prairie, WA 98606. Email: richcarson@q.com .
This paper is written as required by the American Psychological Association style guide.
July 26, 2013
1
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Abstract
This is a 600 level course paper completed at Washington State University Vancouver in
Summer 2013. Washington State University defines a 600 level course as an “independent study,
special projects, and/or internships.” I am a doctorate student in the Individual Interdisciplinary
Doctorate Program (IIDP). My doctorate degree research proposal is Does the effectiveness of
public agencies, in communicating and managing relationships with internal and external
stakeholders, increase the likelihood of successfully managing organizational change? This
paper defines the field of public sector organizational development historically, explores how it
is being implemented, and assesses whether it is succeeding in achieving its goals.
One of the major findings of this paper is that while there is some consensus about what
organizational development is in general, it is viewed very differently by academics and
practitioners. So the research is not about explaining a universal theory of organizational
development. Rather it is about finding the commonalities of individual perspectives in this new
and growing field.
Keywords: organizational development, municipal government, communication,
stakeholders
2
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Introduction to Organizational Development in the Public Sector
Definition
There are as many definitions of organizational development as there are authors who
wrote books about the subject. As a term, the phrase goes back to the early 1900s. However, the
term took on a more sociological meaning. For the purposes of this paper the definition is the one
used by Cummings and Worley (2005):
Organization development is a system-wide application and transfer of
behavioral science knowledge to the planned development, improvement, and
reinforcement of the strategies, structures and processes that lead to
organization effectiveness.
It is important to keep in mind that other definitions also emphasize technology,
research, problem-solving, planned interventions, data collection, diagnosis, selfrenewing capacity and collaboration.
David Carnevale (2005) explains that organizational development as a philosophy
that says:
OD…manifests a normative, re-educative education philosophy because it
encourages individuals and groups to reexamine core values, beliefs, and
operating assumptions about themselves, other people, and the way their
organizations function.
Introduction and Purpose
The purpose and goal of the study is to create an understanding of organizational
development that local governments can utilize in the pursuit better managing organizational
change. It will provide a qualitative review by which local governments can achieve change and
a quantitative process to measure and monitor such change.
This research project is an extension of my WSU doctorate research question. The
Individual Interdisciplinary Doctorate Program (IIDP) “Proposed Plan of Study” asks the
3
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Research Question, “Does the effectiveness of public agencies, in communicating and managing
relationships with internal and external stakeholders, increase the likelihood of successfully
managing organizational change?” This is the research question approved by the IIDP Advisory
Committee and the WSU Graduate School.
My personal interest in this topic is both professional and academic. I have spent 30 years
working at the city, county and state government level in Alaska, California, Oregon, Utah and
Washington. Most of this time was spent as a top level government manager. For the last five
years I have worked as a consultant, working with local government on creating organizational
change that leads to greater efficiencies and communication. My academic interest is an
extension of my professional interest.
Revising the Research Question
The first task was to change the research question to one that was more concise and that
lent itself to an improved research project. It is important to note that I have made some changes
to my initial research question. The second task was to do so in manner that conforms to the
norms of academic research terminology and practice.
The proposed new research statement is now “Do municipal corporations that effectively
communicate with their stakeholders better manage organizational change?” It is shorter and
more specific, and will make for a better research result. I have reduced the scope from “public
agencies” to “municipal corporations.” In political science terms this means that federal, state,
regional, county and city governments are now limited to city and county governments. I think
this will limit the research because municipal corporations operate differently and at a different
scale that state and federal agencies.
4
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
The phrase “communicating and managing relationships” is changed to “communicate.”
“Managing relationships” is no longer an explicit consideration. This is not a concern since it
could end up as a recommendation or consideration of the research.
The topic statement phrase “effectively communicate” is changed to “communicate” and
“successfully manage organizational change” to “better manage organizational change.” It is
easier to demonstrate an action without using nebulous adjectives like “effective” or
“successful.”
The terms “internal and external stakeholders” have been aggregated to just
“stakeholders.” There is a discussion to have about who is or is not an appropriate stakeholder in
such research. Whether this is a real reduction in research effort is questionable. The research
will still have to address both the internal and external groups. It could certainly limit the inquiry
to one or the other. The question is one more or less significant in terms of understanding
outcomes?
Research Methodology
There are three academic research methods used in the examination of organizational
development in the public sector. First, there is the literature review. Second, is an inventory of
best organizational management practices conducted by several consulting firms. The latter
reports are all a matter of public record. This consisted of numerous city and county
organizational audits. Third, structured interviews were conducted with open-ended questions
(see Appendix A) of five of the leading organizational development experts in the United States.
History of Organizational Development – Three Perspectives
Early History of Organizational Development
5
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
The need to address organizational change is as old as human society itself. Organized
society dates back some 2.6 million years ago to the Paleolithic Era. Dealing with unanticipated
events is ongoing because human life is full of imperfections and unforeseeable events.
Managing organizational change was historically a reactive necessity rather than a proactive
strategy.
One of the interesting findings I made was that organizational change was usually
preceded by the publication of some book or treatise. Four are provided here to underscore the
long history of public sector organizational development in the pre-industrial age. Understand
that this is not an exhaustive or comprehensive list of the forerunners to organizational
development. It is a short summary of some of the major people who, wittingly or unwittingly,
helped create the field of organizational development.
One of the earliest publications was The Art of War by Sun Tzu who lived from 544–496
BC (Cleary, 1988). This was primarily an instructional guide for warfare. In it he spent a lot of
time discussing strategic planning. However, much of his advice was equally applicable to
organizational management. Many of today’s business publications dutifully quote him because
his ideas are still relevant. For example, he said:
Plan for what is difficult while it is easy, do what is great while it is
small. The most difficult things in the world must be done while they
are still easy, the greatest in the world must be done while they are
small.
The Prince written in 1513 AD by Niccolo Machiavelli, provided guidance on how to
publicly govern. It had extensive advice on how to manage change. One example of
Machiavelli’s organizational development advice on bureaucratic complacency and the status
quo is:
6
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
For such a prince cannot rely upon what he observes in quiet times, when
citizens had need of the state, because everyone agrees with him… Therefore
a wise prince ought to adopt such a course that his citizens will always have
need of the state and him, and then he will always find them faithful.
(Marriott, 1992).
Charles Darwin (1809 - 1882) commented that “It is not the strongest of the species that
survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change (Darwin, 1859).” Of
course he was speaking biologically, but it still resonates politically.
Fredrick Taylor wrote an essay for Scientific Management in 1911. Taylor established
four principles: data gathering, worker selection and development, integration of science and the
trained worker, and redivision of the work of business). What is so important about Taylor’s
work is that he focused on organizational work. Today’s concepts of reengineering and process
engineering are attributed to him (Burke, 2002).
All of this advice could be found in any modern organizational development text. The
point here is that organization development as a concept is not recent, but the actual practice is a
a 20th century innovation.
Private Sector Perspective
Being proactive and managing organizational development, commonly referred to as OD,
is a recent innovation of the post-industrial revolution. With the advent of scientific management
in the early 1900s, a more systematic approach for managing business organizations evolved.
The private sector initiative came from several directions. In 1982, Thomas Peters and
Robert Waterman published their ground breaking book In Search of Excellence. Their basic
message was that “Innovative companies are especially adroit at continually responding to
change of any sort in their environment. They said that the “The nature and uses of
communication in the excellent companies are remarkably different from those their non-
7
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
excellent peers.” They went on to say that “The intensity of communications is unmistakable in
the excellent companies” (Peters & Waterman, 1982). I will explain how this applies later in the
report.
Also in 1982, W. Edwards Deming published Quality, Productivity and Competitive
Position. This too would become became a national business trend setter. Deming had long been
ignored by American industry and early on took his message to Japanese industry. It was only
when the Japanese started taking American market share in durable goods that American
industry took notice of him. Deming’s focus was quality control and statistical analysis. (Walton,
1986). He is considered the father of Total Quality Management. He also created the Fourteen
Points and Seven Deadly sins (Cummings & Worley, 2005).
He said that “The prevailing style of management must undergo transformation. A
system cannot understand itself. The transformation requires a view from outside” (Walton,
1986). In organizational development terms this is called an intervention.
Public Sector Perspective
The public sector response to In Search of Excellence was slow. It was eleven years later
that Osborne and Gaebler published Reinventing Government (1993). Even then the public sector
was not too enthused about embracing its tenets. The title’s subheading was “How the
entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector.” The authors spent a lot of time talking
about privatization and using business practices. The former meant a loss of government jobs
and the latter meant a fundamental change in how government does business.
The application of organizational development in the public sector took longer
historically because of perception and reality that private sector and public sector institutions
8
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
were functionally and normatively different. Public sector organizations are more concerned with
fairness than with competitiveness.
There are important distinctions between political democracy and corporate capitalism
(Cummings and Worley, 2005). These are values and structure, multiplicity of decision makers,
stakeholder diversity and intergovernmental relationships.
Values and structure. In the private sector, profit and competition are the primary
drivers. In the public sector it is governing for the greater good and responsiveness to the public.
The latter includes representation, respect for individual rights and social equity. Public entities
are more transparent and must provide open access to the public and especially the media.
Private companies are competitive, but public entities must be fair to all citizens and be
consistent in that fairness. So they are not allowed to be flexible and must abide by a strict set of
policies, rules and procedures. The only commonalities between the two are a desire for
efficiency and customer service.
Multiplicity of decision makers. For any given public policy there are multiple decision
makers. For example, water quality is regulated by several federal government agencies, state
agencies, the local government and a water district. So the citizen has access at various levels to
seek redress or receive answers. The private sector is much more singular in its decision making
and does not have to answer to the public at so many levels.
Stakeholder diversity. Public entities deal with numerous stakeholders. There are the
various levels of governments in terms of agencies and elected officials: special interest groups
representing citizens, environmentalists and businesses; internal groups like unions and safety
committees; and various non-profit partners that they contract with. All of these groups have
9
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
complete access to documents and records. The private sector has a lot less stakeholder
interaction.
Intergovernmental relationships. As noted, governments share responsibility with
many other groups on any given issue. Coordination is imperative for the efficient
implementation of any program. This also included shared and intermingled funding sources that
often come with numerous reporting requirements and spending limitations.
The current trends to improve government communication and organizational
performance can be traced historically back twenty years to Reinventing Government (1993).
This book was followed by Improvement Driven Government (Carr, 1995). Both books were
basically operationalized by the National Performance Review process during the Clinton-Gore
administration (Carr & Condon, 1995).
It is important to keep in mind that these antecedents proposed to transform the public
sector through a private sector model (Osborne & Gaebler, 1993). It has only been in recent
years that the efficacy of this transformation has been questioned. That is why I have placed
special emphasis on organizational change strictly in a public sector setting and in explaining the
historical context of its evolution and its separate evolution in the field of organizational
development (Carnevale, 2005).
I need to point out that improvement driven government is not a new concept. In fact, it
was President Woodrow Wilson who was a forerunner to Fredrick Taylor’s ideas on scientific
management. When he taught at Byn Mawr College he wrote an essay for Political Science
Quarterly (1887). In it he said that in terms of bureaucracy, there should “be a science of
administration which shall seek to straighten the paths of government, to make its business less
10
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
unbusinesslike…” He went on to say there was a need to “expand into efforts to improve, not
only the personnel only, but also the organization and methods of government offices.”
Professional Perspective
Today’s organizational development practice was initially practiced by human resource
specialists, applied social scientists and behavioral scientists (French, 1999). The field itself grew
out of five backgrounds. These were the growth of the National Training Laboratories and the
concomitant development of training groups (a.k.a., T-groups, sensitivity training groups), action
research and survey feedback, the normative view that espoused a participative management
framework, focusing on productivity and quality of work life, and strategic change and
organizational transformation (Cummings & Worley, 2005) . I will explain much of this
terminology later in the paper.
What is unique about the field of organizational development is that it was the first
attempt to actually study the organizational change process. The forerunners to organizational
development were such endeavors as scientific management, the Hawthorne studies, survey
feedback, socio-technical systems and industrial psychology (Burke,2002).
The field also philosophically grew out of three schools of thought. These were the
Classic School of Thought, Human Relations School of Thought and the Human Resources
School of Thought (Rothwell, Sullivan & McLean, 1995). A generalization of these schools of
thought are:
Classic School of Thought:
Work is inherently distasteful to employees
Human Relations School:
Employees want to feel useful and important
Human Resources School:
Employees want to contribute to meaningful goals
11
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Today the field is transforming into the second generation. This transformation is driven
by the frenzied activity that occurred in the 1990s where there were increased mergers and
acquisitions, technical innovations, leveraged buyouts, downsizing and changes in law. The
second generation relies heavily on the theories and practices of the first generation, but had to
adapt new tools to address the changing landscape. The new organizational development
included interest in organizational culture, learning organizations, total quality management and
visioning (French & Bell, 1999).
Much of the ground work for organizational development was created by Kurt Lewin
(1898–1947). He is recognized as being the founding father of organizational development.
Lewin came up with the ideas of group dynamics and action research which are the basic
foundation of the organizational development process. Lewin played a key role in the evolution
of organization development as it is known today. Lewin experimented with a collaborative
change process using a three-step process of planning, action and measuring. This was the
beginnings of action research. Lewin participated in the beginnings of laboratory training (Child,
2005).
Literature Review
There are numerous papers and studies about the separate research topics of municipal
corporations, communication with stakeholders and managing organizational change. The most
important material addresses the point that among municipal corporations, the greater the level of
communication with stakeholders, the greater the level management of organizational change.
In the process of this literature review there are three objectives to keep in mind. First,
there is the issue of vocabulary to sort out. The variables proposed are municipal corporations,
communication, stakeholders and managing organizational change. The first step of the research
12
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
task is to find corollary terms in the literature that will lead to relevant research. The second step
is evaluating the relevance of the material in explaining the phenomenon. Finally, the review will
be to discover if there is any relevant statistical data.
Communication
George Bernard Shaw (1916) said that “The single biggest problem with communication
is the illusion that it has taken place.” The point being that most local governments exists with
the illusion that that they are communicating with their constituent stakeholders and believe that
they understand what their stakeholders want from their government. But it is an illusion because
they don’t document this hypothesis.
There is a qualitative study published by The Journal of Change Management in which
interviews were conducted with 25 employees from a range of organizations. The limitation here
is that these were not specifically public sector employees, so the questions need more scrutiny.
The result did produce a better understanding of how employees process information about
organizational change. Three examples are that line employees prefer information from their
direct supervisors, senior managers prefer more strategic information, and that employees who
believed they received quality change information accept the change better (Allen, Bordia &
Irmer, 2007).
The University of Nebraska conducted a study on public input methods in order to gain
trust and confidence. Their methodology consisted of telephone surveys and face-to-face
discussions, and an on-line survey. One of their questions was does it make a difference which
methods are used to solicit information. The findings were that the participants rated face-to-face
higher in terms of procedural fairness and trust/confidence. However, the variance was so
insignificant as to be negligible (Tomkins, 2010).
13
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
The same university group did a similar study with interesting results and said that “the
study design is correlational rather than experimental and data were not originally gathered to
test the identified hypothesis” (PylikZillig, 2012).
Organizational Change
In 1999, Linkage, Inc. conducted a study regarding organization and human
resource development. A survey asked human resource and organizational development
professionals which of five categories had the highest demand with organizations they
worked with. The results were Organizational Development and Change (4.6),
Leadership Development (4.5), Recruitment and Retention (4.27), Performance
Management (4.24), and Coaching and Mentoring (4.03). Clearly there is a demand for
organizational change (Carter, Girber & Goldsmith, 2001).
There is an article in Public Administration Review (2006) that focused on the related
public sector information (Fernandez and Rainey, 2006). In this article Fernandez and Rainey
talk about the streams of research that contain various models and frameworks, and claim there
are empirical studies supporting them (Fernandez and Rainey, 2006). However, the article did
not provide findings. The authors say:
The public-management literature contains evidence of the importance of
determining the need for change and persuasively communicating it through a
continuing process of exchange with as many stake-holders and participants as
possible.
Another study done by Kuhn and Corman (2010), specifically did research “using
interviews, observations, and a unique discovery processing technique, a nine month case study
of one division of a municipal government organization.” Their study found that “traditional
examinations of organizational change overlook the complex interactive, structural, and
14
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
contextual forces that influence planning change” (p. 224). This study is by far the most
thorough and well-documented reviewed.
There is a lot of literature on the topic of organizational development and change. The
research measures and methods are easy to identify. Cummings and Worley (2005) provide such
information in their book Organizational Development & Change. The section on Collecting and
Analyzing Diagnostic Information is especially useful. It is worth noting that I have
corresponded with both of these professors and they are most helpful.
Cummings and Worley (2005) summarize data collection methods such as
questionnaires, interviews, observations and what they call unobtrusive measures. They also
describe specific measurement categories such as strategy, technology, structure, measurement
systems, human resource systems and culture.
It should be noted that much of the literature review findings related to organizational
development is to be found in the other sections of the report and did not require being repeated
here.
Performance Review
Perhaps the best opportunity to statistically document and validate the research
hypothesis will be through the use of performance review data. There has been a great deal of
effort placed on measuring and monitoring in order to improve government performance at the
city, county, state and federal level.
For example, the U.S. National Performance Review program has morphed over time, but
still keeps vast amounts of data. Similarly, the International City/County Manager Association –
which I am a member – has its own Center for Performance Management that maintains a huge
15
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
data base on city and county performance programs. Terminology is important here because the
study is looking for data on program performance and not personnel performance.
Stakeholders
The stakeholders are a key public participation variable that allows municipal
governments to translate perception into organizational change. Work done by the Institute for
Food Research took a look at public participation methods and evaluated them (Rowe & Frewer,
2000). The source is not tied directly to municipal government, but their research is applicable to
any stakeholder/public participation process.
There is a very interesting publication by the United Nations Development Programme
titled Multi-Stakeholder Engagement Process. It details a number of non-U.S. cases studies of
using a “structured processes that can be used to ensure participation on specific issues that are
based on a set of principles.” (UNDP, 2006).
Technology
Another prevalent theme in the transparency discussion is the use of technology to
better engage and communicate with the public. The technological argument focuses
mainly on the use of the Internet to provide data transparency, open participation and
improved collaboration (Foxworthy & Bingham, 2013).
Alfred Tat-Kei Ho (2002) of Iowa State University says that the e-government
initiative “emphasizes coordinated network building, external collaboration, and
customer services.” In his study, he did both content analysis of city Web sites and
surveyed web development officials. He was particularly interested in both internal and
external communication processes. His survey focused on 55 cities nationwide that
16
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
ranged in size from 300,000 to 7,300,000. He focused on web management
characteristics such as citizen feedback and improving customer service.
It is important to note that technology and e-Government take in numerous
opportunities such as government websites, social media and electronic surveys. For
example, a social media exploratory study was conducted in 2012 in order to understand
social media use by government specifically for managing crisis situations (Kavanaugh,
Fox & Sheetz, 2012). This is exactly the type of information that can inform the study
research.
Transparency
Most of the current literature talks about transparency in government. A recent PA Times
essay by Catherine Howard (2013) typifies the current concepts:
The performance management process is inherently a change management process and
highlights how, by integrating change management, performance management is
enhanced add supports not only achieving performance goals, but also goals related to
transparency, openness, collaboration and accountability.
In her essay, Howard lays out a five-stage process to achieve this goal. This
includes testing and the need to “conduct statistical analysis to determine correlations –
or the lack thereof as a means to validate.” She says that the organization needs to
develop the strategy statement, translate and communicate the strategy, plan the
operations in terms of human and monetary capital, monitor and learn about the change
process, and then test and adapt the strategy.
Another study done through the University of Illinois explores the relationship
between transparent and participative government in the United States. Although the two
17
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
would ideally go hand-in-hand, the reality is quite different. In a study of five local
governments, it was found that the police departments had the lowest levels of both and
the parks department had the highest levels of both. This raises the question of whether
this is because of the internal agency culture or the external public perception, or both
(Welch, 2012).
Organizational Development Best Management Practices
This is a review of some of the best organizational management practices conducted by
several consulting firms. The latter reports are all a matter of public record and consist of
numerous city and county organizational audits.
Interdepartmental/Interdivisional Coordination
Recommendation 1: Eliminate organizational silos between departments.i
Recommendation 2: Make staff pro-active participants in meetings.ii
Recommendation 3: Create a “one-stop shop” application center.iii
Management Support
Recommendation 4: Direct the department director to discuss and consider adoption of
the best management practices identified in the report.iv
Customer Service Improvements
Recommendation 5: Establish an ongoing customer service program.v
Recommendation 6: Institute an unanticipated service program.vi
Recommendation 7: Hold employees accountable to meet process times, and other
standards, such as returning phone calls with 24 hours.vii
Recommendation 8: Adopt a consistent policy for how fast line staff and supervisors
respond to phone calls and emails.viii
18
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Recommendation 9: Beat the competition with a high-level of customer
communication.ix
Recommendation 10: Institute a program where employees “listen, hear, and appreciate
what their customers are saying.”x
Recommendation 11: All staff and particularly managers should be required to make a
few random phone calls to customers to look for important issues.xi
Recommendation 12: Institute effective performance measures in order to gauge
customer satisfaction.xii
Communication Improvements
Recommendation 13:
With the assistance of a technical writer, provide a booklet
that clearly explains what the applicant can expect during the development review process, the
planner’s role, and the decision-making body that must approve the application.xiii
Recommendation 14:
Avoid technical and bureaucratic jargon in all publications,
public notices and other communications.xiv
Recommendation 15: All handouts should be reviewed on an annual basis. Handouts
should immediately be amended whenever new changes occur.xv
Regulatory/Policy/Procedural Improvements
Recommendation 16: Empower representatives attending meetings with the authority to
solve development issues and make commitments for the Department.xvi
Recommendation 17: Develop an organization-wide sense of urgency and timeliness of
the processes; encourage, support, and promote staff that embraces this philosophy.xvii
Recommendation 18: Develop a procedures manual, which provides checklists for each
agency process.xviii
19
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Recommendation 19: Develop a systematic procedures manual training program.xix
Recommendation 20: Expand the range of procedure manuals and checklists to
encompass all of the major processes undertaken by the department.xx
Recommendation 21: Update the procedures manuals and checklists on an ongoing
“Continual Improvement” basis; keep it on the Department staff meeting agenda. xxi
Human Resource Improvements
Recommendation 22: Redeploy professional staff in order to provide meaningful and
effective support to customers and stakeholders.xxii
Recommendation 23: Identify, empower and reward results-oriented employees across
departmental lines.xxiii
Recommendation 24: Conduct a new equity study to ensure salaries are reasonable with
the responsibilities they perform.xxiv
Recommendation 25: Conduct a training needs assessment for the Department.xxv
Recommendation 26: Establish professional development expectations for each
employee, including cross-training and career development.xxvi
Recommendation 27: Work the basics of environmental reviews in each employee’s
professional development program.xxvii
Recommendation 28: Conduct performance evaluations consistently and at regular
intervals.xxviii
Recommendation 29: Substantially increase the use of consultant/contract services to
manage workload.xxix
20
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Performance Measures and Monitoring
Recommendation 30: Develop a set of meaningful performance measures directly linked
to cycle time performance indicators.xxx
Project Management/Case Management Systems
Recommendation 31: Institute effective performance measures that relate directly to
customer satisfaction with regard to timeliness and clarity.xxxi
Recommendation 32: Ensure an effective project management approach for project
review.xxxii
Recommendation 33: Develop and implement a system to ensure that mitigation
measures are passed through from project approval to later stages of subsequent permits
throughout the organization.xxxiii
Recommendation 34: Designate a project manager immediately and prepare a
timeline/milestone project-tracking document.xxxiv
Technological Improvements/Systems
Recommendation 35: Move to online application and payments
Recommendation 36: Prioritize ongoing training of employees on the computer
processing system.xxxv
Recommendation 37: Increase client communication through the website.xxxvi
Facility/Building Improvements
Recommendation 38: Institute a modern one-stop shopping center.xxxvii
Recommendation 39: Design an application center with both customer service and the
process in mind.xxxviii
21
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Recommendation 40: The agency should do a space inventory to see how spaces could
be better utilized.xxxix
Document Management Systems
Recommendation 41: Ensure that once a file is ready for close out, that all documents in
the files are scanned to provide electronic copies (and access) for easy reference.xl
Recommendation 42: Pursue funding to more aggressively scan files for the last 5-10
years so they are readily available to staff.
Recommendation 43: Secure existing files into the file room/records center.xli
Recommendation 44: Until files can be scanned and maintained in the file room/records
center, relocate various files in one location so all files for a given year are together.xlii
An Organizational Development and Change Blueprint
This section reviews the basic practices of organizational development as they can be
adapted to public sector use. The program example set forth in this paper is based on the
literature search, a review by the professional interview panel and the author’s experience as an
organizational development practitioner. It is a sequential “10-step” program that is
comprehensive in scope. However, it may include more steps than would normally be utilized in
an average intervention. It should be understood as an illustrative series of tools in the
organizational development toolbox.
Step 1. Problem Identification
There needs to be an initial meeting with the organization’s elected and/or appointed
officials to ascertain what they think the problems are and what their expectations are in terms of
the intervention. It is important to keep in mind that their perceptions of what is working and not
working maybe total erroneous and based on a political agenda and bias. Elected officials are
22
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
especially prone to getting elected on a set of propositions that may not be true or effective.
Appointed officials suffer from a similar bias in that they believe any organizational problems
are being caused by someone else internally or externally.
Step 2. Program Kick-Off
Initial Group Meeting. It is important to pull together all members of the organization
early in the process. This is an opportunity to explain what will happen and when, and to allay
any fears that the process is meant as either retribution or as a method to purge unproductive or
unwanted employees. It provides for a common set of expectations.
Setting Ground Rules. It is important that a set of ground rules be established and
explained to the employees. These are rules that involve behavior and process expectations.
Employee Involvement. Knowing what is expected and when things will happen will
alleviate a lot of the pessimism. So will knowing that the employees will be intimately involved
in the process and provide input during the process.
Step. 3 Data Collection/Assessment/Analysis
Existing Vision, Mission, Strategy. This needs to be documented with the understanding
that there is both a written and unwritten sets of goals for the organization.
Human Dynamic. There needs to be a thorough understanding of the roles and
responsibilities of individuals, groups and the overall organizational culture. It is also important
to focus on the interaction between groups that work on specific processes.
Document Review. It is important to collect and cataloque all policies, procedures and
other written documentation that guides the organization’s operation.
Performance Measures. Progress cannot be measured unless a baseline is first created
regarding existing processes.
23
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Step 4. Stakeholder Feedback
Surveys. Surveys are especially effective at gaining an understanding of the
organizational perceptions of internal and external groups of people. Such surveys can be done
by mailing or electronically. The challenge is to conduct a scientifically valid survey that reflects
a useful sample population (Singleton, 2010).
Focus Groups. These are useful for getting input from large groups of external
stakeholders. When it comes to municipal government the external stakeholders are usually
citizen activists, property owners, environmentalists, and business interests like retailers and
developers. Such groups are most effective when limited to 10-12 people. It is best to have both
a separate moderator and a note taker (Singleton, 2010).
Structured Interviews. There are always key individuals who are internal and external
to the organization who are better interviewed alone and not in a group. This is especially true of
the organization’s staff. They have the greatest insight into the organizations operations and
management, but may not be forthcoming in a group setting (Singleton, 2010).
Step 5. Preliminary Diagnosis
The major objectives are to understand and validate the issues and needs, identify
resistance and support, and clarify competence and commitment. So it is a matter of asking what
is the problem, what are the causes of the problem, what is the current situation and how do
people feel about it (Rothwell, 1995).
Step 6. Planning Change/Designing Interventions
It is important to development the need for change, establish a relationship between the
change agent and the client organization, and determine how to work toward the change (Burke.
2002).
24
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
In terms of the actual intervention, it is important to determine how the various units and
individuals will be involved. It is a matter of time and money. Some staff merely need to be
informed and other actively engaged at some level (Rothwell, 1995). This is more art than
science.
Step 7. Implementing Change/Action
Mapping of Processes, Procedures, Management Practices. Systems cannot be
improved until they are understood. It is often the case that the staff doesn’t really understand or
agree on the existing processes.
Reengineering Process. Once the current practices are understood and agreed to, then
the staff can proceed to reengineer the processes to make them more efficient, cost-effective, less
time consuming and transparent. The major complaints from customers have to do with cost of a
process, length of time it takes and not being able to understand what is wanted.
Step 8. Restructuring Organization/Managing Change
Mixed Implementation Teams. It is best to create teams to undertake specific areas of
the organizational change implementation. It is also important to create teams from different
units and with different levels of authority. Having implementation teams of like minded
individuals can result in the same set of problems being continued.
Strategic Planning. There is a enormous body of literature on this subject but here are
some basics. A multi-year action plan and budget are needed to move forward. All of the
changes needed to achieve organizational change cannot be created immediately. So a plan must
be established identifying what can be done in 3 months, 6 months, 12 months or in future years.
It is also important that one or more persons be assigned and held accountable for individual
25
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
actions. It is important to dedicate human and monetary resources commensurate to the
successfully completing or undertaking the task.
Step 9. Institutionalize Change
Employee Training and Development. Employees must be trained in the new policies,
processes and programs. Everyone needs to be on the same page and have a common
understanding in terms of organizational expectations.
Executive Leadership Coaching. Coaching the leadership is different from employee
training. The leadership needs to know what the organizational changes are and how to motivate
and lead the change. Bolman and Deal (1991) say that “success depends on developing the right
blueprint for the relationship between their organization’s structure and strategy, as well as on
finding ways to get that blueprint accepted.”
Cross Functional Training. Where possible and feasible, employees should be trained
to do more than one function. The fact is that employees go on vacation, get sick or take
maternity leave. Even having one employee out sick and another on a break creates a problem
when a customer has to wait 15 minutes to get an answer.
Customer Service Training. Not everyone is born with the innate ability to relate to
other people and be an active listener. Customer service training is essential to make sure that the
customer feels the employee is listening to their concerns and wants to help them. Too often an
employee’s answer is simply “No, you can’t do that.” There is no excuse for this. Like it or not,
there is always a process, however onerous, that the customer can pursue to achieve their goal.
This may include trying to convince the elected officials to legislate a change in process (Carson,
2004).
26
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Team Building. This is important because too often individuals in a group create
problems by not participating in decision making about a process or implementing it
consistently. They can also be a disruptive influence if they don’t participate as part of the team.
Procedures Manual. It is important to document exactly how the new processes work
for two reasons. First all staff must understand the need for consistency. One of the major
complaints from citizens is the inconsistency of decision making from one staff person to the
next. In fact, some customers shop staff based on the customer’s perception of how a staff person
makes decisions. A manual is also important in order to train new staff on how processes work.
Establishing Performance Measures and Expectations. Once the reengineering is
complete, it is important to establish clear performance measures and expectations for all
employees. The use of a procedures manual is very important. Leadership needs to take
ownership of the organizational changes and make it clear to both mid-managers and front line
employees that these changes are to be taken seriously and will be part of future performance
reviews.
Performance Appraisal. Performance reviews are not the favorite task for any manager
to do. In many cases performance reviews either don’t occur or they are cursory at best.
Consistent and comprehensive performance reviews will result in better employee performance
and better organizational operations.
Total Quality Management. Attention to quality in terms of services.
Step 10. Maintenance
Monitoring Performance. In Step 3 a measurement baseline was established. The
saying is that “What measured gets done.” It is important to continually measure performance.
How often any activity gets measured depends on the circumstances. It could be daily, monthly
27
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
or annually. Today there are numerous software packages that actually measure time
spent on specific process tasks. This can be
useful in determining if a particular step in the
process is taking too long or if a particular
employee is having problem completing the
task in a timely manner and needs further
training.
Sustaining Change. Working the
strategic plan is paramount. Unfortunately,
most organizations create a strategic plan and
then put it on a shelf. The most effective way
to guarantee implementation is to appoint one
person to manage the strategic plan. This
person will monitor action deadlines and
deliverables and provide written reports to
Public Sector Organizational Development Process
Phase I – Initiate the Organizational Audit
Problem Identification
Program Kick-Off
o Initial Group Meeting
o Setting Ground Rules
o Employee Involvement
Step. 3 Data Collection/Assessment/Analysis
o Existing Vision, Mission, Strategy
o Human Dynamic
o Document Review
o Performance Measures
Step 4. Stakeholder Feedback
o Surveys
o Focus Groups
o Structured Interviews
Phase II - Implement Organizational Change
Step 5. Preliminary Diagnosis
Step 6. Planning Change/Designing Interventions
Step 7. Implementing Change/Action
o Mapping Processes, Procedures, Practices
o Reengineering Process
Step 8. Restructuring Organization/Managing Change
o Mixed Implementation
o Strategic Planning
Step 9. Institutionalize Change
o Employee Training and Development
o Executive Leadership Coaching
o Cross Functional Training
o Customer Service Training
o Team Building
o Procedures Manual
o Establish Performance Measures/
Expectations
o Performance Appraisal
o Total Quality Management
Phase III – Maintain Organizational Development
Step 10. Maintenance
o Monitoring Performance
o Sustaining Change
o Continuous Improvement
Step 1.
Step 2.
management on a monthly or quarterly basis.
This person needs to attend all executive team meetings and report on progress, or the lack
thereof, on specific items. This puts everyone on notice that they will be held accountable for
their performance and that it is being documented. If what get measured gets done, then what
gets reported also gets completed.
Continuous Improvement. It is important to revisit and review processes and
procedures on an establish schedule. The work environment is constantly changing because of
28
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
technology, elections, state and federal legislation and current events. Continuing to operate
under the status quo is a recipe for disaster.
The Structured Interviews
The emphasis of the paper so far has been given to the literature review and history of
organizational development. Now the paper will provide the reader with the opinions of the
leading academic and practitioners in the field of organizational development (see Appendix B).
Each interviewee was asked the same questions, but they were opened-ended in terms of survey
research questions. The survey questions were conducted from July 12-22, 2013
This is the most interesting part of the report because there are no boundaries or
restrictions on their answers. It was important to limit questions to specifics in order to achieve a
level of both consistency and comparability. The dilemma was to summarize what they said to
me or just let quote what they said. So I decided not to translate what they said. It displays what
they really think. At the end of the paper, the author will summarize his thoughts about what they
said. It is important to say upfront that the paper does not speak for them. The following are the
email responses exactly as sent:
Lee Bolman (July 22, 2013):
1.
Do you think that organizational development and change has been successfully
implemented in the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why not?
There have been successes and failures, as in the private sector, but I don’t know
how to quantify the balance.
2.
In general, which best management practices (please choose 3-5) do you feel have the
most significant impact on organizational change in the public sector?
I don’t know how to get my head around this question.
3.
Can you give me a couple of examples of local governments that have successfully
implemented organizational development?
Sorry, but this isn’t an area where I know enough to make a sensible answer.
29
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
4.
How important is communication with stakeholders in terms of the effective management
of public sector organizational change? What factors are most critical to effective
communication with stakeholders during the organizational change process?
It’s vital, as in other sectors. It’s essential to hear from and communicate to the
right stakeholders with the right message, and keep at it.
5.
Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead
to negative and inconsequential outcomes in the organizational change process?
I don’t really know how to answer this question. If you don’t communicate
enough, or if you communicate the wrong message to the wrong people, your chances of
success decline.
6.
Do you have any other thoughts about the importance of communication in the public
sector organizational development process?
Probably.
7.
How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the
organizational development process?
That will depend on a number of things, such as how quickly people see positive
results, how much people feel better or worse off as a result of the changes, how
confident people feel that they know how to be effective in the new world, etc.
8.
How do you change attitudes about good customer service in an organization that lacks
it?
As with most of your questions, this is so broad that my mind boggles at trying to
answer it. There are many possible ways to change attitudes on this, as on just about
anything else you might want to change. You can put people in contact with customers,
give them more information about customer experiences, train them in ways to serve
customers better, change their perceptions of what they’re rewarded for, etc.
9.
Are there any future trends in organizational development that you feel will be of
particular importance and relevance to the public sector?
I don’t know.
David Carnevale (July 13, 2013):
Before you get too far, you need I believe to note what change is for you. There is everything
in OD from helping just a leader for example to full system change, total transformation.
You might note that change agents can come from an internal Human Resources
Administration unit to, what I am used to, the work of an external agent or external team of
agents.
My experience is that there are precious few inside units facilitating change and
most often the degree of change the employer seeks almost always underestimates the
degree of change necessary to achieve organizational ends.
It is good to note that change efforts are in the end less about techniques to realize
goals than the reality always is political and deals with power relations which being
30
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
disturbed bring forth the greatest change, and the most significant problems for the change
agent.
"It all starts at the top" which means for me that no real change is possible without
the support of the top executive in charge. It is important that the change agent have the
visible support of the "boss."
You already raise a good point that needs to be dealt with -- sectorial differences
matter -- dealing with a public agency as opposed to a private company are in several ways
different.
Jumping ahead I feel that communication is the essential variable affecting degree of
change and that is especially true when one takes the position, as I do, that it is all about
process and process and process why communication, openness, transparency and
maintain a good public visible profile is the heart of the matter.
The first change effort centers around analysis of what is, and based on that
diagnosis choosing where to start and with what techniques to bring to bear. The initial
diagnosis is to likely change as the agent goes forward but getting in, working one's way in
provides a solid feet on the ground dimension, then going forward from there.
Most important change agent skills -- facilitation, expertise brought to bear
concerning group dynamics, and, again, political skills. In some way the agent is always
"running uphill in the agency or unit" and is alone privately in her thinking save what she can
share with other members of the external team of agents.
Trust is always in play. No change is possible if the agent(s) don't or can't generate
trustworthy relations inside and throughout the unit seeking OD facilitation. If they don't
trust you, leave, or stay in the toxic low trust atmosphere.
In the public sector, so unionized as it is, the agent needs the support of union
leaders before really engaging things. This of course is a trust problem. So, no change is
possible without union support and it truly impossible if change ideas are generated outside
of the bargaining relationship between the parties. If a labor contract negotiations overlap
with OD initiatives, then the agent needs to be at the table observing as a neutral. Getting
welcomed is hard since the OD agent is seen as a creature of the boss and suspicion of her
motives is always in play with the union. They will take the position that if these things are
so important why is management not bringing to the table? Why is a "consultant" being used
to affect change when the bargaining process can, and should, be the focus of change
initiatives? In the City of Norman, I had OD program invited by the city manager. Three labor
contracts were being bargained at the same time I tried to enter the group. I had to behave
as a mediator in the labor talks if I wanted to be accepted as "an honest broker" in the OD
program. Again, public labor representing police, firefighters, teachers, and general unit
personnel is quite strong. Ignore it at your peril.
The worst thing an OD agent can do is to concentrate at the top of the hierarchy,
which has several implications, not necessarily good, about power in the organization. Start
at the top and try to have change, the acceptance that change is necessary, cascade down
from the top. It is a disaster in the making. I learned the hard way in the State Department
of Health that, in the end, starting bottom up would have been better than my trying to
make acceptance by the power elite my initial goal. OD really demands starting with
employees down the line. Not to do that presents systemic trust problems. I learned my
lesson in this case, not a happy journey being wrongheaded at the outset.
Tom Cummings (July 22, 2013):
31
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
1. Do you think that organizational development and change has been successfully
implemented in the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why not?
Yes, Bob Golembiewski has done reviews of public sector OD efforts and generally they
are no more or less successful than private sector OD projects. There is a fairly long history
of OD in the public sector and there is growing competence in this area both in internal and
external OD consultants. Also, public services more and more face competition with the
private industry delivering these services; this opens the public sector to market forces which
should push it more and more to get more efficient and change itself.
2. In general, which best management practices (please choose 3-5) do you feel have the most
significant impact on organizational change in the public sector?
High-involvement work practices; team-based work practices; service quality
interventions; process interventions.
3. Can you give me a couple of examples of local governments that have successfully
implemented organizational development?
Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, which implemented strategic changes
(strategy, structure, etc.) to make it more adaptable to changing conditions including rising
fiscal demands and more diverse public needs.
4. How important is communication with stakeholders in terms of the effective management of
public sector organizational change? What factors are most critical to effective
communication with stakeholders during the organizational change process?
Participation and active engagement of multiple stakeholders is particularly essential in
the public sector; must go beyond communication to get stakeholders involved in all stages of
the change process. Also, must account for shifting power of different stakeholders in the
public sector as the governance process changes.
5. Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead to
negative and inconsequential outcomes in the organizational change process?
Top down, one way communication; dialogue not communication.
6. Do you have any other thoughts about the importance of communication in the public sector
organizational development process?
Communication needs to account for multiple, conflicting values of different
stakeholders; cannot assume shared values.
7. How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the
organizational development process?
By putting in place an ongoing learning process which periodically cycles through
change-feedback-learn/adjust processes as normal part of organization functioning
8. How do you change attitudes about good customer service in an organization that lacks it?
Strong leadership, explicit service goals, contingent reward practices, and training and
development.
32
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
9. Are there any future trends in organizational development that you feel will be of particular
importance and relevance to the public sector?
Almost all the current trends in OD (more strategic, more multiple stakeholders, more
learning by doing, etc) are relevant to public sector.
Caryn Tilton (July 22, 2013):
Here are my answers. Please keep in mind that 90% of my public experience is with local
government (city, county and district).
Regarding OD, I think there are huge opportunities to be had. But unfortunately, most local
governments do not have the systems in place to take advantage of these opportunities. They
continue with what is familiar avoiding the discomfort that could inspire badly needed change.
1. Do you think that organizational development and change has been successfully
implemented in the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why not?
No. Very few government entities have the systems, programs and/or technology in place
to take advantage of opportunities, efficiencies, and ongoing process improvements. They
have many challenges including a diverse group of stakeholders, multiple layers of
management, politics, and governance in part by unskilled leaders.
2. In general, which best management practices (please choose 3-5) do you feel have the most
significant impact on organizational change in the public sector?
The following “best management practices” could have a huge impact on organizational
change in the public sector if they had the skills, knowledge and abilities to take advantage of
them:
o Process Reengineering
o Performance Management
o Strategic Planning
3. Can you give me a couple of examples of local governments that have successfully
implemented organizational development?
o Aztec, New Mexico – Strategic Planning (Mayor Sally Burbridge)
o Madras, Oregon – Currently making strides in the area of Performance Management
and Strategic Planning (City Administrator, Gus Burril)
o Boring Fire District – Strategic Planning (Council President Les Otto)
Sadly, due to lack of accountability, lack of leadership, failure to govern
appropriately, and outdated and ineffective performance management programs most
local governments are incapable of the efficiencies necessary to take advantage of OD.
Some public entities like Aztec, NM have pockets of productivity but in my experience (30
years), I can’t name one single public organization that successfully undertook the task to
develop all employees, the organization and the governing body to capitalize on existing
opportunities.
33
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
4. How important is communication with stakeholders in terms of the effective management of
public sector organizational change? What factors are most critical to effective
communication with stakeholders during the organizational change process?
While OD needs the support (maybe the directive) of the governing body, they are not the
ones who will implement the changes. I think you should communicate anticipated outcomes
to stakeholders (citizens, elected officials, special interests) and do it in a way that removes
any risk from decision making that may be connected to the change. However, I think it is a
mistake to involve stakeholders with methods, tools and strategy at the organizational level.
Administration and the workforce will be the drivers of meaningful, interdisciplinary change.
Effective change will most likely require culture change, behavior change, and measurable
competencies at the individual, team, department, and organizational level.
5. Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead to
negative and inconsequential outcomes in the organizational change process?
o Communication that is untrue
o Communication that creates unrealistic expectations. When the expectations are not
met, trust is lost and credibility dissolves.
o Communication that is selective – passed on to a select few
o Communication that is not transparent
o Communication that is not complete or thorough
6. Do you have any other thoughts about the importance of communication in the public sector
organizational development process?
Communication is the life blood of change. Thorough communication at all levels of the
organization is imperative, it is critical, and your success absolutely depends upon it.
7. How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the
organizational development process?
Process Reengineering is the silver bullet to continuous improvement and generally
involves these steps:
o Identify your customers (those who depend upon you or your team for products,
information, or services) and their expectations
o Interview key customers to rate (1. How important on a scale of 1-7 is this product,
information, or service to you or your team? 2. On a scale of 1-7 what is the
effectiveness of our delivery?
o Identify the steps in your current process.
o Conduct process analysis exercises
o Redesign your process
o Determine process and end result measures and data sources
o Measure and continuously improve
8. How do you change attitudes about good customer service in an organization that lacks it?
It’s as easy as 1-2-3!
34
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
o Hire the best
o Provide a work environment that supports individual success
o De-hire those who don’t measure up
Every public organization should have a Customer Service Policy and Program
including customer service standards for all positions. Employees should first learn about
customer service and what the expectations are for their contribution during their onboarding. Going forward, employees should be held accountable to meeting the customer
service standards for their area and position. Like other expectations, failure to meet them is
cause for progressive corrective action up to and including termination.
9. Are there any future trends in organizational development that you feel will be of particular
importance and relevance to the public sector?
No future trends that I am aware of….
Christopher Worley (July 22, 2013):
I Should Open With A Disclaimer…I Do Not Have Much Experience In Government OD. You
Might Want To Contact Ray Patchett…Former City Manager For The City Of Carlsbad, Ca.
Who Practices Od And Writes The Section On Od In The Public Sector For The Od Textbook
That Cummings And I Write. Ray Patchett <patchettr@aol.com>
1. Do you think that organizational development and change has been successfully implemented in
the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why not?
In General, No. First, For All The “Transparency” About Government Affairs And Processes,
There Is A Fair Amount Of Information Hoarding – Information Is Power – And That Fundamentally
Works Against Some Of The Core Values Of The Od Process. Second, Most Governments Are Under Cost
Pressures And Cannot (Or Will Not) Justify The Costs Of An Od Internal Function
2. In general, which best management practices (please choose 3-5) do you feel have the most
significant impact on organizational change in the public sector?
Again, Not An Expert Here… My Best Guess – Depending On How You Define “Management
Practices” Would Be 1) Strategic Planning, 2) Process Improvement Technologies, 3) Organization
Design
3. Can you give me a couple of examples of local governments that have successfully implemented
organizational development?
City Of Carlsbad, Ca – See Reference To Ray Patchett Above
4. How important is communication with stakeholders in terms of the effective management of
public sector organizational change?
Sorry, rich, this seems like an odd question… of course it’s important. I don’t understand what
you are trying to get at.
What factors are most critical to effective communication with stakeholders during the
organizational change process?
o
o
Clarity Of Message
Timing Of Message
35
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
o
o
The Medium (Face-To-Face, Email, Public, Private)
Level Of Trust Between The Parties
5. Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead to
negative and inconsequential outcomes in the organizational change process?
Blast Email
6. Do you have any other thoughts about the importance of communication in the public sector
organizational development process?
7. How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the
organizational development process?
Rich, I’m struggling here. First, the question assumes that things will be sustained. In a world
that is changing faster and faster, i find the notion of institutionalizing change (refreezing) an almost silly
idea. Second, there are a ton of continuous improvement methodologies – six sigma, total quality
management, lean, and so on that would work fine. I’m still not understanding what you are looking for.
8. How do you change attitudes about good customer service in an organization that lacks it?
Whose attitudes? The workers? The public’s?
There is a whole literature on attitude change in social psychology… my own approach would be based
on a combination of social learning theory and socio-technical work design.
9. Are there any future trends in organizational development that you feel will be of particular
importance and relevance to the public sector?
I would go to ray’s section in the OD text… I think he does a good job describing the
current state of the field in public sector organizations.
Organizational Development Trends
The need for organizational development evolves with societal change. The following
trends and potential issues are ones identified through the literature review, structured interviews
and discussions with colleagues. These observations were put forward by Cummings and Worley
(2005).
Global, Cultural Interdependencies
The globalization of politics means that organizations must become more sensitive to
ethnic and cultural difference when it comes to communication and interactions. Knowing about
your counterpart is extremely important in order to make sure that understanding is not lost in
translation.
36
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Ecological Awareness
Society is becoming more aware of the human impact on the environment. Government
institutions are specifically charged with taking a leadership role in addressing climate change,
resource conservation, recycling. The organizational development practitioner needs to keep
pace with such issues.
Social Justice and Responsibility
There is a growing desire on the part of employees to contribute more to society than just
their daily labor. Some organizations encourage and financial support community action and
participation by their employees.
Age, Gender, Lifestyle and Ethnicity
The workforce is aging and there will be more retirees. This requires a succession
strategy component. There are also changing lifestyle expectations by the incoming younger
generation and the outgoing older generation to consider. The population is experiencing a
growing ethnic mix and minorities are becoming the new majority. Understanding cultural
expectations and traditions of the minority groups is important.
Technological Change
The speed of technological change and improvements is accelerating. We have moved
from type writers, to punch cards, to personal computers, to lap tops, smart phones and tablets.
There is no way of knowing what will come next, but it will come. This also has a generational
impact when it comes to employees and their acceptance of new technology in the organization.
Employee Expectations
There is a trend toward creating new and innovative employee reward systems beyond merit
pay. Employees are beginning to expect more non-monetary personal fulfillment.
37
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
New Economy
The new economy is characterized by layoffs, downsizing, mergers and acquisitions. This
leads to people working part-time, unemployed or underemployed. This means that
organizational development must now take into account these impacts on the organization.
Improve Employee Health
More and more employees expect on-site facilities to keep healthy. This is also a concern
for employers who want to reduce the health care costs.
Systems Integration
There is an increasing trend toward integrating administrative, human and technological
systems that the practitioner needs to keep pace with.
Best Practice Solution
Given the changing organizational trends, it is difficult for organizational development
professionals to keep pace with the need for information and cutting edge solutions. One answer
is to first conduct a situational analysis and then create teams of professionals who understand
the separate and specific issues that need to be addressed. For example, if an organization has a
large ethnic group involved, then someone with experience working with such a group would be
extremely useful. So the future of organizational development is that it will become more
interdisciplinary.
Summary
This paper began with the premise that the research thinking and the conclusions would
be based on the literature review. However, the structured interviews were the very insightful.
These are consulting and academic professionals on the cutting edge of the new world of public
sector organizational development. So they became the academic heart of the paper.
38
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Organizational development in the public sector has its roots going back
centuries. However, the modern day field of organizational development is only starting to
impact the public sector organizations like municipal corporations. Part of the problem is that
they are considered rule-bound. But many, if not most, of the procedures are simply historical
antecedents and not organizationally logical in terms of performance.
As a 30-year government manager and a current doctorate student in organizational
development, I struggle with the reality that municipal governments are regulatory machines that
grind on daily without ever questioning what they are doing. Reality is that the management of
municipal governments changes on four-year elections cycles. The staff does not.
So the challenge of public administration is the theoretical fire-wall between public
policy by elected officials and public management by appointed officials does not exist at the
municipal corporation level. The opportunity for long-term organizational change and
development is often challenging at best.
I have provided a 10-step plan for long term organizational development and change. The
challenge is to find political leadership to implement it over time. That will be difficult
depending on the situational analysis of any municipal corporation. It is often said that you get
what you pay for. In local government, you get who you elect. So the question goes back to my
doctorate thesis. The question is “Do municipal corporations that effectively communicate with
their stakeholders better manage organizational change?” I believe the answer is “Yes.”
39
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Appendix A
Structured Interviews
Introduction Script
Thank you for taking the time to answer a few questions about public sector organizational
development. I have 10 questions and this will probably only take about 15 minutes. Please note
that all answers are confidential and I will not be attributing answers to anyone I interview.
Interview Questions
1. Do you think that organizational development and change has been successfully implemented in
the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why not?
2. In general, which best management practices (please choose 3-5) do you feel have the most
significant impact on organizational change in the public sector?
3. Can you give me a couple of examples of local governments that have successfully implemented
organizational development?
4. How important is communication with stakeholders in terms of the effective management of
public sector organizational change? What factors are most critical to effective communication
with stakeholders during the organizational change process?
5. Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead to
negative and inconsequential outcomes in the organizational change process?
6. Do you have any other thoughts about the importance of communication in the public sector
organizational development process?
7. How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the organizational
development process?
8. How do you change attitudes about good customer service in an organization that lacks it?
9. Are there any future trends in organizational development that you feel will be of particular
importance and relevance to the public sector?
40
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Appendix B
Dr. Lee G. Bolman, University of Missouri - Kansas City, Bloch School of
Management. Author of Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice and Leadership. Education:
Yale University, Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior and Yale Law School.
Dr. David G. Carnevale, Florida State University. Education: Ph.D. in public
administration from Florida State University. Author of Organizational Development in the
Public Sector. Professor Carnevale has served as the Samuel Roberts Noble Presidential
Professor at the University of Oklahoma, where he is currently a Professor of Human Relations
and Political Science.
Dr. Thomas G. Cummings, University of Southern California. Co-author of
Organization Development and Change. Thomas G. Cummings, is chair of the Department of
Management and Organization and executive director of the Leadership Institute. Education:
MBA from Cornell University and Ph.D. socio-technical systems University of California at Los
Angeles.
Caryn A. Tilton. Caryn is President of CT Consulting and has owned and operated CT
Consulting since 1984 providing programs and supporting services in management consulting,
organizational development, employee training, board development, strategic planning,
performance management, executive coaching, and process re-engineering.
Dr. Christopher G. Worley, Pepperdine University. Dr. Worley consults with
organizations in the health care, high technology, and natural resource industries on strategy and
organization design. He is the co-author of Organization Development and Change, the largest
selling textbook in the field of organization development.
41
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Attachment C
Richard H. Carson
12920 NE 227th Avenue
Brush Prairie, WA 98606
Phone:
(360) 635-8161
Email:
richcarson@Q.com
Internet: www.richcarson.org
June 25, 2013
To:
My name is Richard Carson and I am a doctoral student at Washington State University. I am currently
working on a research paper in preparation for my dissertation.
The goal of the dissertation is to construct a framework that local governments can apply to better
manage the process of organizational change. It will provide a qualitative road map by which to achieve
the desired organizational changes and a quantitative process to measure and monitor the results of these
changes.
The research question I am pursuing is, “Does the effectiveness of public agencies, in
communicating and managing relationships with internal and external stakeholders, increase the
likelihood of successfully managing organizational change?”
My personal interest in this topic is both professional and academic. I have spent 30 years
working at the city, county and state government level in Alaska, California, Oregon, Utah and
Washington. Most of this time was spent as a top level government manager. For the last five years I have
worked as a consultant, helping local governments create organizational change that leads to greater
efficiencies and communication.
As part of my research, I would like to conduct several structured interviews with academic, nonprofit and for-profit professionals who are working in the field of public sector organizational
development. In light of your experience and insight in this field, I would like to be able to interview you
if you are available. The interview consists of 10 questions and I expect the time commitment will be 1520 minutes. The interviews can be done in one of two ways. I can arrange to call you at your convenience
and ask you the questions. I can also send you the questions by email and you can return your responses
to me by email.
I would like to schedule my interview with you before July 12th. I will email you the questions in
advance. You can also return the email questionnaire back by July 12th. Thank you in advance for your
time and consideration and I look forward to hearing back from you.
Sincerely,
Richard H. Carson
42
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
References
Allen, J., Jimmieson, N., Bordia, P., Irmer, B (2007). Uncertainty during Organizational Change:
Managing Perceptions through Communications. Journal of Change Management. 7, 187-210.
Bolman, L., Deal, T. (2001). Reframing Organizations. Artistry, Choice and Leadership. Josey-Bass,
San Francisco, CA. 434.
Burke, W. (2002). Organization Change: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications. 19-20, 21-26.
Carnevale, D. (2005). Organizational Development in the Public Sector. Boulder, CO: Westview
Press. 1-2, 21-26.
Carr, D., Littman, I., Condon, J. (1995). Improvement Driven Government: Public Service for the
21st Century. Washington, D.C.: Coopers and Lybrand. 42
Carson, R., (December 2004). Changing the Culture of “NO”, Planning, 70,16-19.
Carter, L., Girber, D., Goldsmith, M. (2001). Best Practices in Organizational Development and
Change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer. xii-xiii.
Child, John (2005). Organization: Contemporary Principles and Practice,Hoboken, NJ, Blackwell
Publishing, 292.
Cleary, T. (1988). The Art of War. Boston, MA. Shambala Publications. 2.
Cummings, T., Worley, C. (2005). Organization Development & Change. Mason, OH: ThomsonSouthwestern, 6-7, 13, 91, 114-131,320, 597-602, 611-625, 661-670.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
http://www.iveybusinessjournal.com/topics/strategy/adapt-or-die
Fernandez, S., Rainey, H. (2006 April-March). Managing Successful Organizational Change in the
Public Sector. Public Administration Review. 168-176.
43
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Foxworthy, S., Bingham, L. (2013 Jan/Feb/March). Open Government 2.0 – Creating a Model for
Transparency in Government. PA Times. 3. 3, 27
French, W., Bell Jr., C. (1999). Organization Development: Behavioral Science Interventions for
Organization Improvement (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 46-48.
Ho, A. (2002 July/August). Reinventing Local Government and the E-Government Initiative. Public
Administration Review. 62, 434-444.
Howard, C. (2013 Jan/Feb/March). Enhancing Transparency through an Integrated Performance and
Change Management Process. 14-15
Kavanaugh, A., Fox, E., Sheetz, S., et al. (2012 October). Social media use by government: From the
routine to the critical. Government Information Quarterly. 29, 34, 480-491.
Kuhn, T., Corman, S. (2003, September).The Emergence of Homogeneity and Hetergenity in
Knowledge Structures During a Planned Organizational Change. Communications Monographs.
198-229.
Osborne, D., Gaebler, T. (1993). Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is
Transforming the Public Sector. New York, NY: Penguin Books. 3.
Marriot, W. (1992). Niccolo Machievelli – The Prince. New York, NY. Random House, 47.
Peters, T., Waterman, R. (1982). In Search of Excellence. Harper and Row. New York, NY. 12,121122.
Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2010, April 18). The People and Their
Government: Distrust, Discontent, Anger and Partisan Rancor. Retrieved from www.peoplepress.org on March 14, 2013. 13,15, 19.
PytlikZillig, L., Tomkins, A., Herian, M. et al. (2012). Public input methods impacting confidence in
government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy. 6, 92-111.
44
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Rothwell, W., Sullivan, R., McLean, G. (1995). Practicing Organization Development. San Diego,
CA: Pfeiffer and Company. 14-18, 23.
Rowe, G., Frewer, L. (2000 Winter). Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation.
Science Technology Human Values. 25, 3-29.
Shaw, G. Pygmalion, (1916).
Singleton, R., Straits, B. (2005) Approaches to Social Research (5th ed.). New York, NY, 2010,
Oxford University Press, 325, 309-353.
Tompkins, A., Zillig, L., Herian, M., Abdel-Monem, T., (2010, May 1). Public Input for Municipal
Policy Making: Engagement Methods and Their Impact on Trust and Confidence. Public Policy
Commons. 41-50.
United Nations Development Programme (2006 November). Multi-Stakeholder Engagement
Processes. Conference Paper #7. 4.
Walton, M. (1986). The Deming Management Method. Putnam Publishing. New York, NY. __, __
Welch, E. (2012 March). The relationship between transparent and participative government: A
study of local governments in the United States. International Review of Administrative Services.
23, 93-115.
Wilson, W. (1887), The Study of Administration, Political Science Quarterly,___.
45
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
References (reviewed but not cited)
Barnes, C. (2000 Autumn). Information and Communication Technologies: assessing public attitude
and local government resolve. Public Policy and Administration. 15, 20-31.
Bryson, J. (1988). Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Chadwick, A. (2006). Internet Politics. States, citizens, and New Communication Technologies. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Coleman, B. (2013, March 7). Old ways of local government communication not enough in today’s
society. State and Local Connection. SAS Software.
http://blogs.sas.com/content/statelocalgov/2013/02/15/
David, F. (1991). Strategic Management (3rd ed.). New York, NY. Macmillan Publishing.
Hahn, D. Dudley, P. (2004) How Well Does Government do Cost Benefit Analysis? AEI-Brookings
Joint Center Working Paper No. 04-01.
Lerner, A., Wanat, J. (1992). Public Administration: A Realistic Reinterpretation of Contemporary
Public Management. Edgewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall.
Miller, K. (2011). Organizational Communication: Approaches and Processes (6th ed.). Belmont,
CA: Thomson-Wadsworth.
Morgan, G. (1997). Images of Organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage Publications.
Nutt, P., Backoff, R. (1992). Strategic Management of Public and Third Sector Organizations. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Perrow, C. (1986). Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay (3rd ed.). New York, NY. McGraw-Hill.
Prachett, L. (1999, December 22). New Technologies and the Modernization of Local Government:
An Analysis of Biases and Constraints. Public Administration. 77, 731-751.
46
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Steiner, G. (1979). Strategic Planning. What Every Manager Must Know. New York, NY. The Free
Press (Macmillan Publishing).
Taleb, N. (2010). The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable (2nd Ed). New York, NY.
Random House.
Tushman, M., O’Reilly III, C., (2002). Winning Through Innovation: A Practical Guide to Leading
Organizational Change and Renewal. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
United States Census Bureau (2010). City and County Data Book. Washington, D.C.
Wohler, T. (2008). E-Government: Trends and Sophistication at the Local Level of Government.
Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics.6, 49-55.
Wong, W.,Welch, E. (2004, April). Does E-Government Promote Accountability? A Comparative
Analysis of Website Openness and Government Accountability. Governance, 17, 275-297.
i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
xv
xvi
xvii
xviii
xix
xx
xxi
xxii
xxiii
xxiv
xxv
xxvi
xxvii
xxviii
xxix
xxx
xxxi
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Prothman Associated, City of SeaTac - 2010
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Management Partners, City of SeaTac - 2007
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Bruce McClendon, Mastering Change - 1972
Paul Zucker, The ABZs of Planning Management - 1983
Richard Carson, Tips for Planning Agency Managers - 2009
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Elaine Cogan, Successful Public Meetings - 1992
Paul Zucker, City and Borough of Juneau - 2009
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County -2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
47
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
xxxii
xxxiii
xxxiv
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
xxxvi
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
xxxvii
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
xxxviii
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County – 2008
xxxix
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
xl
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
xli
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
xlii
Citygate Associates, Sacramento County - 2008
xxxv
48