The Hidden Power of Organization Development

Articles | The Hidden Power of Organization Development

Check Out Our Programs

eMail Us for More Info

The Hidden Power of Organization Development

I often speak of organization development as "the most powerful technology in existence for managing change in human systems." We are supposedly the experts at ferreting out the systemic root cause of organizational pain that is embedded in dysfunctional human systems and transforming that negative energy into energizing, enlivening, engaging energy that can move toward powerful visions.

But how many of us bemoan the lack of popularity or understanding of our field within our potential client base? How often have you heard that our field is dying? How often is our field buried inside of some human resources department, or not even acknowledged while the "expert" consultants—the Mackenzies, the Deloitte & Touches—do their studies, write their reports that live long lives in hidden drawers, and get paid the major bucks that we could be earning.

We can become the major force in the world of organizations if we are willing to more fully access the power of our field, but to do that we must begin to understand and build our skills with the fundamental issue of human systems: How to deal with differences and the power dynamics that surround them.

To look at the cutting edge of Organization Development we must always look at the cutting edge of organizations. For the same reasons, the cutting edge of organizations is closely related to the societies in which our organizations exist.

Before we enter this realm we need to understand that the term "cutting edge" connotes, maybe even denotes, danger. Edges are dangerous—we might fall off the edge. Cuts certainly hurt. So cutting edges puts us in double danger.

It may also be useful to understand that what I'll be talking about is not new. So your initial reaction might be, "That's not new," or "I didn't expect that." Either, both, or neither are fine. And here it is:

Much has changed in the human sphere—technology, globalization, having more to do than we have time for. What hasn't changed is conflict. If we would learn to deal well with our differences (our only source of conflict), we would change not only ourselves and our relationships; we would also change the world.

Differences raise issues of who has more power than whom? Who's going to win and who's going to lose? As an OD person, an HR person, do you see yourself as a person of power or something less than the key people that you work with? How do you think they see you?

We live in societies based on social contracts focused on supporting safety and keeping the peace. Societies have various ways of doing that. Duality oriented societies have two primary ways of accomplishing this goal: They provide healthy ways to resolve conflict or they suppress conflict. In Western societies we have government and the "rule of law." In addition, we used to have, into the 1950s, strong cultural mores (rules) of obedience that one dare not transgress if one wanted to avoid significant disapproval. Some examples include disobeying—even talking back to—your parents or teachers, divorcing your mate, using forbidden words, disregarding codes of dress in airports and restaurants, and challenging the roles that women couldn't have, the jobs Black folks couldn't have, and the places we couldn't live, etc.

Our society offers a third way of helping us deal with conflict, that being sublimation in the form of entertainment. This includes the conflict depicted constantly in our movies, TV shows, novels, game consoles, and sports events. "Let's you and him fight while I watch," is a major part of our entertainment lives (romances and comedies not withstanding).

Not all conflict can be sublimated though, so we must return to our primary means of dealing with the conflicts that involve us directly. For egregious conflicts the "rule of law" is in place and strong—maybe more so since our system of mores has weakened in favor of a progressing belief in personal freedom and personal choice. One result is that we have a litigious society now more than ever.

But what do we do with our lesser, more common conflicts? We avoid them (or at least pretend to).

Data Gathering
Creating Possibility
Contracting for Collaboration
Implementation
Feedback as a Learning Process
Clear Consequences
Disengagement

We avoid conflict all too often at tremendous cost to our integrity, our relationships and organizational productivity. This cost occurs because what we do not complete, we will repeat. Accordingly, too many of us live lives that are somehow not quite satisfying enough as we search for greater satisfaction in addictive behaviors (eating, drinking, drugs, and more this or more that) that never fully satisfy us, either.

But what about all of those incomplete conflicts that have been avoided?

Here's where organization development folks have a clear role. Our expertise is the realm of human systems dynamics. We understand that the single most problematic issue in human systems is their frequent failure to deal with differences effectively. For example, we talk about employee engagement, but how can I fully engage when I must suppress significant parts of myself and my ideas so that I can fit in and be a good team player? I'm not just talking about people of color and women; I am talking about white men, too, who must fit the molds of corporate and social norms even though those norms itch us and scratch us and grate on us until we forget who we really are.

We don't just avoid; we do compete. There's the bantering, kidding, and witty retorts we in which often engage with friends and colleagues that often conceal carefully hidden edges of seriousness. Conflict and negotiation over business deals or technical issues tend to work out because coming to closure is often temporally important so the deals are completed or abandoned and the technical discussion ended one way or another. It is over so that we can move on.

Unfortunately, we also have power struggles, turf battles, empire building, backstabbing, ego trips, personality conflicts, finger pointing, and blaming that waste much personal and organizational energy.

Whether we are talking about team building, employee engagement, globalization, or diversity, we must help our clients deal effectively with differences if we are to truly take advantage of the fundamental power of our field: As the human system goes, so goes the rest of the organization including its productivity. To do that, we must deal with conflict, conflict avoidance and their attendant power dynamics. We must deal with it in ourselves, in our clients, and in their systems.

What's the path forward here? First, we must understand our automatic penchant for finite, win/lose power dynamics. Then, we will have enough self–awareness to enable ourselves to choose a more useful, infinite rather then finite, perspective. Only then can Peter Senge's vision of learning organizations become real.

FINITE AND INFINITE PERSPECTIVES OF POWER
Our basic assumptions about power have a profound impact on our behavior and consequently on our personal and professional success. The chart below outlines the consequences of viewing power as scarce—the Finite Perspective, or abundant—the Infinite Perspective. Too often we automatically choose the Finite Perspective with its inherently power–limiting consequences. With the awareness offered, you can begin to consciously choose the Infinite Perspective with its expansive potential, if (and only if!) it is appropriate to the situation.

The Finite Perspective	The Infinite Perspective
Fundamental supposition: Power is scarce.	Fundamental supposition: Power is abundant
A zero-sum, win/lose game.	A positive-sum, win/win game.
The purpose of playing a finite game is to establish a winner.	The purpose of playing an infinite game is to continue and maintain play of the game.
Playing finitely easily evokes defence of self-esteem and identity. Deception and secrecy become strategies of choice.	Playing infinitely evokes cooperation and openness while not allowing one's self to lose.
This is a game to be played very seriously whenever the survival of our self-esteem or sense of identity is at stake.	This is a game to be played well-even play-fully-because our self-esteem or sense of identity is not at stake.
Differences are used to define who is winner and who is loser. Differences are, therefore, threatening. Conformity is safe.	Differences are valued and safe. As the only source of learning, differences stimulate curiosity, creativity, and synergy.
As players, we freely choose to play finitely although we often lose sight of there being an alternative.	As players, we freely choose to play infinitely whenever we remember it as a possibility.
"Power is scarce" is a self-fulfilling win/lose prophecy because partnerships are temporary and finite in number.	"Power is abundant" is a self-fulfilling, win/win prophecy because potential partnerships are secure and infinite in number.
The finite perspective is the paradigm of choice when survival is a moment-to-moment issue.	The infinite perspective is the paradigm of choice when growth and learning are primary goals.

NB: The win/lose of the finite perspective always becomes lose/lose whenever one's sense of self–esteem or identity is all that is at stake and actual physical survival is not!

Of particular relevance to this article is the notion that, in the Finite Perspective, differences are used to define who is winner and who is loser. Differences are, therefore, threatening. Conforming is safe.

In contrast, in the Infinite Perspective differences are valued and safe. As the only source of learning, differences stimulate curiosity, creativity, and synergy.

Accordingly, the path forward for OD practitioners is to steep themselves in the understanding of these power dynamics in order to help our clients and their systems achieve the desired productivity and employee engagement. Of course, to do that we must make that shift ourselves with the commitment and courage that it takes to swim against the current of the prevalent culture. But then that is what OD practitioners do.

Michael F. Broom, Ph.D.

June 27, 2011