Background
We are in the fifth generation of OD practitioners. This first generation were the founders of the field including Kurt Lewin, Ron Lippit, Ken Benny, and Leland Bradford; the second generation were their students including the likes of Edie Seashore, Charlie Seashore, and Chris Argyris; the third generation included Michael Broom, Robert Marschak, Judith Katz and their contemporaries. The first generation learned the field through inventing it, the second and third generations developed their skills through being closely coached and mentored (often for years) in real-time situations. As the field grew, however, coaching and mentoring were replaced by academic programs founded and taught by second and third generation practitioners. Unfortunately, in the experi,ence of Seashore and Broom these programs are having only limited success as measured by the success as practitioners of their graduates.
What they have noticed is that many of their former students while academically sound were struggling as practitioners. Poor contracting, data gathering that was too narrowly focused, interventions deficient in systemic orientation, and limited group facilitation skills were routinely evident upon observation and in conversations about their practices. These difficulties exist in spite of the experiential emphasis of their academic training. There are graduates of these programs who have developed strikingly successful practices; however, they seem the exception, not the rule. Somehow, the academic programs on average are not succeeding in turning out success practitioners.
What makes the disciplines of organization development so difficult to impart academically? Organization development is a set of disciplines that are as behavioral as they are conceptual. It deals with focusing the tremendous variability that is a hallmark of behavior in human systems coherently toward the goals of a particular system: a daunting task for rocket scientists and brain surgeons who prefer the relatively simple set of variables that comprise space flight and surgery. In addition, although conceptually uncomplicated, the disciplines and perspectives of OD are often counter to the organizational cultures, reflecting the larger social culture that practitioners are asked to change. That calls for a depth of personal discipline, a conscious use of self and support that goes substantially beyond that which can be garnered conceptually. Mastery of the disciplines under such circumstances is what makes organization development the most powerful technology extant for creating and managing organizational change.
To respond to this educational challenge Seashore and Broom invented the Practitioners Program in Organization Development and Change Management.
The Practitioners Programs has two primary purposes:
Its target audience is people who are currently working at change management either as internal, external OD practitioners or as organization leaders who have significant change projects to manage. The latter group includes many human resources executives who are being asked manage culture change projects (it is of interest that these HR folks often begin asking about degree programs in OD as they complete the program.) Graduates and advanced students of change managementñoriented academic programs are welcomed.
Enrollment is limited to ten (10) participants per program. This is in stark contrast to class sizes ranging from 25 to 35 in academia. In the initial years of the Practitioners Program, enrollment was limited to 15. Experience has shown that the program provides greater efficacy with smaller group sizes, thus the current limit of ten per program.
Definition of Organization Development
There are many definitions of organization development in the literature. They are fairly consistent in their content. Our definition, with considerable implications for practice, is also consistent with them:
Supporting organizational leaders and their groups to create long-lasting systemic change toward improving productivity and employee satisfaction through improving the human processes through which they get their work done.
It's implication for practice:
That description of how OD works points to what sets us apart from other consulting processes that involve studying the client's problems and then presenting expertî technical recommendations in a report that is likely to simply gather dust in some drawer. People will implement solutions that they have invented and in which they, therefore, believe. Those are the solutions that we help invent!
This a model of managing change in human systems based on the definition above which is a classic perspective of organizational development as developed by NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science. That perspective holds that the tasks of an organization,from planning to production,are accomplished with the highest level of productivity through processes that are highlighted by a high quality of relationship among those responsible for those tasks. With that in mind, the Meta-Model of Planned Change was developed. It is a model that believes in the empowerability of human systems and the people that live and work within them. Accordingly, the Meta-Model calls for collaborative strategies and tactics aimed at open communication, and consensual decision-making.
A model is a descriptive system of information, theories, inferences, and implications used to represent and support understanding of some phenomenon. Meta-, in the sense used here, is a context or framework. A meta-model could, then be understood as a framework or context of a model,albeit, a model of a model. A meta-model of change management, then, is a framework from which any number of more specific models of how to manage change in human systems can be understood and developed.
The model is a matrix (see Meta-Model 3D Graphic) with three axes as depicted on the graphic of the page after next. The vertical axis describes seven disciplines which, when each is consistently adhered to as disciplines, will support the success of any particular change management effort.
The horizontal axis describes the five iterative stages of any change management project within which each of the disciplines must be applied.
The stages are as follows:
The diagonal axis describes the four levels human systems--personal, interpersonal, group, and organization or community--to which the disciplines and stages of planned change must be applied for optimal effectiveness.
"The Meta-Model of Planned Change," by Broom and Seashore offers a more in-depth description of each of the seven disciplines and five iterative stages. Pr
ogram Structure and Format The Practitioners Program is conducted over ten months, October to July, one full day per month, generally on a Friday. This action learning model allows participants the opportunity to practice what they learn after each session with the opportunity to review the results they get with the other participants and staff for further learning and refinement at the next session. This adds considerable power to the program.
The basic content for each session is as follows:
| Month | Discipline | Stage |
|---|---|---|
| Oct | Program Overview | |
| Nov | Use of Self (all sessions) | Contracting |
| Dec | Support Systems | Contracting |
| Jan | Sound and Current Data | Data Gathering |
| Feb | Systems Orientation | Interventions |
| Mar | Learning from Differences | Interventions |
| Apr | Infinite Power | Interventions |
| May | Empowerment | Interventions |
| June | Use of Self | Evaluation & Disengagement |
The first half of each session is dedicated to theoretical, experiential, and introspective exploration of that day's concepts and skills. The second half of each session is devoted to direct coaching in small groups by the staff regarding application of the concepts and skills to current situations from the participants own work.
An important aspect of the program is the individual coaching sessions with the staff that are available outside of the regular sessions. This allows participants direct and confidential attention from either staff person at their request.
THE STAFF
Ms. Edith Whitfield Seashore and Dr. Michael Broom are multicultural teams who have worked together for many years. Both are psychologists and seasoned change management professionals who have worked both internally and externally. They are well known and published in the field.
Edie has been consulting for over 40 years and has been an important shaper of organization development, as we know it today. She served as the President of NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, and has been on the faculties of Johns Hopkins, Georgetown, and American Universities. She is the co-author of What Did You Say? The Art of Giving and Receiving Feedback; as well as "Breaking Sex Role Stereotypes: Power Collusion, Intimacy/Sexuality, Support." She is also co-editor of The Promise of Diversity among other publications.
Michael has been consulting internally and externally for over 25 years with all types of organizations--for profit, not for profit, and government. He has served on the Board of the NTL Institute and chaired its Transformative Social Change Committee. He has been on the faculties of Johns Hopkins, Georgetown and American Universities. He is the co-author with Don Klein of Power: The Infinite Game and sole author of The Infinite Organization published Sept. 2002.