Chapter 1

Organizational Development

Introduction
Organization development (OD) is a planned approach to respond effectively to changes in its
external and internal environment.

Essentially there are two schools of thought in OD:

a. Programmed – Procedure School
b. System – Process School

a. The Programmed – Procedure School

It is an older approach. According to it, OD is the effective implementation of the
organization’s policies, procedures and programmers.

It is concerned with
 personnel activities that contribute to the overall growth
 development of the organization, such as recruitment, training, career development,
compensation, welfare and benefits, labour relations etc.

b. The System Process School

This school considers organization development in the context of both its internal and
external environment. Proponents of this approach view organization as a system which
can be changed and developed to best achieve its goals and objectives.

Definition
According to Cummings and Worley “OD is a systematic application of behavioral science
knowledge to the planned development and reinforcement of organizational strategies,
structures and processes for improving an organization’s effectiveness”

According to Warren Bennis “Organization Development (OD) is a complex strategy intended

to change the beliefs, attitudes, values, and structure of organizations so that they can better
adapt to new technologies, markets, and challenges.”

Characteristics of Organizational Development

a. Planned and Long-Term
OD is a data-based approach to change that involves all of the ingredient that go into
managerial planning. It involves goal setting, action planning, implementation, monitoring,
and taking corrective action when necessary.
b. Problem-Oriented
OD attempts to apply theory and research from a number of disciplines including
behaviourals science, to the solution of organizational problems.
c. Reflects a Systems Approach
OD is both systemic and systematic. It is a way of more clearly linking the human
resources and potential of an organization to its technology, structure, and management
processes.
d. Action-Oriented
OD focuses on accomplishments and results. Unlike approaches to change that tend to
describe how organizational change takes place, OD’s emphasis is on getting things done.
e. Change Agents
 The process requires the facilitative role of a change agent to assist the organization in
redirecting its functioning.
f. Learning Principles
OD’s basic feature is a reliance on re-education to bring about change. Re-education
involves applying fundamental learning principles.
g. Performance
OD programs include an emphasis on ways to improve and enhance performance and
quality (TQM).
h. Humanistic
OD relies on a set of humanistic values about people and organizations that aims at gaining
more effective organizations by opening up new opportunities for increased use of human
potential systems.

Objectives of Organizational Development

a. OD represents a viable strategy for improving organization effectiveness and enhancing the quality
of work-life of members.
b. It makes organization better able to achieve both the goals of the organization and goals of
individuals within the organization. OD helps solve problems that adversely affect the operational
efficiency at all levels.
c. OD keeps work organization productive as well as hospitable for members.

d. It is a strategy for intelligently facing the requirements of changing world and coping up effectively
the environment. Its focus is on developing total organization.
e. OD is a collaborative management of organizational culture (beliefs and values).
f. OD is far different from “efficiency system” introduced to speed up production in the past.
g. OD is a collaborative effort by the members of an organization to develop their capabilities so that
organization can attain an optimum level of performance.

Importance of Organizational Development

a. Organizational Change
The process of organizational development identifies areas of company operations where
change is needed. Each need is analyzed, and the potential effects are projected into a change
management plan.
The plan outlines the
 specific ways in which the change will improve company operations
 which will be affected by the change
 How it can be rolled out efficiently to employees.
 Without organizational development as part of change management, a company would have a difficult
time developing effective change management programs.
b. Growth
Organizational development is an important tool in managing and planning corporate growth.
An organizational development analysis brings together sales projections, consumer demand to
help determine the rate of company growth
This information is used to alter the company business plan and plan the expansion and use of
company resources such as personnel and the distribution network to accommodate future
growth.
c. Work Processes
When a company is involved in organizational development, it analyzes work processes for
efficiency and accuracy. Any quality control measures required to attain company standards
are put in place.
 Evaluators analyze a duplicate process or processes that can be combined for greater
efficiency, and develop and implement detailed plans on how to improve company methods.
d. Product Innovation
Product innovation requires the analysis of several kinds of information to be successful.
Organizational development is critical to product innovation because it can help analyze each
element of product development and create a method for using it effectively.

Nature of Organizational Development

1. Organizational development is an educational strategy for bringing a planned change.
2. It is related to real problems of the organization.
3. Laboratory training methods based on experienced behavior are primarily used to bring change.
4. OD. Uses change agent (or consultant) to guide and affect the change. The role of change agent is to
guide groups towards more effective group processes rather than telling them what to do. Change
agents simply assist the group in problem solving processes and the groups solve the problems
themselves.
5. There is a close working relationship between change agents and the people who are being changed.
6. OD seeks to build problem-solving capacity by improving group dynamics and problem confrontation.
7. OD. reaches into all aspects of the organization culture in order to make it more humanly responsive.
8. OD. is a long term approach (of 3 to 5 years period) and is meant to elevate the organization to a higher
level of functioning by improving the performance and satisfaction of organization members.
9. OD. is broad-based and describes a variety of change programmes. It is concerned not only with changes
in organizational design but also with changes in organizational philosophies, skills of individuals and
groups.
10. OD. is a dynamic process. It recognises that the goals of the organization change and hence the methods
of attaining them should also change.
11. OD. utilizes systems thinking. It is based on open, adptive systems concept. The organization is treated
as an interrelated whole and no part of the organization can be changed without affecting other parts.
12. OD. is research based. Change agents conduct surveys, collect data, evaluate and then decisions are
taken.
13. OD. uses group processes rather than individual process. It makes efforts to improve group
performance.
14. OD. is situational and contingency oriented.
15. Organization Development and Management Development are complementary rather then conflicting.

Competencies of an OD Practitioner

a. “Competency 1: Systems Change Expert

Systems Change Leader — who can comfortably work within a whole system and advise on
strategies for organizational change, transformation, and alignment.
Culture Builder — who fosters commitment and engagement based on an environment of
trust and promotes the health and vitality of the organization.
Innovator — who sponsors, develops, and can challenge the organization to create strategies
for disruption, breakthroughs, transformation, and innovation.
b. Competency 2: Efficient Designer
Efficient Designer — who strives for simplicity and designs strategies, interventions, and
processes to facilitate a desired business outcome with the client and end-user in mind.
Process Consultant — who increases leadership and organizational capacity, facilitates group
dialogue and decision-making by creating a non-threatening environment.
Data Synthesizer — who operates as an integrator connecting multi-stakeholder views and
translates salient information to create clarity and commitment.
c. Competency 3: Business Advisor
 Strategic Catalyst — who thinks strategically, takes initiative, and acts to achieve results tied
to the organization’s goals.
Results-Oriented Leader — who understands and applies the principles of customer service,
sets challenging goals, and measures impact and project return on investment.
Trusted Advisor — who effectively develops trusting relationships and partnerships through
integrity and authenticity and is clear about the outcomes that are important to key
stakeholders.
d. Competency 4: Credible Strategist
Credible Influencer — who empathetically relates to clients, understands their needs, and has
the knowledge to translate the business reality into terms that can be agreed upon and
committed to by the client.
Collaborative Communicator — who communicates clearly and concisely, and tailors
communication in ways that meet the needs and motivations of client groups at all levels.
Globally Diverse Integrator — who can effectively work within diverse cultures, and creates
an inclusive environment for people of all identities to feel valued, respected, and able to
contribute.
e. Competency 5: Informed Consultant
Exemplary Consultant — who cultivates meaning, working relationships, and commitment
with stakeholders to effect change, and demonstrates an understanding of client expectations,
effectively contracting for goals, outcomes, and resources.
Emotionally Intelligent Leader — who effectively reads stakeholders, seeks out different
perspectives, and uses emotional intelligence to guide appropriate action, and understands and
reflects on one’s own personal values, boundaries, feelings, biases, triggers, and ethics to
manage their impact on the work.
Life-Long Learner and Practitioner — who demonstrates leadership in a specialized area of
OD, stays up to date on methodologies and tools, and leverages best practices to drive results
in line with the organization’s needs. The website has about a dozen specific theories listed,
including appreciative inquiry, culture change, diversity and inclusion, organization design, the
science of decision making, systems theory, and team development.”

Ethical Guidelines of an OD Practitioner

a. Responsibility to Self
 Act with integrity; be authentic and strive for self-knowledge and personal growth.
 Recognize my personal needs and desires, and when they conflict with responsibilities, seek an all-win
resolution.
b. Responsibility for Professional Development and Competence
 Accept responsibility for the consequences of my acts, (or omission to act).
 Strive to achieve and maintain a professional level of competence by developing the full range of my
own competence, establishing collegial and cooperative relations with others, including people of and
with an understanding of diverse cultures.
c. Responsibility to Clients and Stakeholders
 Serve the long-term well-being and interests of the client system and its shareholders/community.
 Conduct professional activity honestly, and deal with any conflicts constructively.
 Define and protect the confidentiality of client relationships.
 Make any public statements accurately, including promotion. Deliver services as promised.
d. Responsibility to the Profession
 Contribute to continuing professional development; promote sharing of OD/CM knowledge and skills.
 Act in ways that bring credit to our profession; and in case of questionable practice, use appropriate
channels for dealing with it.
 e. Social Responsibility
 Act with sensitivity to the fact that our recommendations and actions may alter the lives and well-being
of people within client systems and the larger environment.
 Act with awareness of the cultural filters that affect my view of the world; respect cultures different from
my own; and be sensitive to cross-cultural and multi-cultural differences/implications.
 Promote fairness, and serve the well-being of all people and organizations.

Process of OD

a. Initial Diagnosis of the Problem:

In the first step, the management should try to find out an overall view of the situation to find
the real problem. Top management should meet the consultants and the experts to determine
the type of programme that is needed. In the first stage only, the consultants will meet various
persons in the organisation and interview them to collect some information.
b. Data Collection:
In this stage, the consultant will make the surveys to determine the climate of the organisation
and the behavioural problems of the employees.
The consultant will meet groups of people away from their work environment to get some
answers to the questions such as:
 What specific job conditions contribute most to their job effectiveness?
 What kind of conditions interferes with their job effectiveness?
 What changes would they like to make in the working of the organisation?
c. Data Feedback and Confrontation:
The data which has been collected in the second step will be given to the work groups, who
will be assigned the job of reviewing the data. Any areas of disagreement will be mediated
among themselves only and priorities will be established for change.
d. Planning Strategy for Change:
In this stage, the consultant will suggest the strategy for change. He will attempt to transform
diagnosis of the problem into a proper action plan involving the overall goals for change,
determination of basic approach for attaining these goals and the sequence of detailed scheme
for implementing the approach.
e. Intervening in the System:
Intervening in the system refers to the planned programmed activities during the course of an
OD programme. These planned activities bring certain changes in the system, which is the
basic objective of OD. There may be various methods through which external consultant
intervene in the system such as education and laboratory training, process consultation, team
development etc.
f. Team Building:
During the entire process, the consultant encourages the groups to examine how they work
together. The consultant will educate them about the value of free communication and trust as
essentials for group functioning. The consultant can have team managers and their subordinates
to work together as a team in OD sessions to further encourage team building. Following the
development of small groups, there may be development among larger groups comprising
several teams.
g. Evaluation:
OD is a very long process. So there is a great need for careful monitoring to get precise
feedback regarding what is going on after the OD programme starts. This will help in making
suitable modifications whenever necessary. For evaluation of OD programme, the use of
critique sessions, appraisal of change efforts and comparison of pre and post training
behavioural patterns are quite effective.
 Entering and Contracting

The planned change process generally starts when one or more key managers or administrators
somehow sense that their organization, department, or group could be improved or has
problems that could be alleviated through organization development. The organization might
be successful yet have the room for improvement. It might be facing impending environmental
conditions that necessitate a change in how it operates. The organization could be experiencing
particular problems, such as poor product quality, high rates of absenteeism or dysfunctional
conflicts among departments. Conversely, the problems might appear more diffuse and consist
simply of feelings that the organization should be “more innovative,” “more competitive,” or
“more effective.” Entering and contracting are the initial steps in the OD process.

They involve defining in a preliminary manner the organization’s problems or opportunities for
development and establishing a collaborative relationship between the OD practitioner and
members of the client system about how to work on those issues.

Entering and contracting set the initial parameters for carrying out the subsequent
phases of OD:
a. Diagnosing the organization
b. Planning and implementing changes
c. Evaluating
d. Institutionalizing

They help to define what issues will be addressed by those activities, which will carry them
out, and how they will be accomplished. Entering and contracting can vary in complexity and
formality depending on the situation. In those cases where the manager of a work group or
department serves as his or her own OD practitioner, entering and contracting typically involve
the manager and group members meeting to discuss what issues to work on and how they will
jointly accomplish that.

Diagnosis Meaning and Definition

Development in any organization will depend to a great extend on diagnosis. It is a planned
change by the organizational development practitioners and plays an active role in gathering
data from employees and management for diagnostic purpose.
Diagnosis in an organization is a way of determining gaps between current and desired
performance and also to understand ways in which the goals of the organization can be
achieved.

Diagnosis in an organization should be carried in a systematic fashion, with focus on the

organization and its structures. It should then focus on the changes that are required to be
brought in the organization. Diagnosis gives the state of the organization or one or more of its
subsystems and points out the scope for improvements that made for achieving organizational
effectiveness.

According to Cummins and Worley diagnosis involves the systematic collection of data to
determine the current state of an organization allowing managers and consultants to enhance
organizational effectiveness. This definition helps clarify that the diagnostic approach in
 organizational development is the understanding the organization and enhancing its
effectiveness.

According to Howard diagnosis involves developing road maps to guide and direct
organizational change. That is, when any diagnosis is carried out in the organization it leads
towards changes on the overall aspect.

Models of Diagnosing:

a. Organizational Level
The Organizational level is looked at in three phases: Inputs, System Designs and Outputs.
 First, the practitioner wants to look at the inputs which require them to understand the general
environment and industry structure.
 Secondly, it is necessary to look at the design components which consist of technology, strategy,
structure, human resource systems, and measurement systems that exist internally. This creates a
process through which the organization arrives at its goals or outputs. This is seen in organizational
effectiveness, productivity, and stakeholder satisfaction.
 Once the practitioner and the key stakeholders review this information, they have a useful starting
point to determine how well the organization is functioning.

b. Group Level
The second level of diagnosis would be on the Group level. On this level the focus would
primarily be on the input of organizational design. This speaks to how the organization is
designed to function within the general structure of the organization with a greater focus on its
inner workings. The internal systems have key components that need to be observed such as
task structure, goal clarity, team functioning, group composition, and group norms. The

Group level gives the practitioner a closer look at what the culture is, how communication
flows, and how well each component is aligned with the overarching design of the
organization.

The outputs examined in this case are team effectiveness, quality of work life, and
performance.

Observations on this level must consider whether or not the group design is properly aligned
and embedded in the larger group. It is very important that each segment of the organization is
in sync and balanced with the other so that all the components of the system flow properly for
the most effective results.

c. Individual Level
Individual jobs have specific designs to accomplish specific tasks that need to be performed
through certain processes. Characteristics of individuals working these jobs will be effective
based on the level of skills, maturity, education, and experience with the jobs. In addition,
individual needs and expectations have to be considered on the Individual level of diagnoses.

Individual growth levels can be a factor in self-direction, learning, and motivation when it
comes to the job fit. Inputs on the Individual level focuses on organizational design, group
design and personal characteristics. Design components consist of skill variety, task identity,
task significance, autonomy, and feedback.
Skill variety is the degree to which a job requires a range of activities and abilities to perform
the work. Task identity measures the degree to which a job requires the completion of a
relatively whole, identifiable piece of work. Task significance identifies the degree to which a
job has a significant impact on other people's lives. Autonomy indicates the degree to which a
job provides freedom and discretion in scheduling the work and determining work methods.

Feedback speaks to the degree by which the job provides employees with direct and clear
information about the effectiveness of task performance. The Individual level of diagnosis is
important to ensuring that the right people are fitted to the right job which in turn promotes
good attitudes and work environments that are conducive to productivity. Ultimately, the goal
is to create opportunity for individual effectiveness, job satisfaction, performance, and personal
development.

Collecting and Analyzing Diagnostic information
Organization development is vitally dependent on organization diagnosis: the process of
collecting information that will be shared with the client in jointly assessing how the
organization is functioning and determining the best change intervention. The quality of the
information gathered, therefore, is a critical part of the OD process. We discuss several key
issues associated with collecting and analyzing diagnostic data on how an organization or
department functions. Data collection involves gathering information on specific organizational
features, such as the inputs, design components, and outputs.

The Diagnostic Relationship:
In most cases of planned change, OD practitioners play an active role in gathering data from
organization members for diagnostic purposes. For example, they might interview members of a
work team about causes of conflict among members; they might survey employees at a large
industrial plant about factors contributing to poor product quality.

Before collecting diagnostic information, practitioners need to establish a relationship with

those who will provide and subsequently use it. Because the nature of that relationship affects
the quality and usefulness of the data collected, it is vital that OD practitioners clarify for
organization members who they are, why the data are being collected, what the data gathering
will involve, and how the data will be used.

Establishing the diagnostic relationship between the consultant and relevant organization
members is similar to forming a contract. It is meant to clarify expectations and to specify the
conditions of the relationship.

Who am I? The answer to this question introduces the OD practitioner to the organization,
particularly to those members who do not know the consultant and yet will be asked to provide
diagnostic data.
Why am I here, and what am I doing? These answers are aimed at defining the goals of the
diagnosis and data-gathering activities. The consultant needs to pres- ent the objectives of the
action research process and to describe how the diagnostic activities fit into the overall
developmental strategy.
Who do I work for? This answer clarifies who has hired the consultant, whether it be a
manager, a group of managers, or a group of employees and managers. One way to build trust
and support for the diagnosis is to have those people directly involved in establishing the
diagnostic contract
What do I want from you, and why? Here, the consultant needs to specify how much time
and effort people will need to give to provide valid data and subsequently to work with these
data in solving problems. Because some people may not want to participate in the diagnosis, it
is important to specify that such involvement is voluntary.
How will I protect your confidentiality? This answer addresses member concerns about who
will see their responses and in what form. This is especially critical when employees are asked
to provide information about their attitudes or perceptions. OD practitioners can either ensure
confidentiality or state that full participation in the change process requires open information
sharing.
In the first case, employees are frequently concerned about privacy and the possibility of being
punished for their responses. To alleviate concern and to increase the likelihood of obtaining
honest responses, the consultant may need to assure employees of the confidentiality of their
information, perhaps through explicit guarantees of response anonymity.
In the second case, full involvement of the participants in their own diagnosis may be a vital
ingredient of the change process. If sensitive issues arise, assurances of confidentiality can co-
opt the OD practitioner and ruin meaningful diagnosis.
Who will have access to the data? Respondents typically want to know whether they will have
access to their data and who else in the organization will have similar access. The OD
practitioner needs to clarify access issues and, in most cases, should agree to provide
respondents with their own results. Indeed, the collaborative nature of diagnosis means that
organization members will work with their own data to discover causes of problems and to
devise relevant interventions.
What’s in it for you? This answer is aimed at providing organization members with a clear
delineation of the benefits they can expect from the diagnosis. This usually entails describing
the feedback process and how they can use the data to improve the organization.
Can I be trusted? The diagnostic relationship ultimately rests on the trust established between
the consultant and those providing the data. An open and honest exchange of information
depends on such trust, and the practitioner should pro- vide ample time and face-to-face contact
during the contracting process to build this trust. This requires the consultant to listen actively
and discuss openly all questions raised by participants.

Careful attention to establishing the diagnostic relationship helps to promote the three goals of
data collection.4 The first and most immediate objective is to obtain valid information about
organizational functioning. Building a data collection contract can ensure that organization
members provide honest, reliable, and complete information.
Data collection also can rally energy for constructive organizational change. A good diagnostic
relationship helps organization members start thinking about issues that concern them, and it
creates expectations that change is possible. When members trust the consultant, they are likely
to participate in the diagnostic process and to generate energy and commitment for
organizational change.
Finally, data collection helps to develop the collaborative relationship necessary for effecting
organizational change. The diagnostic stage of action research is probably the first time that
most organization members meet the OD practitioner, and it can be the basis for building a
longer-term relationship.

Methods of data collection are:

Questionnaires
One of the most efficient ways to collect data is through questionnaires. Because they typically
contain fixed-response queries about various features of an organization, these paper-and-pencil
measures can be administered to large numbers of people simultaneously. Also, they can be
analyzed quickly, especially with the use of computers, thus permitting quantitative comparison
and evaluation. As a result, data can easily be fed back to employees. Numerous basic resource
books on survey methodology and questionnaire development are available.
Questionnaires can vary in scope, some measuring selected aspects of organizations and others
assessing more comprehensive organizational characteristics. They also can vary in the extent
to which they are either standardized or tailored to a specific organization. Standardized
instruments generally are based on an explicit model of organization, group, or individual
effectiveness and contain a predetermined set of questions that have been developed and refined
over time.

Job Design Questionnaire

MY JOB: STRONGLY SLIGHTLY SLIGHTLY STRONGLY
DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREEUNDECIDED AGREE AGREE AGREE
provides much variety

permits me to be left on my
own to do my own work
is arranged so that I often have
the opportunity to see jobs or
projects through to completion
provides feedback on how well
I am
doing as I am working
is relatively significant in our
organization
gives me considerable
opportunity for independence
and freedom in
how I do my work
gives me the opportunity to do a
number of different things

Interviews
A second important measurement technique is the individual or group interview. Interviews are
probably the most widely used technique for collecting data in OD. They permit the interviewer
to ask the respondent direct questions. Further probing and clarification is, therefore, possible
as the interview proceeds. This flexibility is invaluable for gaining private views and feelings
about the organization and for exploring new issues that emerge during the interview.
Interviews may be highly structured, resembling questionnaires or highly unstructured, starting
with general questions that allow the respondent to lead the way.
Structured interviews typically derive from a conceptual model of organization functioning; the
model guides the types of questions that are asked.
Unstructured interviews are more general and include the following broad questions about
organizational functioning:

What are the major goals or objectives of the organization or department?

How does the organization currently perform with respect to these purposes?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the organization or department?
What barriers stand in the way of good performance?
Although interviewing typically involves one-to-one interaction between an OD practitioner and
an employee, it can be carried out in a group context. Group interviews save time and allow
people to build on others’ responses. A major drawback, however, is that group settings may
inhibit some people from responding freely.
A popular type of group interview is the focus group or sensing meeting. These are unstructured
meetings conducted by a manager or a consultant. A small group of 10 to 15 employees is
selected to represent a cross section of functional areas and hierarchical levels or a
homogeneous grouping, such as minorities or engineers.

Group discussion is frequently started by asking general questions about organizational features
and functioning, an intervention’s progress, or current performance.

Another popular unstructured group interview involves assessing the current state of an intact
work group. The manager or the consultant generally directs a question to the group, calling its
attention to some part of group functioning. For example, group members may be asked how
they feel the group is progressing on its stated task. The group might respond and then come up
with its own series of questions about barriers to task performance. This unstructured interview
is a fast, simple way to collect data about group behavior.
A major drawback of interviews is the amount of time required to conduct and analyze them.
Interviews can consume a great deal of time, especially if interviewers take full advantage of the
opportunity to hear respondents out and change their questions accordingly. Personal biases also
can distort the data. Like questionnaires, interviews are subject to the self-report biases of
respondents and, perhaps more important, to the biases of the interviewer.

Observations
One of the more direct ways of collecting data is simply to observe organizational behaviors in
their functional settings. The OD practitioner may do this by walking casually through a work
area and looking around or by simply counting the occurrences of specific kinds of behaviors
(for example, the number of times a phone call is answered after three rings in a service
department). Observation can range from complete participant observation, in which the OD
practitioner becomes a member of the group under study, to more detached observation, in
which the observer is clearly not part of the group or situation itself and may use film,
videotape, and other methods to record behaviors.
Observations have a number of advantages. They are free of the biases inherent in self-report
data. They put the practitioner directly in touch with the behaviors in question, without having
to rely on others’ perceptions. Observations also involve

It provides Real-time data, describing behavior occurring in the present rather than the past.
This avoids the distortions that invariably arise when people are asked to recollect their
behaviors. Finally, observations are adaptive in that the consultant can modify what he or she
chooses to observe, depending on the circumstances.

Among the problems with observations are difficulties interpreting the meaning underlying the
observations. Practitioners may need to devise a coding scheme to make sense out of
observations, and this can be expensive, take time, and introduce biases into the data. Because
the observer is the data collection instrument, personal bias and subjectivity can distort the data
unless the observer is trained and skilled in knowing what to look for; how, where, and when to
observe; and how to record data systematically
Another problem concerns sampling: Observers not only must decide which people to observe,
they also must choose the time periods, territory, and events in which to make those
observations. Failure to attend to these sampling issues can result in highly biased samples of
observational data.

When used correctly, observations provide insightful data about organization and group
functioning, intervention success, and performance. For example, observations are particularly
helpful in diagnosing the interpersonal relations of members of work groups. As discussed in
Chapter 6, interpersonal relationships are a key component of work groups; observing member
interactions in a group setting can provide direct information about the nature of those
relationships.

Unobtrusive Measures
Unobtrusive data are not collected directly from respondents but from secondary sources, such
as company records and archives. These data are generally available in organizations and
include records of absenteeism or tardiness; grievances; quantity and quality of production or
service; financial performance; meeting minutes; and correspondence with key customers,
suppliers, or governmental agencies.
Unobtrusive measures are especially helpful in diagnosing the organization, group, and
individual outputs At the organization level, for example, market share and return on investment
usually can be obtained from company reports. Similarly, organizations typically measure the
quantity and quality of the outputs of work groups and individual employees. Unobtrusive
measures also can help to diagnose organization-level design components—structure, work
systems, control systems, and human resources systems.

A company’s organization chart, for example, can provide useful information about
organization structure. Information about control systems usually can be obtained by examining
the firm’s management information system, operating procedures, and accounting practices.
Data about human resources systems often are included in a company’s personnel manual.
Unobtrusive measures provide a relatively objective view of organizational functioning. They
are free from respondent and consultant biases and are perceived as being “real” by many
organization members. Moreover, unobtrusive measures tend to be quantified and reported at
periodic intervals, permitting statistical analysis of behaviors occurring over time. Examining
monthly absenteeism rates, for example, might reveal trends in employee withdrawal behavior.

The major problems with unobtrusive measures occur in collecting such information and
drawing valid conclusions from it. Company records may not include data in a form that is
usable by the consultant. If, for example, individual performance data are needed, the consultant
may find that many firms only record production information at the group or departmental level.

SAMPLING
Before discussing how to analyze data, the issue of sampling needs to be emphasized.
Application of the different data collection techniques invariably raises the following questions:
“How many people should be interviewed and who should they be?”,“What events should be
observed and how many?”, “How many records should be inspected and which ones?
Sampling is not an issue in many OD cases. Because OD practitioners collect inter- view or
questionnaire data from all members of the organization or department in question, they do not
have to worry about whether the information is representative of the organization or unit.
Sampling becomes an issue in OD, however, when data are collected from selected members,
behaviors, or records. This is often the case when diagnosing organization-level issues or large
systems. In these cases, it may be important to ensure that the sample of people, behaviors, or
records adequately represents the characteristics of the total population. For example, a sample
of 50 employees might be used to assess the perceptions of all 300 members of a department. A
sample of production data might be used to evaluate the total production of a work group. OD
practitioners often find that it is more economical and quicker to gather a sampling of diagnostic
data than to collect all possible information. If done correctly, the sample can provide useful
and valid information about the entire organization or unit.
Sampling design involves considerable technical detail, and consultants may need to become
familiar with basic references in this area or to obtain professional help.11 The first issue to
address is sample size, or how many people, events, or records are needed to carry out the
diagnosis or evaluation. This question has no simple answer: The necessary sample size is a
function of population size, the confidence desired in the quality of the data, and the resources
(money and time) available for data collection.

Feeding Back Diagnostic Information

Perhaps the most important step in the diagnostic process is feeding back diagnostic information
to the client organization. Although the data may have been collected with the client’s help, the
OD practitioner often organizes and presents them to the client. Properly analyzed and
meaningful data can have an impact on organizational change only if organization members can
use the information to devise appropriate action plans. A key objective of the feedback process
is to be sure that the client has ownership of the data.

DETERMINING THE CONTENT OF THE FEEDBACK

In the course of diagnosing the organization, a large amount of data is collected. In fact, there is
often more information than the client needs or can interpret in a realistic period of time. If too
many data are feedback, the client may decide that changing is impossible. Therefore, OD
practitioners need to summarize the data in ways that enable clients to understand the
information and draw action implications from it.

a. Relevant. Organization members are likely to use feedback data for problem solv- ing when
they find the information meaningful. Including managers and employ- ees in the initial data
collection activities can increase the relevance of the data.
b. Understandable. Data must be presented to organization members in a form that is readily
interpreted. Statistical data, for example, can be made understandable through the use of
graphs and charts.
c. Descriptive. Feedback data need to be linked to real organizational behaviors if they are to
arouse and direct energy. The use of examples and detailed illustrations can help employees
gain a better feel for the data.
d. Verifiable. Feedback data should be valid and accurate if they are to guide action. Thus, the information
should allow organization members to verify whether the findings really describe the organization. For
example, questionnaire data might include information about the sample of respondents as well as
frequency distributions for each item or measure. Such information can help members verify whether
the feedback data accurately represent organizational events or attitudes.
e. Timely. Data should be fed back to members as quickly as possible after being collected and
analyzed. This will help ensure that the information is still valid and is linked to members’
motivations to examine it.
 f. Limited. Because people can easily become overloaded with too much information, feedback
data should be limited to what employees can realistically process at one time.
g. Significant. Feedback should be limited to those problems that organization members can do
something about because it will energize them and help direct their efforts toward realistic
changes.
h. Comparative. Feedback data can be ambiguous without some benchmark as a ref- erence.
Whenever possible, data from comparative groups should be provided to give organization
members a better idea of how their group fits into a broader context.
i. Un-finalized. Feedback is primarily a stimulus for action and thus should spur further diagnosis
and problem solving. Members should be encouraged, for example, to use the data as a
starting point for more in-depth discussion of organizational issues.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FEEDBACK PROCESS

a. Motivation to work with the data. People need to feel that working with the feedback data will
have beneficial outcomes. This may require explicit sanction and support from powerful groups so
that people feel free to raise issues and to iden- tify concerns during the feedback sessions. If
people have little motivation to work with the data or feel that there is little chance to use the data
for change, then the information will not be owned by the client system.
b. Structure for the meeting. Feedback meetings need some structure or they may degenerate into
chaos or aimless discussion. An agenda or outline for the meeting and the presence of a discussion
leader can usually provide the necessary direc- tion. If the meeting is not kept on track, especially
when the data are negative, ownership can be lost in conversations that become too general.
When this hap- pens, the energy gained from dealing directly with the problem is lost.
c. Appropriate attendance. Generally, people who have common problems and can benefit from
working together should be included in the feedback meeting. This may involve a fully intact work
team or groups comprising members from different functional areas or hierarchical levels. Without
proper representation in the meet- ing, ownership of the data is lost because participants cannot
address the problem(s) suggested by the feedback.
d. Appropriate power. It is important to clarify the power possessed by the group. Members need to
know on which issues they can make necessary changes, on which they can only recommend
changes, and over which they have no control. Unless there are clear boundaries, members are
likely to have some hesitation about using the feedback data for generating action plans.
Moreover, if the group has no power to make changes, the feedback meeting will become an
empty exercise rather than a real problem-solving session. Without the power to address change,
there will be little ownership of the data.
e. Process help. People in feedback meetings require assistance in working together as a group.
When the data are negative, there is a natural tendency to resist the implications, deflect the
conversation onto safer subjects, and the like. An OD prac- titioner with group process skills can
help members stay focused on the subject and improve feedback discussion, problem solving, and
ownership.

SURVEY FEEDBACK
Survey feedback is a process of collecting and feeding back data from an organ- ization or
department through the use of a questionnaire or survey. The data are analyzed, fed back to
organization members, and used by them to diagnose the organization and to develop
interventions to improve it.
What Are the Steps?
Survey feedback generally involves the following five steps:
a. Members of the organization, including those at the top, are involved in preliminary planning
of the survey. In this step, all parties must be clear about the level of analysis (organization,
department, or small group) and the objectives of the survey. Because most surveys derive
from a model about organizational or group functioning, organization members must, in effect,
approve that diagnostic framework. This is an important initial step in gaining ownership of the
data and in ensuring that the right problems and issues are addressed by the survey.
Once the objectives are determined, the organization can use one of the standardized
questionnaires or it can develop its own survey instrument. If the survey is developed
internally, pretesting the questionnaire is essential to ensure that it has been constructed
properly. In either case, the survey items need to reflect the objectives established for the
survey and the diagnostic issues being addressed.
b. The survey instrument is administered to all members of the organization or department.
This breadth of data collection is ideal, but it may be appropriate to administer the instrument
to only a sample of members because of cost or time constraints. If so, the size of the sample
should be as large as possible to improve the motivational basis for participation in the
feedback sessions.
c. The OD consultant usually analyzes the survey data, tabulates the results, suggests
approaches to diagnosis, and trains client members to lead the feedback process.
d. Data feedback usually begins at the top of the organization and cascades downward to
groups reporting to managers at successively lower levels. This waterfall approach
ensures that all groups at all organizational levels involved in the survey receive appropriate
feedback. Most often, members of each organization group at each level discuss and deal with
only that portion of the data involving their particular group. They, in turn, prepare to
introduce data to groups at the next lower organizational level if appropriate.

Data feedback also can occur in a “bottom-up” approach. Initially, the data for specific
work groups or departments are fed back and action items proposed. At this point, the
group addresses problems and issues within its control. The group notes any issues that
are beyond its authority and suggests actions. That information is combined with
information from groups reporting to the same manager, and the combined data are fed
back to the managers who review the data and the recommended actions. Problems that
can be solved at this level are addressed. In turn, their analyses and suggestions
regarding problems of a broader nature are combined, and feedback and action sessions
proceed up the hierarchy. In such a way, the people who most likely will carry out
recommended action get the first chance to propose suggestions.
e. Feedback meetings provide an opportunity to work with the data. At each meeting, members
discuss and interpret their data, diagnose problem areas, and develop action plans. OD
practitioners can play an important role during these meetings,7 facilitating group discussion to
produce accurate understanding, focusing the group on its strengths and weaknesses, and
helping to develop effective action plans.

Limitations of Survey Feedback

Although the use of survey feedback is widespread in contemporary organizations, the
following limits and risks have been identified:
a. Ambiguity of purpose. Managers and staff groups responsible for the survey-feedback process
may have difficulty reaching sufficient consensus about the purposes of the survey, its content,
and how it will be fed back to participants. Such confusion can lead to considerable
disagreement over the data collected and paralysis about doing anything with them.
b. Distrust. High levels of distrust in the organization can render the survey feedback ineffective.
Employees need to trust that their responses will remain anonymous and that management is
serious about sharing the data and solving problems jointly.
c. Unacceptable topics. Most organizations have certain topics that they do not want examined.
This can severely constrain the scope of the survey process, par- ticularly if the neglected topics
are important to employees.
d. Organizational disturbance. The survey-feedback process can unduly disturb organizational
functioning. Data collection and feedback typically infringe on employee work time. Moreover,
administration of a survey can call attention to issues with which management is unwilling to
deal, and can create unrealistic expectations about organizational improvement.