Chapter 2

Organization Development and Change
Chapter Two:
The Nature of Planned Change
Thomas G. Cummings
Christopher G. Worley
Learning Objectives
for Chapter Two
• To describe and compare three major
perspectives on changing organizations.
• To introduce a General Model of Planned
Change that will be used to organize the
material presented in the book.
• To describe how planned change can be
adopted to fit different kinds of conditions.
Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-2
(c)2005 Thomson/South-Western
Lewin’s Change Model
Unfreezing
Movement
Refreezing

Specifically, a particular set of behaviors at
any moment in time is the result of two
groups of forces:
•those striving to maintain the status quo and
•those pushing for change.

When both sets of forces are about equal,
current behaviors are maintained in what
Lewin termed a state of “quasi-stationary
equilibrium.”
To change that state, one can increase those
forces pushing for change, decrease those
forces maintaining the current state, or apply
some combination of both.
Unfreezing
This step usually involves reducing those forces
maintaining the organization’s behavior at its present
level. Unfreezing is sometimes accomplished
through a process of “psychological
disconfirmation.” By introducing information that
shows discrepancies between behaviors desired by
organization members and those behaviors currently
exhibited, members can be motivated to engage in
change activities.
Moving
This step shifts the behavior of the
organization, department, or individual to a
new level. It involves intervening in the
system to develop new behaviors, values, and
attitudes through changes in organizational
structures and processes.

Refreezing
This step stabilizes the organization at a new
state of equilibrium. It is frequently
accomplished through the use of supporting
mechanisms that reinforce the new
organizational state, such as organizational
culture, rewards, and structures.

Kotter’s eight-stage process can be mapped
onto Lewin’s phases:
•establishing a sense of urgency, creating the guiding
coalition, developing a vision and strategy, and
communicating the change vision (unfreezing);
•empowering broad-based action, generating short-term wins
(moving); and
•consolidating gains and producing more change, and
anchoring new approaches in the culture (refreezing)

Action Research Model
Problem Identification
Joint diagnosis
Consultation with a
behavioral scientist Joint action planning
Data gathering & Action

preliminary diagnosis
Data gathering after

Feedback to Client action

1. Problem identification. This stage usually begins when an
executive in the organization or someone with power and
influence senses that the organization has one or more problems
that might be solved with the help of an OD practitioner.
2. Consultation with a behavioral science expert. During the
initial contact, the OD practitioner and the client carefully
assess each other. The practitioner has his or her own
normative, developmental theory or frame of reference and
must be conscious of those assumptions and values. Sharing
them with the client from the beginning establishes an open and
collaborative atmosphere
3. Data gathering and preliminary diagnosis. This step is
usually completed by the OD practitioner, often in
conjunction with organization members. It involves gathering
appropriate information and analyzing it to determine the
underlying causes of organizational problems. The four basic
methods of gathering data are interviews, process
observation, questionnaires, and organizational performance
data (unfortunately, often overlooked).

One approach to diagnosis begins with observation, proceeds
to a semistructured interview, and concludes with a
questionnaire to measure precisely the problems identified by
the earlier steps. When gathering diagnostic information, OD
practitioners may influence members from whom they are
collecting data. In OD, any action by the OD practitioner can
be viewed as an intervention that will have some effect on the
organization.

4. Feedback to a key client or group. Because action research
is a collaborative activity, the diagnostic data are fed back to
the client, usually in a group or work-team meeting. The
feedback step, in which members are given the information
gathered by the OD practitioner, helps them determine the
strengths and weaknesses of the organization or unit under
study.

The consultant provides the client with all relevant and useful
data. Obviously, the practitioner will protect confidential
sources of information and, at times, may even withhold data.
Defining what is relevant and useful involves consideration
of privacy and ethics as well as judgment about whether the
group is ready for the information or if the information would
make the client overly defensive.

5. Joint diagnosis of the problem. At this point, members
discuss the feedback and explore with the OD practitioner
whether they want to work on identified problems. A close
interrelationship exists among data gathering, feedback, and
diagnosis because the consultant summarizes the basic data
from the client members and presents the data to them for
validation and further diagnosis.

An important point to remember, as Schein suggests, is that the
action research process is very different from the doctor–patient
model, in which the consultant comes in, makes a diagnosis, and
prescribes a solution. Schein notes that the failure to establish a
common frame of reference in the client–consultant relationship
may lead to a faulty diagnosis or to a communication gap
whereby the client is sometimes “unwilling to believe the
diagnosis or accept the prescription.” He believes that “most
companies have drawers full of reports by consultants, each
loaded with diagnoses and recommendations which are either
not understood or not accepted by the ‘patient.’”

6. Joint action planning. Next, the OD practitioner and the
client members jointly agree on further actions to be taken.
This is the beginning of the moving process (described in
Lewin’s change model), as the organization decides how best
to reach a different quasi-stationary equilibrium. At this
stage, the specific action to be taken depends on the culture,
technology, and environment of the organization; the
diagnosis of the problem; and the time and expense of the
intervention

7. Action. This stage involves the actual change from one
organizational state to another. It may include installing new
methods and procedures, reorganizing structures and work
designs, and reinforcing new behaviors. Such actions
typically cannot be implemented immediately but require a
transition period as the organization moves from the present
to a desired future state.

8. Data gathering after action. Because action research is a
cyclical process, data must also be gathered after the action
has been taken to measure and determine the effects of the
action and to feed the results back to the organization. This,
in turn, may lead to rediagnosis and new action.

Positive Model
• This model represents an important

departure from Lewin’s model and the
action research process.
– Those models are primarily deficit based; they focus
on the organization’s problems and how they can be
solved so it functions better.
– The positive model focuses on what the organization is
doing right. It helps members understand their
organization when it is working at its best.

Positive Model
• The positive model has been applied to

planned change primarily through a process
called appreciative inquiry (AI).
• As a “reformist and rebellious” form of
social constructionism, AI explicitly infuses
a positive value orientation into analyzing
and changing organizations.

Social Constructionism
• Social constructionism assumes that

organization members’ shared experiences
and interactions influence how they
perceive the organization and behave in it.

Positive Model
Initiate the Inquiry
Inquire into Best Practices
Discover Themes
Envision a Preferred Future
Design and Deliver Ways to

Create the Future
Initiate the inquiry
• This first phase determines the subject of change. It emphasizes

member involvement to identify the organizational issue they
have the most energy to address.
• For example, members can choose to look for successful male–
female collaboration (as opposed to gender discrimination),
instances of customer satisfaction (as opposed to customer
dissatisfaction), particularly effective work teams, or product
development processes that brought new ideas to market
especially fast.
• If the focus of inquiry is real and vital to organization members,
the change process itself will take on these positive attributes.

Inquire into best practice
• This phase involves gathering information about the “best

of what is” in the organization.
• If the topic is organizational innovation, then members
help to develop an interview protocol that collects stories
of new ideas that were developed and implemented in the
organization. The interviews are conducted by
organization members; they interview each other and tell
stories of innovation in which they have personally been
involved. These stories are pulled together to create a pool
of information describing the organization as an innovative
system.
Discover the themes
• In this third phase, members examine the stories, both large and
small, to identify a set of themes representing the common
dimensions of people’s experiences.
• For example, the stories of innovation may contain themes about
how managers gave people the freedom to explore a new idea,
the support organization members received from their
coworkers, or how the exposure to customers sparked creative
thinking.
• No theme is too small to be represented; it is important that all of
the underlying mechanisms that helped to generate and support
the themes be described. The themes represent the basis for
moving from “what is” to “what could be.”
2-27
Envision a preferred future
• Members then examine the identified themes, challenge

the status quo, and describe a compelling future.
• Based on the organization’s successful past, members
collectively visualize the organization’s future and develop
“possibility propositions”—statements that bridge the
organization’s current best practices with ideal
possibilities for future organizing.
• These propositions should present a truly exciting,
provocative, and possible picture of the future.

Envision a preferred future
• Based on these possibilities, members identify the relevant

stakeholders and critical organization processes that must
be aligned to support the emergence of the envisioned
future. The vision becomes a statement of “what should
be.”

Design and deliver ways to create
the future
• The final phase involves the design and delivery of ways to
create the future.
• It describes the activities and creates the plans necessary to
bring about the vision.
• It proceeds to action and assessment phases similar to those
of action research described previously. Members make
changes, assess the results, make necessary adjustments, and
so on as they move the organization toward the vision and
sustain “what will be.”
• The process is continued by renewing the conversations
about the best of what is.
Comparison of
Planned Change Models
• Similarities
– Change preceded by diagnosis or preparation
– Apply behavioral science knowledge
– Stress involvement of organization members
– Recognize the role of a consultant
• Differences
– General vs. specific activities
– Centrality of consultant role
– Problem-solving vs. social constructionism
General Model of Planned Change
Planning Evaluating
Entering and and
and Diagnosing Implementing Institutionalizing
Contracting Change Change

Different Types of
Planned Change
• Magnitude of Change
– Incremental
– Quantum
• Degree of Organization
– Overorganized
– Underorganized
• Domestic vs. International Settings
Critique of Planned Change
• Conceptualization of Planned Change
– Change in not linear
– Change is not rational
– The relationship between change and
performance is unclear
• Practice of Planned Change
– Limited consulting skills and focus
– Quick fixes vs. development approaches

Chapter 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Organization Development and Change

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-3

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-4

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-7

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-8

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-9

Data gathering & Action

Data gathering after

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-10

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-12

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-13

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-14

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-15

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-16

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-17

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-18

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-19

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-20

• This model represents an important

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-21

• The positive model has been applied to

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-22

• Social constructionism assumes that

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-23

Inquire into Best Practices

Envision a Preferred Future

Design and Deliver Ways to

• This first phase determines the subject of change. It emphasizes

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-25

• This phase involves gathering information about the “best

• Members then examine the identified themes, challenge

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-28

• Based on these possibilities, members identify the relevant

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-29

Cummings & Worley, 8e 2-32

You might also like