The Process and Practice of Organizational Development

04CH_Bierema_Organization_2e.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Economics homework help > The Process and Practice of Organizational Development

Action Research: The Planning Phase

Rawpixel/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Learning Outcomes After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Describe action research and compare Lewin’s model with those of at least two other OD theorists.

• State the importance of considering multiple levels of analysis in the planning phase. • Identify the steps of the planning phase. • Describe different types of research. • Describe different types of research methodologies. • Discuss five methods of gathering organization data, including strengths and weaknesses of each. • Discuss methods of analyzing the data collected. • Explain how to prepare for and manage the feedback meeting, including how to address

confidentiality concerns and manage defensiveness and resistance.

In Chapter 3, the QuickCo vignette provided one example of how OD consultants work. Jack, the internal OD consultant at QuickCo, led his clients, Ned (the shipping supervisor) and Sarah (the manufacturing manager), through an action research process to solve communication and teamwork problems in the shipping department. Action research, the process OD consultants follow to plan and implement change, follows three general phases:

1. Planning. Data is collected, analyzed, and shared with the client to determine corrective action.

2. Doing. Action is taken to correct the problem. 3. Checking. The effectiveness of the intervention is evaluated, and the cycle is

repeated as needed.

Let us return to the QuickCo vignette and examine the action research steps taken. Ned and Sarah met with Jack to outline how employees were at each other’s throats, letting conflicts fester, and failing to work well together. Their first meeting incorporated their planning phase. As explained in Chapter 3, this initial meeting is known as contracting. During the meeting, Jack asked questions to begin identifying the root cause of the conflicted department. The three struck a collaborative agreement and worked to devise a plan for resolving the issues.

The first action they took was to collect data. Jack reviewed the performance trends and cus- tomer complaints from the shipping department and interviewed the employees individually about their views on the problems.

The planning also involved analyzing the data Jack collected to arrive at a diagnosis. When he met with Ned and Sarah to share feedback from the data collection, Jack presented his analysis, noting, “Ned and Sarah, you have a dysfunctional team on your hands. They have no ground rules, collaboration, or means of handling conflict. Everyone needs to be more understanding and respectful toward each other. It would also be helpful to create some guidelines for how the team wants to operate and manage conflict. Ned, you also need to take a more active role in resolving issues.”

Jack laid the problems out in a matter-of-fact, nonjudgmental way. Once all the analyzed data was presented, the three worked jointly to plan an intervention to address the problems. They agreed to take the group through a facilitated process to address communication and team effectiveness. They also agreed that Ned would benefit from individualized executive coaching to help him learn behaviors that would be more productive for dealing with conflict.

The second phase of action research, doing, occurred when Jack, Ned, and Sarah scheduled the intervention with the shipping department and implemented it. The outcome of the intervention was a tangible plan for the department for how to be more effective, including specific actions they would take to address conflict.

The final phase, checking, involved Ned, Sarah, and Jack continuing to monitor the shipping department after the intervention. Ned helped the department uphold its new ground rules on a daily basis and coached employees to help them stick to the plan. He also asked for regular feed- back on his own management skills as part of his ongoing coaching. Ned, Sarah, and Jack reviewed departmental data on productivity and customer complaints and learned that the

Section 4.1A Review of Action Research

timeliness and accuracy of shipped orders had significantly improved. Jack followed up a few months later by conducting individual interviews with shipping department mem- bers. He discovered that the solutions had been maintained. If and when new conflicts arise, or new members join the team, it may be time to start the action research process over again to address new issues.

The QuickCo vignette demonstrates all three phases of the action research process. This chapter focuses on the first phase, plan- ning. Chapters 5 and 6 provide a similarly detailed look at the second and final phases, doing and checking, respectively. But before turning to the planning phase, let us review action research.

4.1 A Review of Action Research Chapter 1 defined OD as a process of planned change that is grounded in a humanistic, demo- cratic ethic. This specific process of planned change is known as action research.

Defining Action Research Action research is a recurring, collaborative effort between organization members and OD consultants to use data to resolve problems. As such, it involves data collection, analysis, intervention, and evaluation. Essentially, it is a repeating cycle of action and research, action and research. However, the words action research reverse the actual sequence (Brown, 1972), in that “research is conducted first and then action is taken as a direct result of what the research data are interpreted to indicate” (Burke, 1992, p. 54). Moreover, the cycle yields new knowledge about the organization and its issues that becomes useful for addressing future problems. It thereby allows organizations to improve processes and practices while simulta- neously learning about those practices and processes, the organization, and the change pro- cess itself.

Action research provides evidence, which enables a consultant to avoid guesswork about what the issue is and how to resolve it. According to French and Bell (1999),

Action research is the process of systematically collecting research data about an ongoing system relative to some objective, goal, or need of that system; feeding these data back into the system; taking actions by altering selected variables within the system based both on the data and on hypotheses; and evaluating the results of actions by collecting more data. (p. 130)

Catherine Yeulet/iStock/Thinkstock Following the action research process helped the QuickCo shipping department resolve employees’ interpersonal conflicts.

Section 4.1A Review of Action Research

Action Research Is a Democratic Approach to Problem Solving Many theorists have characterized action research as democratic and collaborative:

• “Action research is a participatory, democratic process concerned with developing practical knowing in the pursuit of worthwhile human purposes, grounded in a par- ticipatory worldview” (Reason & Bradbury, 2008, p. 1).

• “Action research is the application of the scientific method of fact-finding and experi- mentation to practical problems requiring action solutions and involving the col- laboration and cooperation of scientists, practitioners, and laypersons” (French & Bell, 1999, p. 131).

• “Action research approaches are radical to the extent that they advocate replacing existing forms of social organization” (Coghlan & Brannick, 2010, p. 6).

In addition, Coghlan and Brannick (2010) identified broad characteristics of action research:

• Research in action, rather than research about action • A collaborative, democratic partnership • Research concurrent with action • A sequence of events and an approach to problem solving (p. 4)

These definitions are similar in that they all characterize action research as a democratic, data-driven, problem-solving, learning-based approach to organization improvement. Some other examples of how organizations apply action research include a nonprofit organization that surveys donors or beneficiaries before engaging in strategic planning, a government department that conducts a needs analysis prior to a training program, or a corporation that conducts exit interviews before initiating recruitment for positions.

Action Research Helps Clients Build Capacity for Future Problem Solving Although typically guided by a consultant, action research engages key stakeholders in the process. Indeed, its effectiveness depends on the active engagement and accountability of the stakeholders. As discussed in Chapter 3, OD consultants are responsible for influencing the action research process while at the same time exercising restraint to avoid solving the problem for the client.

An example can illuminate how action research helps the client build problem-solving capac- ity. Suppose an organization introduces a process of assimilating new leaders when they join

Consider This Can you recall a project in your organization that involved members in a collaborative prob- lem-solving mission? Chances are it was action research, even if that terminology was not used. Can you think of any other examples?

Section 4.1A Review of Action Research

it (action). The organization hires a consultant to survey team members about this initiative’s effectiveness (research). The client and the consultant collaborate to develop the survey and analyze the results. What is learned informs continued assimilation of new leaders and the way the process gets modified (action). The client is initially engaged to learn the process so that it can be repeated in the future without the help of a consultant. The action research pro- cess helps the organization collect, analyze, and apply data to make informed decisions and not waste time and money on inappropriate interventions. Helping organizations become proficient at the action research process is the outcome of effective consulting, because the best consultants work themselves out of a job.

Models of Action Research Recall from Chapter 1 that action research originated with the work of Kurt Lewin, the father of OD. Lewin’s model (1946/1997) includes a prestep (in which the context and purpose of the OD effort are identified), followed by planning, action, and fact finding (evaluation). Sev- eral models of action research generally follow Lewin’s, although the number and names of steps may vary. See Table 4.1 for a comparison.

Table 4.1: Comparison of action research models to Lewin’s original model

Lewin’s (1946/1997) original action research steps

Cummings and Worley (2018)

Coghlan (2019) Stringer (2013)

1. Prestep to determine context and purpose

1. Entering and contracting

0. Prestep: Understanding context and purpose of the issue

1. Constructing: Determining what the issues are

1. Look a. Gather relevant

information b. Build a picture;

describe the situation

2. Planning 2. Diagnosing 2. Planning action 2. Think a. Explore and

analyze b. Interpret and

explain

3. Action 3. Planning and implementing change

3. Taking action 3. Act a. Plan b. Implement c. Evaluate

4. Fact finding (evaluation)

4. Evaluating and institutionalizing change

4. Evaluating action

Section 4.1A Review of Action Research

Figure 4.1: Plan, do, check action research cycle

The plan, do, check model of action research was popularized by the total quality movement. The contemporary research cycle has more steps, although it essentially accomplishes the same steps of diagnosing and designing (plan), implementing (do), and evaluating (check).

The model of action research used in this book has three phases, paralleling Lewin’s (1946/1997) model (Figure 4.1): planning, doing, and checking. (See Who Invented That? Plan, Do, Check Cycle to read about the person who originally developed plan, do, check.) Each phase has substeps derived from multiple action research models:

1. Planning (the discovery phase)

a. Diagnosing the issue b. Gathering data on the issue c. Analyzing the data gathered d. Sharing feedback (data analysis) with the client e. Planning of action to address the issue

2. Doing (the action phase)

a. Learning related to the issue b. Changing related to the issue

3. Checking (the evaluative phase)

a. Assessing changes

Plan

Check Do

Action research cycle

Section 4.2Planning: The Discovery Phase

b. Adjusting processes c. Ending or recycling (back to the planning stage) the action research process

The action research steps may look simple, and it may appear that planning change is a neat, orderly, and rational process. In reality, though, it can be chaotic, political, and shifting, with unexpected developments and outcomes. Nevertheless, learning the action research process equips consultants with a proven method for navigating such shifts as they work with clients on organization challenges.

4.2 Planning: The Discovery Phase When beginning an OD intervention, the initial steps taken to identify the problem and gather data about it are known as planning. The planning phase is a diagnostic one. The client and consultant work with other organization stakeholders to study the problem and determine the difference between desired outcomes and actual outcomes. The discrepancy between what is and what should be is known as a performance gap. For example, if an organization aspires to be first in quality in the industry but lags behind in second or third place, that would be a performance gap. The organization would have to engage in performance improvement practices to close the gap with its competitors. Or, perhaps a leader receives feedback that she is not as skilled at leadership as she had thought. The leader begins to work with a mentor or coach to identify what behaviors she needs to be more effective. By improving listening, rec- ognition, and delegation behaviors, the leader begins to narrow the gap between her current and desired future leadership performance.

Organizations perform gap analysis to assess reasons for a gap between reality and the desired outcome. The performance gap idea can also be applied to yourself. Let us say you aspire to a managerial position but have not achieved it. Upon analyzing the gap, you realize you lack the training and experience to attain the position. If you decide to eliminate the gap, you might enroll in a graduate program, earn a leadership certificate, or find a mentor to help you attain your goal. Consider a performance gap you have experienced and complete the chart in Figure 4.2.

Who Invented That? Plan, Do, Check Cycle Although often attributed to quality guru W. Edwards Deming, the plan, do, check cycle was created by Walter A. Shewhart of Bell Labs. Shewhart was an American physicist, engineer, and statistician who was one of the originators of statistical quality control, which preceded the total quality movement.

Consider This In your life, what example do you have of action research? How have you employed plan, do, check? What actions or adjustments were necessary?

Section 4.2Planning: The Discovery Phase

Figure 4.2: Performance gap analysis

Use this chart to assess your own performance gap. Identify a desired reality—perhaps running a 5K. Next, honestly note your current performance goal: Can you run around the block? Run or walk for a mile? Once you determine the gap, fill out the middle column with specific action steps to move closer to your goal—how will you close the gap? To download an interactive version of this figure, visit your e-book.

Now that you have applied the gap analysis to yourself, let’s think about using it in an orga- nization setting. Identify a desired reality—perhaps being first to market with a new tech- nology. Next, honestly note the organization’s current reality. In the case of introducing the technology: Does it have the right people to do the work? Is the technology ready for market? Is the marketing campaign ready to go? Once you determine the gap, fill out the middle col- umn with specific action steps to move the organization closer to its goal—how will you close the gap? What would be the desired reality in your own organization? How equipped is it to close the gap? What other performance gaps have you experienced?

Benefits of the Planning Phase Planning is a critical phase of OD, because poor plans will result in poor outcomes such as fix- ing the wrong problem, wasting time and resources, and frustrating organization members. The benefits of good planning include setting the OD process up for success through careful analysis and diagnosis of the problem; engaging organization members from the beginning in the processes of collaboration, ongoing learning, and capacity building in the action research process; and prioritizing issues. See Tips and Wisdom: Alan Lakein to read and apply tips about planning.

Tips and Wisdom: Alan Lakein Time management guru Alan Lakein is credited with coining the phrase “Failing to plan is plan- ning to fail” (as cited in Johnson & Louis, 2013, para. 1). This advice is to be heeded in OD. Plan- ning is key to effective interventions. How does Lakein’s quotation apply to your experience?

Current reality Steps to close the gap Desired reality

Section 4.2Planning: The Discovery Phase

Levels of Analysis Before we delve into the steps of the planning phase, we should understand the location of the OD effort—that is, the level at which the action research might occur. This is known as the level of analysis. The OD effort might focus on the individual, group, organization, or sys- tem. Each level comes with its own issues, needs, and appropriate interventions. These levels, along with appropriate interventions, were discussed in Chapter 2.

All levels of analysis, from the individual to the system, face similar issues. Cockman, Evans, and Reynolds (1996) categorized organization issues according to purpose and task, struc- ture, people, rewards, procedures, or technology:

• Purpose and task refers to identifying the reason the organization exists and how its members advance its mission.

• Structure pertains to reporting relationships and how formal and informal power relations affect the organization.

• People issues relate to relationships, leadership, training, communication, emotions, motivation and morale, and organization culture.

• Rewards systems include financial and nonfinancial incentives available for perfor- mance and perceived equity among employees.

• Procedures include decision-making processes, formal communication channels, and policies. These are an important category for analysis.

• Technology involves assessing whether the organization has the necessary equip- ment, machinery, technology, information, and transport to accomplish its tasks.

Table 4.2 identifies questions to ask about each area of Cockman, Evans, and Reynolds’s levels of analysis.

Table 4.2: Cockman, Evans, and Reynolds’s organizational issues and diagnostic questions

Organizational issues Diagnostic questions

Purpose and tasks • What business are we in? • What do people do?

Structure • Who reports to whom? • Where is the power?

People • How are relationships managed? • What training is provided? • Who communicates with whom? • How do people feel? • How high is motivation and morale? • What is the culture?

Rewards • What are the incentives to perform well?

Procedures • What are the decision-making procedures? • What are the channels of communication? • What are the control systems?

Technology • Does the organization have the necessary equipment, machinery, information technology, transport, and information?

Source: From Client-Centered Consulting: Getting Your Expertise Used When You’re Not in Charge, by P. Cockman, B. Evans, & P. Reynolds, 1996, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Section 4.2Planning: The Discovery Phase

Identify a performance gap you are aware of personally or professionally and see if you can answer Cockman, Evans, and Reynolds’s questions.

Steps in the Planning Phase The steps in the planning phase include identifying the problem area, gathering data, analyz- ing the data, sharing feedback, and planning action. These steps illuminate the core problem and identify key information for making an intervention.

Step 1: Preliminary Diagnosis of the Issue When an OD process is initiated, it is imperative that the problem be correctly defined. Doing so involves a process of diagnosis. A consultant’s job is to push the client to identify the root cause of the problem, rather than its symptoms. Considering the QuickCo example, it might have been easy for Ned to decide to put the department through a customer service training based on the symptoms of late, erroneous orders. Had he done so, however, it likely would have worsened matters, because no amount of customer service training would fix the department’s interpersonal conflicts, poor communication, and ineffective conflict reso- lution. It may take intensive study and data collection to accurately diagnose a problem, but doing so is well worth it.

The action research process begins by defining a problem that warrants attention. Consul- tants must ask good questions to illuminate a problem’s source. They can then move on to the next step in the planning phase. Questions a consultant might ask a client include the following:

• “What do you think is causing the problem?” • “What have you tried to fix it?” • “How has this attempt to fix the problem worked?” • “What has been stopping you from fully addressing this issue?”

In addition to asking questions to pinpoint the issue, consultants must ask questions about who else will be involved in the OD effort. Also, as Chapter 3 explored, a consultant needs to uncover the client’s expectations regarding the duration of the project and make sure the cli- ent is willing to assume an equal responsibility for outcomes.

Good questioning enhances one’s authenticity as a consultant. How have you diagnosed problems in your organization? Have you ever misdiagnosed an issue? What were the consequences?

Step 2: Gathering Data on the Issue Once QuickCo diagnosed the team’s lack of communication and interpersonal effectiveness as the source of the problem, it was ready to collect information to inform next steps. This is known as data gathering. Data can be gathered in many ways. The most common data col- lection methods in action research include interviews, questionnaires, focus groups, direct observation, and document analysis.

Section 4.2Planning: The Discovery Phase

Jack, the internal QuickCo consultant, took several steps to better understand the problem. He reviewed performance trends and customer complaints, inter- viewed department members, and relied on his own working knowledge and observations of the department to formulate a solid understanding of the issues. What types of data have you gathered to better understand organiza- tion issues? Methods of data gathering are explored in detail in the next section of this chapter.

Step 3: Analyzing the Data Once data has been collected, it must be turned into something meaningful and useful for the client. Data collected to provide information about a problem is not useful until it is inter- preted in ways that inform the issue and provide clues to possible interventions. For example, a survey is not helpful unless it is examined within the organization’s context. Data analysis will be more fully defined in the data analysis methods section later in this chapter.

Step 4: Sharing Feedback With the Client Once data has been collected and analyzed, a feedback meeting is scheduled in which results are presented to the client. In the QuickCo example, Jack met with Ned and Sarah to share his analysis. Feedback meetings require careful planning to keep the consultancy on track. Consultants should decide on the key purpose and desired outcomes for the meeting. For example, do they want the client to better understand the problem? Agree on a course of action? Confront some issues affecting the problem? Sharing feedback with the client involves determining the focus of the feedback meeting, developing the agenda for feedback, recogniz- ing different types of feedback, presenting feedback effectively, managing the consulting pres- ence during the meeting, addressing confidentiality concerns, and anticipating defensiveness and resistance.

Step 5: Planning Action to Address the Issue The last step of the planning or discovery phase is to plan the action that will be taken. This planning might occur during the feedback meeting, or you might schedule a time at a later date to give the client an opportunity to digest the data analysis and feedback. The outcome of the planning is to design the activity, action, or event that will be the organization’s response to the issue. This is known as an intervention. The type of intervention selected depends on the organization’s readiness and capability to change, the cultural context, and the capabilities of the OD consultant and internal change agent (Cummings & Worley, 2018). The intervention will also target strategy, technology and structure, and human resource or human process issues. The consultant and the client will collaboratively plan the appropriate intervention(s) to address the issue. Chapter 5 will address interventions in detail.

Filo/DigitalVision Vectors/Getty Images Plus Collecting data ensures the OD process is evidence based.

Section 4.3Types of Research

4.3 Types of Research OD is a joint endeavor between the client and the consultant that includes data gathering and analysis. Involving clients in the data collection process reinforces their commitment to the OD process. The consultant’s role in this process is to help the client focus on the root cause of the problem and to organize the data collection and interpretation. A consultant’s objectivity can be very helpful to clients, enhancing their understanding of how they might be contribut- ing to the problem or how the issue plays out within the broader organization context.

Einstein is credited with saying, “If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?” (as cited in Albert Einstein Site, 2012, para. 4). People conduct research when they have questions that do not have obvious answers. Depending on the question they wish to answer, there are differing types of research.

Basic Research The word research might evoke images of people working in labs, examining petri dish cul- tures, and making new discoveries. This type of research is known as basic research, and it generally creates or extends the knowledge base of a discipline such as medicine, physics, or chemistry through experiments that allow researchers to test hypotheses and examine per- plexing questions. Basic research results in new discoveries and theories and includes inno- vations such as testing cures for cancer, establishing scientific laws such as gravity, or refuting previously held beliefs such as the world being flat. There are other types of research beyond basic, and they vary based on the type of question being asked.

Applied Research When people seek to answer questions such as “What is the best way to facilitate learning during change?” or “How do we motivate employees to embrace new technology?” they are usually seeking to improve practice within a certain field. This is known as applied research because its results are germane to problems and issues within a particular setting such as business. This type of research is practical and helps people solve problems, but unlike basic research, it does not necessarily yield new knowledge. OD is applied research because it asks questions about challenges that are unique to the individual organizational context in which they are located but does not necessarily expand our understanding of human behavior in organizations.

Action Research Action research explores specific problems within a locality such as an organization or com- munity. It might ask questions such as “How can we prevent employees from leaving Com- pany A at a rate three times higher than the industry standard?” “How can Hospital B imple- ment an electronic health record with minimal disruption to patient care?” or “How can we lower poverty rates in Community C?” As the name implies and we have already covered, action research involves recurring cycles of study and action regarding a problem within a specific context. Action research is participative because it usually involves members of the organization.

Section 4.4Research Methodology

OD generally engages in both applied research and action research because it aims to improve practice (applied) within a specific context (action). When you engage in action research, you are conducting a systematic inquiry on a particular organization problem by methodically collecting and analyzing data to provide evidence on which to base your intervention. When people do research in organizations, they are seeking not so much to generate new knowl- edge (or cure diseases) as to improve the quality of organization life. Action research is there- fore a form of applied research because it seeks to directly address organization problems and respond to opportunities in ways that improve the organization for all its stakeholders.

Evaluation Research People may also want to judge the quality of something like an educational program, confer- ence, or OD intervention. Here they might ask, “How was the learned information applied?” “What was the most effective mode of delivery of instruction?” or “What are people doing differently as a result of the intervention?” This type of research is known as evaluation research. Evaluation seeks to establish the value of programs or interventions and judge their usefulness. Evaluation can occur during the OD process, especially when the process is being evaluated before, during, or after the intervention. We will learn more about evaluation research in OD in Chapter 6. Refer to Table 4.3 for further description of the different types of research.

Table 4.3: Different types of research

Basic Applied Action Evaluation

• Contributes to knowledge base in field (basic, pure)

• Experimental • Tests hypotheses • Seeks to answer

perplexing problems

• Improves practice in discipline (applied)

• Seeks to describe, interpret, or understand problems within specific settings

• Will not necessarily create new knowledge

• Addresses particular, local problem (action research)

• Systematic inquiry • Addresses specific

problem within specific setting

• Often involves participants

• Focused on practical problems, social change

• Assesses value • Measures worth or

value of program, process, or technique

• Judges accomplishments and effectiveness

• Establishes decision-making basis

4.4 Research Methodology In addition to the four types of research based on the types of questions asked, research can also be classified according to the type of methodology that is used to collect data. Methodol- ogy represents the overarching philosophy and approach to collecting data.

Qualitative Research Methodology When seeking to understand “how” a phenomenon occurs or unfolds (“How do leaders best develop?”) or inquire into the nature or meaning of something (“How does participation on a

Section 4.4Research Methodology

high-performing team affect individual identity and performance?”), a qualitative methodol- ogy is appropriate. Qualitative methodology is concerned with “understanding the mean- ing people have constructed” (italics in original, Merriam & Tisdell, 2015, p. 15) and as “an umbrella term covering an array of interpretive techniques which seek to describe, decode, translate, and otherwise come to terms with the meaning, not the frequency, of certain more- or-less naturally occurring phenomena in the social world” (Van Maanen, 1979, p. 520).

Qualitative inquiry is not generally quantifiable but rather provides convincing evidence. Qualitative data is generated from methods such as interviews, focus groups, or observations that are commonly conducted as part of the discovery phase of action research. Qualitative methods are rooted in constructivist philosophy—the idea that people build meaning from experience and interpret their meanings in different ways. For example, two people would likely define the meaning of life differently.

Qualitative research occurs within the social setting or field of practice, and data collection is often referred to as “fieldwork” or being in the “field.” Qualitative approaches can effec- tively address organization members’ everyday concerns, help consultants understand and improve their practice, and inform decisions. Examples of qualitative questions asked in OD include “Why are employees dissatisfied with Organization Y?” and “What specific concerns do employees have about anticipated changes in the organization?” Qualitative methodology uses techniques that allow deep exploration of social phenomena through interviews, obser- vations, focus groups, or analysis of documents.

Qualitative Research Characteristics Qualitative research focuses on building meaning and understanding about social phenom- ena. The researcher (generally the consultant in OD) is the primary instrument for data col- lection and analysis. This means that it is the consultant who conducts interviews, focus groups, or observations and then interprets or analyzes their meaning. Interpretation is con- sidered an inductive process—that is, meaning is inferred from the data through a process of comparison, reflection, and theme building. Unlike quantitative methodology, where study participants are often collected at random, qualitative participants are selected purposefully and are individuals who can provide informed accounts of the topic under study. For example, if a consultant wants to know about the experiences of new employees, he or she obviously needs to ask new employees.

Qualitative Analysis and Results Qualitative analysis provides a detailed account of the phenomenon. Direct quotations from participants and a full depiction of the setting, issue, or individuals under study is known as rich description. The design of a qualitative study is emergent and flexible, meaning that the questions may change as new insights are gained. For example, if Sarah is conducting focus groups on issues faced by new employees, a topic may arise that she wants to query future groups about as she collects data.

Quantitative Research Methodology When people want to know “how much” or “how many” of something, they generally seek a quantitative methodology. For example, a researcher might ask, “What are the percentage

Section 4.4Research Methodology

breakdowns of employee satisfaction in Organization Y, from very dissatisfied to very satis- fied?” or “What is our organization’s productivity rate compared with the industry standard?” Quantitative methods assume there is one correct answer to a question. This type of research yields statistical descriptions and predictions of the topics under study.

Recall from earlier coverage in this book the process of survey feedback, in which employees are given a questionnaire about the organization’s management, culture, or atmosphere. Sur- veys are regularly used in OD to assess issues such as attitudes, individual performance, and technology needs or to evaluate certain functions or products. Surveys provide quantifiable data, such as what percentage of employees feel management is doing a good job or what percentage of employees plan to look for other work in the coming year.

Quantitative Research Characteristics Quantitative techniques include surveys, questionnaires, and experiments that may involve testing with control groups. For example, Team A might be trained on effective team dynam- ics and facilitation procedures. Its productivity and performance might then be measured against Team B, which received no prior training. Quantitative studies are carefully designed, and once data collection begins, they are not changed. For example, if Jonas were administer- ing a survey to a population, he would not change the questions halfway through data collec- tion. Samples in a quantitative study are random and large. A corporation of 40,000 employ- ees being surveyed on their opinions about health benefits would target a smaller number of randomly selected workers to provide a representation of what the majority of workers would likely prefer.

Quantitative Analysis and Results Quantitative data is analyzed using a deductive process in which the numbers or statistics will be used to determine an understanding of what is being studied. Assuming a benefits survey was conducted in the previous example, the organization might learn that 60% of employees prefer managed care, 40% want vision, and only 30% want dental insurance. The company would use this information to modify its benefits packages.

Table 4.4 compares and contrasts qualitative and quantitative methods.

Table 4.4: Comparison of qualitative and quantitative research methods

Comparison Qualitative Quantitative

Research focus Quality (nature, essence) Quantity (how much, how many)

Philosophical roots Phenomenology, symbolic inter- actionism, constructivism

Positivism, logical empiricism, realism

Associated phrases Fieldwork, ethnographic, natu- ralistic, grounded, constructivist

Experimental, empirical, statistical

Goal of investigation Understanding, description, discovery, meaning, hypothesis generating

Prediction, control, description, confirmation, hypothesis testing

(continued on next page)

Section 4.5Research Methods

Table 4.4: Comparison of qualitative and quantitative research methods (continued)

Comparison Qualitative Quantitative

Design Flexible, evolving, emergent Predetermined, structured

Sample Small, nonrandom, purposeful, theoretical

Large, random, representative

Data collection Researcher as primary instru- ment, interviews, observation, documents

Inanimate instruments (scales, tests, surveys, questionnaires, computers)

Analysis Inductive, constant comparative method

Deductive, statistical

Findings Comprehensive, holistic, richly descriptive

Precise, numerical

4.5 Research Methods Research methods are procedures used to collect data. They are based on the type of research methodology used. Methods typically used in OD are profiled in this section.

Interviews A conversation facilitated by the consultant for the purpose of soliciting a participant’s opin- ions, observations, and beliefs is an interview. Interviews give participants the opportunity to explain their experience, record their views and perspectives, and legitimize their under- standings of the phenomenon under study (Stringer, 2013). The interviews at QuickCo likely asked employees about departmental problems, communication, leadership, and so forth. Conducting interviews requires constructing questions that best address the issues under investigation. For example, Jack might have asked the QuickCo shipping employees these questions:

• “What do you see as the top three challenges in the shipping department?” • “Can you tell me about a specific event that contributed to the problems you face

today?” • “What has to change for you to be happy here?” • “What have you tried to resolve the problem?” • “What role have you played in the shipping department?” • “How likely are you to leave your position in the next year?”

Recording interviews can be useful, but make sure you have permission from the participant (interviewee) and prepare and test the recording equipment in advance. If you are not able to record, you will want to take notes, but this is not ideal because it distracts you from what the interviewee is sharing.

Interviews have several strengths. They provide in-depth insight into an interviewee’s opin- ions, attitudes, thoughts, preferences, and experiences. Interviews allow the interviewer to

Section 4.5Research Methods

probe and pose follow-up questions. Interviews can be done rapidly, particularly by tele- phone and email, and they tend to elicit high response rates.

Interviews also have several weaknesses, including that they can be costly and time consum- ing, especially when done in person. Interviewees may answer in ways they think will please the interviewer rather than tell the truth. The quality of the interview is dependent on an interviewer’s skill and ability to avoid bias and ask good questions. To avoid bias, an inter- viewer should set aside expectations about the problem and solutions and truly listen to what the participants say during data collection. Interviewees may lack self-awareness or forget important information and thus fail to provide good data. They may also have confidentiality and trust concerns. Data analysis can also be time consuming.

Questionnaires A questionnaire is an electronic or paper form that has a standardized set of questions intended to assess opinions, observations, and beliefs about a specific topic, such as employee satisfaction. It is a quantitative method. Questionnaires are also known as surveys, and one of OD’s first interventions was survey research, as was discussed in Chapter 1. Questionnaires measure attitudes and other content from research participants. The results can be quanti- fied, often to show statistical significance of the responses.

Questionnaires are commonly administered to employees to inquire about the organiza- tion’s culture and climate and their satisfaction levels with their work, management, and relationships. Participants are usually asked to rate the questionnaire items using a Likert scale (described in Chapter 1). For example, they might rate an item such as “Management is concerned with my welfare” on a 5-point scale from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree.” Questionnaires should feature clearly written questions that will yield actionable information.

Questionnaires and surveys have several benefits. They are inexpensive to adminis- ter, especially if done electronically or in groups. Software programs make surveys relatively easy to develop and distribute. Questionnaires provide insights into partic- ipants’ opinions, thoughts, and preferences. They allow rapid data collection and are generally trusted for confidentiality and anonymity. Questionnaires are reliable and valid when well constructed and permit open-ended data to be collected, as well as exact responses to direct questions.

Questionnaires and surveys also pose some challenges. They should be kept short or participants may not complete them. Participants may answer in ways they think please you instead of telling the truth. They may not respond to certain items at all, especially if the wording is unclear. Participants may not trust confidentiality or may feel that the survey is tedious; thus, the response rate may be low. Finally, data analysis can be time consuming for open-ended items.

AnreyPopov/iStock/Getty Images Plus Surveys and questionnaires are common data collection methods used in OD.

Section 4.5Research Methods

Focus Groups A group of approximately eight to 12 participants assembled to answer questions about a certain topic is known as a focus group. Focus groups are similar to interviews, but they are conducted collectively and facilitated by a moderator. Developing targeted questions is important, as is inviting the right people who possess insight and experience relevant to the problem. Focus group sessions should be recorded and transcribed verbatim, with partici- pants’ permission.

Focus groups are beneficial for understanding participants’ thinking and perspectives, as well as for exploring new ideas and concepts. Participants can generate new knowledge and ideas, especially if they build off each other’s remarks. Focus groups might also yield in-depth infor- mation about problems or potential fixes. They can offer insight into the client organization’s relationships and communications and may provide an opportunity to probe relationship issues. Focus groups are relatively easy to organize and represent an efficient way to collect data from several stakeholders simultaneously.

Focus groups also pose challenges. They might be expensive to conduct if participants are brought in from multiple locations. Finding a skilled facilitator can be difficult. Participants may be suspect of the process and have confidentiality concerns. Participants may also be overbearing, negative, or dominant during the session, so adroit facilitation is needed. If employees are angry or worried, their emotions can dominate. Focus groups can also gener- ate voluminous findings that may not be generalizable if the participants are not representa- tive of the organization or that may not be relevant to the issue under investigation. Finally, large amounts of data may be time consuming to analyze. Consultants should hone their focus group facilitation skills, and resources for building this competency are listed at the end of this chapter.

Direct Observation Suppose Nina watches people, meetings, events, work processes, or day-to-day activity in the organization setting and records what she sees. Nina is undertaking direct observation. This data collection method involves recording observations in the form of field notes. Stringer (2013) listed typical observations made in action research:

• Places: the contexts where people work, live, and socialize, including the physical layout

• People: the personalities, roles, formal positions, and relationships experienced by participants

• Objects: the artifacts in our contexts such as buildings, furniture, equipment, and materials

• Acts: the actions people take (signing a form, asking a question) • Activities: a set of related acts (e.g., facilitating a meeting) • Events: a set of related activities (e.g., putting on a training session) • Purposes: what people are trying to accomplish • Time: times, frequency, duration, and sequencing of events and activities • Feelings: emotional orientations and responses to people, events, activities, and

so forth

Section 4.5Research Methods

Direct observation has several benefits. It allows direct insight into what people are doing, avoiding the need to rely on what they say they do. Observation offers firsthand experience, especially if the observer participates in activities he or she observes. This is known as par- ticipant observation, and it is just as useful for observing what happens as for what does not (for example, a manager may tell you she involves employees in decision making, but you may observe her doing the opposite). An observation might yield valuable details that offer insight into the organization’s context and politics that organization members may miss. Observa- tional data may also provide a springboard from which to raise issues that people would otherwise be unwilling to talk about.

Direct observation also poses challenges. It may be impossible to determine a rationale for observed behavior. If people know they are being observed, they may alter their behavior. Observations may be clouded by personal bias and selective perception. One must avoid over- identifying with the studied group so that observations are objective (this is especially chal- lenging in the case of participant observation). Doing observation can be time consuming, and access may sometimes be limited, depending on the type of organization. A consultant may have to sort through observations that seem meaningless in relation to the problem. Data analysis can also be time consuming.

See Tips and Wisdom: Effective Observation to read advice about undertaking productive observation.

Tips and Wisdom: Effective Observation Doing effective observations requires planning, skill, and focus. Here are some tips to make your observa- tions more robust:

1. Determine the purpose of the observation. Observations can be used to understand a wide range of activities in organizations such as how employees respond to a new office layout, how customers engage with employees, how supervisors relate to their subordinates, or how certain procedures are executed. You should be able to state in one sentence the focus of your observation: The purpose of this observation is to document the use of personal safety equipment usage [specify time, procedure, or location]. Or per- haps you are more interested in the nature of interaction: The purpose of this observation is to understand what types of questions medical professionals ask during a clinic. Specific- ity saves the consultant from capturing a lot of extraneous data. In the first example, you might note the frequency and types of personal safety equipment used, and the

(continued on next page)

DragonImages/iStock/Getty Images Plus Tips for conducting effective observation are to determine the purpose and what is relevant, decide how to document, and report observations directly rather than interpreting.

Section 4.5Research Methods

Document Analysis Document analysis involves reviewing relevant records, texts, brochures, or websites to gain insight into organization functioning, problem solving, politics, culture, or other issues. Docu- ments might include memoranda, meeting minutes, records, reports, policies, procedures, bylaws, plans, evaluation reports, press accounts, public relations materials, vision state- ments, newsletters, and websites. Most organizations have a prolific amount of documen- tation, so using this type of data requires a clear focus and purpose. For example, Jack, our QuickCo consultant, reviewed performance trends and customer complaints to better under- stand the shipping department’s problems. If Jack were trying to help an executive improve communication skills, he might review his client’s email correspondence to determine how effectively and respectfully the executive communicates. This type of data collection can sig- nificantly inform the OD initiative.

Documents provide several advantages, including access to historical data on people, groups, and the organization, as well as insight into what people think and do. Document analysis is an unobtrusive data collection method, which minimizes negative reactions. Certain docu- ments might also prove useful for corroborating other data collected; for example, Jack could compare the executive’s email communications with colleagues’ accounts collected through interviews.

Tips and Wisdom: Effective Observation (continued) conditions when it is not. In the second example, you might be interested in who

is asking the questions, assumptions made about the cases, or what emotions are expressed. Clarity about purpose increases the likelihood of seeing what you are seeking.

2. Determine what is relevant to the observation. If you are observing participation and team dynamics during a meeting, what occurs during an outside interruption of the meeting is probably irrelevant to what is going on in the team.

3. Decide how to document the observation. Your choices include videotaping, audiotap- ing, photography, and notetaking. There is not a perfect method. Technology-assisted video or audio recording might subdue participants who feel self-conscious about the information they are sharing or are fearful of reprisals. Notes can miss key information and quickly lose their meaning. Notetaking can be assisted by creating a shorthand for participants (e.g., “ee” for “employee” and “mgr” for “manager”). Practice taking notes to build skill. Use more than one notetaker and then compare findings. Finally, create a checklist for the observation to make it easy to record items, such as a list of behav- iors during meetings (interruptions, new ideas, constructive criticism, building on ideas, etc.).

4. Avoid interpreting what is observed and instead report it directly. So, if you were observing personal safety equipment usage, you might say “Person A did not wear safety glasses” instead of “Person A appeared to be distracted and hurried and forgot to put on safety glasses.” You will likely have to pair observations with interviews or focus groups to understand intentions behind behaviors and interactions you witness.

Section 4.6Methods of Analyzing the Data

On the other hand, documents may provide little insight into participants’ thinking or behav- ior or may not apply to general populations. They can also be unwieldy and overwhelming in the action research process. Confidential documents may sometimes be difficult to access.

Additional Data Sources Although interviews, questionnaires, focus groups, direct observation, and document analy- sis are the most commonly used OD data sources, other sources of information include the following:

• Tests and simulations: Structured situations to assess an individual’s knowledge or proficiency to perform a task or behavior. For example, some organizations might use an inbox activity to assess delegation skills during a hiring process. Others use psychological tests to measure ethics, personality preferences, or behaviors. These instruments can be used in hiring, team development, management development, conflict resolution, and other activities.

• Product reviews: Reviews of products or services from internal or external sources. These can be useful for addressing quality or market issues.

• Performance reviews: Formal records of employee performance. These can be par- ticularly useful for individual interventions that are developmental or for succession planning on an organization level.

• Competitor information and benchmarking: Comparative analyses of what competi- tors are doing regarding the issue under exploration. Examples might include salary, market, or product comparisons.

• Environmental scanning: Analysis of political, economic, social, and technological events and trends that influence the organization now or in the future.

• Critical incidents: Interviews that ask participants to identify a specific task or experience and pinpoint when it went well, when it did not go well, and what they learned. Critical incidents were first used in military pilot training to identify and eliminate mistakes.

4.6 Methods of Analyzing the Data The most common types of research in OD are survey research using quantitative methods and qualitative inquiry that could employ interviews, focus groups, observa- tion, document analysis, or a combination thereof. As you recall, quantitative methods are used to determine “how much,” while qualitative methods are used to determine “how.” We have already identified the many methods for collecting data; now, what do you do with it?

Data points are simply bits of information until they are assimilated in ways that tell a story or provide deeper understanding of

ktasimarr/iStock/Getty Images Plus A consultant’s role is not just to collect data but to analyze its significance and present findings to the client.

Section 4.6Methods of Analyzing the Data

a phenomenon. For instance, employee responses on a survey about job satisfaction are just numbers on a page until interpreted. Once you know that 35% of respondents are only mod- erately satisfied and are clustered within a certain division or job classification, then you can begin to understand the scope of the problem and consider interventions.

A consultant’s job is to make sense of data and present it to the client. Such a presentation should be in plain language and in quantities that the client can easily manage. It is advis- able to involve the client and other relevant organization members in the presentation of the analysis, because doing so promotes buy-in, collaboration, and accurate data interpretation.

There are several steps to analyzing data effectively. These steps differ depending on whether you are doing qualitative or quantitative analysis. It is beyond the scope of this book to fully train you as a researcher, so it is a good idea to gain additional training and experience in this area if it interests you. Until you gain experience with data analysis, it is recommended that you partner with someone who is an expert. If you have access to a university or other orga- nizational research team, this can be an easy way of both finding a research expert and devel- oping a research partnership. Such relationships help bridge theory and practice and can be great opportunities to enhance your learning. There are also some suggestions for continued learning listed at the end of this chapter. Case Study: Data Collection and Analysis at Jolt Trans- formers offers an example of how to ensure effective data analysis.

Case Study: Data Collection and Analysis at Jolt Transformers Jo Lee of Design Solutions Consulting receives a phone call from Rex James of Jolt Transform- ers. “Rex, what can I do for you?” asks Jo, who has done work for Jolt in the past. “Jo, we’ve got a problem with our technicians,” Rex replies. “We can’t keep them. We hire them and train them, and then they go work for the competition for more money. Then the cycle repeats and it seems we wind up hiring folks back again until they can jump ship for more cash. Our manage- ment team thinks they need more training.”

“What makes you think that, Rex?” Jo is skeptical that training is the solution in this case. She listens a bit longer and sets up a time to meet with Rex and his division CEO. During the meet- ing, Jo asks several questions about the extent of the problem and what steps have been taken to address it. The three agree that the first step is to collect more data to understand the scope of the problem. They decide on a three-pronged approach: a survey of technicians, interviews with key executives, and focus groups with selected technicians. These methods will provide both quantitative and qualitative data.

Over the coming weeks, Jo and Rex work on developing a survey with a small team that includes technician supervisors, technicians, and human resource personnel. They administer the survey to each of the company’s 75 technicians. The survey results show that 70% are dis- satisfied with their careers at Jolt and 62% are planning to apply elsewhere in the next year. Jo and Rex also develop interview questions for the executives and a format and questions for the technician focus groups.

During the interviews, it becomes clear to Jo that the executives believe the problem is that the company lacks a training institute for technicians. A couple of executives want her to design a curriculum to train the technicians more effectively. Jo is highly skeptical of this assumption, however, because it runs counter to what she is learning from the technicians. Other executives

(continued on next page)

Case Study: Data Collection and Analysis at Jolt Transformers (continued) express concern that the company is not investing appropriately in the development and retention of its work force. Jo thinks they might be on to something.

During the focus groups with technicians, Jo hears comments such as these:

“There is no clear career path at Jolt. The only way to progress is to go elsewhere.”

“The company doesn’t seem interested in us at all. They just want us to produce—the faster, the better.”

“The competing companies provide a much better orientation program and connect you with a mentor to help you develop your skills.”

“It’s a mystery what you have to do to get promoted around here. Instead of moving up, you might as well just plan to move out.”

During the weeks that Jo collects and analyzes data, she undertakes several measures to pro- mote a thorough, effective analysis. Each is discussed as a tenet of effective analysis related to the case.

Design a systematic approach; keep a data log. Jo works with a team from Jolt to design a process for collecting quantitative and qualitative data. As the data collection process unfolds, Jo keeps a detailed log of the steps taken, especially for the interviews and focus groups. These notes allow her to tweak the interview and focus group questions based on what she learns.

When you use data logs, you can keep them in the form of a journal or official memoranda that highlight key steps, decisions, and emerging themes. These logs might include visual images of what you are learning, such as models, system diagrams, or pictures. Write notes to yourself as you analyze. Thoroughly documenting your procedures is good practice and should allow another person to step in and repeat your data collection and analysis procedures.

Allow data to influence what is learned. Jo listens and watches carefully as she collects data. Her attention to detail offers her new insights into prevailing assumptions at play in the organization. She is able to add questions to the interviews and focus groups that push participants to think more broadly about the problem. For example, she pushes executives to provide evidence that a training institute would result in better retention of employees. When the executives find they cannot provide clear answers, they reflect more deeply on the problem. Jo is also able to probe more around the lack of development and retention activities going on in the organization.

Constantly compare qualitative data. Constant comparison earned its name because it involves a repetitive process of comparing themes that appear in the data until the researcher arrives at a cogent list that satisfactorily explains the phenomenon. This involves careful study, note making, and looking for patterns in the data. Having more than one set of eyes coding the data and generating themes helps verify the analysis.

In the case of Jolt, two themes were found from the data analysis:

1. Technicians were dissatisfied with a. the lack of a career path and b. the level of support for advancement and growth.

2. Jolt was lacking a. long-term strategies for recruitment, retention, and development of technicians and