The Process and Practice of Organizational Development

05CH_Bierema_Organization_2e.pdf

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

Action Research: The Doing Phase

monkeybusinessimages/iStock/Getty Images Plus

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

• Describe factors that influence a client and organization’s readiness for change and promote acceptance of interventions.

• Define an OD intervention, including the different ways to classify interventions and the crite- ria for choosing an appropriate intervention.

• Explain the consultant’s role in implementing OD interventions and how to promote learning to sustain them.

• Discuss common issues related to monitoring and sustaining change, including the reasons that interventions fail, the ethics of the implementation stage, client resistance, and strategies to sustain change.

A major land-grant university received federal funding to promote education among public health employees in a southern state. As soon as the monies were awarded, several educational initiatives began to serve multiple stakeholders across the state. One of the projects that James, the grant’s principal investigator, wanted to initiate was a leadership academy for mid-level managers with potential to advance to higher levels of public health leadership in the state. Previous analyses of the organization, including succession planning, had revealed a long-term need to provide leadership development. This need lingered for many years because public fund- ing was not available to provide a comprehensive program. The grant finally created the oppor- tunity to deliver this much-needed program. James contacted an external consultant, Leah, to help plan the program.

Leah was a good choice for a consultant; she was an expert in leadership and program develop- ment. The contracting meeting was set up, at which Leah and James determined the scope of the project: a 1-year leadership development academy for the state’s top 25 leaders. The project had two objectives:

1. Pilot a program that will become a permanent leadership development academy available to high-potential leaders on an annual basis.

2. Strengthen the leadership competencies and culture within the state public health work force.

Although Leah would be the lead consultant and facilitator for the project’s planning and imple- mentation over the first 2 years, the goal was to build capacity within the state so that internal facilitators could sustain the program over the long term.

The project required an action research approach to collect and analyze initial data about the target population’s needs, so the decision was made to conduct interviews and surveys to determine the content of the leadership development academy. Based on Leah’s expertise in leadership development, her role was defined as part expert, part collaborative partner with James and his university. The project had a 2-year implementation timeline, with the first year focused on planning and the second year devoted to implementation. Evaluation would be ongo- ing and continue past the second year as a new cohort was started in year 3, staffed by internal consultants.

James and Leah met regularly to plan the pro- gram. This involved undertaking the planning or discovery phase of action research: diag- nosing the issue, gathering data on the issue, sharing feedback, presenting the data analy- sis, and planning to act.

The “doing” phase of the action research pro- cess is the phase in which the intervention is implemented. For the Public Health Leader- ship Academy, this phase began in September with 25 participants who had been competi- tively selected from across the state. The par- ticipants convened at a resort, and the program was kicked off by high-level state public health

CasarsaGuru/E+/Getty Images Plus The Public Health Leadership Academy kicks off after an extensive planning process.

Section 5.1Readiness for Change

officials. The first session lasted 3 days. During this time, the participants received results of a leadership styles inventory, listened to innovative lectures and panels on leadership, planned an individual leadership project in their districts, and engaged with each other to develop working relationships. The academy met monthly for a year and focused on a range of topics related to leadership that were prioritized based on prior data collection. The grant provided for an evalu- ator, so formative data was collected at each meeting. The kickoff of the Leadership Academy set the stage for the entire year. The beginning set the tone and expectations for what the par- ticipants could expect.

Pythagoras is credited with saying, “The beginning is half the whole” (as cited in Infoplease, n.d., para. 1), which inspired the modern idiom “Well begun is half done.” This philosophy is well applied to creating OD interventions; that is, effective planning is key to successful change implementation. Chapter 4 introduced the first phase of the action research model, planning or discovery. This chapter focuses on the second phase, doing or action. Action research takes a data-based approach to diagnosing organization problems so that interventions can be imple- mented to permanently solve problems. We will return to the Public Health Leadership Academy vignette throughout the chapter to illustrate the action phase. See Table 5.1 to review the action research model we are following in this book.

Table 5.1: Action research model

Phase Action

Planning (the discovery phase)

1. Diagnosing the issue 2. Gathering data on the issue 3. Sharing feedback (data analysis) with the client 4. Planning action to address the issue

Doing (the action phase) 1. Learning related to the issue 2. Changing related to the issue

Checking (the evaluative phase)

1. Assessing changes 2. Adjusting processes 3. Ending or recycling (back to the planning stage) the action research

process

This chapter will pick up at Step 4 of the planning phase, planning action to address the issue. Planning action involves choosing and initiating interventions. Interventions represent the action taken to resolve the problem, so they link the action research model’s planning and doing phases. A key activity in Step 4, however, is to assess the organization’s readiness for change.

5.1 Readiness for Change Once you have worked with the client to plan for how the organization will address the prob- lem, you move into the implementation phase. Ultimately, the measure of effective OD is whether a change was made and if it stuck. Implementing change is easier than sustaining it.

Section 5.1Readiness for Change

Most people have successfully dieted and lost weight; the hard part is maintaining the weight loss and sustaining new behaviors over the long term. Similarly, organizations may success- fully implement a new leadership development program but have difficulty in sustaining the necessary behavioral and cultural changes that ensure improved leadership. Making change is not the same as sustaining change. The latter is much more difficult. That is why OD consul- tants must help the client develop strategies to ensure people are accountable to maintain the change and create measures to help the organization sustain the change.

Effectively initiating change depends on the organization’s perception that the change is nec- essary and achievable and that employees are willing to support change efforts (McKay, Kunts, & Näswall, 2013). These variables signal readiness for change. Our understanding of change readiness emerged from the fields of health psychology and medical studies (Block & Keller, 1998) and was later applied to organizations. See Who Invented That? The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change.

Who Invented That? The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change Models of change readiness originated in health care. The transtheoretical model is consid- ered the most influential and was proposed by Prochaska and DiClemente in 1983 based on their research on smoking cessation. A description of the model’s six stages follows.

1. Precontemplation (not ready). A state in which people are unaware their behavior is problematic; thus, there is no intention to take action. For example, suppose Jacob is a manager with an ineffective leadership style. Jacob is doing what he has observed other managers doing and does not give his performance any thought.

2. Contemplation (getting ready). A state in which people begin to notice their behavior is problematic and begin to weigh the pros and cons of their continued actions. (Lewin would refer to this as “unfreezing,” or readiness for change.) For example, Jacob may start to notice that he is not getting the results he would like in his role as a manager. He can see that people do not listen to him, and he starts to ponder whether he should change his behavior.

3. Preparation (ready). A state in which people set intentions to take action on the prob- lem behavior in the immediate future. For example, Jacob may decide to start explor- ing different leadership approaches and resources for improving, such as reading, tak- ing a class, or seeking mentoring from managers whose behavior he wants to emulate.

4. Action (doing). A state in which people are engaged in making visible modifications to their behavior, usually by replacing the problematic behavior with a new, more pro- ductive behavior. (This would be known as “moving” in Lewin’s terms.) For example, Jacob may decide to seek a mentor, read some books, and take a leadership class. He may also begin to implement some new behaviors with his staff.

5. Maintenance (maintaining). A state of preservation in which people have been able to sustain the change for a time and are working to prevent relapse to the former prob- lematic behavior. For example, Jacob may work to avoid slipping back to less effective management behaviors, such as failing to consult employees on important decisions. He may also seek feedback and support from his mentor.

(continued on next page)

Section 5.1Readiness for Change

Reflect on an organization change you recently experienced. Perhaps there was a transforma- tion in financial systems requiring employees to adopt new procedures for reporting travel or making expenditures. Other changes might include adjusting to a new CEO or president, learning new features in products or services provided to customers, or abiding by additional expectations for completing work. Most often, people are neither pleased about nor ready for changes they are asked to make. Changes are often met with skepticism, resistance, and even anger. There are several dimensions to preparing an organization for change, and readiness for change is important for practitioners of OD to consider at individual, group, and organiza- tion levels.

Dimensions of Change Readiness When a change is sprung on an individual or organization, a range of reactions occurs. Per- haps there is a sense of surprise, dismay, anger, excitement, fear, or dread. How people and organizations respond to a change can be measured by how ready they are to make a change, whether planned or unplanned. Dimensions of change readiness involve gauging readiness and understanding the dynamics of change. When you have been faced with change, what was your reaction?

Gauging Change Readiness Five dimensions influence the level of readiness to make changes (Hord & Roussin, 2013). The first is whether data exists that justifies the change in a way that is relevant and compel- ling to the organization. That the data exists is not enough: It must be communicated clearly and compellingly by management. Next, employees must be engaged in ways that promote their input and ownership of the change. The third dimension is to ensure that the scope and impact of the change is appropriate for the organization’s culture and strategy. Next, the structure of the change should be clearly defined in terms of new roles, procedures, and resources. Finally, the organization needs to prepare to let go of past practices and find a rea- sonable timeline and process for incorporating the change.

Table 5.2 offers a checklist of these dimensions, with examples of each category. It can be used to gauge an organization’s change readiness.

Who Invented That? The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change (continued)

6. Termination (ending). A state in which the new behavior has become permanent (this would be known as “refreezing” in Lewin’s terms) and people are not tempted to revert to their old problematic behaviors. By this point, Jacob has integrated the more participative leadership style into his repertoire and does not even think about it any- more—it has become a natural part of his being. He may now be ready to help others make similar changes (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983).

Section 5.1Readiness for Change

Table 5.2: Readiness for change

Readiness dimensions Readiness dimension indicators

Relevance and meaning: Make a compelling case for the change or identify the benefits of the interventions.

• There is ample data to justify the need for this change. • Employees have had plenty of opportunity to discuss the whys for this

change. • This change is not being driven by a crisis mindset. • There is anecdotal evidence from employees expressing why this

change is important. • There is evidence that a culture of trust exists with employees about

this change.

Consensus and ownership: Engage employees so there is ownership of the desired change.

• Employees express ownership for this change. • Employees say they are willing to commit energy and time toward

this change. • This change was not driven by a top-down mandate and one-way

communication. • Employees think this change will make a significant difference and

bring results. • Stakeholders are strong supporters of the change. • There is shared responsibility and collective trust for this change.

Scope and culture: Define the scope of the change and the impact it will have on the organization’s culture, cur- rent mindsets, and behaviors.

• Advocacy for the change has been sensitive to organization culture. • Employees mentally, emotionally, and physically embrace the change. • Change leaders have been respectful and sensitive in helping

employees make sense of the change over time. • The change aligns well with other recently implemented

interventions. • The change will not overwhelm employees’ current workload. • The change leaders serve as role models of the desired change.

Structure and coherence: Determine change leadership roles, structure, decision mak- ing, and how the change will interface with organization operations.

• The right stakeholders have participated in the action research process and decision making for this change.

• Leadership has identified key roles to support the change moving forward.

• Employees understand how future decisions will be made around the change.

• Appropriate resources have been dedicated to implement the change (e.g., finances, time).

• The change is feasible and the right resources are in place to sustain it.

• Frequent and adequate communication with feedback has guided the change.

Focus, attention, and letting go: Assess where to focus attention based on data and determine what can be let go in order to create room for change.

• Change leaders have determined what past initiatives/practices can be let go in order to make room for this change.

• There is a reasonable timeline established for this change to support its full implementation.

• There is clear understanding by employees of what the change is going to entail.

• Employees understand the demand and expectations for the change. • There are indicators established for this change to identify early

successes. • The appropriate technology tools are available to support this change.

Source: Adapted from Implementing Change Through Learning: Concerns-Based Concepts, Tools, and Strategies for Guiding Change (p. 38), by S. M. Hord and J. L. Roussin, 2013, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Section 5.1Readiness for Change

Cheung-Judge and Holbeche (2015) offered tools to map change readiness of various stake- holder groups by charting readiness according to “level of commitment to change” and “abil- ity to make it happen.” Table 5.3 presents their process. Consider a change you experienced in the past or are currently facing. Using Table 5.3, plot your commitment to change and ability to make change happen. Next, plot your view of other key stakeholders or groups involved in the change. What issues in change readiness do you see in yourself or others, and how might you address them?

Table 5.3: Mapping readiness for change

Key stakeholders/ groups Commitment to change Ability to make change happen

Low Medium High Low Medium High

Dynamics of Change Readiness to change usually indicates a willingness to entertain new ways of thinking and doing. Hord and Roussin (2013) outlined the change dynamics in the following manner:

1. “All change is based on learning, and improvement is based on change” (Hord & Rous- sin, 2013, p. 2). Most change depends on learning. Hord and Roussin (2013) valued learning for the way in which it enables people to abandon nonproductive behaviors and replace them with behaviors more supportive of the intervention. They empha- sized, “At the center of all successful implementation of a change is the opportunity for adults to come together and learn” (Hord & Roussin, 2013, p. 2).

2. “Implementing change has greater success when it is guided through social interac- tion” (Hord & Roussin, 2013, p. 3). OD’s collaborative, collective ethic lends itself to building communities of change that band together to implement new programs and solutions.

3. Individuals have to change before organizations can change. If a group or team is to successfully pull off major changes, individuals need to possess the skills and capaci- ties to execute the necessary behaviors. Key to facilitating individual change is giving individuals choice and opportunities to influence the process and their environment. The stages of concern model (Hall & Hord, 1984, 2011) discussed in Chapter 2 pro- vides a framework for helping individuals address concerns related to change.

4. “Change has an effect on the emotional and behavioral dimensions of humans” (Hord & Roussin, 2013, p. 3). Change is stressful. When we fail to respect and tend to the emotional reactions to change, the change will likely fail. People need opportunities to air their hopes and fears about a change; this helps them feel safe during and after the process.

5. Employees will more readily accept change when they understand how the interven- tion will enhance their work. This belief ties in to adults’ need for learning to be

Section 5.1Readiness for Change

timely, relevant, and linked to their experience; it also relates to the power of con- necting individual and organization goals.

6. The client and/or leader’s role is to engage employees in dialogue about the changes as a way of promoting communication and ownership of the change. The more the change is talked about and explained, the easier it will be for employees to embrace.

Factors Influencing Readiness to Change The client and the consultant can take steps to prepare the organization for change. The first is to clearly communicate the discrepancy between the status quo and the desired state. In Chapter 4, this discrepancy was defined as a performance gap. Employees will be prepared to change when they understand why the change matters (Madsen, Miller, & John, 2005). The second step is to bolster employees’ confidence that they possess the knowledge, skills, and abilities to deal with the performance gap and make the changes necessary to close it. Employees will accept change when they perceive a match between their skills and abilities and those needed to diminish the performance gap (Chreim, 2006).

Perceived Appropriateness of the Change Readiness to change depends on several additional variables to be in place if it is to suc- ceed. When employees view the change as appropriate to the organization, they will gener- ally support and readily embrace it (Holt, Armenakis, Feild, & Harris, 2007). For example, several years ago, most organizations did not recycle; the idea of sustainability was unfamil- iar to both companies and communities. As global awareness of pollution and environmen- talism has increased, so has the willingness to change our behavior. Today, it is common to have recycling bins throughout an organization—you may even have one in your office and at home. Recycling is now embraced because we view it as appropriate and necessary. Of course, even the most appropriate change must be communicated well and visibly supported by management.

Creating a Shared Vision of the Change When management engages employees in planning for the future, they are working to cre- ate a shared vision (Hord & Roussin, 2013). A shared vision is the creation and articulation of the organization’s desired future state that is mutually agreed upon with employees. As discussed in Chapter 4, a shared vision may be attained by completing a gap analysis that identifies the discrepancy between the current state and the desired state. For example, when the University of Georgia decided to change its platform for online learning, it involved sev- eral stakeholders, including students and faculty, in evaluating new platforms and providing input in the final decision. By creating a shared vision for what the university desired in terms of technology, image, and learning experience, the OD intervention significantly increased buy-in when the new platform was implemented. The more management can involve affected employees in the change’s planning and implementation, the more the entire organization will support the change.

Level of Managerial Support of the Change When management visibly advocates for and adopts a change, it sends a message to the orga- nization about the change’s necessity and importance (Holt et al., 2007). Management serves

Section 5.1Readiness for Change

as a model to employees, who watch to see whether managers actually commit to the change. For example, suppose an organization attempts to create a more diverse and inclusive culture. Managerial support might include articulating the organization’s commitment to diversity and inclusion at every opportunity, promoting a diverse range of employees to key positions, hiring for diversity, and rewarding behaviors that support diversity and inclusion.

Providing the Necessary Resources, Support, and Assistance Displaying managerial support goes beyond setting an example. It also involves making sure the necessary resources are provided to make the change (Hord & Roussin, 2013). Changing usually takes time, costs money, and diverts energy from other activities. Creating a realis- tic budget and providing resources up front helps ease the transition. Employees may need moral support or training, the organization may need additional resources, or the community may need to be informed of the changes. It benefits the organization to provide sustained assistance as needed during implementation. For example, the university that changed its online learning platform had to develop a strategy for communicating to faculty, staff, and students; train for the implementation; obtain the ongoing support of faculty and students working within the platform; and hire staff to support the logistics of working with the new technology.

Thakur and Srivastava (2018) surveyed 276 middle managers in India about change readi- ness and found that it influences resistance to change. Readiness increases and resistance decreases when levels of trust, perceived organization support, and emotional attachment are high. They also found the human touch to be important, that is, fostering communica- tion, trust, and security for employees experiencing change. Other researchers found that perceived organization support affected individual change readiness among 154 employees of a chain restaurant that introduced new leadership and restructuring and that providing support prior to the introduction of change improved trust and readiness (Gigliotti, Varda- man, Marshall, & Gonzalez, 2019).

Level of Organization Members’ Self-Efficacy for Adopting the Change The perception that employees are skilled and competent enough to successfully implement a change bolsters readiness for it (Holt et al., 2007). Helping employees become comfort- able with both the content and the process of the change is important. Change content is the focus of the change—for example, adopting a new electronic medical record (EMR) program. Change process is the way the change is implemented—for example, piloting the EMR in a small department and seeking user feedback before rolling it out organization-wide. Research- ers investigating individual and group openness to change in relation to primary health care employees’ ability to improve their use of information and communication technologies in Sweden found that openness to both the change content and the process positively predicted competence with adoption of the change (Augustsson, Richter, Hasson, & von Thiele Schwarz, 2017). It is often up to the OD consultant and management to show employees that they have the self-efficacy to adopt the change. For example, if an organization were implementing a new technology, it would be helpful to provide opportunities for employees to experiment with it. Doing so would allow them to discover that they have the skills to implement it. Investing in professional development and professional learning is a key way to build self-efficacy (Hord & Roussin, 2013). Implementing and sustaining change requires acquiring new knowledge,

Section 5.1Readiness for Change

skills, and abilities. Such learning may boost employees’ confidence that they can adopt the new changes, as well as enhance their understanding and acceptance of the change.

Level of Organization Members’ Personal Attachment to the Change Change is more likely to be accepted if management can show that adopting it will positively affect individual employees (Holt et al., 2007). Helping employees connect their personal goals to company goals creates a winning combination. Authors surveyed 1,833 nurses in 23 acute care hospitals across Switzerland and concluded that quality of care and support- ive leadership were positively associated with readiness (Sharma et al., 2018). Connecting employees’ personal attachment to change requires communication and support of employee interests. For example, in a quest to become a learning organization that readily captures and shares information and knowledge, an organization might bolster support of individual learning efforts by funding them, providing in-house learning opportunities, or sponsoring degree attainment and continuing education.

Including a System for Checking and Assessing Progress The change implementation should be evaluated throughout the action research process (Hord & Roussin, 2013). As Chapter 6 will discuss, to ensure the intended outcomes are being achieved, it is important to assess progress and results during and after implementation. For example, in the case of the university that implemented a new online learning platform, a small pilot group of faculty users was designated “early adopters.” The group received train- ing and used the new platform the semester before it was officially implemented. This small, contained implementation offered the opportunity to troubleshoot and eliminate bugs prior to the large-scale implementation.

Promoting Acceptance of Interventions There are several ways the client and consultant can prepare the organization for change and bolster acceptance of the interventions. Acceptance is encouraged via effective and ongoing communication with employees about the change and by creating opportunities to partici- pate in its planning and implementation.

Developing a Change Communication Strategy Management communication about the change is key during both the planning and the imple- mentation phases. Communication not only informs and engages employees about the change but also helps diminish resistance to it. Effective communication comes in many forms; man- agement should take advantage of as many as possible by using media, meetings, and face-to- face interactions.

Communicating about the change has several benefits. First, communication can serve an educational function; it helps employees learn about the performance gap and understand how they can help reduce it. Employees also need to learn about the change’s purpose and value to understand how they can contribute to achieving it. Additionally, communication helps alleviate fears about how the change might negatively affect the organization, certain jobs, or individuals. Effective communication will bolster employees’ confidence that they can cope with the change and the new demands it will bring (Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995;

Section 5.2What Are OD Interventions?

McKay et al., 2013; Walinga, 2008). More broadly, a comprehensive communication plan gives employees the opportunity to understand the scope and strategy behind the change and to raise issues of concern (McKay et al., 2013).

Promoting Employee Participation in the Change Participative management has been advocated as an effective strategy throughout this book. Engaging employees in planning and implementing change will likely result in higher levels of acceptance and understanding (Holt et al., 2007). Involving employees may also benefit the change itself because employees may have insight and information that can inform change- related decision making and problem solving (Courpasson, Dany, & Clegg, 2012).

Promoting active participation might involve educating employees about the change and inviting their critical analysis of its purposes and procedures. It is also wise to engage employ- ees in learning and development activities that will build their competence and ability to cope with the change and whatever new tasks and responsibilities it requires. Engaged par- ticipation gives employees a sense of ownership and responsibility toward the change. When employees participate in the change process, they are less likely to resist the change.

5.2 What Are OD Interventions? During the planning or discovery phase of action research, the OD consultant works with the client to collect, analyze, review, and present data to help diagnose the problem. Once those steps are completed, an informed action to address the problem, also known as an intervention, can be selected. “OD interventions are sets of structured activities in which selected organizational units (target groups or individuals) engage in a task or a sequence of tasks with the goals of organizational improvement and individual development” (French & Bell, 1999, p. 145). Burke and Noumair (2015) defined an intervention as “some specified activity, some event or planned sequence of events that occurs as a result of diagnosis and feedback” (p. 185). Cheung-Judge and Holbeche (2015) offered a composite definition of intervention drawing on multiple definitions. They concluded that interventions have the following elements: entrance into an existing system; use of a structured and planned activ- ity; focus on a person, group, intergroups, or an entire organization; seeking to disturb the status quo and shift the system toward a new state; and aiming to improve and develop the organization (p. 92).

OD interventions might consist of one-time events that happen within a short time frame such as announcing a new leader, or long-term events that may have several shorter inter- ventions such as mergers and acquisitions that bring new team members, additional prod- ucts and services, layoffs, cultural clashes, and so forth. Interventions are fluid and can occur throughout the OD process.

Defining an Intervention Interventions signify the point at which action is taken on an issue. Schein (2011), writing about the consulting role, asserted, “Everything you say or do is an intervention that determines the

Section 5.2What Are OD Interventions?

future of the relationship” (p. 151). Schein’s view underscores that interventions can hap- pen throughout the action research cycle. Schein (2013) later explained, “Once we have made some kind of judgment, we act” (p. 94). As noted in Chapter 3, even the mere presence of a consultant is considered to be an intervention. According to French and Bell (1999),

The OD practitioner, a professional versed in the theory and practice of OD, brings four sets of attributes to the organizational setting: a set of values; a set of assumptions about people, organizations, and interpersonal relation- ships; a set of goals for the practitioner and the organization and its members; and a set of structured activities that are the means for achieving the values, assumptions, and goals. These activities are what we mean by the word inter- ventions. (pp. 145–146)

Interventions have certain characteristics of creating disruption, interacting with the existing organization system, and requiring careful planning. Each of these features is discussed in the following sections.

Interventions Disrupt the Status Quo Coghlan and Brannick (2010) viewed intervening as the point at which the actual change process begins. This is where the organization may be caught in transition from a present defective state to a future desired state (managing its performance gap). In a similar vein, French and Bell (1999) suggested that interventions “purposely disrupt the status quo” (p. 143) toward a more effective state of affairs. This process is similar to identifying and resolv- ing a performance gap; that is, the current state is incongruent with the desired state, and thus actions are required to resolve the gap. Coghlan and Brannick recognized two manage- rial marks of being in this disruptive transition:

1. possessing a plan that describes the goals, activities, projects, and experiments that will move the organization to the desired state and

2. a plan of commitment to the change by the organization.

In the case of the Leadership Academy vignette, Leah and James defined a plan for the acad- emy to develop leaders’ capacity on the individual, group, and organization levels. They also secured the organization’s commitment to the intervention.

Interventions Happen in Complex Systems Interventions do not happen in a vacuum. “To intervene is to enter into an ongoing system of relationship, to come between or among persons, groups or objects for the purpose of helping them” (Argyris, 2000, p. 117). Anderson (2016) deconstructed this definition to emphasize three points:

1. The system is “ongoing,” which suggests that any intervention represents an inter- ruption or disruption to the flow of organization life. The intervention happens in the midst of organization complexities such as politics, priorities, interpersonal relationships, constraints, history, and other factors.

2. Interventions “come between or among persons, groups or objects,” which alludes to how they disrupt usual ways of doing business. As a result, members may resist them.

Section 5.2What Are OD Interventions?

3. “For the purpose of helping” indicates that the goal of intervening is to positively influence organization functioning, effectiveness, and performance.

If we consider the Leadership Academy intervention in Argyris’s (2000) terms, it disrupted the flow of organization life by identifying people with leadership potential. James and Leah also had to navigate politics that evolved within the state public health agency related to the program and its control in the initial planning stages. The academy also came between and among persons, groups, or objects by changing the way participants behaved, problem solved, and coached their employees. In some cases, participants completely overhauled their leader- ship style and began developing their own teams in new ways. Some participants experienced receptivity to their new skills, whereas others encountered resistance. On the third point, the individuals, their teams, and the statewide public health agency were positively affected due to the multiple changes that occurred as a result of this program.

Interventions Require Careful Planning and Sequencing Interventions entail planning the action or intervention, as well as executing these. An inter- vention strategy is a series of events that take place over several weeks or months to address the problem. French and Bell (1999) referred to an intervention strategy as a sequence of tasks. In contrast, a single event, meeting, or workshop is known as an intervention activity (Anderson, 2016) or task (French & Bell, 1999). The Leadership Academy vignette was an example of an intervention strategy, given its yearlong implementation and multiple associ- ated activities.

Interventions share common attributes in that they

• signify a shift away from the status quo toward a new future, • initiate action on the problem, • rely on evidence, • are grounded in relationship, • occur in complex social systems, and • require planning and sequencing.

The Leadership Academy vignette met these attributes. It shifted the culture toward leader- ship and gave participants the tools and support to try their new knowledge within their work environments. The program was based on data collected from participants and the organization, as well as the best evidence available on effective leadership. Each participant’s organization had to provide a letter of support to show commitment to the academy partici- pant, and there were multiple relationships developed during the program that were critical to its success.

Classifying Interventions Interventions are generally decided during the discovery or planning that occurs in the first phase of the action research model. They are implemented in Phase 2, doing or action, and assessed in Phase 3, checking or evaluating. OD interventions are the point of OD. They repre- sent the actions taken on the problem or issue. Intervention is the peak of the OD process—it is what OD intends to do from the start.

Section 5.2What Are OD Interventions?

That said, interventions may occur at any point in the action research cycle and are best understood as fluid. For example, a consultant’s presence represents several opportunities to acknowledge a problem, make an impending change, or alter conditions. A consultant might make an intervention during initial or feedback meetings by offering an observation, such as “Everyone here is talking over one another,” or asking, “What is preventing you from deal- ing with this problem?” or stating, “You are talking over everyone during meetings and not listening to what people are trying to tell you. Are you aware of that?” Of course, in addition to making what might be considered microinterventions, the consultant’s job throughout the process is to guide the client toward making a macrointervention that addresses the root cause of the problem.

Classification as Diagnostic or Confrontive Interventions vary in terms of their level, scope, duration, and strategy. The Leadership Acad- emy vignette focused on individual leaders, but it affected the leaders’ direct reports, groups, organizations, and the wider state public health agency. Schein (1988) classified interventions as either diagnostic or confrontive in terms of their timing and level of difficulty. Interventions that occur at any time during the contracting process, initial meetings, and data collection are diagnostic interventions because they occur as the organization grapples with the correct diagnosis and intervention strategy. As has been pointed out, the consultant is an intervention. “Every decision to observe something, to ask a question, or to meet with someone constitutes an intervention into the ongoing organizational process” (Schein, 1988, p. 141).

Interventions made based on data collection and analysis are confrontive interventions (Schein, 1988). There are four types of confrontive interventions that range in their level of difficulty:

1. Agenda-managed interventions. As the name indicates, agenda-managed interven- tions are concerned with helping the group or organization prioritize what to focus on; these interventions also examine its internal processes. Groups or organiza- tions may get stuck determining what is important; they may do nothing or vacil- late instead of making a decision. Working with a stalled group or organization can be quite frustrating. Helping a group focus on how it functions can be pivotal in improving actions and outcomes. Schein (1988) argued that something as simple as evaluating meetings significantly affects group members’ awareness of interpersonal dynamics, emotional reactions, communications, and decision-making processes. Schein recommended starting with low-risk issues like the agenda. Higher-risk issues regarding the group’s relational and interpersonal patterns should be tackled once people are emotionally prepared to deal with the vulnerability and feelings that will surface when the group begins to critique how it functions.

2. Confronting through feedback of observations or other data. Chapter 4 discussed the process of sharing feedback with the client during the discovery phase of the action research model. Schein (1988) recommended sharing feedback when the group or organization commits to examining interpersonal workings. Confronting through feedback requires that the client be ready to hear and act on it. Consultants play a key role in helping the client absorb and act on feedback. The ability to observe reactions, listen, ask great questions, facilitate learning, defuse defensiveness, and deliver difficult messages with tact and diplomacy are key to these types of interven- tions. Consultants should also model how to hear and accept feedback for the client.

Section 5.2What Are OD Interventions?

This involves asking for feedback on one’s own performance and graciously accept- ing and acting on it as appropriate.

3. Coaching. When individuals and groups receive feedback, there is a natural inclina- tion to seek help in modifying behavior to facilitate the change process. Coaching has become a significant management trend in recent years (Feldman & Lankau, 2005). It involves helping people overcome behaviors that limit their ability to work effectively with others (Corbett, Ho, & Colemon, 2009) and understanding what drives behavior (Corbett & Chloupek, 2019). Coaching is a higher-risk confrontive intervention than agenda-managed interventions or confronting through feedback of observations or other data, making it one that Schein (1988) recommended using with caution. Coaching interventions can have life-altering effects and should there- fore be used with care and sensitivity. The most effective coaching programs follow a defined process (Corbett & Colemon, 2005) and support people in shifting thought and behavior in ways that affect business positively (Corbett & Ho, 2012).

4. Structural interventions. The confrontive interventions in this section are arranged in a descending hierarchy. That is, they are presented from ease of implementation (1) to difficulty of execution (4). Structural interventions pertain to allocation of work, modification of communications, group membership, assignment of responsibility, and lines of authority. These types of changes, which are often called “reorganiza- tion,” are greeted with trepidation by most organization members. They are also the most difficult to implement and sustain and must be undertaken for the right rea- sons. Before resorting to restructuring, consultants should consider interventions 1 through 3 to see if they sufficiently solve the problem.

Interventions are diverse and can address multiple levels of the organization. Selecting the best possible intervention based on your time frame, budget, culture, and goals is a key task of the action research process.

Classification by Level and Process Other theorists use a range of schemes for classifying OD interventions. McLean (2006), for example, classified by levels of analysis (individual, group, team, organization, etc.). Cummings and Worley (2018) organized interventions according to the underlying process (human pro- cess interventions, technostructural interventions, human resource management interven- tions, and strategic change interventions). Table 5.4 goes into more detail on different ways to classify OD interventions.

Table 5.4: OD intervention classifications

McLean (2006) Cummings and Worley (2018) French and Bell (1999)

1. Individual 2. Team and interteam 3. Process 4. Global 5. Organizational 6. Community and national

1. Human process 2. Technostructural 3. Human resource

management 4. Strategic

1. Team interventions 2. Intergroup and third-party

peacemaking interventions 3. Comprehensive

interventions (e.g., large scale or strategic)

4. Structural interventions

Section 5.2What Are OD Interventions?

Although classification helps the OD consultant and client understand an intervention’s scope and focus, no one classification is necessarily “right,” because both levels and processes are fluid. Leadership interventions, for example, commonly fall under more than one classifica- tion. A leadership development program like the one described in the Leadership Academy vignette crosses the classifications of individual, team, organization, human process, human resource, and strategic, because potential leaders receive individual development that affects their interactions with groups and influences the overall organization and future strategies. Another example of an intervention that crosses all levels would be the implementation of a performance management system. Individual behavior is usually affected when performance is appraised, and this in turn influences groups and the organization itself.

See Tips and Wisdom: French and Bell’s OD Interventions.

This Book’s OD Intervention Classification Regardless of classification, each phase of action research builds toward making one or more interventions. This book uses three levels of intervention classification: individual, group or team, and organization. Each of the categories listed previously can be accounted for under one or more of these three categories. Table 5.5 lists typical interventions at these levels. We will further describe these interventions in chapters 7 and 8.

Tips and Wisdom: French and Bell’s OD Interventions As Table 5.4 showed, there are many types of interventions to choose from, particularly based on level. French and Bell (1999) classified OD interventions into 14 types that center more on the activities:

1. diagnostic activities, such as data collection and feedback to determine causes of problems

2. team-building activities, such as determining ground rules or assessing individual interaction styles

3. intergroup activities, such as interoffice collaboration or conflict resolution 4. survey feedback, such as climate assessment 5. education and training, such as a leadership workshop 6. technostructural or structural activities, such as technology implementation or

reorganization 7. process consultation, such as group dynamics analysis 8. grid-organization development, such as determining management style based on lev-

els of concern for people and concern for production (based on Blake & Mouton, 1964) 9. third-party peacemaking activities, such as mediation 10. coaching and counseling activities, such as executive coaching 11. life- and career-planning activities, such as career development or life coaching 12. planning and goal-setting activities, such as departmental goal setting 13. strategic management activities, such as strategic planning 14. organizational transformation activities, such as restructuring and new leadership

The Leadership Academy vignette interventions could be classified according to French and Bell’s (1999) list as 1, 2, 5, 10, 11, 12, and likely others.

Section 5.2What Are OD Interventions?

Table 5.5: Levels of OD interventions

Individual-level interventions Group-level interventions Organization-level interventions

• Learning and development • Leadership and

management development • Career development • Assessment • Job development

• Group or team process and development

• Diversity and inclusion • Conflict management • Problem solving and

decision making

• Vision and mission development

• Strategic planning • Organization design • Culture • Talent management • Large-scale interactive events

Criteria for Choosing an Intervention Argyris (1970, 2000) recommended that three primary intervention tasks occur before mak- ing any type of intervention:

• First, recommended interventions must be based on valid information. This means thoroughly engaging Phase 1 of the action research model by collecting and analyz- ing data on the problem before proceeding.

• Second, the client’s discretion and autonomy must be respected; engagement in the intervention must be based on the client’s free, informed choice.

• Third, the client must be committed to learning and change.

All three of these prerequisites had been met in the QuickCo vignette featured in chapters 3 and 4 and were in place in the case of the Leadership Academy vignette, which positioned the organizations for intervention success.

There is usually more than one appropriate intervention for every problem. Interventions vary in terms of their implementation time frame, cost, scale, level, and complexity. For exam- ple, in the QuickCo vignette, the intervention involved a relatively short time frame in which a facilitated intervention was made with the shipping department and some coaching was provided to the supervisor. The Leadership Academy vignette presents a much more costly, long-term, complex implementation that will last for a year and continue into the future.

Cummings and Worley (2018) defined an effective intervention as one that fits an organiza- tion’s needs, targets outcomes that will address the problem’s root cause, and transfers com- petence to the organization to manage future changes. A key feature of the Leadership Acad- emy was to build internal capacity for the state public health agency to run future programs. French and Bell (1999) advocated a strategic approach to interventions that incorporates goals, activities, and timing. The strategy also needs to anticipate the organization’s readiness to change, potential barriers, and sources of support and leadership. French and Bell’s tips for making effective interventions follow:

1. Include the relevant stakeholders. 2. Base the intervention on the data generated. 3. Involve the stakeholders in the action research process. 4. Keep the intervention focus on the key goal. 5. Set manageable, attainable goals. 6. Design the intervention so that key learning can be attained and shared.

Section 5.3Implementing OD Interventions

7. Emphasize collaborative learning throughout the process. 8. Use the opportunity for the client group to enhance learning about the interpersonal

workings of the group.

Anderson (2016) outlined useful considerations for making good intervention choices. First, the intervention should be congruent with the data and diagnosis from the discovery phase of the action research model. Incongruence will result in solving the wrong problem.

Second, the client readiness for change should be assessed. Without a client that is willing and able to change, the intervention will fail. Striking a collaborative consulting relationship is foundational to promoting readiness throughout the process.

Anderson’s (2016) third consideration is determining where to intervene. Do you start with top management or line management? Do you work on relationships before issues or vice versa? Would it be wise to pilot the intervention on a small scale before rolling it out to the whole organization? Do you start with the easiest or most difficult aspect of the implementation?

Anderson’s (2016) fourth consideration is the depth of the intervention. Less deep interven- tions are observable, whereas very deep interventions are more abstract. The following are Anderson’s depths, listed in order with some potential examples:

• work content (tasks, skills, knowledge); • overt group issues (communication, decision making, or conflict); • hidden group issues (coalitions and power); • values and beliefs (quality, cooperation, stability); and • unconscious issues (assumptions about how we do business, culture).

Finally, Anderson’s (2016) fifth consideration is to sequence activities to ensure optimal out- comes. Consultants need to make the best use of data; be highly effective, efficient, and quick; and use relevant activities that minimize stress on individuals and the organization.

5.3 Implementing OD Interventions Now that the data has been analyzed and shared with the client and an intervention has been agreed upon, it is time to implement a solution. This is the action phase of OD. “Implementa- tion is . . . the point of the consultation” (Block, 1999, p. 247).

Consider This Use French and Bell’s list to evaluate an intervention in which you participated. How did the intervention stack up against this list?

Section 5.3Implementing OD Interventions

The moment of implementation or action is also the moment for the client to visibly take ownership of and lead the process. That is, the client will be accountable for maintaining the intervention in the future. If the client is not hands-on with implementation, the entire proj- ect will be at risk. If the consultant has managed the client relationship well and insisted on a joint process, the client should have little issue with taking charge of the intervention. The client will likely need ongoing coaching and support to help see the implementation through and build confidence in the process.

Determining the Consulting Role Consultants have a range of options for how to conduct themselves during the implementa- tion. A consultant may elect to stay out of the way, take a hands-on approach, or serve as facilitator. As discussed in Chapter 3, the collaborative role is the most effective and gener- ally preferred in OD. Table 5.6 takes Cockman, Evans, and Reynolds’s (1996) list of roles to collaboratively facilitate intervention implementation and offers some strategies for using these roles.

Table 5.6: Consulting roles and strategies during implementation

Role Strategies

Provide support and encouragement.

• Acknowledge the implementation effort in ways that give the client and employees recognition and appreciation.

• Offer praise and words of encouragement to those engaged in the implementation.

Observe and share feedback. • Prepare clear and direct feedback and share it with the client. • Develop observation checklists so the client can also

participate in making observations and checking on progress.

Listen and offer counsel when things go wrong.

• Serve as a sounding board. • Ask good questions to help the client find the answer instead

of giving the answer. • Mediate conflict as necessary.

Help the client modify and fine-tune the plan.

• Engage in ongoing evaluation of the implementation. • Devise adjustments to the change as needed.

Identify process problems that impede implementation.

• Conduct ongoing evaluation and take quick action to make needed corrections.

• Create a process for identifying and resolving problems.

Bring together parts of the client system to address process issues (e.g., conflict, communication).

• Create an implementation task force that conducts regular audits of the implementation and has the authority to intervene as needed.

• Ensure that communication is ongoing with everyone involved in the implementation.

Bring people together from differ- ent disciplines or different parts of the organization to work on implementation.

• Create an implementation task force. • Employ task force members to conduct communication,

training, and evaluation related to the intervention.

(continued on next page)

Section 5.3Implementing OD Interventions

Table 5.6: Consulting roles and strategies during implementation (continued)

Role Strategies

Organize necessary training and education.

• Create ongoing training sessions that will help prepare the employees for the change.

• Develop in-house trainers to help with the training effort.

Work with managers to help them support the change process.

• Develop a means of communicating with managers so information can be shared and problems solved easily.

• Consider regular meetings, technology, or a mix.

Confront inconsistencies between the plan and how it transpires.

• Check the implementation progress to plan regularly and make adjustments.

• Decide on a protocol for making changes and stick to it.

Refer to Chapter 3 for more information about the consulting relationship and how to interact with clients throughout the action research process.

Promoting Learning Related to the Intervention The intervention process moves the client from the current state through a transitional phase and into the new, desired state. Another way to think of it is in terms of Lewin’s (1946/1997) unfreezing, moving, refreezing change model introduced in Chapter 2. People are engaged in the unfreezing stage when they become aware of the need to change, build the desire to create change, and undergo a process of unlearning.

Imagine you decide to go on a diet. The unlearning is the process of recognizing that your cur- rent eating habits are unhealthy and searching for an alternative. Moving is making the changes, and this requires new learning. For example, you might consider several diet plans or review the basics of nutrition. Refreezing occurs when the new behavior becomes part of your lifestyle. Another way to think about this is to imagine a company decides to cut costs. The unlearning process involves recognizing areas where spending is unnecessary or too high. Moving or changing might involve reviewing expenditures and cutting extraneous purchases from the budget. Sometimes, travel budgets get cut in these circumstances or the company switches to cheaper raw materials to make its products. A more extreme cost savings effort might be to lay off workers. Refreezing occurs when new spending behaviors and policies have been adopted and the company is able to sustain a lower cost threshold to operate.

“Human beings have always engaged in learning—learning to survive, learning to live in a social group, learning to understand the meaning of our experiences” (Merriam & Bierema, 2014, p. 44). Learning in the workplace is no exception and is a common focus of OD. Most change requires learning. People often are not aware of a problem until there is a crisis or they reflect on the results they are achieving. At that point, people begin to ask questions such as “Why are we doing it this way?” “Is there another

mapodile/E+/Getty Images Plus Learning is often stimulated by crisis or by reflecting on events and ideas.

Section 5.3Implementing OD Interventions

way to think about this?” “What mistakes have we made and what have we learned from them?” or “What could be improved?” Asking such questions is what is known as reflective practice.

Crises or reflection can jolt people into a learning mode as they build knowledge and under- standing. This learning is often the catalyst for change. People may learn the competition is gaining an edge, their quality is declining, their relationships are dysfunctional, or their man- agement is lacking vision. These insights make them want to act, and OD provides a process for addressing these challenges through action research. Learning happens at every phase of the process, from discovery of the problem, to planning an intervention, to maintaining the change, to evaluating its effectiveness. This section considers the role of learning in the action research process by appreciating the relationship between learning and change and explor- ing ways of facilitating client learning.

The Relationship Between Learning and Change Most OD involves change, and most change involves learning. Think about a change you made in your life, such as switching jobs, starting a relationship, moving to a new city, or pursuing a goal. Chances are these shifts created new learning. Changes often require new action or new thinking that depends on new learning. For example, when you switch jobs, you have to learn how to navigate relationships and how to interact with your new colleagues. This might involve learning how your new boss likes to receive information and make decisions and then changing your behavior to accommodate the preferences of your boss. Working with a new team might involve learning how to be more assertive than you have been in the past if you are working with strong personalities or the team is looking to you for the expertise you bring to the organization.

Similarly, changes made in OD—such as heightened awareness of interpersonal relations, understanding through feedback, or attempting to change your leadership style—also involve learning. Certain conditions promote learning. For example, adults are motivated to learn when education is relevant to their current situation, work challenges, or life needs.

Facilitating Client Learning Knowles (1980) and Knowles and Associates (1984) developed key principles related to adult learning that are relevant to implementing change. These principles are considered the art and practice of teaching adults, also known as andragogy. Principles of andragogy as they relate to implementing change include the following:

1. As people mature, their self-concept moves from that of a dependent personality toward one of a self-directed human being. This means that people desire to have say and control in their learning. Building ways for affected employees to have input into the change and control over aspects of it will enhance buy-in and adoption. For example, if you implement a new procedure, engage the people handling the process in devising best practices.

2. People accumulate a growing reservoir of experience, which is a resource for learning. The people affected by a change have spent a great deal of time in the organization and have a repertoire of know-how related to the problem or issue being addressed by OD. Failure to tap their experience and knowledge will breed resentment and

Section 5.3Implementing OD Interventions

resistance. Find ways for the involved parties to contribute their insights to the pro- cess to enhance buy-in and minimize resistance.

3. People become ready to learn when the tasks and challenges of life demand new knowledge. My organization, for example, is converting to a much-needed data man- agement system. Although it is a major change, the employees who have been wres- tling with outdated, unresponsive, clunky databases have eagerly attended training and are excited about the implementation of the new technology. When change is communicated well and addresses a true need in the organization, there is a better chance that employees will be enthusiastic about learning to adopt it.

4. People tend to be life or problem centered in their learning, rather than subject cen- tered. It is likely that many people did not have any interest in birthing classes until they were expecting a baby. That is because the learning was timely and relevant to their life. Similarly, someone would likely be more motivated to take a wine-tasting class (life centered) than an organic chemistry class (subject centered). Changes that are relevant to employees become learning opportunities. Part of a consultant’s role is to effectively communicate the relevance of planned change and help those affected see the linkage.

5. People are driven by intrinsic motivation. People are more inclined to seek learning that meets an internal need for knowledge or mastery rather than an external need for recognition or money.

6. People need to know the reason to learn something. People will be resistant to learning new software or changing their behavior if they are not provided with a rationale. A consultant’s job may well be to sell the OD effort and connect it with the necessary learning. When my organization announced the shift to a new database, the rationale was for ease of generating reports, combination of databases, and a user-friendly format. These were reasons that made sense to the users and motivated their accep- tance of and learning related to the change.

Facilitating Transformation Through Learning Scharmer and Senge (2016) proposed “Theory U,” a theory of learning and management that helps leaders change unproductive patterns of behavior that hurt relationships and decision making. Recently, Scharmer (2018) published a distillation of this model that uses action research to address learning and leadership challenges in organizations. Scharmer and Kaufer (2013) distinguished two types of learning in the Theory U model: learning from the past and learning from the emerging future. They described this new model of learning and leadership extensively in their model of Theory U, “a framework for learning, leading, inno- vating and profound systemic renewal” (p. 18). The model is called Theory U because of its U shape (Figure 5.1).

Consider This Think of the times you have been motivated to learn. How do the principles of learning relate to your own life? What about to changes you have experienced at work? How can you craft the change in a way that gives affected employees an opportunity for input and control over the learning?

Section 5.3Implementing OD Interventions

Figure 5.1: The Theory U model

The Theory U model moves the client through the process of letting go of the old (left side of the U) and embracing the new (right side of the U).

From The Essentials of Theory U: Core Principles and Applications, by C. O. Scharmer, 2018, San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Scharmer and Kaufer (2013) proposed that “energy follows attention” (p. 21) and that we should therefore focus on what we want to create versus what we want to avoid. That means consultants need to keep clients focused on the outcomes they seek, rather than the problems they want to avoid. To understand this model of learning and change, start at the top left of the U. Moving down the left side of the U involves opening minds, hearts, and wills. You can help clients do this by observing them closely for ideas or practices that are holding them back, then feeding this information back to them. The bottom of the U is a place of deep reflection and shifting away from the problem toward the desired future. Your role is to create activities that help clients reflect on their problem. This might include key assumptions of individuals and the organization, or raise new questions that have not yet been asked. Going up the right side of the U involves acting—much like the doing phase of action research. In these steps, you develop a vision of the intended future and devise and implement appropriate interventions.

Navigating change in the Theory U model requires what Scharmer and Kaufer (2013) refer to as “transform[ing] the three enemies” (p. 23). These are

• the voice of doubt and judgment (shutting down the open mind), • the voice of cynicism (shutting down the open heart), and • the voice of fear (shutting down the open will).

DOWNLOADING past patterns

suspending embodying

redirecting enacting

letting go letting come

SEEING with fresh eyes

SENSING from the field

PERFORMING by operating

from the whole

PROTOTYPING by linking head,

heart, hand

CRYSTALLIZING vision and intention

PRESENCING Connecting to source

OPEN MIND

OPEN HEART

OPEN WILL

Section 5.4Monitoring and Sustaining Change

Scharmer and Kaufer (2013) suggested beginning by focusing on the future and paying par- ticular attention to where the past seems to end. This “place” is similar to what Bridges (1980) called the neutral zone (see Chapter 2).

Theory U is an innovative, future-oriented change model worth knowing. Resources for fur- ther study of this model are listed at the end of the chapter.

5.4 Monitoring and Sustaining Change A vast amount of planning and work goes into making an intervention. As previously noted, making change is easier than sustaining change. A consultant’s job is to keep the client on track to successful change implementation. This requires knowing the warning signs of a faltering intervention and how to get the client back on track to a successful, sustained intervention.

See Case Study: Reorganization Resistance for an example of an organizational change that may not have been planned effectively.

Case Study: Reorganization Resistance The CEO of a publishing company instructs Brenda Frank, the president of one of its divi- sions, to reorganize its management structure. The division was recently purchased and is not aligned with the other divisions. The CEO thinks that the division has too many vice presi- dents and management layers and that its administrative structure is too expensive. Brenda is unconvinced that restructuring is the best answer, due to the niche of the publishing division, but she also understands her marching orders. She contacts a consultant, George Reed, with whom she has worked before on leadership development issues.

“George,” she says, “I’ve got to find a way to reorganize that makes my CEO happy. According to corporate, we have too many layers and too many VPs. I’m going to need your help to figure this out. Can you help?”

George pauses for a moment before answering. He is an expert at leadership but has limited experience with the kind of restructuring Brenda is asking for. “I’m not sure that falls within my expertise, Brenda, but I am willing to hear more about the matter. Let’s meet.”

A meeting is set, and George and Brenda discuss the change. George is hesitant and tells Brenda she might be better off with someone else. “Nonsense!” she exclaims. “You are an expert at leadership. How hard can this be? Let’s get to work.”

Brenda and George set about planning the change. The next thing Brenda and George do is call a meeting of the vice presidents to notify them of the change. Brenda opens the meeting. “We are going to have to reorganize,” she says. “According to corporate, we have too many layers and too many VPs. I’m asking for your help in this process.” Brenda explains that over the com- ing weeks, George will be meeting with them to discuss their functional areas and collect data to help inform the change.

(continued on next page)

Section 5.4Monitoring and Sustaining Change

Reasons Interventions Fail Perhaps your organization has experienced interventions such as training, survey feedback, or restructuring. Can you think of interventions that failed? This section examines reasons interventions fail and the implications of such failures. Interventions fail for several reasons. First, organizations must be ready for change. In addition, certain flaws inherent in the inter- vention design itself can contribute to failure. Anderson (2016) identified 10 reasons inter- ventions fail. They are listed in Table 5.7, along with tips for fixing intervention failures.

Case Study: Reorganization Resistance (continued) After the meeting, the groans and complaints from the VPs are largely uniform. The comments in the hallway range from anger to disbelief to denial:

“I’ll tell you what, we are not at all valued. This is a signal we’d better all be dusting off our résumés.”

“Well, that’s the dumbest idea I’ve heard out of corporate since we were acquired. They have no idea what it takes to run our business and have given no rationale for the change other than they think it will save money. What about the money it could lose?”

“This plan will never work. Let’s just keep our noses to the grindstone and ride it out.”

George and Brenda have a good working relationship, so they forge ahead and try to make the best of a difficult situation. George begins studying the organization chart and interviewing the VPs. Together, they come up with a new structure that merges 10 departments into six, displacing four VPs. The rollout of the change involves holding individual meetings with the VPs to unveil the new structure. Brenda works hard to find new roles within the company for the displaced VPs, but she is not entirely successful and winds up laying off two of them. Once the personnel changes have been made at the individual VP level, Brenda crafts an email to all employees with a new organization chart and informs them that the changes are effective immediately.

The reorganization announcement throws the organization into a frenzy. It catches the employees by surprise; they see no reason for the changes. Immediate reactions are anger, fear, and suspicion. Employees are nervous about their job security and the integrity of their work units. The remaining VPs are unclear about how to implement the changes or how to manage the new staff units of the merged departments. Productivity and morale plummet. Several employees at multiple levels begin to look for other jobs. Customers begin to complain about a lack of support or clarity about whom to contact to meet their needs.

Clearly, Brenda and George have a disaster on their hands. They thought they were doing things right, but obviously they were not.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. What did Brenda and George do wrong? 2. What would you do differently?

Section 5.4Monitoring and Sustaining Change

Table 5.7: Intervention failures and fixes

Failure Fix

1. The intervention attempted to solve the wrong problem.

• Ensure that Phase 1 of the action research process arrives at the correct diagnosis.

• Involve multiple stakeholders to analyze the problem and provide inputs.

2. The wrong intervention was selected. • Ensure that Phase 1 of the action research process plans an appropriate intervention.

• Identify a backup intervention if it becomes clear that the selected one fails to meet the need.

3. Goals were ambiguous, unclear, or too lofty. • Work with the client to establish a clear purpose and goals for the intervention.

• If there is no clarity of purpose, intended outcomes, and process to achieve them, an intervention is not ready to be implemented.

4. The intervention was undertaken as an event rather than as a program of activities with multiple targets for change (strategy missing).

• Develop a long-term implementation strategy using a Gantt chart (see Chapter 3).

• Distinguish interventions from intervention strategy.

5. Not enough time was devoted to change. • Estimate how long it will take to make the intervention and then add at least 10% more time.

• Build time into the workday to implement the change. This is part of the resource allocation the organization has to make if it is committed to change.

6. The intervention was poorly designed to reach the specified goals.

• Ensure that Phase 1 of the action research process arrives at the correct diagnosis and appropriate intervention.

• Engage employees in intervention design— they will be the best debuggers and critics and help get it right the first time.

7. The consultant was not skilled at implementing the intervention.

• Hire the right consultant. • Part ways with the consultant if you are not

getting what you need.

8. Responsibility for change was not transferred to the client.

• Establish client accountability for monitoring and sustaining change during the contracting phase (see Chapter 3).

• Provide the necessary learning and development to managers and leaders to assume accountability for the change.

9. Organizational members resisted or were not committed to the intervention.

• Follow the recommendations for promoting change readiness.

• Watch for evidence of resistance and follow the strategies in this chapter to respond to it.

(continued on next page)

Section 5.4Monitoring and Sustaining Change

Table 5.7: Intervention failures and fixes (continued)

Failure Fix

10. The organization was not ready for change. • Prepare management for the change first so it can provide support to employees.

• Prepare employees for the change prior to implementation.

Source: Adapted from Organization Development: The Process of Leading Organizational Change (pp. 206–208), by D. L. Anderson, 2016, San Francisco, CA: Sage.

Failed interventions have serious implications for the consultant and the organization (Ander- son, 2016). They can damage a consultant’s reputation, causing the consultant to lose clients and future referrals. Failed interventions can also be detrimental to a consultant’s sense of self-efficacy and trust in his or her intuition. This same level of self-doubt can plague orga- nizations with failed OD efforts and may cause organization members to distrust their own intuition about organization problems or ability to implement lasting change. In fact, failure can become a repetitive cycle for consultants and organizations if confidence in the process is not quickly restored.

Argyris (1970) noted that other implica- tions for failed interventions on the organi- zation level include increased defensiveness against any change; diminished ability to cope through conflict resolution and pro- ductive communications; waning energy to work on solving the problem; increased frustration, stress, cynicism, and controlling behaviors; and unrealistic goals (aiming too high or too low to avoid future risk or failure).

Overcoming Resistance A lesser-known definition of change readi- ness is “the cognitive precursor to the behaviours of either resistance to, or support for a change effort” (Armenakis, Harris, & Mossholder, 1993, pp. 681–682). When employees express stress, negativity, or cynicism toward the change, they are showing resistance. Resis- tance has also been defined as “an adherence to any attitudes or behaviours that thwart orga- nizational change goals” (Chawla & Kelloway, 2004, p. 485). Resistance behaviors might be readily visible, such as sabotage or vocal opposition. Or they may be subtler, such as reducing output or withholding information (Giangreco & Peccei, 2005). Resistance may also take the form of ridiculing the change, boycotting change conversations, or sabotage (Lines, 2005). The beginning of this chapter discussed readiness to change. Readiness is related to resis- tance because, when people or organizations are not prepared to change, they will likely find ways to stall or distract the change effort.

See Assessment: Test Your Change Resistance to find out how much you embrace change.

Ridofranz/iStock/Getty Images Plus When interventions fail, the team must decide which steps to take next.

Section 5.4Monitoring and Sustaining Change

Causes of Resistance Resistance to change might be caused by management’s dismissal of employee input or fail- ure to handle negative attitudes toward the change, or it might arise because the level of employee input in planning, implementation, and change maintenance is too low (McKay et al., 2013). Most people do not like change, so resistance is the general disposition most will initially experience. Resistance can also occur on ethical and strategic grounds if employees do not regard the change as favorable to the organization and its stakeholders (Oreg, 2006; Piderit, 2000).

Acknowledging Resistance Management may be tempted to disregard resistance; however, it is a mistake to ignore it. When employees resist change and relay concerns about it, they are behaving normally. Impending change causes fear and a sense of personal loss and grief among employees who find value and a sense of security in their daily routine and work group (Burke, Lake, & Paine, 2008). Sometimes, employees just need an opportunity to raise issues and have management hear their fears. Dismissing employees’ concerns or disregarding how the change will affect employees’ sense of security and trust in the organization risks intensifying negative atti- tudes, increasing resistance behaviors, and compromising effective change implementation. Instead, it is to the organization’s advantage to create opportunities for dialogue about the change and to seek solutions that resolve the concerns. How leaders talk about change also matters (see Tips and Wisdom: Discussing Change). Cheung-Judge and Holbeche (2015) sug- gested talking about change in a less directive and more inclusive way. Table 5.8 shows the differences.

Table 5.8: Using inclusive language about organization change

Instead of saying Say instead

“We [management] are managing change.” “We invite you [employees] to participate and influ- ence the change initiative.”

“We are dealing with resistance to change.” “Here’s what to expect as we make these changes.”

(continued on next page)

Assessment: Test Your Change Resistance Would you consider yourself generally open to change, or are you more inclined to eschew it? Most people claim to welcome change, yet they tend to waver when it happens to them. You may find it hard to believe that inventions such as lightbulbs, coffee, air travel, umbrel- las, taxis, personal computers, and vaccines were widely mocked upon their introduction (Nguyen, 2016), yet these innovations are things we now depend on for our lifestyle, career, convenience, and health. Although you probably don’t like or even care about changes foisted upon you, you may need them and not even realize it.

Find out how much (or little) you embrace change by taking the following survey: http:// pluto.huji.ac.il/~oreg/questionnaire.php.

Section 5.4Monitoring and Sustaining Change

Table 5.8: Using inclusive language about organization change (continued)

Instead of saying Say instead

“We are allowing them [employees] to . . .” “We invite you to participate.”

“We are giving them the opportunity to . . .” “We invite you to identify ways of navigating the change.”

“We are gaining buy-in.” “What processes will help you adjust to the change?” “What support do you need?”

Adapted from Organization Development: A Practitioner’s Guide for OD and HR (pp. 161–162), by M. Cheung-Judge and L. Holbeche, 2015, London, England: Kogan Page.

Ethical Issues Pertaining to Interventions Integrity and authenticity help the OD process run smoothly and avoid failed interventions. OD ethics have also been discussed in chapters 1 and 3. There are some important principles to keep in mind to ensure that the intervention process is ethical.

Avoid Misrepresentation Although it is tempting to avoid telling clients what they do not want to hear, it is a mistake to misrepresent the intervention’s timeline, cost, or difficulty. This mistake can occur due to inexperience, overpromising, or trying to please a client. A better strategy is to underpromise and overdeliver. That way, there are no surprises in the long run. It is also important that you know the limits of your skill set as a consultant. If you promise to deliver a skill or knowledge you do not have, it can create distrust and anger with the client, put the intervention in danger of failure, and imperil your reputation as a consultant.

Avoid Collusion Colluding with the client is another ethical challenge. For example, you might scheme to adopt an intervention because it is appealing or interesting or because it will bring you more busi- ness as a consultant. If you lack evidence to support the need and appropriateness of an inter- vention, it is unethical to recommend it. It is also bad ethics to conspire with the client in ways that result in distortion of the process and exclusion of others. For example, if you know that a certain manager is going to disagree with your desired course of action and you exclude him or her from a meeting where it is discussed, this is considered colluding to exclude.

Tips and Wisdom: Discussing Change A simple exercise to help employees discuss change is to give them an opportunity to talk about their hopes for the change as well as their fears about the change. It is useful to record these (often on a flip chart or whiteboard) and for management to respond to the fears, which helps defuse them. This activity can be done in a meeting format or via an electronic forum or survey.

Section 5.4Monitoring and Sustaining Change

Avoid Coercion or Manipulation Finally, it is unethical to coerce or manipulate the client or members of the organization. This might involve blocking opportunities for organization members to participate in the decisions about the process, which in effect foists the intervention on them. This and other ethical chal- lenges noted can be avoided by following a good action research process that generates data on which to base decisions while actively involving organization stakeholders in the process.

Sustaining Change Whether the change has been on an individual, group, or organization level, implementing it is the easy part. Sustaining it is where trouble occurs. Successful change implementation may cause overconfidence, which fosters an unpreparedness for the difficult work of maintain- ing it (Anderson, 2016; Senge et al., 1999). Anderson cautioned that relapsing to old ways of being is an implementation hazard, especially when an external consultant exits the picture. Change also requires energy that organization members may lack, because other distractions may pull them away from consciously maintaining the change. The education necessary for full change adoption may not keep pace with the change implementation, making it difficult to sustain. Sometimes, the old organization culture and practices are just too powerful for the change to sway, leaving the organization vulnerable to reverting to old ways of doing business.

Actions to Sustain Change How can organizations avoid these pitfalls to lasting change? Change should be translated into the organization’s daily operations so it simply becomes the way business is done. Strate- gies that help sustain change include the following:

1. Communicate regularly about the change implementation. This could be via regu- lar meetings, written or electronic communication, social media, and informal conversations.

2. Formulate an implementation task force that includes top leaders and affected employees. This group can hold regular meetings and help communicate the change.

3. Hold meetings that include a cross-functional, intragroup mixture of people involved with the change to monitor progress, troubleshoot, and evaluate the process.

4. Find ways to reward and recognize employees involved in the implementation. This might include visible items such as T-shirts or trinkets, awards, monetary rewards, or time off.

5. Build change implementation into the performance review criteria of those employ- ees accountable for supporting and sustaining change.

6. Invite external stakeholders and consultants to evaluate the change progress. 7. Ensure that the reward system is aligned with the desired changes. 8. Provide the learning and development needed to sustain the change. 9. Ensure that needed resources are available to sustain the change.

See Tips and Wisdom: The Challenge of Change.

Section 5.4Monitoring and Sustaining Change

Strategies to Defuse Challenges to Change During implementation, a consultant will monitor the client for signs of low commit- ment, such as anger, hostility, objections, inflexibility with implementation options, unwillingness to look at process issues, hid- den agendas, delaying tactics, or failure to implement. To successfully make an inter- vention, there must be commitment and leadership from the top, individual compe- tence, and adequate organization. When consultants observe signs of waning com- mitment, they will want to take action quickly. Faltering commitment will nega- tively affect learning and lasting change.

Senge and colleagues (1999) identified 10 challenges created by resistance to change that relate to initiating change, sustaining change momentum, and meeting the challenges of redesigning and rethinking processes and proce- dures during and after the change:

Time challenges. Employees can feel frustration or worry that they do not have enough time to learn or implement changes. To counter this challenge requires giving employees flexibility and time to process and implement the change.

Support and help with change implementation. Employees will become frustrated and disen- chanted if coaching, guidance, and support are absent during the change. It is important to provide the resources both for supporting the change and for management to be skilled in this area.

Perceptions that the change is not relevant. When employees do not see the rationale for change or its relation to the big picture or business reasons, they may ignore it because they think it does not matter. Establishing the need for and relevance of change is necessary from the beginning of the action research process. The need for change must be tied to business goals, new learning, changed procedures, and processes so employees are not left wondering why they have to make changes.

Tips and Wisdom: The Challenge of Change If there is no struggle, there is no progress.

—Frederick Douglass

Change is hard work. Well-implemented changes make tremendous differences for individu- als, teams, and organizations. The OD and action research processes greatly enhance the prob- ability of success in change endeavors.

NicoElNino/iStock/Getty Images Plus Time must be made for change, and sustaining it takes additional time.

Summary and Resources

Management fails to set an example. When management fails to “walk the talk,” people notice. Management must be held accountable for visibly and personally supporting and implement- ing the change.

Mounting fear and anxiety. When changes are implemented, employees can get nervous. They may feel vulnerable, unable to adopt the change, and distrustful of the change and manage- ment. Open and candid communication from the beginning is a must, along with management setting a good example.

Perceptions that the change is not working as intended. Employees might be negative about the change and look for evidence that it is not working. This perception can serve as an excuse to return to the way things were. It is important to show how the change is resulting in progress and intended outcomes. If metrics are available, it is helpful to show that “since implementing the change, our defects have decreased by 10%,” for example.

Perceptions that the old way of doing things was better. These perceptions can allow employee groups to feel like victims who are disrespected or misunderstood by management. These perceptions are countered by ongoing, effective communication about the change and its need.

Confusion about who is responsible for the change and new procedures. Change can natu- rally breed confusion over new procedures and policies. Management can help by modeling patience, flexibility, and problem solving to create new infrastructure when making changes.

Frustration that the organization is doing nothing but “reinventing the wheel.” Employees can get frustrated when they feel like no real change is occurring or that the change has not improved the problem. Making the case for change early in the process can help minimize frustration and help people focus on the change’s future benefits.

Confusion about the purpose and benefit of the change in the bigger organization picture. Employees may not immediately link the change to organization strategy and purpose. Man- agement can help by showing how the change will benefit the business and its stakeholders.

As has been stressed throughout this chapter, key themes in avoiding resistance include timely and ample communication about the change, providing a clear rationale for why the change is needed, and management support and role modeling throughout the change process.

Summary and Resources Chapter Summary

• Propensity to accept change depends on the level of change readiness for both indi- viduals and the organization. Change readiness signals that employees perceive the change as necessary and attainable and are willing to support its implementation.

• Change readiness is influenced by clear management communication and employ- ees’ confidence in management’s attitudes, knowledge, and skills to effectively implement the change.

Summary and Resources

• Interventions are more likely to be accepted when the change has been clearly com- municated and employees have an opportunity to participate in its planning and implementation.

• OD interventions are change activities that help resolve the presenting problem. • Interventions can be classified in multiple ways, including diagnostic, confrontive,

level, or process. This book classifies them according to individual, group or team, or organization level.

• The criteria for making an effective intervention include basing the intervention on valid data, verifying the client’s free and informed choice to proceed, and establish- ing the client’s commitment to learning and change.

• During the implementation, consultants should be clear about the type of consulting role they want to play. Roles vary from less-involved observation of the implementa- tion to active engagement in providing feedback, modifying the plan, and provid- ing needed training and support. The role the consultant plays will depend on how skilled the client is at leading and facilitating change.

• It is important to promote learning related to the intervention by encouraging reflec- tive practice, helping employees see the connection between learning and change, and facilitating client learning by building principles of andragogy (effective adult learning) into the intervention.

• Theory U embraces the idea that energy follows attention. In consulting, this means consultants need to keep clients focused on the outcomes they seek rather than the problems they want to avoid.

• Interventions fail for multiple reasons, including lack of change readiness, resis- tance, poor levels of management communication and support, and a flawed OD process that results in the wrong problem being solved, ambiguous goals, inade- quate time being allotted, poor design, ineffective consulting, failure to ensure client accountability, and lack of organization commitment.

• Ethical issues abound in OD. During the intervention phase, such issues include mis- representation, collusion, and coercion.

• Resistance to change can be overcome by open and regular communication from management that engages employees in the change’s planning and implementation and acknowledges the fears and concerns that underlie resistance.

• Change can be sustained by regular communication, broad engagement of employ- ees in monitoring the change, rewarding and recognizing employees who are com- mitted to the change effort, and providing the necessary learning and support.

Think About It! Reflective Exercises to Enhance Your Learning

1. The chapter began with a vignette about a Leadership Academy for a state public health agency. Can you recall an intervention you participated in? What was it? How was it executed?

2. Recount a time you or someone you know participated in an OD intervention led by a consultant. What were the outcomes and consequences? How well did the consul- tant do, based on the principles presented in this chapter?

3. Think back to a change you experienced in either your professional or your personal life. How applicable are the principles of andragogy to your experience?

4. When was the last time you reflected on your assumptions, thoughts, and actions related to an idea, practice, or process? Make an appointment with yourself to engage in some deep thinking, and journal about what emerges.

Summary and Resources

5. Assess the changes you have made in your life or organization and evaluate how well you maintained the change. Do you agree with the argument that change is easier to make than maintain? Why or why not?

Apply Your Learning: Activities and Experiences to Bring OD to Life

1. Use the transtheoretical model of health behavior change to assess a change you have made. Did you follow the steps? Why or why not?

2. In Chapter 4, one of the activities was to identify a problem in your organization and plan a data collection process to examine the issue. Assuming you did that, how would you go about planning an intervention to address it? What level(s) of inter- vention would be most appropriate (individual, group, and organizational)?

3. Refer back to Tips and Wisdom: French and Bell’s OD Interventions in section 5.2 and reclassify French and Bell’s 14 types of interventions into the model we are using in this book (individual, team, and organization).

4. Using Table 5.5, take a real example of implementation and identify specific roles and strategies you would use to support the intervention implementation.

5. Go back to the case study in section 5.4 and use the key points in this chapter about change readiness and resistance to change to identify at least five mistakes made by the division president and consultant during the change process.

6. Have you experienced a failed OD intervention? If so, use the information presented in this chapter on effective interventions and reasons interventions fail to diagnose what went wrong.

7. Apply the steps from the Theory U model to a behavior change, organization change, or new learning you have made or hope to make.

8. Using Hord and Roussin’s (2013) readiness for change checklist presented in Table 5.2, assess your readiness to make a change that is impending.

Additional Resources Media

• Theory U: An Interview With Dr. Otto https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8HKxvKVUsU

• Change Is Good... You Go First https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwxrsngEJDw

Further Reading Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L. (2014). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Scharmer, C. O. (2009). Theory U: Leading from the future as it emerges. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Key Terms andragogy The art of teaching adults; a series of principles for effectively facilitat- ing adult learning.

confrontive interventions Activities that occur as a result of the data collected and analyzed during the action research process.

Summary and Resources

diagnostic interventions Activities that address issues as they arise during the OD–action research process of contracting, initial meetings, or data collection.

intervention activity A single event, task, meeting, or workshop implemented to address a problem or issue in the organization.

intervention strategy A sequence of tasks or series of intervention activities that occur over several weeks or months to address a problem or issue in the organization.

readiness for change A perception that making a change is necessary and achiev- able and that willingness to support the change effort exists.

reflective practice The process of ques- tioning the assumptions that underlie thoughts and actions.

resistance An expression of stress, nega- tivity, or cynicism toward a change that can thwart achieving the change goal, along with the general absence of change readiness.

shared vision A mutual picture of a desired future state that an organization’s members seek to achieve together.

Theory U Embraces the idea that energy follows attention. In consulting, this means consultants need to keep clients focused on the outcomes they seek rather than the problems they want to avoid.