Case essay

The case of OD in an NGO in India Nisha Nair

Indian Institute of Management Indore, Indore, India, and

Neharika Vohra Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to report an organizational development (OD) exercise carried out in a prominent non-governmental organization (NGO) that works in the area of rights and advocacy in India.

Design/methodology/approach – The exercise was part of the first author’s graduate program, which required the application of behavioral science theory to a live organization under the supervision of her advisor, the second author. The organizational development exercise spread over four months, involved entering an organization, interacting with key participants and stakeholders of the organization both formally and informally, diagnosing issues facing the organization and a mirroring exercise with the management at the end of the intervention to provide feedback.

Findings – Some of the issues and improvement areas that emerged through the exercise are discussed in the paper. It also offers reflections on some of the key lessons learnt during the process of intervention, with implications for OD in developmental organizations.

Originality/value – The paper offers insights into OD interventions in the developmental sector, posing a different set of challenges than conventional organizations, and also because the organization itself was in a state of flux at the time of the intervention.

Keywords Non-governmental organizations, Business development, Organizational effectiveness, Labour efficiency, Change management, India

Paper type Case study

Introduction Organization development (OD) work has largely been carried out in business or for profit organizations. Bargal and Schmid (1992) refer to the paucity of literature on consultation done in developmental organizations. OD in nonprofit organizations provides some unique challenges for the consultant that may not exist in business organizations (Ramos, 2007; Waysman and Savaya, 1997). Developmental organizations are thought to differ from for-profit organizations in a number of ways (Brown and Covey, 1987). Studies have shown that employees in developmental organizations seek greater autonomy and less organizational control in their work (Mirvis and Hackett, 1983). Since there is a need for flexibility and local discretion in the working of developmental organizations, they tend to be more informal and loosely organized than business organizations ( Joseph, 2000; Lewis, 2003). Another often cited concern is the existence of high role ambiguity and lack of clarity about roles and procedures in such organizations (Goldman and Kahnweiler, 2000; McDonald, 1999). In his study of organizational change in a human service organization, Ramos (2007) discusses the poor communication across the various units/programs of the nonprofit. Given that values and ideology play a central role in developmental organizations (Brown and Covey, 1987; Edwards and Sen, 2000; Lewis, 2003; Tvedt, 2006), they are known to attract workers high in motivation, commitment and satisfaction (Bacchiega

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

JMD 30,2

148

Received 4 August 2009 Revised 21 December 2009 Accepted 21 June 2010

Journal of Management Development Vol. 30 No. 2, 2011 pp. 148-159 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0262-1711 DOI 10.1108/02621711111105740

and Borzaga, 2001; Benz, 2005; Mirvis, 1992). Leadership also plays a critical role in shaping the ideology of these organizations and it has been noted (Markham et al., 2001) that developmental organizations tend to be dominated by a few and active number of leaders. Schnell (2005) points to the issue of moving beyond the leadership of an organizational founder and the challenges of rapid growth in his case study.

The relevance of OD in developmental organizations have been cited variously as increasing the capacity of the social change agencies to cope with organizational problems (Brown et al., 2004), and enhancing the climate or operations of the non-profit agency (Ramos, 2007). Discussing the role of participatory action research in facilitating social change in an Asian developmental organization context, Brown (1993) argues for greater collective reflections of diverse constituencies and participants in order to address social change issues that are complex and loosely organized around various factors and institutions. Using action research and democratic theory to guide forced dialogue, Gustavsen and Engelstad (1986) discuss the role of conferences or workshops as a means to engage organizational participants in an encounter that permits them to experiment with new types of interpersonal processes and promote dialogue in organizational change projects. Speaking of the consultant’s role, Ramos (2007) points that the organizational consultation process employed could include assessment, feedback, and action planning components. Korten (1980) discusses the three stages of the learning process for a development organization as learning to be effective, learning to be efficient, and learning to expand. Although the role of OD can cut across the three stages, it may be most suited for the second stage, when the organization starts growing and would require the consultant’s help to mature as an organization.

Given the paucity of research of OD in developmental organizations, this paper examines the case of OD in a prominent NGO in the state of Jharkand in India, where many of the challenges facing a developmental organization mentioned in the literature and some others, come alive. This was an exploratory study with an attempt to diagnose organizational issues in the NGO during a period of change and mirror back the results of the organizational diagnosis towards improving the working of the organization.

About the organization Adhikar[1] (which stands for human rights) is a mass-based organization in the state of Jharkand in India that started in 1985 with the aim of altering society’s power base towards the poor and the marginalized. It has been working alongside socially marginalized communities with the intent to support organized action from within the community against any unjust distribution of wealth, resources or power. The founder, Mr Rajan Mishra, sought to espouse the ideal of self-determination through organizing people into unions and other collectives. The organization has grown from a few handful inspired by Mr Mishra during its early days to over 200 employees at the time of the intervention. Mr Mishra currently serves in a prominent position at the Center in the Government of India. He has chosen to dissociate himself from Adhikar so that it is seen as politically non-aligned.

Scope of work of Adhikar The differing areas of Adhikar’s involvement are outlined in Figure 1. Adhikar first began its work through the Adivasi Sangathan[2] created to organize tribal people of

The case of OD in an NGO in India

149

the region into unions. Under the umbrella of the Adivasi Sangathan, other unions evolved over time. Adhikar also works in the area of budgetary analysis and expenditure monitoring of the state government through its wing called Arthik Siksha[3]. There is also a scholarship program that seeks to fund and train local level leadership, and the emergency response program encompasses relief work at times of natural calamities.

Structure of the organization Adhikar is structured along both geography and programs. As the organization has grown, its structure too has evolved. The various unions and programs are overseen by different coordinators – all reporting directly to the Managing Trustee, Mr Mishra. In addition, there are location coordinators in Chaibasa, Ghatsila and Saraikela, which are districts of the State. There is considerable overlap between program and region. The structure showing differentiation by program and region along with the respective heads is shown in Figure 2.

Methodology of the study The primary methodology of the study comprised:

. Interviews. The process followed involved closed room interviews with each of the coordinators, usually lasting for 1-2 hours where the author first introduced herself and elaborated on the nature of her engagement and sought the views of those being interviewed regarding the organization, its culture, areas of concern, and any suggestions or other comments pertinent to the discussion. All the respondents were assured of the confidentiality of their responses.

. Field visits. The author also visited the field in Ghatsila where she interacted with the field workers and the regional coordinator, Mr Dubey. During this visit, she sat in on one of the regional meetings, following which she had interviews with the field workers in small groups of four or five. This was done to understand the

Figure 1. Adhikar’s scope of work

JMD 30,2

150

organization from the view of the fieldworkers and gain insight into its issues through their lens.

. Memos and reports. The initial familiarization with the organization and its activities came through a study of the various reports and manuals published. These included annual reports, budget analysis reports of Arthik Siksha, newspaper clippings on Adhikar and other documents relating to the organization.

. Observations. In addition to the interviews, the author also observed the non-verbal cues, pattern of interaction and nature of relationships among members during her visits to the Adhikar office and the field, which was indicative of the climate of the organization. These observations continued beyond the course of the interviews to the time when she was sitting in on some of the meetings of the coordinators and her informal interaction with organizational members.

. Diagnostic presentation. Towards the end of the engagement, a session was held with all the coordinators present, where findings from the authors’ engagement with the organization were presented to the members in a closed room group meeting. This served both as a mirroring (feedback) activity as well as a forum for initiating dialogue and communication across the various units and members of the organization.

Organizational entry – engagement with Adhikar The engagement with Adhikar began when the first author contacted Ms Pia Mishra, who is the program director of Adhikar, and with whom she had worked previously in another capacity, to discuss the possibility of the intervention. Ms Mishra expressed

Figure 2. Structure of Adhikar

showing differentiation by program and region

The case of OD in an NGO in India

151

interest and welcomed the engagement. A second meeting was arranged where both the authors met her again to explain the nature of the intended engagement and seek formal permission for the first author to enter the organization, conduct interviews and apply OD principles as and when required.

Meeting with the coordinators The author met each of the coordinators of Adhikar, starting with Ms Pia Mishra, who served as the point of contact throughout. Following this, she met with each of the coordinators in turn, to get their perspective on the organization. Most of the issues and concerns surfaced through these sessions. While most coordinators opened up freely to discuss their concerns, some like Ms Devi (the then Director of Adhikar) were less open and did not share much about their views on Adhikar and its functioning.

Most coordinators had been with the organization since its inception. All of them echoed a strong sense of organizational identification and commitment. There was high regard for the founder Mr Mishra. His daughter, Pia (the authors’ contact) has had to prove herself in the organization although she is professionally-qualified and has been actively working in the field. Interestingly, during the author’s meetings with Ms Mishra, she never mentioned that she was the daughter of the founder. The author came to know this only during the course of her later interviews.

Diagnosis The issues that emerged were analyzed using Weisbord’s six-box model (as cited in French and Bell, 2003), shown in Figure 3

Each of the emergent issues is discussed in further detail below.

Issues relating to structure Lack of clarity on structure. There appeared to be a lack of clarity regarding the structure of Adhikar. Some clarity on the role of Ms Mishra was also sought by one of the coordinators at the time of the diagnostic presentation. The confusion over the structure existed primarily because of the organizational boundaries being both

Figure 3. Weisbord’s six-box model

JMD 30,2

152

geographical and program-driven. The resultant matrix-structure caused confusion in clarifying reporting relationships. Instances were cited during the interviews when this matrix-structure caused confusion regarding reporting relationships or precedence of command.

Centralization vs. decentralization. There was considerable autonomy and decentralization at the coordinator level in the organization. However, some felt that the sense of responsibility and accountability that comes with empowerment was lacking in Adhikar. The coordinating mechanisms such as periodic meetings among coordinators to make decentralization effective were absent. In such a scenario, the different units seem to be operating in silos with little coordination and total absence of centralization at any level.

Issues relating to purpose Agreement on objectives. Largely, there was agreement on the objectives of the organization as being rights-based, facilitating social change through mobilization and advocacy. However, some coordinators felt that they also needed to work towards the development of the tribals. The vision and future direction of Adhikar as either rights-based, developmental or a combination of both did not have consensus among all the coordinators. The view posed by some was that it is time for Adhikar to foray into developmental work, given that much of the rights-based work had seen its culmination and the future lay in the area of developmental work.

Issues relating to relationships Lack of coordination. This theme emerged as the most common through the interviews. Most of the program directors thought that there was not enough coordination between them. The various units of Adhikar were performing their tasks well, but there was little sharing of information. The high degree of decentralization at the coordinator level had granted a great degree of autonomy but the coordinating mechanisms were absent. There had been a noticeable decline, over time, in the number of meetings when all the coordinators met, and many cited this as a reason for the disconnect they felt with Adhikar as a whole.

Old vs. new. In talking to the coordinators, some of whom had been with the organization since its inception and some who were relatively new, there appeared to be some lack of trust between the two groups. The new coordinators felt their growth, or initiatives, were stymied by the old who appeared to be guarding their turfs. They also did not feel welcomed by the old. On the other hand, the older members in the organization felt that the new were over-ambitious and got right into the field without making an effort to understand the organization. Though this was a concern echoed by a few members, it had the potential to grow and create conflict if not properly addressed.

No proper induction for new employees. Tied in to the seeming gulf between the old and the new members was the fact that the new entrants did not go through any formal socialization process, which also manifested in a feeling of not being welcomed into the organization. Instances were mentioned when the new entrant had to go and seek information and figure things out for him/herself, which further created a feeling of isolation.

The case of OD in an NGO in India

153

Issues relating to leadership Acceptability of women leaders. Ms Devi had been with the organization since its inception and enjoyed support in her region. She was however based off Chaibasa. Ms Pia Mishra, the daughter of Mr Mishra had been with the organization for five years as the Program Director of Ghatsila. Both Ms Devi and Ms Mishra were potential future leaders of Adhikar. However, they independently echoed reservations as potential next leaders and mentioned their gender as one of the reasons. They felt that the other male coordinators and the community they served might not be ready for a female leader. However, in discussions with most of the other coordinators, the authors got the sense that they were open to having a woman leader. Some of the coordination issues were expected to be addressed if a new leader was appointed[4].

Next rung of leaders after a charismatic founding leader. Adhikar had a very charismatic and dynamic leader in Mr Mishra. A number of those who were associated with Adhikar had been attracted by his personal charisma. After Mr Mishra’s active involvement in politics, his association with Adhikar on a regular basis had diminished. This created a leadership vacuum. Many in the organization exhibited an inability to think beyond Mr Mishra as their leader. The organization seemed to be facing a crisis in terms of a leader who could command the same level of respect and following. There was a dearth of second-level leaders in the organization and Mr Mishra still appeared to be the de-facto leader. Even though towards the end of the intervention, Ms Devi was appointed the new Managing Trustee, during the earlier meetings and in the eyes of others she was a shadow of Mr Mishra and a surrogate leader for Ms Pia Mishra, the daughter of Mr Mishra. Pia appeared to be the chief decision maker. She operated from the headquarters while Ms Devi preferred to work from her Chaibasa location. In our interactions it was felt that Ms Devi may have been a good worker, but lacked the vision needed to lead a highly motivated team. Ms Devi had not been very forthcoming in the interview and was not too accommodating of the diverse views that were expressed during the diagnostic presentation meeting. The new leader appeared to be in stark contrast to the charismatic leadership of Mr Mishra. Although Ms Devi appeared a reluctant leader, possibly also inhibited because she was not a successor from within the family, she brought with her tremendous experience from the field, having worked alongside Mr Mishra most of her life, and having been party to the struggles of the early days of setting up the organization. While it is recognized that the dynamics of leading an organization with family ties strongly represented, throws up variety of challenges in terms of power and influence, the predominant leadership issue here appeared to be that of filling the leadership void left by the founding leader. This leadership issue is a classic problem (Ramos, 2007; Schnell, 2005) whenever a charismatic leader moves on and his/her shoes have to be filled.

Issues relating to rewards Differential pay. Adhikar started out as a rights-based organization. Most of the older employees chose to work for it due to their dedication to the original cause. The newer employees (some better qualified professionally) were getting paid higher, which was a perceived to be discriminatory and was a source of discontent among the older members.

JMD 30,2

154

Issue of security. Being a developmental organization that has to often depend on external funding, the issue of job security was a matter of concern to some. With Mr,. Mishra’s lesser involvement, there was a palpable fear that Adhikar may close shutters some day. The view expressed was that some form of assurance from the leadership for the future of Adhikar might ease the sense of insecurity.

Issues relating to other helpful mechanisms Role of reporting. There were some concerns on the irregularity of reporting by some of the coordinators. The tardiness of some coordinators to turn in reports on their progress was also tied in to the issue of leadership and authority. Most coordinators in the past had reported on a regular basis verbally to Mr Mishra, who was able to fill in gaps of information whenever required for other coordinators. Thus, the formal system of submitting and reading others reports had never been emphasized.

Diagnostic presentation meeting Based on the diagnosis and analysis of the issues, it was decided to have a mirroring (feedback) session with all the coordinators. Since one of the most important issues was the lack of coordination or communication between the coordinators, this meeting was also intended as a platform to initiate dialogue at the coordinator level. Around this time, a change that took place in the organization was the appointment of Ms Devi by the board of trustees as the Managing Trustee in place of Mr Mishra.

The meeting was attended by five of the eight coordinators. In the beginning, the first author presented her findings (discussed earlier under issues). The slide explaining the differentiation by program and geography invited most comments, with organizational members unclear or divided in their interpretation of the structure. There was some ambiguity about the role of Ms Mishra too, with questions being asked if she was a coordinator or a region-in-charge. Although this line of discussion and debate didn’t get resolved it pointed out to the group an area of concern.

It was observed that there was an apparent reluctance on the part of the newly-elected Ms Devi, to acknowledge the issues presented. She engaged very little, and when she did, it was mostly to refute the existence of many of the issues even – though they were being openly played out before her eyes – such as the lack of clarity on structure or poor communication between the coordinators. Further, there was a visible divide between the coordinators, with seating arrangement also crystallizing this distinction. Ms Mishra and Ms Devi sat on one side of the room along with the authors and the other coordinators sat on the other side. This was also indicative of the power distance between the two groups.

What was also interesting was the lack of involvement of some of the coordinators during the session. Though they had been very open and vociferous during the individual meetings, when their point-of -view was presented or negated by Ms Devi, they did not speak up. This could possibly be due to the fear of antagonizing the power centers in the organization or for fear of being labeled the dissident camp. It could also be a function of high power-distance (Hofstede, 1983) among Indians, resulting in a reluctance to be openly critical of superiors. Scollon and Scollon’s (1981) observations on power-difference and distance in terms of other factors such as differing beliefs and assumptions hampering the communicative interaction are also relevant in

The case of OD in an NGO in India

155

understanding the reluctance to open up in the presence of power differentials existing within the group.

Though the meeting could not resolve all of the issues, this session to some extent was successful in bringing the coordinators together and engaging them in a constructive discussion. For an organization where various groups had been operating in silos and where the coordinators had not sat down together in years beyond the annual meeting, this was a beginning. Due to the limited time available for the engagement it was left to the organization to follow up on the issues and findings. A report summarizing the findings and observations was provided to the management.

Lessons from the intervention This intervention presented a novel opportunity for the first author to enter an organization of her choice and understand the issues involved and apply the learnings of OD to the field. Some of the personal learnings and reflections about the intervention are provided here.

. Capturing data without appearing intrusive. In her initial meetings, the first author noticed that whenever she started taking notes the interviewees tended to be a bit reluctant to divulge information, especially if they were discussing sensitive issues. For her future interviews she chose to capture what transpired during the sessions after the interviews, refraining from taking notes so the interviewee was not inhibited in discussing sensitive issues. What she learned was that people tend to open up more easily if there are no visible forms of record-keeping which helps to build a comfortable non-intrusive atmosphere during the interviews. The potential use of a small recorder to capture data that interviewees may feel less threatened by as opposed to the overt note taking, could be explored in future interventions.

. The need to be non-aligned to any camp. In one of her not too productive interviews, the author was made aware of how she may be viewed by the interviewees. Try as she might, she could not get one of the coordinators to open up. On reflection, it emerged that she had presented Ms Pia Mishra’s point-of-view on more than one occasion during the meeting. As the coordinator was not too happy with Ms Mishra (something we figured later), he was being non-cooperative during the interview, possibly because he viewed the author as aligned to Ms Mishra’s camp. This interview underlined the importance of appearing impartial in order to establish trust with the interviewee.

. The role of interviewer’s own biases. Before the author met with one of the coordinators, she had heard of him from the other interviewees and had formed a preconception of him as a trouble-maker. She started out being a little defensive; however, during the actual interview she was surprised to find him forthright and candid. The author had a sense that she had been unfair in judging him before the interview. This session forced her to examine the role of biases in the interviewer and the need to keep an open mind.

. The importance of getting the leadership involved. During the time of the author’s engagement with Adhikar, Mr Mishra was not actively involved in Adhikar’s activities owing to his political involvement. A meeting with Mr Mishra could not be arranged due to his other commitments. Due to the peculiar circumstance

JMD 30,2

156

of the organization being in a transition period with a change of leadership, the authors did not get an opportunity to fully engage with the top leader during the diagnosis. Even though important issues surfaced, the new leader was not ready to take them further with the authors at that juncture. The importance of the top leaders’ buy-in for the success of any organization development initiative served an important lesson.

Conclusion This paper is an attempt to address the gap in the literature regarding documented work in developmental organizations. Many of the issues and concerns addressed in this paper are not peculiar to non-profit organizations, but are germane to business organizations too. However, in developmental organizations members are driven towards serving the societal purpose passionately. The passion that provides the motivation could also blind people towards the importance of internal workings, such as structure or coordination mechanisms, in the long run. The role of an outside neutral observer such as the consultant becomes all the more valuable to introduce an element of rationality in the diagnosis of otherwise neglected issues.

The organization studied proved to be an educative one where many of the issues faced by developmental organizations, as indicated in the literature and few others came to the fore. This intervention, although limited in scope to organizational diagnosis and mirroring, provided an ideal opportunity for engagement in a developmental organization. From the point of view of the first author’s exposure to the field, it served as an invaluable experience both for the scope and the depth of issues covered. In addition, the intervention allowed for some very basic yet important lessons for the consultant that is relevant for any OD work.

Notes

1. The names of the organization, its location and the various individuals have been disguised to maintain confidentiality. However, all the events and data are true.

2. Adivasi stands for tribals and Sangathan is the local name for organization.

3. Arthik Siksha stands for financial education.

4. On the day of the final presentation to the Adhikar team the authors were told that Ms Devi had been appointed the new Managing Trustee.

References

Bacchiega, A. and Borzaga, C. (2001), “Social enterprises as incentive structures: an economic analysis”, in Borzaga, C. and Defourny, J. (Eds), The Emergence of Social Enterprises, Routledge, London.

Bargal, D. and Schmid, H. (1992), Organizational Change and Development in Human Service Organizations, Haworth Press, New York, NY.

Benz, M. (2005), “Not for profit, but for satisfaction? Evidence on worker well being in non-profit firms”, Kyklos, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 155-76.

Brown, D. and Covey, J.G. (1987), “Development organizations and organization development: towards an expanded paradigm for organization development”, Research in Organizational Change and Development, Vol. 1, pp. 59-87.

The case of OD in an NGO in India

157

Brown, D., Leach, M. and Covey, J.G. (2004), “Organizational development for social change”, Handbook of Organization Development, Sage Publications, New Delhi.

Brown, D.L. (1993), “Social change through collective reflection with Asian nongovernmental development organizations”, Human Relations, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 249-74.

Edwards, M. and Sen, G. (2000), “NGOs, social change and the transformation of human relationships: a 21st-century civic agenda”, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 605-16.

French, W.L. and Bell, C.H. (2003), Organization Development, 6th ed., Prentice-Hall, New Delhi.

Goldman, S. and Kahnweiler, W.M. (2000), “A collaborator profile for executives of non-profit organizations”, Nonprofit Management & Leadership, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 435-50.

Gustavsen, B. and Engelstad, P.H. (1986), “The design of conferences and the evolving role of democratic dialogue”, Human Relations, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 101-16.

Hofstede, G. (1983), “National cultures in four dimensions”, International Studies of Management and Organization, Vol. 13 Nos 1/2, pp. 46-74.

Joseph, A.J. (2000), “NGOs: fragmented dreams”, Development in Practice, Vol. 10 Nos 3/4, pp. 390-401.

Korten, D.C. (1980), “Community organization and rural development: a learning process approach”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 480-503.

Lewis, D. (2003), “Theorizing the organization and management of non-governmental development organizations”, Public Management Review, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 325-44.

McDonald, C. (1999), “Internal control and accountability in non-profit human service organizations”, Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 58, pp. 11-22.

Markham, W., Walters, J. and Bonjean, C. (2001), “Leadership in voluntary associations: the case of the international association of women”, Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 103-30.

Mirvis, P. (1992), “The quality of employment in the nonprofit sector: an update on employee attitudes”, Nonprofit Management and Leadership, Vol. 3, pp. 23-41.

Mirvis, P.H. and Hackett, E.J. (1983), “Work and workforce characteristics in the non-profit sector”, Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 116 No. 4, pp. 3-12.

Ramos, C.M. (2007), “Organizational change in a human service agency”, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 41-53.

Schnell, E.R. (2005), “A case study of executive coaching as a support mechanism during organizational growth and evolution”, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 41-56.

Scollon, R. and Scollon, S.B.K. (1981), Narrative, Literacy and Face in Interethnic Communication, Ablex Publishing Company, Norwood, NJ.

Tvedt, T. (2006), “The international aid system and the non-governmental organizations: a new research agenda”, Journal of International Development, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 677-90.

Waysman, M. and Savaya, R. (1997), “Differential assessment of the consultation needs of volunteer organizations according to stage of development”, Organization Development Journal, Vol. 15, pp. 61-70.

About the authors Nisha Nair is an Assistant Professor in Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management at the Indian Institute of Management Indore. She received her doctoral degree as a Fellow of the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad (IIMA) with specialization in

JMD 30,2

158

organizational behavior. Her research interests are in the areas of work alienation, workplace deviant behavior, organizational development, and emotions and conflict. Nisha Nair is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]

Neharika Vohra is a Professor in Organizational Behavior at IIM Ahmedabad. Vohra gained her PhD in psychology from University of Manitoba, Canada. Her research interests are in the areas of leadership, commitment, positive organizational behavior, engagement/alienation, and cross-cultural competence. She was the recipient of the Young Psychologist Award at the International Congress of Psychology, and the Best Teacher Award at the University of Manitoba, Department of Arts. Vohra has published many papers in national and international journals and has been on the editorial board of several journals.

The case of OD in an NGO in India

159

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.