Search results

This paper examines the validity standards applied to paper and pencil questionnaires by four social science roles: academic researchers, expert consultants, teachers, and organization development (OD) process consultants. These roles, influenced by their key stakeholders (e.g., clients, reviewers, students), employ different validity standards and socialize firm beliefs about these standards. The resulting divergence of attitudes toward measurement inhibits learning from other roles and slows social science advancement. This paper examines the assumption that each role must apply the same validity standards.

This paper discusses the conceptual and theoretical foundation upon which whole systems change interventions are based The paper first describes six methods of intervention that are currently being utilized to change whole systems: (1) future search, (2) search conferences/ participative design, (3) open space, (4) large scale interactive process methodology, (5) simu‐real, and (6) fast cycle full participation and the conference model. Next, six common values and assumptions underlying these large scale change interventions are identified: (1) organizations are seen as “whole systems,” (2) viewing organizations as whole systems requires the creation of dialogue among all organizational stakeholders, (3) organizations do not exist, but organizing processes and procedures do, (4) what we perceive as our collective organizational reality becomes the organization that is created, (5) individuals within organizations have the capacity to self‐organize and redefine their reality, and (6) humanity shares a set of universal values that are inherently “good” and these values will ultimately influence voluntary collective action. The paper concludes with an appeal for interventionists and users of large group techniques to be cognizant of the assumptions that drive their choice of intervention.

Recent emphasis in research and theory building on compassion in organizations has not yet received sustained attention by organization development and change scholarship. Compassion at work, however, has been reported as instrumental in coaching, ad hoc organizing, prosocial behavior during challenging times, and other processes central to developing and changing organizations. It also has been theorized to bring about an untapped organizational capability, contribute to fostering a climate of workplace forgiveness, and to facilitate development of social entrepreneurship. In this essay, we begin to outline what the recent advances in the compassion literature offer researchers and practitioners of organization development and change. We briefly review how compassion is defined across different contexts, how it can be seen through a positive lens and within broader lines of inquiry on social and emotional dynamics at work, and how interpretive approaches to studying compassion might fit with the study of change. Seeing compassion scholarship as more than a specialized trend in positive organizational behavior, we offer ample opportunities for diverse and novel inquiry into development and change at work.

The presence and practice of individual and organizational humility has the power to enable organizational growth and change. Humility drives behaviors associated with learning and the ability to embrace the value of existing mental models while valuing the insights offered by new perspectives and approaches. This paradox-savvy practice, observed in humble individuals and organizations, allows them to appropriately value what is working about the existing system while simultaneously embracing the need for change. Our research finds humble behaviors emerging within psychologically safe environments that foster an attitude of inquiry, kinship, extraordinary collaboration, and professional excellence. Humble behaviors, at every organizational level, appear to enhance both individual and group capabilities that drive long term strategic advantage. Five capabilities were identified in our research: diverse networks, shared values, flexibility and adaptability, judgment and decision-making, and organizational learning. We bring these concepts to life by synthesizing established and emerging research, as well as diving deeply into an empirical case study that leverages humble practices in order to effectively drive organizational change. We argue that humility can impact organizing at all levels (individuals, leaders, followers, teams, executives, and organizations) and in so doing create the conditions in which sustainable organizational change can flourish.

Ask leaders what their organizations need more of to thrive, and many will identify collaboration. Yet many collaborative efforts fail. A focus on the inner workings of teams, to the exclusion of the ecosystem in which teams work, has masked the importance of a collaborative context. We undertook a single case study of an exemplar firm with the intent of offering a nuanced illustration of the collaborative workplace. We illustrate how three contextual factors related to work, relationships, and behaviors shift the setting from a place where collaboration is hard to do, to one that embodies collaboration as a widespread competence.

Recent research in cognitive and social psychology finds that individual change is more emotional than rational. Further evidence suggests that the contagious power of emotions explains how groups may overcome obstacles and behave in unified ways. We offer a neuropsychological model of emotion-driven change in organizations that explains these findings and predicts conditions in which contagion effects will be successful in facilitating rapid change. Our model posits that emotive precursors to conscious action enable goal alignment and overcome cognitive resource limitations necessary to sustain organizational change over time. Our model adapts the findings from social and cognitive neuroscience to bring new insights into the mental mechanisms underlying the change process. The chapter concludes with tentative suggestions for developing new methods for research and practice that improve our predictive capability for creating rapid large-scale organizational change.

This chapter attempts to elucidate the important role that divergent thinking plays in organizational creativity, innovation, and change. We define brainstorming as a systematized method of divergent thinking, review this literature, and advocate for the strategic use of brainstorming to enhance creativity and innovation. We identify contradictory findings in the research literature that have led practitioners and researchers to disregard brainstorming techniques. We suggest that cultural forces embedded in organizations may prevent divergent thinking and brainstorming from becoming established normative organizational processes, thus hampering organizations’ potential for change and innovation. The chapter closes by putting divergent thinking and brainstorming in perspective and provides guidelines for its use.

This chapter shares the findings of a research study that investigated how organizations managed critical incidents that had the potential for dramatic economic impact and why those organizations chose to pursue certain issues. The findings expose organization identity’s role in stabilizing organizations. Understanding this role creates an opportunity to improve organization change efforts by examining and understanding a subject’s organization identity. Armed with this understanding, a change agent may design interventions in such a way as to align with identity or, when necessary, to specifically alter identity.

Recent democratic trends in Mexico as well as the opening of new economic markets and free trade relationships have made the management of change a major issue in Mexico. Most Mexican organizations need to transform their structures and processes, and to develop management and human resources in order to compete in the global marketplace. In addition, the need for change in Mexico includes such basic issues as uplifting whole classes of people out of poverty so that they can become productive members of society. We argue that change can be produced and facilitated through highly participative, egalitarian, and intensive large-group interventions. Even though existing cultural research might suggest that these approaches are inconsistent with the cultural orientation assumed to be predominant in most Mexican organizations, we offer two case studies employing whole-systems change approaches that provide evidence suggesting quite the opposite: large-scale and highly participative change interventions are very appropriate to facilitate change in Mexican society today.