Practicing Organization Development (A guide for Consultants) - Part 29 pot

10 189 0
Practicing Organization Development (A guide for Consultants) - Part 29 pot

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

Thông tin tài liệu

employee empowerment, and respect for human dignity. Although the consul- tant’s values should not singularly drive the OD intervention, the client and con- sultant may not work together effectively if their values are incompatible. Without some alignment, unhealthy conflict is likely to result over the inter- vention’s goals and means, and that conflict may influence decisions and affect the results of an OD engagement. One client was interested in improving the effectiveness of his department. How- ever, when the consultant suggested group meetings with employees at different levels to get their input, the client was adamant that the consultant only needed to talk to the managers. There were clearly incompatible values related to par- ticipation, manager roles, and systems thinking. Clients often experience mixed feelings (including desire, fear, inadequacy, and vulnerability) about a change effort. Consciously or unconsciously, these feelings can lead the client to resist closure on contracting. Consultants can either be helpful in dealing with these feelings or aggravate them. In addition, if clients find it difficult to understand or work with consultants, additional bar- riers are created. Feelings of satisfaction and comfort during OD interventions are affected by how clients want to be included and informed, how they want to receive inputs from consultants, and what consultants want from their clients. Many of the feelings experienced by clients and consultants are associated with their feelings of vulnerability, interpersonal needs, availability to one another, their priorities, and their levels of commitment to the change effort. Margulies and Raia (1978) have also stressed the importance of the consul- tant-client “fit” and described the quality of the relationship as dependent on their value systems, the consultant’s competence and ability to “help” the client with the perceived challenge, the client’s experience with other consultants, expectations about the consulting role and process, their personalities and inter- personal styles, and the compatibility of their needs and objectives. More recently, Massarik and Pei-Carpenter (2002) describe the client-consultant relationship interconnecting “selves” with the amount of overlay defining the congruence of styles, needs, objectives and values. In one consulting relationship, the client was very controlling and directive and acted as if the consultant was one of his employees (whom he also treated inappropriately). Normally, a consultant would straighten this situation out, re-contract, or quit. However, this consultant was putting up with it. On deeper discussion with a consulting colleague, it was determined that this consultant still had some authority issues hindering his challenging the client and that financially he needed the work. In this case, their needs and styles played into each other, blocking the potential for growth or improvement. PRE-LAUNCH 251 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 251 In developing open, trusting, and aligned consultant-client relationships, the consultant’s ultimate value is in maintaining a boundary position (Cummings & Worley, 2001) with marginality and objectivity (Margulies & Raia, 1978). Becoming intimately involved with the culture of an organization or group, yet remaining apart from it, provides the kind of detachment and objectivity required for effective consulting. It involves balancing the ability to understand and empathize with the client system while avoiding becoming so acculturated that the consultant mirrors the same biases and subjectivity as the client. The consultant’s ability not to be absorbed by the culture (French & Bell, 1999) and to remain free from the organizational forces that might distort his or her view of the organization and its issues should not be compromised in the process of developing a quality client-consultant relationship. Friendship is often an issue in developing quality client-consultant relationships. Some consultants have grown so close, personally and socially, with a particu- lar client that they have lost neutrality, objectivity, and marginality in the eyes of other clients in the system. On the other hand, some consultants have man- aged to remain effective with the client system while maintaining a friendship with the primary client, by openly discussing the situation, keeping boundaries very visible, and behaving in accord with all contracts. The client and consultant do not have to agree on everything at the outset of the change effort, but they do have to be candid, confront their differences, dis- cuss any implications, and clarify how they will proceed. Completing a Preliminary Diagnostic Scan In a preliminary diagnostic scan, the consultant and client are “scouting” (Kolb & Frohman, 1970), which involves developing a general understanding of: • The current state (presenting issues and needs, the culture, the basis they have for developing their vision); • The potential sources of resistance and support; • The apparent power and political system; and • A perception of the organization’s readiness, commitment, and capability. The Current State In the pre-launch phase, the consultant attempts to learn enough about the client and their change desires to contract effectively for the initial work. It is impor- tant to approach this aspect of consulting with a spirit of inquiry and neutrality, accessing one’s ignorance (Schein, 1997) and avoiding any inappropriate 252 PRACTICING ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT, 2ND EDITION 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 252 assumptions or premature conclusions about the situation or what to do. It is best to treat hunches as hypotheses at this point. It is also important for con- sultants to be aware of and to control their own diagnostic orientation and biases to avoid creating self-fulfilling prophecies (Lippitt, Watson, & Westley, 1958). Consultants should seek information from more than their initial con- tact. They may find it helpful to hear from or about people who have various stakes in past problems or new desired futures. When a project is deficit-focused, the consultant might, for instance, seek information to answer such questions as: • What is the issue or the different interpretations of the issue? • What is the apparent cause(s) of the challenge? • Why does the present state exist? • What are the likely consequences if the issue(s) are not resolved? • What would success look like? • How do people feel about the current situation? However, many projects take a positive, developmental stance to help the organization move toward an exciting new future vision. Then it’s important to consider other questions, such as: • What has made us great so far? • What do we have that will help us reach our vision? • What is going well in the organization? • How can these strengths be leveraged? • What are the likely possibilities if our strengths can be further developed? Whenever possible, the consultant should obtain this information directly from those closest to the situation. At a minimum, consultants should be able to question credible sources for their perceptions about how the people involved in the problems or future vision would answer these questions. After an initial meeting with the head of a division, a consultant asked to talk informally, at no charge, with a handful of key players, after which he would meet again with the head person to discuss the project and his “fit” with the pro- posed work and client, and then explore contracting. Another approach is to do phased work—to do the same, but charge for the initial work. PRE-LAUNCH 253 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 253 In a preliminary scan, consultants should not strive to obtain great detail; rather, they should seek to understand the issues and possibilities generally and the relationships among them. In part, consultants are trying to achieve clarity and elevate their confidence about what to work on and how, while serving as an organization mirror (Bruce & Wyman, 1998), sharpening clients’ under- standing. Consultants are also trying to establish the validity of the current state (Cummings & Worley, 2001) and determine the commonality of perceptions or distinctions among different viewpoints. Sometimes consultants are trying to scope the situation in order to design a diagnostic approach. At other times they are trying to scope the possibilities and strength of resources to plan an appreciative process. They want enough knowl- edge of the organization’s issue(s), resources, and desires to enable the two par- ties to make informed choices about proceeding with the engagement (Cummings & Worley, 2001). In this process they should talk to a few key peo- ple or meet with key stakeholder groups. Consultants may have to facilitate dis- cussions so as to surface real strengths and issues and challenge beliefs. Consultants may also review studies, memos, or other documents that relate to the issues, needs, and viewpoints. Consultants may find it helpful to observe some regular meetings or to tour work areas to see the operations, interactions, and culture at work. Investing a little energy in the preliminary scan will help consultants to contract for, and place the OD intervention on, the right path. Touring the work facility of a small design and manufacturing company where creative artists, engineers, and construction people needed to collaborate helped to explain their status issues (very different offices and work space) and some of their conflict (physical distances affecting psychological distances). Support, Resistance, Power, and Politics When performing the diagnostic scan, consultants should also note who appears to support or resist the change effort and why they feel the way they do. Identify- ing supporters and resisters helps to crystallize motives and personal agendas. Sup- porters and resisters may also dramatize the real hurdles to be encountered or identify key considerations in designing the content and process of the change effort. While scouting in a large department with numerous specialists, a consultant discovered some very different perspectives on the presenting problem and some very logical feelings of resistance. In a subsequent meeting with the initial client, the consultant was able to provide a more accurate description of the “starting point,” which expanded the client’s view of the situation and led to contracting for a different initial phase of work to deal with the differences and build con- sensus for any change. 254 PRACTICING ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT, 2ND EDITION 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 254 It is also important to identify potential leverage points for change (Burke, 1994) by understanding the organization’s power system (the people who have influence or authority over key systems and processes, rewards and incentives, and people) and its political dynamics (Greiner & Schein, 1988). They must find out who has significant influence, how decisions are made in the organization, and who has expertise pertinent to the change effort. Consultants must also learn about the motives, perspectives, and values of those in power in the orga- nization to understand the political dynamics inherent in its culture (for exam- ple, coalitions, dependencies, tradeoffs, deals, and incentives). Powerful people attain their status through formal and informal means (for example, position, information, expertise, intimidation, access, or amicability). Consultants must learn about the power/political dimensions of the organiza- tion and gain access to key people in appropriate ways during early stages of work. Greiner and Metzger (1983) refer to this aspect of consulting as “meet- ing the power structure.” A consultant’s knowledge of, and connection to, the power structure can be used in positive ways to help leverage change (Cobb, 1986; Cobb & Margulies, 1981; Greiner & Schein, 1988). In one consulting situation, an OD intervention was terminated when a pending invoice was rejected because a new chief financial officer (CFO) had not been involved in the early stages of the intervention. The client and the consultant had proceeded without paying attention to a key change in the power system and, in this case, the emergence of a new perspective on the value of the work being performed. In another intervention, the human resource client got into trouble with the head of data processing by launching an OD intervention on people issues for implementing technological change without first obtaining the support and approval of the high-powered head of data processing. Even the organization’s president, who initially supported the OD intervention, overlooked the impor- tance of involving this power player. The head of data processing discredited early work in the intervention, and it was terminated after the initial phase. In this case, the consultant should have tested the political system rather than rely- ing on the client’s belief that everyone necessary supported the OD intervention. Readiness, Commitment, and Capability When performing the preliminary scan, consultants should assess the orga- nization’s readiness (motivation to change), level of commitment (attitude and energy toward change), and the capability of its members (their knowl- edge and skills needed for the change effort). It is also important to know the extent of resources (money, people, technology) available to support the change effort (Burke, 1994). Knowing the commitment of key stakeholders is important because it helps consultants determine whether the organization PRE-LAUNCH 255 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 255 is ready for change or if other steps will be required to create the necessary impetus. Commitment can be viewed as levels of energy applied toward or against change. People can be against the change direction, somewhat neu- tral about letting it happen, passively for it, or wanting to make it happen (Beckhard & Harris, 1987). Assessing the commitment to change by those involved in the issues—even as “best guess” perceptions—helps the consul- tant ascertain how much readiness building is needed and the strength of the change champions. After beginning down a path toward a change program, a consultant and client were informally collecting data about readiness and commitment. To their sur- prise, they discovered a lot of neutrality and passive support. Clearly, such atti- tudes would not support a large and significant change process. Everything was put on hold until the chief executive client could have some individual and team meetings to gain alignment or change in thinking about what was needed for the future. The capability of organizational members is measured by their knowledge and experience with change and change processes and their level of required skills, such as their ability to participate, work productively in groups, function in an open way, think creatively, and demonstrate flexibility. Change could be utterly new to some organizations, participation could be counter-cultural, and the people may be highly rigid. However, other organizations may be accus- tomed to change, their members may have undergone extensive training in interpersonal communication and small-group management, and these organi- zations may have employees who seek variety and innovation. A consultant who is familiar with an organization’s change competence can more easily determine how much education or skill building should be included in the inter- vention strategy and how to use the organization’s human resources during the change. A preliminary diagnostic scan will often move the client from wanting a sim- ple training solution to wanting a more complex reexamination of the organiza- tion’s work structure or culture or a participative assessment/planning process. Alternatively, when present-state descriptions are presented by the client, they may be full of attributions and can be seen more accurately only by surfacing the real causes of why a system is not working, why products are of poor qual- ity, why services are fraught with delays, or why the organization is stymied from reaching its potential. The consultant may also find that some form of education or readiness building is essential prior to launching because of the level of capa- bility or the real potential for resistive people to sabotage a change effort. 256 PRACTICING ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT, 2ND EDITION 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 256 When determining whether a good match exists to work with a specific client, consultants may also wish to consider these questions: • Can I work with this client? • Do I have the right competencies? • Will this client keep agreements? • Can this client be honest with him- or herself, others, and me? • Is this client open to bad news, new ideas, and change? • Are the client’s motives, commitments, resources, and values appropriate? • Are the client’s expectations realistic? • Do I believe we can be successful? The results of skipping or short-cutting the preliminary diagnostic scan and the later more in-depth diagnostic activities can be disastrous. Without a good understanding of the “reality,” the subsequent work can be off-target, designed too narrowly, or end up as “a hammer looking for nails.” If a consultant hur- ries to begin the intervention, resistance may be elevated, necessitating unnec- essary remedial work. The consultant must, therefore, help the client pinpoint real needs and intentions. Only then is it possible to contract appropriately and design diagnostic and action strategies effectively. Contracting for the Work, Working Relations, and Exchange The information that has been learned about the client so far provides a foun- dation for the contracting process and data for identifying the content of the work and psychological contracts (Boss, 1985). The word contract is often thought of only in formal and legal terms, but in OD it can be formal, informal, oral, or be in a letter of agreement or in a legal form. However, the term is actu- ally quite appropriate given its original roots—tractus: to draw something along; con: together with someone else (Bruce & Wyman, 1998). Contracting means establishing and clarifying expectations about the change effort, the working relationship(s), consulting support needs, and financial or other arrangements. The process of contracting must be a primary focus in pre-launch, but will be continuous in some respects and reopened as conditions change. Block (2000) refers to contracting as an explicit agreement about what the consultant and the client should expect and how they should work together. That agreement results from discussions in which the wants, offers, and con- cerns of the client and the consultant are clarified. Differences are negotiated and agreement is reached. Weisbord (1973) defines contracting as an explicit exchange of expectations, clarifying for the consultant and client what each PRE-LAUNCH 257 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 257 expects to obtain from the relationship, how much time each will invest, when, and at what cost, and the ground rules under which the parties will operate. Contracting is intended to allow good decisions to be made about how to carry out the change process (Beer, 1980) and sets the tone for the entire OD intervention (Block, 2000). It establishes the clarity needed to have an effective working relationship and avoid subsequent surprises or problems that derail projects. With whom consultants should contract will depend on who is iden- tified as the different types of client(s), sponsor(s), and other key player(s) in the power system. Consultants may sometimes need to perform primary con- tracting for all aspects of a change effort and working relationships with some client(s), but auxiliary contracting for parts of the change effort or limited rela- tionship needs with other client(s). Contracting for the Work The consultant should start the OD intervention by agreeing with the client about the initial understanding of the situation, desired results or intended out- comes, measures of success, the value proposition for the work, and the options, methods, timing, and accountabilities anticipated. As part of these dis- cussions, the consultant and the client should be sure to establish critical suc- cess factors (what it will take to be successful) or organizational effectiveness criteria that can later be used in evaluating success (Smither, Houston, & McIn- tire, 1996). All too often, the measures are vague or left out, resulting in disas- trous conflicts later. Critical success factors and effectiveness criteria can include objective, measurable outcomes, such as reduced turnover, higher margins, or quality improvements, and more subjective attitude or behavior outcomes, such as more participation among a group’s members, improved morale, or shared perceptions of what is valued and rewarded. Caution may be needed, however. There is no guarantee of improvement in human systems work; often, there is no way to show that the changes emerged from the intervention and there is no control over external factors that can negatively impact the change, such as an unfriendly takeover or downturn in the economy. The consultant should keep in mind the mutual nature of the contracting process and change. No matter how well the consultant does, there can be no change or improvement without the full support and committed participation of the client organization. Boss (1985), Lippitt and Lippitt (1986), and Schein (1988) have all stressed the importance of emphasizing the joint responsibility of clients and consultants during contracting. Developing consensus on the strategy and methods of the change effort will produce more detailed information on the project boundaries, work tasks, and data requirements; with whom to work directly; whom to include in vari- ous ways; where the OD work will take place; in what sequence activities should happen; when the work should be performed and at what pace; how technology 258 PRACTICING ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT, 2ND EDITION 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 258 will be used in data collection or ongoing communication; deliverables to be pro- duced; and approximately how long the change effort will take. The consultant should be sure that flexibility is incorporated in the contractual language because, at the time of contracting, there are still many unknowns and it is impossible to know how many and what type of interventions will be used. Even though there may not be a separate assessment/diagnosis phase, it is still important to contract for how data will be generated and used. For interventions to be effective, they still require valid and useful data, free and informed choice, and internal commitment (Argyris, 1970). So the work will always require some forms of data generation leading to action taking. The result of this part of contracting is often a plan that may be more spe- cific and detailed for the immediate next steps, such as diagnosis or preliminary education, and more general for the subsequent cycles of design, intervention, and implementation. It is often helpful to include key decision points in the change plan for client-consultant review or modification. Sometimes contract- ing for the work is actually broken into phases, such as education, diagnosis, design, and implementation work, or preparation, design, and execution of a large-scale event. In one organization, the initial work contract was structured to include a design group drawn from a wide cross-section of the organization that would identify all the relevant stakeholders, select people for invitation, and prepare all the communications and pre-work materials to be sent to the invitees for a fairly comprehensive, multi-day, diagnostic and planning meeting. The executive team would be included along the way and at the meetings. The design group would also compile the work from the large stakeholder meeting and determine com- munication and feedback mechanisms to share with and involve the rest of the organization. Contracting for Working Relations The most in-depth relationship contracting occurs with the consultant’s direct client(s). In contracting with direct client(s), consultants must address the full range of relationship issues and develop a working relationship. Trust and open- ness are issues of central importance. In addition, consultants will find it essen- tial to clarify what roles they will play for the client, what they should expect from each other, how they should work together, how they should plan together, and how they should reach critical decisions. In developing working relations, the consultant and client are contracting pri- marily for the psychosocial aspects of the relationship and creating an interper- sonal relationship for changing the client’s organization (Bruce & Wyman, 1998). This includes—but is not limited to—roles and expectations, commitments, PRE-LAUNCH 259 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 259 needs for involvement, information needs, access, control, work styles, and the ground rules or principles that will be used as the consultant and the client work together. Unless there is mutual understanding and agreement about the process, there is significant risk that one or both of the parties’ expectations will not be met (Bellman, 1990). It is reasonable to expect that roles and needs will change during the life of the project through client growth, transfer of skills, and grow- ing mutual confidence and trust. This type of contracting requires recycling, the consultant and the client asking for what they want or need (Block, 2000; Boss, 1985), and each having self-awareness and clarity of his or her motives and val- ues (Burke, 2002; Smither, Houston, & McIntire, 1996). “Self as an instrument of change” (Jamieson, 2003; Tannenbaum & Eisen, Chapter Twenty-Five of this book) is particularly accentuated in contracting since the outcomes are com- pletely dependent on what each person is capable of putting on the table, know- ing what’s personally important to stand firm on, and how each honors agreements. In one situation, a client and consultant developed a contract that included a weekly meeting for updating and decision making; a monthly meeting with the top team to present progress; no written reports; client-consultant access at any time for emergencies, otherwise during work hours; both would be visible in pro- ject events, but the client would handle other internal communications (related divisions, the board, and so forth); neither required a lot of detail in their dis- cussions; a quarterly review of what had changed in the project, how they were working together, and any changes to their contract; the client asked for “bru- tal honesty” and challenges; the consultant wanted administrative support for the project and monthly billing with thirty-day payments. Consultants have numerous orientation, role, and style choices based on who they are and what the client system requires (Jamieson, 1998). These are also part of establishing expectations and fitting with the client. For example, they might position themselves in the foreground, more central in the change work and visible in the client system, or more in the background, working through the client(s); more oriented to educating the client and building their capabil- ity through the transfer of knowledge and skills or more protective of their skills and expertise; more task or process oriented (Margulies & Raia, 1972); or rely more on the client’s knowledge and experiences versus the consultant’s own. Consultants can be more or less directive, supportive, confrontive, or facilita- tive (Jamieson, 1998; Lippitt & Lippitt, 1986). They can serve as experts, pairs of hands, or collaborators (Block, 2000). As Harrison (1970) put it, the change agent is continuously confronted by the dilemma of whether to “lead and push, or to collaborate and follow.” These choices create very different dynamics in 260 PRACTICING ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT, 2ND EDITION 15_962384 ch09.qxd 2/3/05 12:18 AM Page 260 . to launching because of the level of capa- bility or the real potential for resistive people to sabotage a change effort. 256 PRACTICING ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT, 2ND EDITION 15_962384 ch09.qxd. culture (for exam- ple, coalitions, dependencies, tradeoffs, deals, and incentives). Powerful people attain their status through formal and informal means (for example, position, information,. situation and led to contracting for a different initial phase of work to deal with the differences and build con- sensus for any change. 254 PRACTICING ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT, 2ND EDITION 15_962384

Ngày đăng: 02/07/2014, 02:20

Từ khóa liên quan

Tài liệu cùng người dùng

  • Đang cập nhật ...

Tài liệu liên quan