Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL
Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL
Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
‘Top executives set strategy, middle managers carry it out, <strong>and</strong> very detailed control <strong>and</strong> reporting<br />
systems pass thous<strong>and</strong>s of numbers back up the hierarchy to in<strong>for</strong>m those responsible about the<br />
progress. Un<strong>for</strong>tunately, this model doesn’t work very well any more because it is based on three<br />
assumptions, which are no longer wholly valid:<br />
• Assumption 1 – the organization is a simple ‘closed system’: what it decides to do will<br />
generally take place without too much disruption from outside events.<br />
• Assumption 2 – the operating environment is stable enough <strong>for</strong> manages to underst<strong>and</strong> it<br />
sufficiently well to develop a relevant detailed strategy <strong>and</strong> <strong>for</strong> that strategy still to be<br />
relevant by the time it comes to be implemented.<br />
• Assumption 3 – in an organization there are a series of clear levels, which can be applied<br />
to cause a known response.<br />
These three assumptions have been replaced by three new realities:<br />
• Reality 1 – organizations are complex ‘open systems’, deeply influenced by <strong>and</strong> influencing<br />
their environments. Often intended actions will be diverted off course by external events or<br />
even by internal political or cultural processes within the organization itself.<br />
• Reality 2 – the environment is changing so rapidly (continuously throwing up new<br />
opportunities <strong>and</strong> threats) that top managers cannot expect to have a sufficient sense of<br />
what is happening to be able to <strong>for</strong>mulate very detailed strategies.<br />
• Reality 3 – the simple linear model of cause <strong>and</strong> effect have broken down <strong>and</strong> many<br />
actions can lead to quite unexpected (positive or negative) consequences. (N.Glass, 1998)<br />
Thus the contemporary view of organization as an open, dynamic, chaotic, self-organizing <strong>and</strong><br />
reproductive system that can emerge, function, maintain its own existence - <strong>and</strong> collapse when it<br />
fails to do so - makes us see organizations as living organisms of a specific nature.<br />
Organizations may be ‘founded’ by someone or appear naturally without preliminary design; they<br />
can be young or old, healthy or sick, chronic invalids or world champions. Hence, they may be<br />
treated <strong>for</strong> sicknesses <strong>and</strong> coached to move toward their highest potential as living organisms –<br />
<strong>and</strong> this is the main business of managers, sometimes supported by consultants or trainers. If<br />
organizations were not living organisms, trainers would not be able to do much with them.<br />
<strong>Organizational</strong> health<br />
Accepting organizations as living organisms implies the recognition that organizational health is an<br />
important aspect of organizational life. Richard Beckhard, based on multi-year research, insists<br />
that both individual <strong>and</strong> organizational health can be measured by the same criteria. He proposes<br />
the following ‘Profile of a Healthy Organization’:<br />
20