Be sure to read the description in Organizational Performance Management to understand that organizational structures are ultimately strategies to help increase the performance of the organization.
To successfully decide the best structures for your organization — or to improve the health of an already established organization — you need some basic understanding of organizational design. You should know what an organization really is, including its parts and how they all work together. Too often, this information is not understood. As a result, leaders and managers add or modify activities within their organizations and without meaning to, they adversely affect the other activities.
You should understand the parts that are the same across all types of organizations — and the parts that are highly unique between them. Otherwise, you might miss out on the vast free resources for assistance to you because you believe your organization and its problems are truly unique.
You should know how to recognize the typical features of a new and start-up organization (in its first life stage) as compared to a well established one (in its mature life stage). Without knowing that information, you can have unrealistic expectations of your start-up organization, resulting in increasing confusion,
frustration and conflicts. You won’t know what is needed to evolve to the next level.
You should be able to recognize the differences in cultures between organizations. Otherwise, you will not understand why other people have such different values and expectations than yours — and that theirs is not wrong.
You also should know about how organizations are changing significantly because of numerous driving forces today. These changes are also causing changes in the nature of the leadership and management within them. Those coming changes are likely to affect you.
This purpose of this series of articles is to convey the core concepts in all of that information to you. You should proceed through the series by going through the articles in the following order.
(Those who naturally prefer to focus on the “business side” in organizations, rather than the “human skills” side, might particularly appreciate this topic on organizational structures.)
Learn More in the Library’s Blogs Related to Organizational Theory
In addition to the articles on this current page, see the following blogs which have posts related to Organizational Theories. Scan down the blog’s page to see various posts. Also see the section “Recent Blog Posts” in the sidebar of the blog or click on “next” near the bottom of a post in the blog.
To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics, available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources.
Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.
When we think about a house, we usually take certain features into consideration, e.g., how many rooms it has, the color of its walls, slope of its roof, etc. A person can consider the following dimensions when analyzing an organization.
Learn More in the Library’s Blogs Related to Dimensions of Organizations
In addition to the articles on this current page, see the following blogs which have posts related to Dimensions of Organizations. Scan down the blog’s page to see various posts. Also see the section “Recent Blog Posts” in the sidebar of the blog or click on “next” near the bottom of a post in the blog.
Richard Daft in his book, Organizational Theory and Design (West Publishing, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1992), organizes these dimensions into categories of structural and contextual.
Structural dimensions:
Centralization – the extent to which functions are dispersed in the organization, either in terms of integration with other functions or geographically
Formalization – regarding the extent of policies and procedures in the organization
Hierarchy
– regarding the extent and configuration of levels in the structure
Routinization
– regarding the extent that organizational processes are standardized
Specialization
– regarding the extent to which activities are refined
Training
– regrading the extent of activities to equip organization members with knowledge and skills to carry out their roles
Contextual Dimensions
Culture – the values and beliefs shared by all (note that culture is often discerned by examining norms or observable behaviors in the workplace)
Environment – the nature of external influences and activities in the political, technical, social and economic arenas
Goals
– unique overall priorities and desired end-states of the organization
Size
– number of people and resources and their span in the organization
Technology
– the often unique activities needed to reach organizational goals, including nature of activities, specialization, type of equipment/facilities needed, etc.
Additional Perspectives on Dimensions of Organizations
To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics, available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources.
Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.
The section after this one shares practical advice about designing the structure of your organization. However, it might be interesting first to read about the general principles that the practical advice is following.
Some years ago Albert Cherns, an important figure in the Norwegian work redesign efforts highlighted some important Principles of Social and Technical Systems Design. The Principles of Organization Design have been known for 30 years in the academic and consulting community. Knowing the principles and implementing them are clearly two different things. First, I will detail the principles and following that I will highlight what has made the implementation so difficult.
1. Complementarities
How we go about restructuring needs to be compatible with what we are trying to achieve by the restructuring. The process of design must be complementary with the objectives. This means the design and implementation process is critical. If you want flexibility and participation within the work group as an output of the design, then how you go about designing the organization has to be flexible, interactive and participatory.
If the completed work system will depend upon high levels of meaningful flexibility in accomplishing the work, then it is through a process of meaningful flexibility that the system needs to be built. The “means” have to be complimentary with the “ends”. In other words, if you want a system where people assume responsibility, then people have to be responsibly involved in creating the work system or you won’t get it. We do not get participative highly effective organizations by fiat.
2. Minimal Critical Specification
New technologies require people to learn and change. These abilities have to be developed through the work itself. Therefore, specify as little as possible concerning how tasks combine into jobs and how people are to interact within jobs. The creation of a well-designed work team must involve dialogue and decisions being made by the people involved. Most teams struggle from over-structure, which is based in job descriptions and compensation schemes, which result in “that’s not my job”. The trick in building a team that works is to specify no more than is absolutely necessary about the task or how jobs relate to the task, or how people relate to individual jobs. To build a high performance team the rule is to FIX as little as possible. This means to identify and specify no more than what is absolutely critical. Generally the critical information is about output expected. The vision of results is very important and has to be co-constructed with the group but more than anything you want to build an organic ability to learn and change into the team.
3. Variance Control
Support and reward groups that deal with errors at the point of origin. Effective teams need the legitimacy to find out where things go wrong and deal with variance where it occurs. The goal is to minimize exporting problems to others. The assumption that is safe to make is that people know what good work looks like. Exporting problems and unsatisfied customer needs is the mark of a team that lacks options.
4. Clear Goals and Flexible Strategies
Define what is expected in terms of performance early and clearly and then support adaptations toward appropriate means by which the group can achieve ends. (Do not over-specify.) This is an adaptability principle, which recognizes that we are designing living systems rather than machines. With living systems, the same ends can be reached by different means. There are a lot of ways to solve problems and meet a customers needs.
What is critical here is the definition and understanding of the end goal. The “What” is to be highly specified. The “How” is open to local decision and initiative. This enables learning and an increased sense of “efficacy” on the part of team members. Efficacy is the sense that we are effective as a team that we can make a difference and do the job well. Efficacy is fragile and needs to be supported by continuous learning and improvement. High performance teams constantly “tinker” with the means by which they accomplish their results. They seldom settle on “one best way”
5. Boundary Location and Control
Supervisors and managers have to grow to become more comfortable performing a role as a group resource, a beacon of coming changes and a coordinator across task group boundaries.
Traditional organizations group by: time, technology or territory. The weakness of this is that boundaries interfere with the desirable sharing of knowledge and experience and so learning suffers. The consistent social-technical message is if there are supervisors, they manage the boundaries as a group resource, insuring the group has adequate resources, coordinating activities with other groups and foreseeing coming changes. More and more these resource positions are disappearing as groups become more self-regulating. Often the presence of supervisors is an indication of a lack of success in a groups design, or unwillingness at higher levels to trust based upon a poor job of building the structure. When it is done right supervisors are superfluous at best and harmful at worse.
6. Information Flow
Teams have to be deeply involved to determine what and where information is needed for self-direction. There needs to be a management commitment to provide information for task performance and learning. Information has to be provided where it is needed for self-direction, learning, and task improvement. Control has to be subordinated to achievement.
7. Support Congruence
Goals, reward and support systems that integrate required behaviors have to be consistent. The reward and support systems have to be consistent with goals. Incentives have to be realigned to support team-based work structures. Individual based compensation systems are being modified continually to support many different team structures. Skill-based schemes and gain sharing are foundations for high performance.
8. Design and Human Values
Task and organization design has to be oriented toward improving both the technical and the human components of the organization. The process of design must address the need for variation and meaning in work. It has to take into account the needs for continuous learning, involvement in decision-making, help and support between colleagues, and meaningful relationship between work and outside society, a desirable future. A re-design enterprise will be successful only if it unites a process of organization development, which includes work restructuring combined with a planning process that is both interactive and participatory.
9. Incompletion
Design is a continuous commitment, a reiterative process. A design is a solution, which inevitably has to be changed, therefore it is critical to build learning and change ability into the team. Management has to appreciate that organization design toward high performance is a continuous process. What has to be learned is the process of design because it is a never-ending necessity. Deep in our organizations, people have to learn how to periodically re-fashion their organizational arrangements. Everything falls out of balance and has to be reviewed with an eye toward deciding upon changes necessary. In the early stages learning how to redesign is often more important than the design itself. The design will change over time and learning how to do it is a team life skill.
The basic message is that if you want people to assume responsibility for the work process you have to involve them in the work redesign process itself. Responsibility is the essence of self-management. To accept responsibility people have to define and make decisions. The tendency is for management to hand the operational people an output of redesign thinking done by others, and expect them to work it. Expecting also, the supervisors to supervise the implementation of a design which management has completed. The trick of organizing for real teamwork is getting everyone involved in the total systems improvement.
Practical Advice About Organizing or Reorganizing an Organization and Its Employees
Organization charts (or “org charts” as they affectionately are known) are graphical depictions of the official roles/positions in the organization and their relationship to each other, e.g., the top position and authority in the organization and then what other positions formally report to which other positions throughout the organization. Org charts are very common, especially in organizations with 5 or more people. The following guidelines will help you to understand org charts and how to develop them for your own organization.
Learn More in the Library’s Blogs Related to Organizations
In addition to the articles on this current page, see the following blogs which have posts related to organizations. Scan down the blog’s page to see various posts. Also see the section “Recent Blog Posts” in the sidebar of the blog or click on “next” near the bottom of a post in the blog.
To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics, available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources.
Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.
Simply put, organizations are social systems. They’re groups of people organized
around a common purpose. Their activities include similar recurring practices,
for example, strategic planning, business planning, product and service development,
marketing, financial management and evaluations. Each activity usually includes
formally or informally clarifying goals, taking steps toward those goals, deciding
if the goals are being met or not, and adjusting activities to be even more
effective and efficient in reaching the goals. The social systems can be focused
primarily on the entire organization, teams, each product or service, or within
a certain activity. Individuals themselves are systems, needing a clear purpose
and activities to continually work toward that purpose.
Social systems go through common life-cycles ranging from, for example, from
start-up to growth to maturity. For example, as people mature, they begin to
understand more about the world and themselves. Over time, they develop a certain
kind of wisdom that sees them through many of the challenges in life and work.
They learn to plan and to use a certain amount of discipline to carry through
on those plans. They learn to manage themselves. Meanwhile, they go through
infancy, child-hood and early-teenage phases that are characterized by lots
of rapid growth. People in these phases often do whatever it takes just to stay
alive, for example, eating, seeking shelter and sleeping. Early on, many people
tend to make impulsive, highly reactive decisions based on whatever is going
on around them at the moment.
Why Are They Important to Understand?
Start-up organizations, team and internal practices are like this, too. Often,
founders of the organization or program and its various members have to do whatever
is necessary just to stay in business. Leaders make highly reactive, seat-of-the-pants
decisions. They fear taking the time to slow down and do planning.
Experienced leaders have learned to recognize the particular life cycle that
a system is going through. These leaders understand the types of problems faced
during each life cycle. That understanding gives them a sense of perspective
and helps them to decide how to respond to decisions and problems in the workplace
and their lives and the workplace.
That understanding also suggests the priories that they need to soon address
in order to evolve to the next stage. Systems that do not evolve often stagnate
or decline between stages. Symptoms can be unclear priorities, unclear roles,
increasing frustrations and conflict, and people leaving the organization. If
the understanding of the life cycle is not known, then these problems are often
not resolved.
When discerning the particular stage that a system is currently in, it does
not depend on the age of the system. Rather, it depends on the nature of its
current activities. For example, if the activities are mostly unplanned, high
reactive and decisions are made primarily by certain personalities rather than
by plans and policies, then that organization is operating more like an early
stage organization.
Example of a Simple Organizational Life
Cycle Model
Life cycles of social systems are so important to understand that there has
been an increasing number of suggested frameworks and models for life cycles.
Here is one simple model to further enhance your understanding of life cycles.
In this example, the focus is on an organization-wide social system.
Some systems planners consider there to be an additional stage of decline that
is after the maturity stage. That stage recognizes that not all systems are
meant to exist forever. It also helps systems planners to avoid desperately
staying in the maturity stage, lest the system “fails”.
Start-Up Features
Has compelling, exciting vision and purpose
People are motivated by exciting, charismatic leaders
Board is usually a hands-on (working) Board
People are recruited because they’re excited and want to chip in
People chip in wherever they feel they’re needed
Decisions are often reactive and spontaneous. Plans, if developed at all, are often not implemented
Resources (money, facilities, etc.) are continually sought, sometimes in crisis situations
Occasional confusion, frustration and conflicts can exist about who’s doing what, how and when
People begin to talk about the need for more planning and procedures
If there’s strong resistance to change, then crises increase, for example, cash shortages, conflicts and people leaving
Priorities in Growth Stage
Focus is on strengthening internal systems to support growth, while expanding services and markets
Leaders focus on managing change as much as on generating new ideas
Board evolves to more of a policy-Board with continued focus on plans, policies and full participation
Different departments and teams are appropriately coordinated for efficiencies
Planning is regular and systematic, and focused on goals, roles and deadlines
Progress is regularly monitored for status, learning and continuous improvement
Regular and routine activities are proceduralized for reliability and efficiencies
Internal systems are developed to systematically obtain resources, based on plans
Performance management practices are focused on personnel and the organization
Priorities in Maturity Stage
Focus in on sustaining momentum and renewal, especially to avoid entrenching in bureaucracy
Focus is also on creativity and innovation – sometimes to start new ventures, that start new life cycles themselves
Management priorities are especially on succession planning and risk management
More learning is shared with other people and organizations
Leaders seek to successfully duplicate their business model elsewhere
People attend to even longer-range planning, for example, 3-5 years out
Priority continues to be on managing change and transformation
Some organizations consider terminating the organization if its vision is achieved
Product Life Cycles
The recurring activities to plan, develop, implement, evaluate and then adjust
the plans for each product and service is a essentially a systematic recurring
set of activities. It is a system and has a life cycle like many other systems.
The phases in the system might be described by the above simple diagram of phases.
Experienced product managers understand the stages of development of a typical
product or service, and know what the typical traits of each stage are. Thus,
they know what priorities to address to evolve the product or service to maturity.
They understand that problems that can occur if the next stage is not reached.
Consider the following articles.
Learn More in the Library’s Blogs Related to Organizations
In addition to the information on this current page, see the following blogs
which have posts related to organizations. Scan down the blog’s page to see
various posts. Also see the section “Recent Blog Posts” in the sidebar of the
blog or click on “next” near the bottom of a post in the blog.
To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics, available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources.
Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.
Most of us have worked in an organization of people — even a family is a type of organization. The word is so widely used that its meaning can sometimes be lost. The word means a collection of resources that are working together somehow to achieve a common purpose. When we talk about an organization, we are usually referring to a group of people.
Organizations of people come in many forms. They might be a random group of people who spontaneously came together to address a short-term need, such as collecting litter along a certain stretch of road. Or, it might be a carefully collected, aligned and integrated group of people who came together for the long-term to address a long-term need, such as stopping poverty in a certain country.
An overall organization can have a variety of small organizations within it, for example, various departments and teams of people. The way that people work together in an organization depends on a variety of factors, including the values in their culture, the nature of their leadership and types of current needs they are working to address. See What Makes Each Organization Unique.
Let us look at some other definitions of the word “organization” and some more about how an organization works toward a common purpose.
All of the people in an organization should be working toward a common purpose. That purpose is often referred to as the mission. The mission might be implied to its members or explicitly expressed to them.
When explicitly expressed, it is often in the form of a mission statement. The statement is often reviewed during a process called strategic planning.
Vision
The organization’s vision is an image of what success would look like at some point in the future, both
for the people that the organizations serves and for the organization itself. It can be very inspirational and motivational to explicitly articulate that vision in a statement like the mission statement during strategic planning.
Values
The organization’s values are the overall priorities in the nature of how the organization wants to work
toward its mission. Values can be reflected in how the people in the organization are actually working together. These might be referred to as real or enacted values. Values can also be about how the organization wants it members to work together. These might be referred to as desired values.
Strategic Priorities
These are the overall, most important matters and activities for members to attend to, when working toward the mission. Similar to the mission, vision and values, they might be implied or explicit among members. The priorities might be associated with assignments for who is address which ones and by when. The priorities are often referred as “strategic goals” during a strategic planning process.
Thus, it could seem to be a major challenge when working to lead, manage or improve an organization. Fortunately, there are some things in common to all types of organizations — because they all are systems. We will review more about systems later in this series of articles.
Learn More in the Library’s Blogs Related to Organizations
In addition to the information on this current page, see the following blogs which have posts related to organizations. Scan down the blog’s page to see various posts. Also see the section “Recent Blog Posts” in the sidebar of the blog or click on “next” near the bottom of a post in the blog.
To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics,
available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources.
Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.
Basically, organizational culture is the personality of the organization. Culture is comprised of the assumptions, values, norms and tangible signs (artifacts) of organization members and their behaviors. Members of an organization soon come to sense the particular culture of an organization. Culture is one of those terms that’s difficult to express distinctly, but everyone knows it when they sense it. For example, the culture of a large, for-profit corporation is quite different than that of a hospital which is quite different than that of a university. You can tell the culture of an organization by looking at the arrangement of furniture, what they brag about, what members wear, etc. — similar to what you can use to get a feeling about someone’s personality.
Corporate culture can be looked at as a system. Inputs include feedback from, e.g., society, professions, laws, stories, heroes, values on competition or service, etc. The process is based on our assumptions, values and norms, e.g., our values on money, time, facilities, space and people. Outputs or effects of our culture are, e.g., organizational behaviors, technologies, strategies, image, products, services, appearance, etc.
The concept of culture is particularly important when attempting to manage organization-wide change. Practitioners are coming to realize that, despite the best-laid plans, organizational change must include not only changing structures and processes, but also changing the corporate culture as well.
There’s been a great deal of literature generated over the past decade about the concept of organizational culture — particularly in regard to learning how to change organizational culture. Organizational change efforts are rumored to fail the vast majority of the time. Usually, this failure is credited to lack of understanding about the strong role of culture and the role it plays in organizations. That’s one of the reasons that many strategic planners now place as much emphasis on identifying strategic values as they do mission and vision.
Some Types of Organizational Culture
There are different types of culture just like there are different types of personality. Researcher Jeffrey Sonnenfeld identified the following four types of cultures.
Academy Culture
Employees are highly skilled and tend to stay in the organization, while working their way up the ranks. The organization provides a stable environment in which employees can development and exercise their skills. Examples are universities, hospitals, large corporations, etc.
Baseball Team Culture
Employees are “free agents” who have highly prized skills. They are in high demand and can rather easily get jobs elsewhere. This type of culture exists in fast-paced, high-risk organizations, such as investment banking, advertising, etc.
Club Culture
The most important requirement for employees in this culture is to fit into the group. Usually employees start at the bottom and stay with the organization. The organization promotes from within and highly values seniority. Examples are the military, some law firms, etc.
Fortress Culture
Employees don’t know if they’ll be laid off or not. These organizations often undergo massive reorganization. There are many opportunities for those with timely, specialized skills. Examples are savings and loans, large car companies, etc.
Understanding the Culture of Your Organization
Quite often, a leader has a very good sense of the culture of their organization. They just haven’t made that sense conscious to the extent that they can effectively learn from, and lead within, the culture.
Different people in the same organization can have different perceptions of the culture of the organization. This is especially true regarding the different perceptions between the top and bottom levels of the organization. For example, the Chief Executive may view the organization as being highly focused, well organized and even rather formal. On the other hand, the receptionist might view the organization as being confused, disorganized and, sometimes, even rude.
Here are some basic guidelines to help a leader assess the culture of their organization.
Understand some of the major types of cultures. There are a number of research efforts that have produced lists of different types of culture. You can start by reviewing the very short list in the previous subsection, Major Types of Cultures.
Describe the culture of your organization. Consider what you see and hear, not what you feel and think. Answer the following questions.
a. Who seems to be accepted and who doesn’t? What is it about those who are accepted as compared to those who aren’t?
b. What kinds of behaviors get rewarded? For example, getting along? Getting things done? Other behaviors?
c. What does management pay the most attention to? For example, problems? Successes? Crises? Other behaviors?
d. How are decisions made? For example, by one person? Discussion and consensus? Are decisions made at all?
Note that there may not be close alignment between what the organization says it values (for example, creativity, innovation, team-building) as compared to what you’re actually seeing (for example, conformity, individualism). This disparity is rather common in organizations. You might explain this disparity to other leaders in the organization. An ideal time to address this disparity is when developing a values statement during the strategic planning process.
Influencing the Culture of Your Organization
There are four primary ways to influence the culture of an organization.
Emphasize what’s important. This includes widely communicating goals of the organization, posting the mission statement on the wall, talking about accomplishments and repeating what you want to see in the workplace.
Discourage behaviors that don’t reflect what’s important. There is no need to punish or cause prolonged discomfort. Rather, you want to dissuade the employee from continuing unwanted behaviors by giving them constructive feedback, verbal warnings, written warnings, or firing them.
Model the behaviors that you want to see in the workplace. This is perhaps the most powerful way to influence behaviors in the workplace. For example, if you want to see more teamwork among your employees, then involve yourself in teams more often.
Learn More in the Library’s Blogs Related to Organizational Culture
In addition to the articles on this current page, see the following blogs which have posts related to Organizational Culture. Scan down the blog’s page to see various posts. Also see the section “Recent Blog Posts” in the sidebar of the blog or click on “next” near the bottom of a post in the blog.
Learn More in the Library’s Blogs Related to Organizations
In addition to the articles on this current page, see the following blogs which have posts related to organizations. Scan down the blog’s page to see various posts. Also see the section “Recent Blog Posts” in the sidebar of the blog or click on “next” near the bottom of a post in the blog.
To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics, available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources.
Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.
A house should be designed to meet
the needs of the people living in it. Builders of houses must
consider, e.g., the number of people in the house, how much the
owners can afford to pay, etc. The ultimate design of an organization
should be whatever structure best helps the organization to achieve
its goals. The following are the standard concepts in the design of an
organization.
– the range of employees who to report to
a managerial position
Authority
– the formally-granted influence of a position
to make decisions, pursue goals and get resources to pursue the
goals; authority in a managerial role may exist only to the extent
that subordinates agree to grant this authority or follow the
orders from that position
Responsibility
– the duty to carry out an assignment or
conduct a certain activity
Delegation
– process
of assigning a task to a subordinate along with the commensurate
responsibility and authority to carry out the task
Chain of command
– the lines of authority in an organization,
who reports to whom
Accountability
– responsibility for the outcome of the process
Line authority
– the
type of authority where managers have formal authority over their
subordinates’ activities (the subordinates are depicted under
the manager on a solid line in the organization chart); departments
directly involved in producing services or products are sometimes
called line departments
Staff departments
– the
type of authority where managers influence line managers through
staff’s specialized advice; departments that support or advise
line departments are called staff departments and include, e.g.,
human resources, legal, finance, etc.
For the Category of Organizational Development:
To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics, available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources.
Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.
The purpose of this topic is to acquaint the reader with the field of Organization Development, a field with a rich history of research, publications and highly qualified practitioners dedicated to improving the performance of organizations, whether they are teams, departmental units or the overall organizations.
The information in those topics is not sufficient to develop competencies in guiding successful significant change. Those competencies comes from extensive experience in applying those types of information.
NOTE: This topic distinguishes the difference between “organizational development” and “Organization Development.” The former phrase refers to the context, focus and purpose of the change while developing an organization. The latter phrase refers to a field of people with expertise in guiding successful organizational development. An organization can be a team, departmental unit within an entire organization, the entire organization itself or a collaboration of organizations. However, there are various articles below which refer to “organizational development”, but it is clear that their content relates as directly to the field of Organization Development itself. Thus, those articles are included in this topic.
Like many relatively long-standing fields, the members of each are constantly discussing what their field really is. However, the following definition is standard and often used as the starting point for further discussions about the definition of Organization Development.
“Organization Development is an effort planned, organization-wide, and managed from the top, to increase organization effectiveness and health through planned interventions in the organization’s ‘processes,’ using behavioral-science knowledge.” — Beckhard, “Organization development: Strategies and Models”, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1969, p. 9.
Some More Modern Definitions
Today’s organizations operate in a rapidly changing environment. Consequently, one of the most important assets for an organization is the ability to manage change — and for people to remain healthy and authentic. Consider the following definition of Organization Development:
“Organization Development is the attempt to influence the members of an organization to expand their candidness with each other about their views of the organization and their experience in it, and to take greater responsibility for their own actions as organization members. The assumption behind Organization Development is that when people pursue both of these objectives simultaneously, they are likely to discover new ways of working together that they experience as more effective for achieving their own and their shared (organizational) goals. And that when this does not happen, such activity helps them to understand why and to make meaningful choices about what to do in light of this understanding.”
— Neilsen, “Becoming an Organization Development Practitioner”, Englewood Cliffs, CA: Prentice-Hall, 1984, pp. 2-3.
Experts might agree that the following definitions of Organization Development represent the major focus and thrust of many of today’s Organization Development practitioners.
“Organization Development is a system-wide application of behavioral science knowledge to the planned development and reinforcement of organizational strategies, structures, and processes for improving an organization’s effectiveness.”
— Cummings and Worley, “Organization Development and Change”, Sixth Edition, South-Western Publishing, 1997, p.2.
“Organization Development is a body of knowledge and practice that enhances organizational performance and individual development, viewing the organization as a complex system of systems that exists within a larger system, each of which has its own attributes and degrees of alignment. Organization Development interventions in these systems are inclusive methodologies and approaches to strategic planning, organization design, leadership development, change management, performance management, coaching, diversity, and work/life balance.” — Matt Minahan, MM & Associates, Silver Spring, Maryland
Organization Development Practitioners as “Organizational Physicians”?
There is a complex integration of various systems in an organization. Likewise, there is a complex integration in the human body. Therefore, when trying to understand the field of Organization Development, it might be useful to compare aspects of the field of Organization Development to aspects of the field of medicine.
For example, the study of the theories and structures of organizations (often in courses called “organizational theory”) is somewhat similar to the study of anatomy and physiology of human systems. Similarly, the study of organizational behavior is somewhat similar to the study of psychology and sociology in human systems.
So in Organization Development, its practitioners might be considered to be “organizational physicians” intending to improve the effectiveness of the organization by:
Establishing relationships with key personnel in the organization (sometimes occurring in phases called “start-up”, “entering” and/or “contracting” with the client organization);
Researching and evaluating systems in the organization to understand dysfunctions and/or goals of the systems in the organization (“diagnosing” the systems in the organization);
Identifying approaches (or “interventions”) to improve the effectiveness of the organization and its people;
Applying approaches to improve effectiveness (methods of “planned change” in the organization); and
Evaluating the ongoing effectiveness of the approaches and their results.
There are many practitioners who would oppose that comparison, believing that physicians too often take a mechanical, linear and detached approach when treating their patients. Those practitioners would assert that approaches in Organization Development are much more dynamic in nature.
Additional Perspectives On What Organization Development Is
Other Overviews of the Field of Organization Development
It is useful now to build from those various definitions to consider various overviews of the field. The field itself is so large that an overview should start with a relatively small scope and then broaden from that.
The topic of organizational change has received a great deal of attention over the past several decades as organizations face new and complex challenges like never before. Correspondingly, the field of Organization Development is receiving a great deal of attention now, too. As the field has grown, so has the diversity of perspectives on the field. The question “What is Organization Development?” is now common in discussions among those interested in the field.
Field or Profession? (Ethics and Certification)
Organization Development is sometimes referred to as a profession. Yet others assert that it is a field because it does not have a standard code of ethics or universal accrediting body. Early practitioners recommended a Credo, which is widely respected. The Organization Development Institute has also recommended an International Organization Development Code of Ethics.
The Organization Development Institute admirably suggests levels of certification for Organization Development practitioners, but these do not appear to have become standard for practitioners. The Organization Development Network is a large organization that also focuses on developing the field and serving its members, including by developing a framework of competencies.
Scope of the Field?
Some have distinguished Organization Development from other fields because it works from a systems perspective and according to humanistic values to help people to change for the better. Others might respond that other fields or professions, however, such as trainers and community organizers, also work from a systems perspective and according to humanistic values — and, thus, that description is not unique to Organization Development. Those people might assert that Organization Development must proclaim a scope for their field, in particular, a scope to changing organizations.
Focus on People Side and/or Business Side?
Another area of diversity about perspectives on Organization Development is in regard to how people view organizations. Some focus especially on the structures, strategies, policies and procedures (the “business side”), while others focus especially on the human relations and interactions (the “people side”). Still others focus especially on the politics and power, while others focus especially on the cultures and values of the organization. The following article gives more information about these perspectives: Understand the Preferred Lens Through Which You View Organizations
Currently, there seems to be strong focus on “soft” skills in Organization Development, for example, coaching, leadership development, facilitation, conflict management and process consulting. However, many would assert that the “hard” skills, such as organizational theory, strategizing, and various quality management initiatives should also be a focus in Organization Development. The following article gives more information about these perspectives. What Type of Organization Development Practitioner Are You?
Organization Development Versus Change Management?
Recently, there have emerged many opinions that Organization Development and change management are two somewhat different disciplines. The opinions are that Organization Development is focused primarily on changing a whole system, for example, a team, departmental unit or organization, while change management is focused on the necessary changes among people in the organization in order to accomplish the overall change in the organization.
Others believe that change management is not a separate discipline and is actually an aspect of what Organization Development naturally focuses on when changing the entire system, that is, that Organization Development also focuses a great deal on what is needed to change people. Other views on change management might sound much like how others would define Organization Development, for example, “Organizational Change Management is about an organization achieving a desired future state from its current state with minimal disruption or negative impact to the organization” … “Change Management … is not organization-wide or enterprise-wide. It is change specific to a project or program” (Rona Puntawe).
There is a rich history in the field of Organization Development. Professional practitioners in the field should know that history, including the early beginnings of the field and the major players in it. They should know its history and evolution, including its major phases of development over the years that bring us up to the dynamic changes that are now occurring in the field.
Future and Emerging Theories of Organization Development
Dialogic Organization Development
As quoted from the website Dialogic Organization Development, “Dialogic Organization Development is the next step in the evolution of organizational change theory, from thinking of organizations as organisms that adapt to their environments, to organizations as conversations where individual, group, and organizational actions result from self-organizing, socially constructed realities created and sustained by the prevailing narratives, stories, and conversations through which people make meaning about their experiences.”
The field of Organization Development includes a wide range of perspectives on the scope and, in particular, how it relates — or does not relate — to other fields. Many believe that an activity could be classified as an “Organization Development” activity if it is focused especially on changing a significant part or all of an organization. Others believe that activities focused especially on changing a person or people (such as learning and development, coaching, training and facilitation) within an organization also changes the organization itself and, thus, each of those activities could be classified as an “Organization Development” activity. Here are some articles that further portray differences in perspective.
Recommended Competencies for Organization Development Practitioners
Almost as diverse as the opinions about the focus, scope and nature of Organization Development are the opinions about the competencies that its practitioners should have. The following link will take you to a list of recommended competencies from different organizations and professionals in the field.
Books Focused on the Field of Organization Development
The field of Organization Development encompasses a wide variety of business-, management- and organization-related practices. Therefore, a list of Organization Development-related books could well be exhaustive in length. The following are some of the major books focused primarily on the field of Organization Development.
This short list is by no means meant to represent the singular “foundation” texts in the field. Rather, the list is a good starting point from which to gain some basic understanding of the field.
Organization Development-Specific Books
Much of the content of this Library topic came from this book:
Field Guide to Consulting and Organizational Development by Carter McNamara, Authenticity Consulting, 2006. This book is about the field of Organization Development and combines major practices from the field with major practices from the field of consulting, as well. (The author of this book is the author of much of the content in this Library.) Field Guide to Consulting and Organizational Development
Organization Development and Change Sixth Edition, by Cummings and Worley. South-Western Publishing, 1997. Available from Amazon Books. This is one of the best books about the background, movements, theories, models and case studies regarding Organization Development.
Organization Development Classics : The Practice and Theory of Change — The Best of the Organization Development Practitioner by Van Eynde (Editor), Judith C. Hoy (Editor), Dixie Cody Van Eynde (Editor), Donald Van Eynde (Editor). Jossey-Bass, 1997. Available from Amazon Books. This is a collection of classic articles from the pioneers in the field of Organization Development. Together, they provide a very meaningful overview of the field.
Practicing Organization Development : A Guide for Consultants by Rothwell (Editor), Roland Sullivan (Editor), Gary N. McLean. Pfeiffer & Co., 1995. Available from Amazon Books. This is one of the best books with guidelines and practical about applying all phases of Organization Development.
Annotated Lists of Organization Development-Related Books
Learn More in the Library’s Blogs Related to Organization
In addition to the articles on this current page, see the following blogs which have posts related to Organization Development. Scan down the blog’s page to see various posts. Also see the section “Recent Blog Posts” in the sidebar of the blog or click on “next” near the bottom of a post in the blog.
To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics, available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources.
Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.
For the Category of Organizational Change
and Development:
To round out your knowledge of this Library topic, you may want to review some related topics, available from the link below. Each of the related topics includes free, online resources.
Also, scan the Recommended Books listed below. They have been selected for their relevance and highly practical nature.
Organizational sustainability is often misunderstood to mean primarily financial sustainability. That misconception occurs because, when an organization becomes unsustainable, the symptoms of that problem show up in the finances. However, organizational sustainability — or the surviving or even thriving of an organization — depends on much more than effectively managing the organization’s finances. Just like the sustainability of individuals and families, there are many complex and dynamic dimensions that must be sustainable in organizations, as well. However, in an organization, there are some primary dimensions that, if they are managed well, will ensure the sustainability of the organization.
If You’re Looking for the topic of Sustainable Business Development (e.g., “Green” Sustainable Development), then see Sustainable Business Development
Learn More in the Library’s Blogs Related to Organizational Sustainability
In addition to the articles on this current page, see the following blogs which have posts related to Organizational Sustainability. Scan down the blog’s page to see various posts. Also see the section “Recent Blog Posts” in the sidebar of the blog or click on “next” near the bottom of a post in the blog.
Primary Dimensions of Organizational Sustainability
1. Strategic Sustainability — Ensure Realistic Vision and Goals
If an organization is trying to do far too much, it will likely not have enough resources, including not enough money to do what it wants to do. One of the most important considerations to have a realistic vision and goals for the organization. If these are not realistic, then many of the other activities in the organization will not be realistic, as well. The solution is not to keep trying to get more money.
2. Product and Program Sustainability — Ensure High-Quality Products, Services and Programs
If your organization does not have high-quality products, services and programs, then customers’ and clients’ participation will eventually decline as will funding. That’s why it’s so important to do a few things very well, rather than a lot of things not so well. The solution is not to keep trying to get more money to offset deficits. The solution is to pick which products, services and programs you can do very well, do them — and keep proving your strong results.
3. Personnel Sustainability — Ensure Personnel Can Effectively and Reliably Perform
If your personnel do not fully understand their jobs or are not resourced to do their jobs, then your products, services and programs will be not be as effective as they could be. As a result, you’ll make less money than you expected or the money you do make will not generate as much profit. Be sure personnel are fully trained and supervised well. Also be sure that, if a member of the organization cannot do his/her job, that someone else can do that job in a timely fashion.
4. Financial Sustainability — Conduct Financial Reserve and Contingency Planning
If the above 3 dimensions are not effectively addressed, then symptoms show up in the finances when there’s not enough money. However, there are two financial practices you should be doing regardless of whether you have enough money or not, and they include:
Achieving a financial reserve — obviously this is done over time and before a financial crises occurs.
Doing contingency planning — plan for what will happen if you get 10% less money than planned for the upcoming year and for what will happen if you get 30% less.
The following sections and links will help you address the above dimensions for your for-profit, nonprofit or government agency.
Avoiding Sustainability Issues in For-Profit and Government Organizations
Strategic
The following links will help ensure that your strategic planning results in realistic visions and goals.
One of the best ways to ensure that these are carefully planned — or reviewed — is to do business planning. (There is often confusion about the different between strategic planning and business planning. Strategic planning is planning for the entire organization. Business planning is focused on a particular product or service.)
One of the best ways to ensure that these are carefully planned — or reviewed — is to do business planning. (There is often confusion about the different between strategic planning and business planning. Strategic planning is planning for the entire organization. Business planning is focused on a particular product or service.)
Suggestions to Address Current Sustainability Problems
If you currently have problems in sustainability, the following links to resources will be helpful. Your most immediate concern now is very likely that of insufficient financial resources. Keep in mind that financial problems are usually a symptom of other causes, which usually can be addressed by following the guidelines in the resources linked from the above sections of this topic. However, for now, it’s very likely most important to address a shortage of financial resources. There are a variety of strategies in the resources from the following links. After addressing the financial issues, you should review the guidelines referenced from the links in the above sections to help your organization to avoid financial crises in the future.
Many of the problems faced by nonprofits are also faced by for-profits. So it’s useful to review some of the resources in the above suggestions for for-profits.
We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data. This includes unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalized ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights.
With your permission, we and our partners may use precise geolocation data and identification through device scanning. You may click to consent to our processing as described above. Alternatively, you may click to refuse to consent or access more detailed information. You may also change your preferences before consenting.
Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing. Your preferences will apply to this website only. You can change your preferences at any time by returning to this site or by visiting our privacy policy.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
I’m okay with functional and analytical cookies for website functionality. I agree to the use of cookies under these circumstances:
Will be used if you visit Managementhelp.org
Are necessary for the proper functioning of the website
Enable you to use the site securely
Do not collect personal information that’s not needed for personalization
Help us detect any bugs and improve our website
Collect anonymous information about your visits to our website
Are never used for remarketing
I’m okay with the functional and analytical cookies for marketing purposes and not for website functionality.
Are used to monitor the performance of marketing campaigns
Enable us to compare performance across our marketing campaigns
Are used for individual targeting
Can be used for retargeting on other partner platforms
Enable a more personalized experience