Organisation Design Organisation Development (Other (Not Listed) Sample)

ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
Student’s name
Course
Instructor
Institutional Affiliations
Date
Organizational Design and Development
Change is an evolving and dynamic concept in the undertakings of business. Competition and creativity form the major reason to why organizational change is a continuum process. According to Odor (2018), leaders may initiate change in order to better the organization’s business processes and solution delivery when responding to competition. Smither, Houston, and McIntire (2016) are of the opinion that change arises in a business in the form of new input into management structure, diversification of operations, ethics, sustainability, and globalization. Marshak and Bushe (2018) strongly believe that change is nd should be planned. Therefore, for change to be incorporated into an organization, management and workers need to have a development plan.
Change causes people to form some kind of resistance. They typically do not appreciate and embrace change unless they must. According to Shimoni (2017) and Amarantou et al. (2018), resistance to change is attributable to individual psychologic disposition, social context and ideologies, and differences between its creators and targeted acceptors/receivers. Awakening happens when organizational level(s) pay the price when in a sticky situation or when they miss a key business opportunity thus change becomes necessary to relieve the “pain” of realization (Grama & Todericiu 2016; Rafferty & Jimmieson 2017). Based on this approach, change does not occur simply because “it’s a good idea” but rather as a justification to assimilate changes with the aim of finding solutions to the problems faced. Therefore, planned change should focus on the absolute need of a change in the organization rather than simply on the benefits of the anticipated change. Organizational development understand this, and it then aims to assist organizational levels in realizing that they have no choice but to assimilate changes.
Organization development (OD) is all about change. Waddell, Creed, Cummings, and Worley (2019, 11) define OD as “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.” The definition translates to organizational change incorporating every stakeholders in the organization with an aim of planning on how to cope with change (Rothwell, Stavros, & Sullivan 2016). Therefore, change in organization happens to their mission, vision, and/or processes at individual and organizational levels (Bejinariu, Jitarel, Sarca, & Mocan 2017). Other researchers acknowledge that businesses are shifting their stakeholder management strategies and business model to continuously adapt to consumer needs and demands (Reim, Parida, & Ortqvist, 2015). However, there seems to be an ideology shift from equating OD to organizational change.
Ideology shift is evident in how businesses traansform and dapt to change. Studies by Marshak & Bushe (2018) and Bushe & Nagaishi (2018) suggest that OD is more of a generative change where organizations transform their operations and structure to create great teams and improve of problem solving mechanism. The globalization trend today is a great contributor to organizational development from the perspective of offering competitive products and services (Kitamura & Takahashi 2019). In general, OD revolves around planning for eminent change and subsequently creating an environment where stakeholders to the plan can be creative to develop change strategies and adapt to them.
Organizational development occurs at group or team levels, as well as within the entire organization. Effective organization development strategy should be on an ongoing and systematic basis with the aim of strengthening both individuals and groups at their different capacities in the organization (Carnevale 2018). Today, organizations fulfill their organizational development and changes goals through adoption of project management approach by bringing together teams for a specified period. For effective planning and implementation of organizational development and change, team members should be heterogeneous hence represent different levels and constituencies within the organization. The rationale is that the team members should have diverse focus and vision of the challenge at hand and the possible solutions (Szabla, Pasmore, Barnes, & Gipson 2017). In this setting, an ongoing system of organizational development becomes useful since the team members falter their responsibilities because of their ineffective communication chain, conflicting perspectives, or pose unclear and divergent objectives. Incorporating and supporting team building is one effective way that an organization can ensure its development and change strategies are formulated and implemented.
Summary of “Values, Motives, and Interventions of Organization Development Practitioners” by Church, A. H., Burke, W. W., & Van Eynde, D. F. (1994).
Research question
This article’s research question is directed to practitioners with the aim of obtaining answers as to their perception of what coerces people into OD field. Also, the article seeks answers on the values and standards practitioners hold about their work with organization.
The hypothesis tested
The study’s hypothesis was does OD today focus on human concerns and orientation of the past?
The methods adopted, what was measured, and how data were analyzed
The authors of the article use qualitative analysis method by offering 1500 respondents questionnaires. In order to ensure their sample population is not biased, they spread the respondents over three organizations. The study adopted OD Values Questionnaire that were mailed to the respondents, qualitative analysis of a literature article, and 12 extensive telephone interviews. The respondents were OD practitioners and only 416 returned their questionnaire feedback. The questionnaires included both open and closed questions aiming to get a glimpse of the practitioner’s perspective of OD and its future. The authors of this article provide a breakdown of the respondents’ demographics. Male were 64% with those employed internally being 51%. Most of the respondents did not bear any institutional affiliation. A 41% of the respondents were educated to the level of PhD, EdD.
Results and the significant differences
Results of the study were grouped into three analysis. The first analysis evaluates the importance of OD Values in the field. Respondents supported OD as a humanistic approach by 31.9%, business effectiveness by 11.7% and external environment by 5.8%. The most significant responses regarded respondent’s own perception of what OD focuses on. Most of them were of the opinion that OD is increasing effectiveness and efficiency in the organization. Others were of the opinion that OD entails enhancing productivity and empowering employees to act.
A shift in perception of the practitioners’ view of OD reveals that most are of the opinion that OD is all about empowering employees. On average, most respondents supported that ideologies into OD revolve round humanistic characters. Other practitioner responses supported that OD is human centric with an aim to create openness in communication and facilitates ownership of processes and their outcomes.
Due to the differences in variance of the feedbacks, the authors adopted MANCOVA analysis to determine the most significant input factor into OD perception. The analysis revealed that only multivariate environmental values scores were significant to the study. Thus, OD practitioners who were fully into the organization were in a better position to rate environmental concerns of the entity better than those working externally were. For univariate analysis, business effectiveness and environmental values were significant by gender comparison. The analysis revealed that male respondents were more likely to rate business effectiveness as more important in the profession today. on the contrry, female respondents indicated that external environment values were more important.
Key implications of the results
The results revealed that the respondents grouped their results in three distinct groups. Their decisions were their own views, beliefs, and perceptions of OD in the field. The grouped OD as either being human centered, effective to the business and organization, and external environmental factors. The respondents affirmed that OD is centered on effectiveness running the business with most supporting the concept. Others had the idea that OD is achieved when employees are empowered to act and the organization opens up communication structures. Internal OD practitioners were more concerned with the external environment and business undertakings. They perceive external environments of OD to be more important than external practitioners would be.
Self-reflection
The lack of proper co