Getting top management support for OD efforts in an organization is absolutely crucial. Because OD works on whole organizations, significant change needs to be understood and fully supported by senior management. Sometimes we learn this the hard way: I know of a very successful plant redesign project that used the conference-based model developed by Dick and Emily Axelrod. It was highly participative, with large cross-section groups from all plant functions meeting for three days at a time, integrating the outcomes of the session, then meeting again for three days--five cycles of conferences. The focus for each one was built on the outcomes of the previous one. They worked on generating a shared vision for a better, more effective way to operate, followed by an analysis of the plant's technical production system, then an analysis of the social system, then a redesign of key aspect of the plant to optimize both technical and social system goals, and finally an implementation planning conference.
This all worked very successfully and generated creative new approaches for organizing the work and also great enthusiasm for implementing the changes. And then they hit a catastrophic glitch: The internal consultants and plant manager had made an early decision to not include a key vice-president in planning the project. He had a reputation of not supporting participative work methods, so they thought they would demonstrate the success of the project to him after it was completed and thus get his approval. Instead, the VP walked in on the implementation planning session, having missed all the previous ones, and was outraged. He declared the new design totally inappropriate: "This is communism--we're not doing it." And that was that. The whole project was cancelled and everyone went back to the old way of doing things, though with great disappointment and frustration.
So what should one do when the needed support at the top is not there? For one thing, it depends on the role of the OD practitioner. External OD consultants learn to focus on the clients who are genuinely interested and ready to work in this different way. Rather than convincing or "selling" managers that this would be good for their organizations, the strategy is to work only with those organizations that have a demonstrated readiness, understanding and interest in an OD project. Since these projects are much more likely to succeed, they will create the track record of effective change projects, and word of these successes will quickly get around to other organizations that were almost ready, often leading them to consider the OD approach themselves. I learned this perspective from Herb Shepard, who was my mentor at Case Institute of Technology, and one of the founders of OD. One of his rules of thumb for change agents was "Never work uphill."
But what about internal OD consultants or managers who see the potential for OD in their organization, but don't have the support of higher managers? Shepard also said, "Start where the system is." He meant by this that one must assess the situation and propose projects that the organization and its leaders understand as relevant and appropriate. These may be less ambitious than the consultant can envision, but they are much more likely to be accepted and to succeed--thus laying the foundation for more comprehensive projects. This way of working requires great patience, and great empathy. One must see the world through the managers' eyes, and design and propose projects that are relevant to their current view of the organization.
This is a tough discipline and requires patience, self-acceptance, and a focus on the long view--even if that key manager is being driven by this quarter's business numbers. Shepard also used to say, "Think globally and act locally." The corollary of that statement might be, "Think about the future and act in the present."
I invite further comments and questions.
Saul, thank you... i really enjoyed reading this, and being reminded of the 'never work uphill' maxim...
as i write that, and listen inside, i realize that there is something in me that still tends to 'work uphill'... something that feels that it NEEDS to push... (much less than it used to ... but still, i notice that it is still there... )
and, i realize that it would be good for me to spend more time in a listening way with that place... not just to become a more effective practitioner, but also because that place inside affects other parts of my life as well...
meanwhile, i have been doing my best to practice "patience, self-acceptance, and a focus on the long view"... and, slowly but surely, things do shift... there is a non-profit organization that i have been doing some consulting with, for about 9 months... and just recently, it has begun to feel that the trust has developed enough, the various relationships have grown, and the situation has become such that we are all ready to 'go to a deeper level' of the work... so, it DOES take time!
thanks again...
with all best wishes,
Rosa
Posted by: Rosa Zubizarreta at June 28, 2005 07:10 AMSaul, I appreciate each entry and gain insight on OD work. So far, they've been a good reminder of what OD is all about and what I should be doing/ remembering/ focusing on/ relaying to others/ etc. Thanks. I hope there will be many more entries. Tim S.
Posted by: Tim Senkir at June 28, 2005 04:39 PMA key OD skill is to be able to see the organization through the client's eyes. Some research I did long ago on T-group trainer effectiveness using Saul's Problem Solving Expression Scale showed that trainers who were half a step ahead of their trainees were more effective than trainers who were further ahead. I know that when I was learning how to work a computer I learned faster from kids who had just learned, than experts. The same is true for my new challenge of learning how to paint watercolors. My best teachers are the ones who empathize with my struggle and offer timely suggestions and quiet encouragement.
Warm regards,
Joel Beak
Well, as often happens right before I go on vacation (loved your pictures, Saul!), I clear off my desk and my email inbox. Thus I rediscovered the latest blog announcement and clicked on the link before deleting! Good me, good me....
I add my thanks for the entries, Saul! And a comment about the participative redesign/negating VP story:
(First, a deep sigh. Seen a few beloved projects defused from above.)
A wonderful tool I've continued to learn from is the stakeholder analysis. During my years at Interaction Associates, my colleagues and I used it as a great thinking and conversation tool with clients, and it's been a real keeper. We'd do the usual brainstorm of all the people important to the prospective project, then use a grid to note their stake in the project (from 0=neutral but need to know, to I think 3=crucial), their possible current stance toward it, positive, neutral, or negative, then possible strategies and actions toward informing, involving, getting help with/protection from.... whatever. Could be very simple or deeply nuanced.
A way to get a laugh and entree into scarier conversations was to ask, "any "anti-sponsors" out there?" (Which in this case would be the scary VP. Sponsors were managers who would protect and provide cover and support for projects within the organization. Anti-sponsors might work against the project). More perjoratively, but again, good for a laugh preceding deeper exploration: "Any duckhunters out there? You know, they sit behind a blind and look for projects to fly by and take aim at...?"
Having had a laugh, or cry, or shaken fist, we could explore ways to inform, protect, include.... whatever, with the resources we had, which might involve the project's sponsor either managing that, or getting further sponsorship at the person in question's level or above.
I found this tool helped me brave the trip away from my own tendency, which would be to go for the project without engaging its detractors, and do such a good job that they'd have to admit it worked! I also found that it got me away from feeling I had to figure everything out myself. Often clients had a lot of insight into untapped resources and positive ways of making contact with such people, once we started sorting things out.
The preventive ounce, revisited!
Posted by: Mary Fewel Tulin at August 23, 2005 11:01 AM