ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (OD)

Organizational development plan is the process through which an organization develops

the internal capacity to be the most effective it can be in its mission work and to sustain
itself over the long term. This definition highlights the explicit connection between
organizational development work and the achievement of organizational mission. This
connection is the rationale for doing OD work. Organization development, according to
Richard Beckhard, is defined as:

1. A planned effort...
2. organization-wide...
3. managed from the top...
4. to increase organization effectiveness and health...
5. through planned interventions in the organization's 'processes', using behavioral
science knowledge.

According to Warren Bennis, organization development (OD) is a complex strategy

intended to change the beliefs, attitudes, values, and structure of organizations so that
they can better adapt to new technologies, markets, and challenges.

Warner Burke emphasizes that OD is not just "anything done to better an organization"; it
is a particular kind of change process designed to bring about a particular kind of end
result. OD involves organizational reflection, system improvement, planning, and self-
analysis.

The term "Organization Development" is often used interchangeably with Organizational

effectiveness, especially when used as the name of a department or a part of the Human
Resources function within an organization.

Organizational effectiveness
Organizational effectiveness is the concept of how effective an organization is in
achieving the outcomes the organization intends to produce. The idea of organizational
effectiveness is especially important for non-profit organizations as most people who
donate money to non-profit organizations and charities are interested in knowing whether
the organization is effective in accomplishing its goals.

An organization's effectiveness is also dependent on its communicative competence and

ethics. The relationships between these three are simultaneous. Ethics is a foundation
found within organizational effectiveness. An organization must exemplify respect,
honesty, integrity and equity to allow communicative competence with the participating
members. Along with ethics and communicative competence, members in that particular
group can finally achieve their intended goals.
Organizational effectiveness is an abstract concept and is basically impossible to
measure. Instead of measuring organizational effectiveness, the organization determines
proxy measures which will be used to represent effectiveness. Proxy measures used may
include such things as number of people served, types and sizes of population segments
served, and the demand within those segments for the services the organization supplies.

For instance, a non-profit organization which supplies meals to house bound people may
collect statistics such as the number of meals cooked and served, the number of
volunteers delivering meals, the turnover and retention rates of volunteers, the
demographics of the people served, the turnover and retention of consumers, the number
of requests for meals turned down due to lack of capacity (amount of food, capacity of
meal preparation facilities, and number of delivery volunteers), and amount of wastage.
Since the organization has as its goal the preparation of meals and the delivery of those
meals to house bound people, it measures its organizational effectiveness by trying to
determine what actual activities the people in the organization do in order to generate the
outcomes the organization wants to create.

Activities such as fundraising or volunteer training are important because they provide
the support needed for the organization to deliver its services but they are not the
outcomes per se. These other activities are overhead activities which assist the
organization in achieving its desired outcomes.

The term Organizational Effectiveness is often used interchangeably with Organization

Development, especially when used as the name of a department or a part of the Human
Resources function within an organization.

Human resources
Human resources have at least two meanings depending on context. The original usage
derives from political economy and economics, where it was traditionally called labor,
one of three factors of production. The more common usage within corporations and
businesses refers to the individuals within the firm, and to the portion of the firm's
organization that deals with hiring, firing, training, and other personnel issues. This
article addresses both definitions.

Human resource management serves these key functions:

1. Hiring (recruitment)
2. Compensation
3. Evaluation and Management (of Performance)
4. Promotions
5. Managing Relations

It is the responsibility of human resource managers to conduct these activities in an

effective, legal, fair, and consistent manner.
The objective of Human Resources (HR's raison d'etre) is to maximize the return on
investment from the organization's human capital

"Human resource management aims to improve the productive contribution of

individuals while simultaneously attempting to attain other societal and individual
employee objectives." Schwind, Das & Wagar (2005)

In reality, human resources deals with two different worlds

1) Non-Unionized - Where management has the control, and
2) Unionized - Where there is shared control through a collective agreement -
Management and a union negotiate a collective agreement with respect to terms and
conditions of employment. The Union represents employees to management. (That is the
Union speaks for employees, both collectively and individually)

Collective Agreements - Can cover any and all terms and conditions of employment.
Collective agreements become "the Bible," the code and are binding in law. - Disputes of
the collective agreement are resolved by arbitration.

Human resources in political economy and social sciences

Modern analysis emphasizes that human beings are not "commodities"" or "resources",
but are creative and social beings that make contributions beyond 'labor' to a society and
to civilization. The broad term human capital has evolved to contain some of this
complexity, and in micro-economics the term "firm-specific human capital" has come to
represent a meaning of the term "human resources."

Advocating the central role of "human resources" or human capital in enterprises and
societies has been a traditional role of socialist parties, who claim that value is primarily
created by their activity, and accordingly justify a larger claim of profits or relief from
these enterprises or societies. Critics say this is just a bargaining tactic which grew out of
various practices of medieval European guilds into the modern trade union and collective
bargaining unit.

A contrary view, common to Workforce planning

Strategic Workforce Planning involves analyzing and forecasting the talent that
companies need to execute their business strategy, proactively rather than reactively, it is
a critical strategic activity, enabling the organization to identify, develop and sustain the
workforce skills it needs to successfully accomplish its strategic intent whilst balancing
career and lifestyle goals of its employees.

Strategic Workforce Planning is a relatively new management process that is being used
increasingly to help control labor costs, assess talent needs, make informed business
decisions, and assess talent market risks as part of overall enterprise risk management.
Strategic workforce planning is aimed at helping companies make sure they have the
right people in the right place at the right time and at the right price
Through Strategic Workforce Planning organizations gain insight into what people the
organization will need, and what people will be available to meet those needs. In creating
this understanding of the gaps between an organization’s demand and the available
workforce supply, organizations will be able to create and target programmes, approaches
and develop strategies to close the gaps.

Different Types of Strategic Workforce Planning

Strategic Workforce Planning is fundamentally different from many processes in that it is
not prescriptive, sequential or linear. There are various approaches to Workforce Planning

Supply/Demand Approach:

This is the traditional approach to workforce planning that analyzes supply/demand to

identify gaps. The intent being to develop strategies to close the gaps, so that supply
better fits with demand.

Workforce analytics approach:

The focus is to analyse current and historical employee data to identify key relationships
among variables and use this to provide insight into the workforce they need for the
future.

Modeling approach:

This approach incorporates forecasting and scenario planning. Forecasting uses

quantitative data to create forecasts incorporating multiple what-if and modeling the
future. Scenario Planning being the more useful tool where there are uncertainties,
therefore incorporating quantitative and qualitative.

Steps in Workforce Planning

Though there is no definitive ‘Start here’ activity for any of the approaches to Strategic
Workforce Planning, there are five fundamentals activities that most Workforce Plan
models have: • Environment Scan • Current Workforce Profile • Future Workforce View •
Analysis and Targeted Future • Closing the gaps •

Environment Scan

Environment Scan is a form of business intelligence. In the context of Workforce

Planning it is used to identify the set of facts or circumstances that surround a workforce
situation or event.
Current Workforce Profile

Current State is a profile of the demand and supply factors both internally and externally
of the workforce the organization has ‘today’.

Future Workforce View

Future View is determining the organization’s needs considering the emerging trends and
issues identified during the Environment Scanning.

Future View is often where the different approaches identified above are applied:
Quantitative futuring: understanding the future you are currently tracking to by
forecasting; Qualitative futuring: scenario planning potential alternative futures in terms
of capabilities and demographics to deliver the business strategy.

Analysis and Targeted Future

Qualitative and quantitative futuring creates the content for an organizational unit to
analyze and identify critical elements. As the critical elements are identified the Targeted
Future begins to take form. The targeted future is the future that the organization is going
to target as being the best fit in terms of business strategy and is achievable given the
surrounding factors (internal/external, supply/demand).

Closing the Gaps

Closing the gaps is about the people management (human resources) programs and
practices that deliver the workforce needed for today and tomorrow. The process is about
determining appropriate actions to close the gaps and therefore deliver the targeted future.

There are 8 key areas that Closing the Gaps needs to focus on -

Resourcing, Learning and Development, Remuneration, Industrial Relations,

Recruitment, Retention, Knowledge Management, Job design.

t parties, is that it is the infrastructural capital and (what they call) intellectual capital
owned and fused by "management" that provides most value in financial capital terms.
This likewise justifies a bargaining position and a general view that "human resources"
are interchangeable.

A significant sign of consensus on this latter point is the ISO 9000 series of standards
which requires a "job description" of every participant in a productive enterprise. In
general, heavily unionized nations such as France and Germany have adopted and
encouraged such descriptions especially within trade unions. One view of this trend is
that a strong social consensus on political economy and a good social welfare system
facilitates labor mobility and tends to make the entire economy more productive, as labor
can move from one enterprise to another with little controversy or difficulty in adapting.
An important controversy regarding labor mobility illustrates the broader philosophical
issue with usage of the phrase "human resources": governments of developing nations
often regard developed nations that encourage immigration or "guest workers" as
appropriating human capital that is rightfully part of the developing nation and required
to further its growth as a civilization. They argue that this appropriation is similar to
colonial commodity fiat wherein a colonizing European power would define an arbitrary
price for natural resources, extracting which diminished national natural capital.

The debate regarding "human resources" versus human capital thus in many ways echoes
the debate regarding natural resources versus natural capital. Over time the United
Nations have come to more generally support the developing nations' point of view, and
have requested significant offsetting "foreign aid" contributions so that a developing
nation losing human capital does not lose the capacity to continue to train new people in
trades, professions, and the arts.

An extreme version of this view is that historical inequities such as African slavery must
be compensated by current developed nations, which benefited from stolen "human
resources" as they were developing. This is an extremely controversial view, but it echoes
the general theme of converting human capital to "human resources" and thus greatly
diminishing its value to the host society, i.e. "Africa", as it is put to narrow imitative use
as "labor" in the using society.

In a series of reports of the UN Secretary-General to the General Assembly over the last
decade [e.g. A/56/162 (2001)], a broad intersectoral approach to developing human
resourcefulness has been outlined as a priority for socio-economic development and
particularly anti-poverty strategies. This calls for strategic and integrated public policies,
for example in education, health, and employment sectors that promote occupational
skills, knowledge and performance enhancement.

In the very narrow context of corporate "human resources", there is a contrasting pull to
reflect and require workplace diversity that echoes the diversity of a global customer
base. Foreign language and culture skills, ingenuity, humor, and careful listening, are
examples of traits that such programs typically require. It would appear that these
evidence a general shift to the human capital point of view, and an acknowledgment that
human beings do contribute much more to a productive enterprise than "work": they
bring their character, their ethics, their creativity, their social connections, and in some
cases even their pets and children, and alter the character of a workplace. The term
corporate culture is used to characterize such processes.

The traditional but extremely narrow context of hiring, firing, and job description is
considered a 20th century anachronism. Most corporate organizations that compete in the
modern global economy have adopted a view of human capital that mirrors the modern
consensus as above. Some of these, in turn, deprecate the term "human resources" as
useless.
As the term refers to predictable exploitations of human capital in one context or another,
it can still be said to apply to manual labor, mass agriculture, low skill "McJobs" in
service industries, military and other work that has clear job descriptions, and which
generally do not encourage creative or social contributions.

In general the abstractions of macro-economics treat it this way - as it characterizes no

mechanisms to represent choice or ingenuity. So one interpretation is that "firm-specific
human capital" as defined in macro-economics is the modern and correct definition of
"human resources" - and that this is inadequate to represent the contributions of "human
resources" in any modern theory of political economy.

Human resource development in relation to recruitment and

selection
In terms of recruitment and selection it is important to consider carrying out a thorough
job analysis to determine the level of skills/technical abilities, competencies, flexibility of
the employee required etc. At this point it is important to consider both the internal and
external factors that can have an impact on the recruitment of employees. The external
factors are those out-with the powers of the organization and include issues such as
current and future trends of the labor market e.g. skills, education level, government
investment into industries etc. On the other hand internal influences are easier to control,
predict and monitor, for example management styles or even the organizational culture.

In order to know the business environment in which any organization operates, three
major trends should be considered:

• Demographics – the characteristics of a population/workforce, for example, age,

gender or social class. This type of trend may have an effect in relation to pension
offerings, insurance packages etc.
• Diversity – the variation within the population/workplace. Changes in society
now mean that a larger proportion of organizations are made up of female
employees in comparison to thirty years ago. Also over recent years organizations
have become more culturally diverse and have increased the number of working
patterns (part-time, casual, seasonal positions) to cope with the changes in both
society and the global market. It is important to note here that an organization
must consider the ethical and legal implications of their decisions in relation to
the HRM policies they enact to protect employees. Employers have to be acutely
aware of the rise in discrimination, unfair dismissal and sexual/racial harassment
cases in recent years and the detrimental effects this can have on the employees
and the organization. Anti-discrimination legislation over the past 30 years has
provided a foundation for an increasing interest in diversity at work which is
“about creating a working culture that seeks, respects and values difference.”
• Skills and qualifications – as industries move from manual to a more managerial
profession so does the need for more highly skilled graduates. If the market is
‘tight’ i.e. not enough staff for the jobs, employers will have to compete for
 employees by offering financial rewards, community investment etc. also the
political issues

In regards to how individuals respond to the changes in a labour market the following
should be understood:

• Geographical spread – how far is the job from the individual? The distance to
travel to work should be in line with the pay offered by the organization and the
transportation and infrastructure of the area will also be an influencing factor in
deciding who will apply for a post.
• Occupational structure – the norms and values of the different careers within an
organization. Mahoney 1989 developed 3 different types of occupational structure
namely craft (loyalty to the profession), organization career (promotion through
the firm) and unstructured (lower/unskilled workers who work when needed).
• Generational difference –different age categories of employees have certain
characteristics, for example their behaviour and their expectations of the
organization.

Recruitment methods are wide and varied, it is important that the job is described
correctly and any personal specifications stated. Job recruitment methods can be through
job centres, employment agencies/consultants, headhunting, and local/national
newspapers. It is important that the correct media is chosen to ensure an appropriate
response to the advertised post.

Organization
An organization or organisation (read more about -ize vs -ise) is a social arrangement
which pursues collective goals, which controls its own performance, and which has a
boundary separating it from its environment. The word itself is derived from the Greek
word ὄργανον (organon) meaning tool. The term is used in both daily and scientific
English in multiple ways.

In the social sciences, organizations are studied by researchers from several disciplines.
Most commonly in sociology, economics, political science, psychology, management,
and organizational communication. The broad area is commonly referred to as
organizational studies, organizational behaviour or organization analysis. Therefore, a
number of different theories and perspectives exist, some of which are compatible, and
others that are competing.

• Organization – process-related: an entity is being (re-)organized (organization as

task or action).
• Organization – functional: organization as a function of how entities like
businesses or state authorities are used (organization as a permanent structure).
 • Organization – institutional: an entity is an organization (organization as an actual
purposeful structure within a social context)

Organization theories
Among the theories that are or have been most influential are:

• Weberian organization theory (refer to Max Weber's chapter on Bureaucracy in his

book 'Economy and Society')
• Marxist organization analysis
• Scientific management (mainly following Frederick W. Taylor)
• Human Relations Studies (going back to the Hawthorne studies, Maslow and
Hertzberg)
• Administrative theories (with work by e.g. Henri Fayol and Chester Barnard)
• Contingency theory
• New institutionalism and new institutional economics
• Network analysis
• Economic sociology
• Organization ecology (or demography of organizations)
• Transaction cost economics
• Agency theory (sometimes called principal - agent theory)
• Studies of organization culture
• Postmodern organization studies
• Labour Process Theory
• Critical Management Studies
• Complexity Theory and Organizations
• Transaction cost theory/Transaction cost Economics (TCE)
• Garbage can model
• Actor-Network Theory and the 'Montreal School'

Definition
At the core of OD is the concept of an organization, defined as two or more people
working together toward one or more shared goals. Development in this context is the
notion that an organization may become more effective over time at achieving its goals.

"OD is a long range effort to improve organization's problem solving and renewal
processes, particularly through more effective and collaborative management of
organization culture-with specific emphasis on the culture of formal work teams-with the
assistance of a change agent or catalyst and the use of the theory and technology of
applied behavioral science including action research"

History
Kurt Lewin (1898 - 1947) is widely recognized as the founding father of OD, although he
died before the concept became current in the mid-1950s. From Lewin came the ideas of
group dynamics, and action research which underpin the basic OD process as well as
providing its collaborative consultant/client ethos. Institutionally, Lewin founded the
Research Center for Group Dynamics at MIT, which moved to Michigan after his death.
RCGD colleagues were among those who founded the National Training Laboratories
(NTL), from which the T-group and group-based OD emerged. In the UK, working as
close as was possible with Lewin and his colleagues, the Tavistock Institute of Human
Relations was important in developing systems theories. Important too was the joint
TIHR journal Human Relations, although nowadays the Journal of Applied Behavioral
Sciences is seen as the leading OD journal.

Currently
OD is taught in many institutions worldwide, including:

• Alliant International University

• American University/NTL Institute
• Assumption University of Thailand
• Benedictine University
• Bowling Green State University
• Cebu Doctor's University in the Philippines
• Case Western Reserve University
• Claremont Graduate University
• Columbia University
• Fielding Graduate University
• George Mason University in Arlington, VA
• The University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis, MN
• The Johns Hopkins University
• London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)
• Pepperdine
• Sonoma State University
• the University of La Verne
• the University of Monterrey in Monterrey, Mexico
• University of San Francisco
• Tavistock Institute of Human Relations

• Southern Oregon University Ashland, Oregon

Organization Development Topics

 • Action research
• Appreciative Inquiry
• Chaos Theory in Organizational Development
• Collaboration
• Collaborative methodologies
• Diversity management
• Employee research
• Group process
• Knowledge management
• Leadership development
• Managing change
• Meetings
• Organizational communication
• Organizational culture
• Organizational diagnostics
• Organizational engineering
• Organizational learning
• Organizational performance
• Performance improvement
• Process improvement
• Quality
• Social networks
• Strategic planning
• Succession planning
• Systems intelligence
• Systems thinking
• Team building
• T-groups
• Value networks
• Workforce Planning

OD in context
• Coaching
• Facilitation
• Human resources
• Industrial and organizational psychology
• Training & Development
• Change Management

Richard Beckhard was a pioneer in the field of organizational development. He co-

launched the Addison-Wesley Organization Development Series and began the
Organization Development Network in 1967. His classic work, Organization
Development: Strategies and Models, was published in 1969. Beckhard was an adjunct
professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management from 1963-1984. He died on
December 28, 1999.

He helped to define organizational development as: "an effort (1) planned, (2)
organization-wide, (3) managed from the top, to (4) increase organization effectiveness
and health through (5) planned interventions in the organization's 'processes', using
behavioral-science knowledge".

Together with David Gleicher, he is credited with developing a Formula for Change. The
formula proposes that the combination of organizational dissatisfaction, vision for the
future and the possibility of immediate, tactical action must be stronger than the
resistance within the organization in order for meaningful change to occur.

Formula for Change

Formula for Change

The Formula was created by Richard Beckhard and David Gleicher and is sometimes
called Gleicher's Formula. This formula provides a model to assess the relative
strengths affecting the likely success or otherwise of organizational change programs.

DxVxF>R

Three factors must be present for meaningful organizational change to take place. These
factors are: D = Dissatisfaction with how things are now; V = Vision of what is possible;
F = First, concrete steps that can be taken towards the vision.

If the product of these three factors is greater than R = Resistance, then change is
possible. Because of the multiplication of D, V and F, if any one is absent or low, then the
product will be low and therefore not capable of overcoming the resistance.

To ensure a successful change it is necessary to use influence and strategic thinking in

order to create vision and identify those crucial, early steps towards it. In addition, the
organization must recognize and accept the dissatisfaction that exists by communicating
industry trends, leadership ideas, best practice and competitive analysis to identify the
necessity for change.

Action research
Action research is research that each of us can do on our own practice, that “we” (any
team or family or informal community of practice) can do to improve its practice, or that
larger organizations or institutions can conduct on themselves, assisted or guided by
professional researchers, with the aim of improving their strategies, practices, and
knowledge of the environments within which they practice.
Kurt Lewin, then a professor at MIT, first coined the term “action research” in about
1944, and it appears in his 1946 paper “Action Research and Minority Problems”. In that
paper, he described action research as “a comparative research on the conditions and
effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action” that uses “a
spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding
about the result of the action”.

Action research is not only a research that describes how humans and organizations
behave in the outside world but also a change mechanism that helps human and
organizations reflect on and change their own systems (Reason & Bradbury, 2001). After
six decades of action research development, many methodologies have been evolved,
ranging:

from those that are more driven by the researcher’s agenda to those more driven by
participants;

from those that are motivated primarily by instrumental goal attainment to those
motivated primarily by the aim of personal, organizational, or societal
transformation; and

from 1st-, to 2nd-, to 3rd-person research (i.e. my research on my own action, aimed
primarily at personal change; our research on our group (family/team), aimed
primarily at improving the group; and ‘scholarly’ research aimed primarily at
theoretical generalization and/or large scale change).

Action research can change the entire sense of social science, transforming it from
reflective knowledge about past social practices formulated by a priesthood of experts
(research PhDs) to an active moment-to-moment theorizing, data collecting, and
inquiring occurring in the midst of our ongoing lives. “Knowledge is always gained
through action and for action. From this starting point, to question the validity of social
knowledge is to question, not how to develop a reflective science about action, but how
to develop genuinely well-informed action—how to conduct an action science” (Torbert
2001).

Five major action research theories are:

• Chris Argyris's Action Science

• John Heron and Peter Reason's Cooperative Inquiry]]
• Paulo Freire's Participatory Action Research (PAR)
• William Torbert’s Developmental Action Inquiry
• Jack Whitehead's and Jean McNiff's Living Theory approach

Argyris’ action science invites individuals to study themselves in action with others, and
simultaneously attempts to contribute to and transform the practice of social science
itself. Therefore, it is primarily a 1st-person approach, learned in 2nd-person settings, but
with implications for 3rd-person social science theory and method that Argyris (1970,
1980) has strongly articulated.

Heron’s (1996)and Reason’s (1995) Cooperative Inquiry brings peers (e.g. doctors, social
workers, young women managers, men) together in self-study groups. Thus, it is
primarily a 2nd-person approach, though group participants are also encouraged to try
1st-person action research outside the groups, and Reason has played a central role in
mounting a paradigm challenge to ‘naively objective’ modernist social science.

The Participatory Action Research approach of Freire (1970) and others, primarily in the
southern hemisphere, concerns empowering the poorest and least educated members of
society for literacy, for land reform analyses, and for community. Hence, this approach is
primarily 3rd-person in the scope of its intended societal transformations.

The Developmental Action Inquiry approach of Torbert & Associates (2004) attempts to
interweave individual, 1st-person self-study with face-to-face 2nd-person self-study by
teams and with 3rd-person institution-wide self-study.

In the Living Theory approach of Whitehead (1989) and Whitehead and McNiff (2006)
individual's generate explanations of their educational influences in their own learning, in
the learning of others and in the learning of social formations. They generate the
explanations from experiencing themselves as living contradictions in enquiries of the
kind, 'How do I improve what I am doing?' They use action reflection cycles of
expressing concerns, developing action plans, acting and gathering data, evaluating the
influences of action, modifying concerns, ideas and action in the light of the evaluations.
The explanations include life-affirming, energy-flowing values as explanatory principles.
Living Theories generated through this approach can be accessed at
http://www.actionresearch.net . A living theory approach with the above qualities is
distinguished from the living theories produced by practitioner-researchers because of the
uniqueness of each living theory generated by individuals.

Since action research is as much about creating a better life within more effective and just
social contexts as it is about knowledge-creating and discovering true facts and theories,
it should not be surprising that it has flourished in Latin America, Northern Europe, India,
and Australia as much or more than within university scholarship in the US.

A powerful tool for modern action research uses video of communities by communities,
and variations on that theme. Surprisingly it started in 1967 by a pioneering advocate
Don Snowdon who changed the lives of Newfoundland's Fogo islanders by filming them
and their grievances and promulgating their distress to their government. This
methodology is now called Participatory Video (see external link). Its chief power is that
the video is edited by it partipants.
Employee research
In organizational development (OD), employee research involves the use of surveys,
focus groups and other data-gathering methods to find out the attitudes, opinions and
feelings of members of an organization.

Leadership development
In organizational development, leadership development is the strategic investment in,
and utilization of, the human capital within the organization.

David Day (2000) distinguished between leaders versus leadership development.

Leader development focuses on the development of the leader, such as the personal
attributes desired in a leader, desired ways of behaving, ways of thinking or feeling.

In contrast, leadership development focuses on the development of leadership as a

process. This will include the interpersonal relationships, social influence process, and
the team dynamics between the leader and his/her team at the dyad level, the contextual
factors surrounding the team such as the perception of the organizational climate and the
social network linkages between the team and other groups in the organization.

Both forms of development may mutually influence each other, as exemplified in the
concept of "Deep Change" in Robert E. Quinn's 1996 book of the same title.

Typically, leader development has focused on 3 main areas - providing the opportunities
for development, stimulating the ability to develop (including motivation, skills and
knowledge for change), and providing a supportive context for change to occur (see
Cynthia D. McCauley, 2001).

Leadership development can build on the development of individuals (including

followers) to become leaders. In addition, it also needs to focus on the interpersonal
linkages between the individuals in the team.

In the belief that the most important resource that an organization possesses is the people
that comprise the organization, some organizations address the development of these
resources (even including the leadership).

Leadership development can encompass any number of developmental processes

including:

talent identification and management

individual development planning

management development
 360-degree feedback

succession planning

mentoring

coaching

Managing change
In organizational development (OD), specialists assist their clients in recognizing that
"the only constant is change" and in acknowledging the critical role of managing
change.

Organizational development (OD) practitioners help organizations to manage change in

various ways including:

• assessing the need for change

• designing the plan for change
• coaching those who will lead others through the transition to change
• helping others adapt to change
• dealing with resistance to change

Figures in managing change

• Kurt Lewin
• William Bridges
• Stephen Robbins

Organizational communication
Organizational communication, broadly speaking, is: the transactional, symbolic
process in which the activities of a social collective are coordinated to achieve individual
and collective goals.

1. Discipline History

The modern field DOES NOT have a more recent lineage through business information,
business communication, and early mass communication studies published in the 1930s
through the 1950s. Until then, organizational communication as a discipline consisted of
a few professors within speech departments who had a particular interest in speaking and
writing in business settings.

Several seminal publications stand out as works broadening the scope and recognizing
the importance of communication in the organizing process, and in using the term
"organizational communication". Nobel Laureate Herbert Simon wrote in 1947 about
"organization communications systems", saying communication is "absolutely essential
to organizations".

In 1951 Bavelas and Barrett wrote An Experimental Approach to Organizational

Communication in which they stated that communication "is the essence of organized
activity".

In 1953 the economist Kenneth Boulding wrote The Organizational Revolution: A Study
in the Ethics of Economic Organization. While this work directly addressed the economic
issues facing organizations, in it he questions the ethical and moral issues underlying
their power, and maintains that an "organization consists of a system of communication."

In 1954, a young Chris Argyris published Personality and Organization. This careful and
research-based book attacked many things, but singled out "organizational
communication" for special attention. Argyris made the case that what passed for
organizational communication at the time was based on unstated and indefensible
propositions such as "management knows best" and "workers are inherently stupid and
lazy." He accused the emerging field of relying on untested gimmicks designed to trick
employees into doing management's will.

2. Assumptions underlying early organizational communication

Some of the main assumptions underlying much of the early organizational

communication research were:

• Humans act rationally. Sane people behave in rational ways, they generally have
access to all of the information needed to make rational decisions they could
articulate, and therefore will make rational decisions, unless there is some
breakdown in the communication process.

Formal logic and empirically verifiable data ought to be the foundation upon which
any theory should rest. All we really need to understand communication in
organizations is (a) observable and replicable behaviors that can be transformed
into variables by some form of measurement, and (b) formally replicable
syllogisms that can extend theory from observed data to other groups and settings

Communication is primarily a mechanical process, in which a message is constructed

and encoded by a sender, transmitted through some channel, then received and
decoded by a receiver. Distortion, represented as any differences between the
original and the received messages, can and ought to be identified and reduced or
eliminated.

• Organizations are mechanical things, in which the parts (including employees

functioning in defined roles) are interchangeable. What works in one organization
 will work in another similar organization. Individual differences can be
minimized or even eliminated with careful management techniques.

• Organizations function as a container within which communication takes place.

Any differences in form or function of communication between that occurring in
an organization and in another setting can be identified and studied as factors
affecting the communicative activity.

Herbert Simon introduced the concept of bounded rationality which challenged

assumptions about the perfect rationality of communication participants. He maintained
that people making decisions in organizations seldom had complete information, and that
even if more information was available, they tended to pick the first acceptable option,
rather than exploring further to pick the optimal solution.

Through the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s the field expanded greatly in parallel with several
other academic disciplines, looking at communication as more than an intentional act
designed to transfer an idea. Research expanded beyond the issue of "how to make people
understand what I am saying" to tackle questions such as "how does the act of
communicating change, or even define, who I am?", "why do organizations that seem to
be saying similar things achieve very different results?" and "to what extent are my
relationships with others affected by our various organizational contexts?"

3. Types of Communication Flow

• Downward Communication
• Upward Communication
• Lateral Communication

4. Research Methodologies

Historically, organizational communication was driven primarily by quantitative research

methodologies. Included in functional organizational communication research are
statistical analyses (such as surveys, text indexing, network mapping and behavior
modeling). In the early 1980s, the interpretive revolution took place in organizational
communication. In Putnam and Pacanowsky's 1983 text Communication and
Organizations: An Interpretive Approach. they argued for opening up methodological
space for qualitative approaches such as narrative analyses, participant/observation,
interviewing, rhetoric and textual approaches readings) and philosophic inquiries.

During the 1980s and 1990s critical organizational scholarship began to gain prominence
with a focus on issues of gender, race, class, and power/knowledge. In its current state,
the study of organizational communication is open methodologically, with research from
post-positive, interpretive, critical, postmodern, and discursive paradigms being
published regularly.
Organizational communication scholarship appears in a number of communication
journals including but not limited to Management Communication Quarterly, Journal of
Applied Communication Research, Communication Monographs, Academy of
Management Journal, Communication Studies, and Southern Communication Journal.

5. Areas of Study in Organizational Communication

Organizational communication can include:

Flow of Communication, e.g.,

• formal, informal
• internal, external
• upward, downward, horizontal
• networks

Induction, e.g.,

• new hire orientation

• policies & procedures
• employee benefits

Channels, e.g.,

• electronic media such as e-mail, intranet, internet

• teleconference
• print media such as memos, bulletin boards, newsletters etc.
• face-to-face

Meetings, e.g.,

• briefings
• staff meetings
• project meetings
• town hall meetings

Interviews, e.g.,

• Selection
• Performance
• Career

More recently, the field of organizational communication has moved from acceptance of
mechanistic models (e.g., information moving from a sender to a receiver) to a study of
the persistent, hegemonic and taken-for-granted ways in which we not only use
communication to accomplish certain tasks within organizational settings (e.g., public
speaking) but also how the organizations in which we participate affect us.

These approaches include "postmodern", "critical", "participatory", "feminist",

"power/political", "organic", etc. and draw from disciplines as wide-ranging as sociology,
philosophy, theology, psychology (see, in particular, "industrial/organizational
psychology"), business, business administration, institutional management, medicine
(health communication), neurology (neural nets), semiotics, anthropology, international
relations, and music.

Thus the field has expanded or moved to study phenomena such as:

Constitution, e.g.,

• how communicative behaviors construct or modify organizing processes or

products
• how the organizations within which we interact affect our communicative
behaviors, and through these, our own identities
• structures other than organizations which might be constituted through our
communicative activity (e.g., markets, cooperatives, tribes, political parties, social
movements)
• when does something "become" an organization? When does an organization
become (an)other thing(s)? Can one organization "house" another? Is the
organization still a useful entity/thing/concept, or has the social/political
environment changed so much that what we now call "organization" is so
different from the organization of even a few decades ago that it cannot be
usefully tagged with the same word--"organization"?

Narrative, e.g.,

• how do group members employ narrative to acculturate/initiate/indoctrinate new

members?
• do organizational stories act on different levels? Are different narratives
purposively invoked to achieve specific outcomes, or are there specific roles of
"organizational storyteller"? If so, are stories told by the storyteller received
differently than those told by others in the organization?
• in what ways does the organization attempt to influence storytelling about the
organization? under what conditions does the organization appear to be more or
less effective in obtaining a desired outcome?
• when these stories conflict with one another or with official rules/policies, how
are the conflicts worked out? in situations in which alternative accounts are
available, who or how or why are some accepted and others rejected?

Identity, e.g.,
 who do we see ourselves to be, in terms of our organizational affiliations?

do communicative behaviors or occurrences in one or more of the organizations in

which we participate effect changes in us? to what extent are we comprised of the
organizations to which we belong?

is it possible for individuals to successfully resist organizational identity? what would

that look like?

do people who define themselves by their work-organizational membership

communicate differently within the organizational setting than people who define
themselves more by an avocational (non-vocational) set of relationships?

Interrelatedness of organizational experiences, e.g.,

• how do our communicative interactions in one organizational setting affect our

communicative actions in other organizational settings?
• how do the phenomenological experiences of participants in a particular
organizational setting effect changes in other areas of their lives?
• when the organizational status of a member is significantly changed (e.g., by
promotion or expulsion) how are their other organizational memberships affected?

Power e.g.,

• how do the use of particular communicative practices within an organizational

setting reinforce or alter the various interrelated power relationships within the
setting? Are the potential responses of those within or around these organizational
settings constrained by factors or processes either within or outside of the
organization--(assuming there is an "outside"?
• do taken-for-granted organizational practices work to fortify the dominant
hegemonic narrative? Do individuals resist/confront these practices, through what
actions/agencies, and to what effects?
• do status changes in an organization (e.g., promotions, demotions, restructuring,
financial/social strata changes) change communicative behavior? Are there
criteria employed by organizational members to differentiate between "legitimate"
(i.e., endorsed by the formal organizational structure) and "illegitimate" (i.e.,
opposed by or unknown to the formal power structure)? Are there "pretenders" or
"usurpers" who employ these communicative behaviors? When are they
successful, and what do we even mean by "successful?"

Organizational performance
Organizational performance comprises the actual output or results of an organization as
measured against its intended outputs (or goals and objectives).
Specialists in many fields are concerned with organizational performance including
strategic planners, operations, finance, legal, and organizational development.

In recent years, many organizations have attempted to manage organizational

performance using the balanced scorecard methodology where performance is tracked
and measured in multiple dimensions such as:

- financial performance (e.g. shareholder return) - customer service - social responsibility

(e.g. corporate citizenship, community outreach) - employee stewardship

Performance improvement
Performance improvement is the concept of measuring the output of a particular
process or procedure, then modifying the process or procedure in order to increase the
output, increase efficiency, or increase the effectiveness of the process or procedure. The
concept of performance improvement can be applied to either individual performance
such as an athlete or organizational performance such as a racing team or a commercial
enterprise.

In Organizational development, performance improvement is the concept of

organizational change in which the managers and governing body of an organization put
into place and manage a program which measures the current level of performance of the
organization and then generates ideas for modifying organizational behavior and
infrastructure which are put into place in order to achieve a better level of output. The
primary goals of organizational improvement are to improve organizational effectiveness
and organizational efficiency in order to improve the ability of the organization to deliver
its goods and/or services and prosper in the marketplaces in which the organization
competes. A third area of improvement which is sometimes targeted for improvement is
organizational efficacy which involves the process of setting organizational goals and
objectives.

Performance improvement at the operational or individual employee level usually

involves processes such as statistical quality control. At the organizational level,
performance improvement usually involves softer forms of measurement such as
customer satisfaction surveys which are used to obtain qualitative information about
performance from the viewpoint of customers.

1. Performance defined

Performance is a measure of results achieved. Performance efficiency is the ratio between

effort expended and results achieved. The difference between current performance and
the theoretical performance limit is the performance improvement zone.

Another way to think of performance improvement is to see it as improvement in four

potential areas. First, is the resource INPUT requirements (e.g., reduced working capital,
material, replacement/reorder time, and set-up requirements). Second, is the
THROUGHPUT requirements, often viewed as process efficiency; this is measured in
terms of time, waste, and resource utilization. Third, OUTPUT requirements, often
viewed from a cost/price, quality, functionality perspective. Fourth, OUTCOME
requirements, did it end up making a difference.

Performance is an abstract concept and it must be represented by concrete, measurable

phenomena or events in order to be measured. Baseball athlete performance is abstract
covering many different types of activities. Batting average is a concrete measure of a
particular performance attribute for a particular game role, batting, for the game of
baseball.

Performance assumes an actor of some kind but the actor could be an individual person
or a group of people acting in concert. The performance platform is the infrastructure or
devices used in the performance act.

There are two main ways to improve performance: improving the measured attribute by
using the performance platform more effectively, or by improving the measured attribute
by modifying the performance platform, which in turn allows a given level of use to be
more effective in producing the desired output.

For instance, in several sports such as tennis and golf, there have been technological
improvements in the apparatuses used in these sports. The improved apparatus in turn
allows players to achieve better performance with no improvement in skill by purchasing
new equipment. The apparatus, the golf club and golf ball or the tennis racket, provide
the player with a higher theoretical performance limit.

2. Levels

Performance improvement can occur at different levels:

• an individual performer
• a team
• an organizational unit
• the organization itself

3. Cycle

Business performance management and improvement can be thought of as a cycle:

1. Performance Planning where goals and objectives are established

2. Performance Coaching where a manager intervenes to give feedback and adjust
performance
3. Performance appraisal where individual performance is formally documented and
feedback delivered
Strategic planning
Strategic planning is an organization's process of defining its strategy, or direction, and
making decisions on allocating its resources to pursue this strategy, including its capital
and people.

The outcome is normally a strategic plan which is used as guidance to define functional
and divisional plans, including Technology, Marketing, etc.

Methodologies

There are many approaches to strategic planning but typically a three-step process may
be used:

• Situation - evaluate the current situation and how it came about.

• Target - define goals and/or objectives (sometimes called ideal state)
• Path - map a possible route to the goals/objectives

One alternative approach is called Draw-See-Think

• Draw - what is the ideal image or the desired end state?

• See - what is today's situation? What is the gap from ideal and why?
• Think - what specific actions must be taken to close the gap between today's
situation and the ideal state?
• Plan - what resources are required to execute the activities?

An alternative to the Draw-See-Think approach is called See-Think-Draw

• See - what is today's situation?

• Think - define goals/objectives
• Draw - map a route to achieving the goals/objectives

In other terms strategic planning can be as follows:

• Vision - Define the vision and set a mission statement with hierarchy of goals
• SWOT - According to the desired goals conduct analysis
• Formulate - Formulate actions and processes to be taken to attain these goals
• Implement - Implementation of the agreed upon processes
• Control - Monitor and get feedback from implemented processes to fully control
the operation

Situational analysis
When developing strategies, analysis of the organization and its environment as it is at
the moment and how it may develop in the future, is important. The analysis has to be
executed at an internal level as well as an external level to identify all opportunities and
threats of the new strategy.

There are several factors to assess in the external situation analysis:

1. Markets (customers)
2. Competition
3. Technology
4. Supplier markets
5. Labor markets
6. The economy
7. The regulatory environment

It is rare to find all seven of these factors having critical importance. It is also uncommon
to find that the first two - markets and competition - are not of critical importance.

Analysis of the external environment normally focuses on the customer. Management

should be visionary in formulating customer strategy, and should do so by thinking about
market environment shifts, how these could impact customer sets, and whether those
customer sets are the ones the company wishes to serve.

Analysis of the competitive environment is also performed, many times based on the
framework suggested by Michael Porter.

Goals, objectives and targets

Strategic planning is a very important business activity. It is also important in the public
sector areas such as education. It is practiced widely informally and formally. Strategic
planning and decision processes should end with objectives and a roadmap of ways to
achieve those objectives.

The following terms have been used in Strategic Planning: desired end states, plans,
policies, goals, objectives, strategies, tactics and actions. Definitions vary, overlap and
fail to achieve clarity. The most common of these concepts are specific, time bound
statements of intended future results and general and continuing statements of intended
future results, which most models refer to as either goals or objectives (sometimes
interchangeably).

One model of organizing objectives uses hierarchies. The items listed above may be
organized in a hierarchy of means and ends and numbered as follows: Top Rank
Objective (TRO), Second Rank Objective, Third Rank Objective, etc. From any rank, the
objective in a lower rank answers to the question "How?" and the objective in a higher
rank answers to the question "Why?" The exception is the Top Rank Objective (TRO):
there is no answer to the "Why?" question. That is how the TRO is defined.
People typically have several goals at the same time. "Goal congruency" refers to how
well the goals combine with each other. Does goal A appear compatible with goal B? Do
they fit together to form a unified strategy? "Goal hierarchy" consists of the nesting of
one or more goals within other goal(s).

One approach recommends having short-term goals, medium-term goals, and long-term
goals. In this model, one can expect to attain short-term goals fairly easily: they stand just
slightly above one's reach. At the other extreme, long-term goals appear very difficult,
almost impossible to attain. Strategic management jargon sometimes refers to "Big Hairy
Audacious Goals" (BHAGs) in this context.) Using one goal as a stepping-stone to the
next involves goal sequencing. A person or group starts by attaining the easy short-term
goals, then steps up to the medium-term, then to the long-term goals. Goal sequencing
can create a "goal stairway". In an organizational setting, the organization may co-
ordinate goals so that they do not conflict with each other. The goals of one part of the
organization should mesh compatibly with those of other parts of the organization.

Mission statements and vision statements

Organizations sometimes summarize goals and objectives into a mission statement
and/or a vision statement:

While the existence of a shared mission is extremely useful, many strategy specialists
question the requirement for a written mission statement. However, there are many
models of strategic planning that start with mission statements, so it is useful to examine
them here.

• A Mission statement: tells you what the company is now. It concentrates on

present; it defines the customer(s), critical processes and it informs you about the
desired level of performance.

• A Vision statement: outlines what a company wants to be. It concentrates on

future; it is a source of inspiration; it provides clear decision-making criteria.

Many people mistake vision statement for mission statement. The Vision describes a
future identity and the Mission describes why it will be achieved. A Mission statement
defines the purpose or broader goal for being in existence or in the business. It serves as
an ongoing guide without time frame. The mission can remain the same for decades if
crafted well. Vision is more specific in terms of objective and future state. Vision is
related to some form of achievement if successful.

For example, "We help transport goods and people efficiently and cost effectively without
damaging environment" is a mission statement. Ford's brief but powerful slogan "Quality
is Job 1" could count as a mission statement. "We will be one amongst the top three
transporters of goods and people in North America by 2010" is a vision statement. It is
very concrete and unambiguous goal.
A mission statement can resemble a vision statement in a few companies, but that can be
a grave mistake. It can confuse people. The vision statement can galvanize the people to
achieve defined objectives, even if they are stretch objectives, provided the vision is
SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time bound). A mission
statement provides a path to realize the vision in line with its values. These statements
have a direct bearing on the bottom line and success of the organization.

Which comes first? The mission statement or the vision statement? That depends. If you
have a new start up business, new program or plan to re engineer your current services,
then the vision will guide the mission statement and the rest of the strategic plan. If you
have an established business where the mission is established, then many times, the
mission guides the vision statement and the rest of the strategic plan. Either way, you
need to know where you are, your current resources, your current obstacles, and where
you want to go - the vision for the future.

Features of an effective vision statement may include:

• Clarity and lack of ambiguity

• Paint a vivid and clear picture, not ambiguous
• Describing a bright future (hope)
• Memorable and engaging expression
• Realistic aspirations, achievable
• Alignment with organizational values and culture, Rational
• Time bound if it talks of achieving any goal or objective

In order to become really effective, an organizational vision statement must (the theory
states) become assimilated into the organization's culture. Leaders have the responsibility
of communicating the vision regularly, creating narratives that illustrate the vision, acting
as role-models by embodying the vision, creating short-term objectives compatible with
the vision, and encouraging others to craft their own personal vision compatible with the
organization's overall vision.

Workforce planning
Strategic Workforce Planning involves analyzing and forecasting the talent that
companies need to execute their business strategy, proactively rather than reactively, it is
a critical strategic activity, enabling the organization to identify, develop and sustain the
workforce skills it needs to successfully accomplish its strategic intent whilst balancing
career and lifestyle goals of its employees.

Strategic Workforce Planning is a relatively new management process that is being used
increasingly to help control labor costs, assess talent needs, make informed business
decisions, and assess talent market risks as part of overall enterprise risk management.
Strategic workforce planning is aimed at helping companies make sure they have the
right people in the right place at the right time and at the right price
Through Strategic Workforce Planning organizations gain insight into what people the
organization will need, and what people will be available to meet those needs. In creating
this understanding of the gaps between an organization’s demand and the available
workforce supply, organizations will be able to create and target programmes, approaches
and develop strategies to close the gaps.

1. Different Types of Strategic Workforce Planning

Strategic Workforce Planning is fundamentally different from many processes in that it is

not prescriptive, sequential or linear. There are various approaches to Workforce Planning

1.1 Supply/Demand Approach:

This is the traditional approach to workforce planning that analyzes supply/demand to

identify gaps. The intent being to develop strategies to close the gaps, so that supply
better fits with demand.

1.2 Workforce analytics approach:

The focus is to analyse current and historical employee data to identify key relationships
among variables and use this to provide insight into the workforce they need for the
future.

1.3 Modeling approach:

This approach incorporates forecasting and scenario planning. Forecasting uses

quantitative data to create forecasts incorporating multiple what-if and modeling the
future. Scenario Planning being the more useful tool where there are uncertainties,
therefore incorporating quantitative and qualitative.

1.4 Segmentation approach:

Breaking the workforce into segments along the lines of their jobs and determining
relevance to strategic intent. Provides a technique for prioritizing.

2. Steps in Workforce Planning

Though there is no definitive ‘Start here’ activity for any of the approaches to Strategic
Workforce Planning, there are five fundamentals activities that most Workforce Plan
models have: • Environment Scan • Current Workforce Profile • Future Workforce View •
Analysis and Targeted Future • Closing the gaps •
2.1 Environment Scan

Environment Scan is a form of business intelligence. In the context of Workforce

Planning it is used to identify the set of facts or circumstances that surround a workforce
situation or event.

2.2 Current Workforce Profile

Current State is a profile of the demand and supply factors both internally and externally
of the workforce the organization has ‘today’.

2.3 Future Workforce View

Future View is determining the organization’s needs considering the emerging trends and
issues identified during the Environment Scanning.

Future View is often where the different approaches identified above are applied:
Quantitative futuring: understanding the future you are currently tracking to by
forecasting; Qualitative futuring: scenario planning potential alternative futures in terms
of capabilities and demographics to deliver the business strategy.

2.4 Analysis and Targeted Future

Qualitative and quantitative futuring creates the content for an organizational unit to
analyze and identify critical elements. As the critical elements are identified the Targeted
Future begins to take form. The targeted future is the future that the organization is going
to target as being the best fit in terms of business strategy and is achievable given the
surrounding factors (internal/external, supply/demand).

2.5 Closing the Gaps

Closing the gaps is about the people management (human resources) programs and
practices that deliver the workforce needed for today and tomorrow. The process is about
determining appropriate actions to close the gaps and therefore deliver the targeted future.

There are 8 key areas that closing the Gaps needs to focus on -

Resourcing,

Learning and Development,

Remuneration,

Industrial Relations,

Recruitment,
Retention,

Knowledge Management,

Job design.

References:
• Beckhard, R 1969 Organization Development: Strategies and Models, Addison-
Wesley, Reading, MA.
• Smith, A 1998, Training and Development in Australia, Butterworths, Sydney

• Gergen, Kenneth and Tojo Joseph. 1996. "Organizational Science in a Postmodern

Context." Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, vol. 32, pp. 356-378.

• Redding, W. Charles. 1985. "Stumbling Toward Identity: The Emergence of

Organizational Communication as a Field of Study" in McPhee and Tompkins,
Organizational Communication: Traditional Themes and New Directions.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• May, Steve and Mumby, Dennis K. 2005. "Engaging Organizational

Communication Theory and Research." Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Bradford and Duncan,, Simplified Strategic Planning,(Chandler House, 2000)

• Kono, T. (1994) "Changing a Company's Strategy and Culture", Long Range
Planning, 27, 5 (October 1994), pp: 85-97
• P. Kotler, "Megamarketing", Harvard Business Review, (March--April 1986)
• J. Naisbitt, Megatrends: Ten New Directions Transforming our Lives,
(Macdonald, 1982)
• T. Levitt, "Marketing myopia", Harvard Business Review, (July--August 1960)
• M. Lorenzen, "Strategic Planning for Academic Library Instructional
Programming." Illinois Libraries 86, no. 2 (Summer 2006): 22-29.
• L. Fahey and V. K. Narayman, Macroenvironmental Analysis for Strategic
Management&rdquo,(West Publishing, 1986)
• R. F. Lusch and V. N. Lusch, Principles of Marketing, (Kent Publishing, 1987)
• Smith, 1998, p.261. Training and development in Australia.

• Beckhard, R., 1969 Organization Development: Strategies and Models, Addison-

Wesley, Reading, MA.
• Smith, A., 1998, Training and Development in Australia, Butterworths, Sydney