The Firs t Comp onent in Orgcmizcıtional
Deve lopm ent Process: Diagn osing the Syste m and
its Probl ems.. .
Ar. Gör. Dr. Ömer DİNÇER (işletme Yönetim i Bilim Dalı)
Or gan iza tion al Deve lopme nt is a plann ed chan ge proce ss. Imp lem ent atio n of cin Org ani zat ion al Dev elopm ent prog ram requ ires att en tio n to thre e ope rati ons tha t we cali the basi c com pon ent s or elem ents of an OD prog ram in ope rati ons ; the dia gn os tic com pon ent, int erv en tion com pon ent and pro ces s-m ain ten anc e comp onen t.
The dia gn os tic com pon ent repr esen ts a con tinu ous co llec tio n of System data , focu ses on the tot al org ani zat ion , its sub syst ems and syst em proce sses. İnte rve ntio n com pon ent con sis ts of ali the ac tiv itie s of con su lta nts an d/ or org ani zat ion memb ers desig ned to impr ove org ani zat ion . Pro ces s-m aint ena nce com pon ent enco mpa sses the ac tiv itie s orie nte d tovvard the ma inte nan ce and man age men t of the OD proc esse s itsel f. Act ion plans (sp eci fic inte rve ntio ns) and pro ces s-m ain ten anc e ef for ts shou ld alvvays be based upon ade qui te diag nos is, so a good prob lem solv ing pro ces s sta rts with Inf orm atio n gat her ing and diag nos is. The refo re we vviil in itia lly disc uss dia g nosin g the org an iza tion system , its subs ystem and the ir probl ems.
The best pla ce to begin prob lem solv ing and OD is wi th the proble m. A prob lem is a gap betvveen exp ecte d res ults or co nd itio ns and act ual res ults or con ditio ns. Often we assu me th at ve know wh at the probl em is, but too ofte n vve’re vvrong. An OD pro gra m thus mus t sta rt with dia gno sis con tinu ous ly emp loys data co llec tin g and data ana lyzi ng thro ugh out .
The req uire men t for dia gno stic ac tiv itie s stem s from tw o needs; the fir st need is to know the State of thin gs, or «what is»; the secon d need is to know the eff ec ts or cons equ enc es of acti ons .
Any usefu l dia gno stic orie nta tio n mu st deal with thre e maj ör issues. First, the re must be some basi c framevvor k of con cep ts
abo ut the natur e of orga niza tion . Seco nd, the re mu st be some paıt i- cula r atte ntio n to org ani zat ion al pro ces ses (p ar tic ul ar ly processe s tha î lead or cause problem e). Thir d, a dia gn os tic ap pro ac h should includ e some ideas abo ut the na tur e of pro ble ms in orga niza tion . Tha t is, a diag nos tic app roac h sho uld co nta in a de fin at io n or model of wha t effe ctiv e orga niza tion s «Look Like» as vvell as def ina tion s of problem areas.
We will brie fly review thre e ma jör di ag no sti c app roa che s. Each is an example of a ınore gen eral set of app roa che s. The three presented here were chose n beca use the y are pa rti cu la rly clear and reason ably easy to unde rstan d.
1. A system mo del : Ac co rdi ng to F-'rench and Bell, an org an i
zation system model con sis ts of six sub syt em ele me nts: goals subsystem, task subsyst em, tec hn olo gic al sub sys tem , hum an-s ocia l subsystem, sut ruc tur al subs yste m and ex ter na l in te rfa ce subsy stem.
2. A contingency model (Lcsuvrence a nd Lorsch) : Law ren ce and Lorsch conclu ded tha t dif fer en t ext ern al en vir on me nts req uire d diffe - rent orga nizat ion stru ctu re, and the ef fe cti ve org an iza tio ns had o good «fit» betvveen str uc tur e and en vir on me nt wh ile ine ffe cti ve or gani zatio ns did not.
They cons ider two maj ör con cep ts: Di ffe re nta tio n and integ- ration. Diff eren tatio n is defi ned as the di ffe re nc e in co gn itiv e and emotio nal orie nta tion amon g man age rs in di ffe re nt fu nc tio na l de- partmen ts. Integ ratio n is defin ed as the qu ali ty of the State of col labc ratio n tha t exis ts amon g de pa rtm en ts th at are requ ired to achieve unity of ef fo rt by the dem and s of th e env iron me nt. Dif fer ent enviro nmen ts requir e (1) dif fer en t am oun ts of in teg ra tio n and (2) ıntegra tion betvveen dif fe re nt wo rk ünite.
3. Force-Field Anaiysis : Forc e fiel d ana lys is is a meth od for
iden tifyin g the psy cho logi cal and soc ial for ce s th at af fe ct orga m- zatio nal and peop le’s beha vior. İn any sit ua tio n the re are driv ing forc es tha t push for chan ge as vvell as res tra ini ng for ce s th at hind er change. Alth ough ther e is some va ria bil ity , ac tua l be ha vio r is some- where in betvveen these etre mes and usu ally does not ver much tovvard one or the oth er ext rem es and th at is, beh avi or is fai rly stable vvithin a much more narrovv rang e tha n the pos sib le extre mes . Change can oc cu r by incr eas ing the dri vin g for ce s or by redu cing the restr ainin g forces .
