Organization Development: What's Actually Happening?

Nistelrooij, A.T.M. van; Sminia, Harry

doi:10.1080/14697017.2010.516487

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If change is the outcome of sensemaking, and sensemaking is a social process, this positions social interaction at the heart of change (Ford & Ford, 1995;Marshak & Grant, 2008;Van Nistelrooij & Sminia, 2010). Accordingly, many contemporary approaches to change emphasize the importance of facilitated interactions between members of an organization.…”

Section: Dialoguementioning

confidence: 97%

Leading Change – Insights Into How Leaders Actually Approach the Challenge of Complexity

Lawrence¹

2015

Journal of Change Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, a multitude of authors have compared and contrasted traditional, episodic approaches to change management with more dynamic and continuous approaches that have emerged from thinking around complexity and complex adaptive systems. This debate has taken place alongside a narrative that suggests that most change interventions are unsuccessful, a claim based on little substantive evidence, and that most change leaders are not deemed to be capable of effectively leading change. This paper outlines the findings of an exploratory piece of research designed to find out what change leaders actually do. The results suggest that many leaders are at least intuitively aware of the limitations of traditional approaches to change and tend not to rely upon traditional change models. Many aspects of emerging change theory were reflected in the stories they recounted about their personal experiences of change. The content of those stories is reflected in the Emerging Change Model, which captures aspects of both rationalist and emergent change theories and which, it is hoped, may prove useful to change practitioners as a reflective device.

show abstract

Section: Dialoguementioning

confidence: 97%

Leading Change – Insights Into How Leaders Actually Approach the Challenge of Complexity

Lawrence¹

2015

Journal of Change Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The second and related factor is that newer forms of OD, such as dialogic OD and AI, which are based on a social constructionist perspective, have also been linked to Lewin's work (Burnes ; Oswick ; Van Nistelrooij and Sminia ). As a major review of OD by Burnes and Cooke () argues, though Lewin is often painted as a modernist with a unitary view of reality, the gestalt psychology that underpins field theory maintains that individuals and groups perceive and experience the world from their own perspectives, i.e.…”

Section: The Re‐emergence Of Field Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Kurt Lewin's Field Theory: A Review and Re‐evaluation

Burnes

Cooke

2012

Int J Management Reviews

222

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field theory was central to Kurt Lewin's work yet, after his death, interest in it declined significantly until the 1990s when a variant, force field analysis, became widely used. This paper examines the origins, purpose and continuing relevance of field theory. It especially looks at the influences of gestalt psychology, topology and Ernst Cassirer's philosophy of science on its development. It argues that Lewin's attempt to replace conventional topology with his own Lewinian mathematics‐based topology in pursuit of scientific rigour resulted in the undermining of its relevance. The paper also compares force field analysis with Lewin's original conception of field theory and shows that it has significant weaknesses in terms of rigour. It concludes that a return to Lewin's original conception of field theory, based on gestalt psychology and conventional topology, can provide academics and practitioners with a valuable and much‐needed approach to managing change.

show abstract

“…Wooten and White (1999) have shown that Lewin's change thinking aligns with post-modern organisation values, such as egalitarianism. Indeed, social constructionism can be seen as the ontological and epistemological foundation of Lewinian OD (Cummings & Worley, 2009;Van Nistelrooij & Sminia, 2010).…”

Section: Smith and Mackinnon: Organisation Development 119mentioning

confidence: 99%

Organisation development: The argument still stands

Smith

Mackinnon

2019

Journal of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After the national transition in 1994, South Africa was welcomed back into the international political and economic arena. Becoming part of the global community, including emerging economies, has had major implications for the country, including its school system. The previously relatively stable and predictable, if unjust, school system needed radical change. In this paper, we report on how Organisation Development (OD) as an action research school change strategy was introduced to a school staff. The outcome has been a gradual change in the organisation culture of the school. This includes more collaborative decision-making, open communication, teacher leadership, increased enthusiasm among teachers, and an ongoing process of incremental school change. We suggest that OD is a feasible change strategy for schools and school systems in emerging contexts of rapid and ongoing change in which schools are expected to take increasing responsibility for themselves.

show abstract

Organization Development: What's Actually Happening?

Cited by 26 publications

References 42 publications

Leading Change – Insights Into How Leaders Actually Approach the Challenge of Complexity

Leading Change – Insights Into How Leaders Actually Approach the Challenge of Complexity

Kurt Lewin's Field Theory: A Review and Re‐evaluation

Organisation development: The argument still stands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About