Theories and Practices of Organizational Development

Abstract

We review research on and the practice of Organization Development. Organization development has been an active area for research during the past decade, and current research benefits from well‐developed theoretical frameworks of organization change. Organization Development has also been a fertile ground for the development of change practice methodologies during this time. To organize this chapter, we distinguish between change process and implementation theories. Change process theories, which typically guide research on change, are sorted using Van de Ven and Poole's (1995) typology of teleologic, life‐cycle, dialectic, and evolutionary motors for change. Likewise, we categorize implementation theories, which typically guide the practice of change, by their underlying motors of participation, self‐reflection, action research, and narrative/rhetorical intervention. We identify some contemporary organization development interventions in terms of their implementation motors and indicate ways implementation and change process motors may complement each other. Despite their common interest in change, and complementary theoretical motors, we find that change process research and implementation research occupy relatively separate intellectual spheres. This divide is hindering further theory development regarding change. We outline some possible causes of the divide and propose strategies to bridge it.

The treatment of self‐efficacy among psychology and management scholars

“…Learning, as it pertains to the workplace, involves an employee adaptively changing his or her behavioral response to a stimulus, particularly when it comes to the learning of routines (see Austin & Bartunek, 2003). In this sense, the research previously cited linking self-efficacy to outcomes associated with occupational training is of relevance.…”

Organizational Development

“…They must be proficient in the new skills. More recently, Austin and Bartunek (2003) described OD as an evolving field, and emphasized that OD, at its core, involved the promotion of change and was really one of many approaches to the larger field of study now called planned change. One of the most obvious examples of the lack of understanding of this systems approach to managing is the inconsistency between organizational rewards and desired behaviors (Kerr, 1995).…”

Can organisation development principles in India's local governments improve governance?

“…As Fernandez and Rainey (2006) note, research and theory related to organisation change and allied topics is more likely to find space in journals specialising in general management than those focusing on public administration (Fernandez and Rainey 2006). Secondly, OD literature has largely limited itself to distinguishing between public and private organisations, with a widely acknowledged failure to address the sub-dimensions that distinguish individual organisations within the public and private spheres (Perry and Rainey 1988;Austin and Bartunek 2003).…”