Guiding principles

10/7/2012

Who or what has most influenced your OD thinking and practice? What maxims or principles do you bear in mind as you approach organisational issues from an OD perspective? Someone asked me this question recently and I crystallised my response into seven statements, drawing on background influences including Morgan, Schein, Bolman & Deal, Gergen and Burr:

*Organisations do not exist but people do.

*Every action is an intervention.

*Actions have symbolic as well as rational meaning.

*What’s important is not what happens, but what it means.

*The same event has different meanings for different people.

*People get trapped in their own psychological and cultural constructs.

*What passes for rationality is often irrationality in disguise.

These statements, taken as a whole, create a metaphorical lens through which I often view, analyse or interpret a situation or experience. They help me to consider an underlying question, ‘What is really going on here?’ before attempting to work with a client or organisation to devise a way forward. What maxims or principles do you use to guide your practice?

40 Comments

Ken Hudson

12/7/2012 06:45:29 am

My thinking in OD relates to using the OD framework from Go MAD Thinking. Organisations have to be: 1. Clear on their strategic vision and objectives, 2. Understand clearly the organisational reasons for their chosen approach. 3. Have the right "culture" for delivering the vision 4. Have excellence in management thinking planning. 5. Ensure that their people are bought into the vision and goals 6. The senior leadership team take full responsibility for its delivery. 7. The agreed actions are taken and results measured.
One of the keys is having full employee engagement in the direction being taken and that the senior leaders and managers are role models and supporters.

Nick Wright

12/7/2012 06:49:47 am

Hi Ken and thanks for the note. I too find Go MAD's framework quite compelling. I find the employee engagement aspect particularly interesting because it relates to wider issues of organisational beliefs, assumptions, values and culture. With best wishes. Nick

Mukundlal H.R.

12/7/2012 06:51:09 am

At every bend,turn in life & in Time,I was gifted,to be guided,by Guides.I was taught to Respect regardless of consequences;to be the finest way forward...................and it has Been.

Nick Wright

13/7/2012 08:13:30 am

Hi Mukundlal. I do like your emphasis on respect as a core value in OD. With best wishes. Nick

Mukundlal H.R.

14/7/2012 09:57:49 pm

Sir,I have inculcated these guiding principles ...sucessfully motivated me as a competent marketing professional spanning 26 +yrs...steadfast! & now as a tutor }......Respect...Smile...maintaining eye Contact...as pillars of O&D.

Michael Holland

13/7/2012 05:43:03 am

Thank you, Nick for making my coffee time a reflective pleasure once again as I reconsider the make up of my consultancy model assumptions. Reading Malcolm Knowles' The Adult Learner some time ago revolutionised my then quite basic thinking and opened up the way to all sorts of new things. The whole desire to be autonomous and self-directed in learning (and in a large part of life generally) continues to appeal to me and I am always interested in the conflict between this desire and the often experienced inability to articulate, imagine or achieve it whether through organisational, personal or cultural inhibitors.

I like your list of principles and appreciate the idea of these constructing a metaphor. Images and stories, skillfully used can open up a new or a deeper level of perception and engagement in our situations.

Could you point me in the right direction of to explore further some of the principles you list, please?

Every blessing, Michael

Nick Wright

13/7/2012 08:27:23 am

Hi Michael and thanks for the note. I think there's something about opening up deeper levels of perception and engagement that appeal to me too. I would add values and experience to this - how we approach people and situations often influences how we and others experience them.

The books that have inspired me in some of the areas I listed include the Bible, Images of Organisation by Gareth Morgan, Reframing Organisations by Bolman & Deal, Process Consultation by Edgar Schein, Invitation to Social Construction by Kenneth Gergen and Social Constructionism my Vivien Burr.

I hope that helps. If you do read them, have any further questions or insights or come across any other interesting resources in this area, let me know? With best wishes. Nick

Michael Holland

13/7/2012 09:30:40 am

Thanks Nick. I've got Morgan and Schein and the Bible. I'll look out for the others.

Bob Larcher

13/7/2012 07:58:21 am

I always keep in mind the saying, "you can't shake hands with an organisation", i.e. OD is essentially about people development - be it executives, managers, supervisors or those on the shop floor!!

Nick Wright

13/7/2012 07:59:05 am

Hi Bob. I like it! :) With best wishes. Nick

Michael Holland

13/7/2012 09:18:51 am

Thanks, Bob, that's terrific! I'm going to use that myself.

Nicholas Walker

13/7/2012 08:00:57 am

One of my biggest things is making sure the goal or vision is clear enough. If it is not, others can view OD as change for change sake. From the OD side, “if we don’t know exactly where we are going, we’ll never know when we get there.”

Nick Wright

13/7/2012 08:10:59 am

Hi Nicholas. I think that's an interesting point. I've heard some complain that OD can seem more preoccupied with process than goals, as if it lacks clarity of purpose. On the other hand, some would argue that OD shouldn't become too fixed on predefined outcomes, preferring a more emergent approach.

Perhaps the latter outlook could be summarised as, 'we don't have a fixed view of where we're going in mind, but we are committed to following principles and processes that we believe will lead to the best organisational outcomes.' Would be interested to hear what you think about that? With best wishes. Nick

Arthur Lerner

14/7/2012 09:59:04 pm

My thinking about OD has been most influenced by an answer to a question I asked Warner Burke when I went to my first ODN conference, deepened by reading Edgar
Schein, and drummed into me by being mentored by Ron Lippitt and Kathie Dannemiller, It is that process the core of OD and what distinguishes it from alo other forms of management consulting. Later in my career further validation and expansion on the idea came from discussions with Meg Wheatley and reading her first book "Leadership and the New Science".

Working with process does not state values people practicing OD should have, but does connote depending on a few, including respect, curiosity, compassionate yet impartial observation, equality (if not democracy) among participants when consulting, and sets of inferences that serve as guides, e.g.: Never make an intervention in a group that harms an individual, and never make a intervention on behalf of an individual than harms the group.

Nick Wright

14/7/2012 10:10:33 pm

Hi Arthur and thanks for the note. It sounds like you have had positive connections with a number of OD gurus! I like your list of values because I believe they influence intention, quality of contact and outcomes as much as process.

Could you say something more about what you see as the difference between OD and management consulting? I tend to see difference in their respective approaches as: OD is done with an organisation; management consulting is done for an organisation.

With best wishes. Nick

Arthur Lerner

17/7/2012 03:23:46 pm

The briefest explanation is to reiterate what Warner Burke said about process being at the core of OD. By this, btw, he meant, I think, sort of the array of human intra- and interpersonal processes, and those that evolve third order into group processes, as distinct from manufacturing, or hiring, or other formally articulated and managed processes in organizations.

Management consulting (this not to say all management consultants) never deal with such issues until MacGregor wrote the Human Enterprise, giving rise - among other things - to the whole field of Management Development. Given the variety of practice in both management and OD consulting there is no fine line boundary, but in the main I think that management consulting deals with/focuses more on the invented processes and methods for running businesses more effectively and profitably. Within that is the critical, but often overlooked, distinction that - even when talking about process - management is focused on content issues, including specific recommendations about the right way to do something, and providing mental "tools" to do that. OD is not focused on those things, and most good OD consultants I know steer clear of offering business or management plan advice about which path to take, what to cut, what to invest in, etc., at least with their OD hat on. (Many of us have developed strong relationships with clients over time where things "click" on many levels, sometimes including strong trust and mutual recognition of what we know that is not OD. In a few rare instances with such people (who have become friends as much as clients) I may offer "off line" if asked specific advice about what to do in terms of dealing with specific employees, making a next career move, shifting focus on certain business issues. I also do so when the other person is clear about the separation, and that I am not in any way acting as a consultant, OD or otherwise.)

At first I disagreed with what you said about OD working with an organization and management consulting for an organization. I now take your observation with deeper an more complex (what I hope is) understanding. At one level, I think OD consultants are working for an organization as much as management consultants, but the focus is more on how members of the organization work WITH EACH OTHER. To do so effectively, of course, requires a different set of skills and ways of being with the organization members. To that extent I think people often experience me working with them (but, Lord knows, I've others in the same organization think I'm working against them). To the extent I don't know people who will be affected by an intervention (often thousands) I am working collaboratively with others FOR (what they state are) the interests of the organization as a whole. Corporations often send me checks for services, but I've always been retained by, and built working relationships with, people.

I'd also add something I learned from Tony Putman, who wrote "Ally Relationships.' There are those who become more than consultants, or providers, or preferred providers to their clients. I have done it modestly in a few cases as indicated above. That is when they see me as not only competent and knowledgeable about my profession, but as having earned a degree of trust as well as a respect for how I think in general that they ask me to help them with significant issues, and value me precisely because I am bringing more than my professional skills and persona to bear with them. In such cases they literally and fully consider me to be on their side as regards the issues at hand. There are others who are masters at this, some are even management consultants. Some, as "The Presidents Club" indicates are former combatants for the same high office.

Terrence Seamon

14/7/2012 10:16:07 pm

Start small, think big (http://learningvoyager.blogspot.com/2008/06/start-small-think-big.html)

Think global, act local

When planning to change things, find out what is working well already

Remember that all solutions generate new problems

Get the whole system in the room

The wisdom is in the people (http://learningvoyager.blogspot.com/2008/11/visioning-with-shared-wisdom.html)

People support what they help to create

Do a Force Field analysis

Use the Start Stop Continue method

Read Herb Shephard's Rules of Thumb for Change Agents (at Nick Heap's website http://nickheap.co.uk/articles.asp?ART_ID=268)

Nick Wright

14/7/2012 10:23:13 pm

Thanks Terrence. I liked your list of principles and reminders. Your comment, 'remember that all solutions generate new problems' came up in conversation with a colleague last week as I was explaining an OD perspective on an issue she was facing.

It reminded me of some brief reflections I once wrote up for a leadership journal that you may find interesting: http://www.nick-wright.com/blue-rabbits.html. Let me know what you think? With best wishes. Nick

Terrence Seamon

15/7/2012 07:44:53 am

Great blog, Nick. Really good stuff. I not only enjoyed the blue rabbits, but your latest entries have given me some excellent ideas for my own coaching and facilitating work.

David Hurst

14/7/2012 10:37:38 pm

How does it help to bear maxims or principles in mind when approaching organizational issues?

Herbert Simon was hugely critical of maxims and principles, arguing that for every maxim there was another maxim with the opposite implication: "he who hesitates is lost" is countermanded by "look before you leap", and so on.

The problem is that principles imply that organizational issues are independent of context and that just isn't true. It's a hangover from the days when it was believed that the social sciences should emulate the natural sciences.

It confuses fuzzy natural categories with precise formal categories. So I can multiple the length and breadth of a rectangle to get its area (apply the principles of measurement and multiplication) because "rectangle" is a precise formal category and measurement abstracts from all its other qualities - texture, color etc. "Organization" is a fuzzy, natural category with no clean edges; for almost every principle there will be numerous exceptions.

Many principles are merely desirable outcomes e.g. "Set clear objectives" "align organization with strategy" all very true but not very helpful. Each is the outcome of a successful process and the successful process will vary from circumstance to circumstance.

See my blog:"Management Without Principles" at

http://www.davidkhurst.com/management-without-principles/

Nick Wright

14/7/2012 10:59:23 pm

Hi David and thanks for such a stimulating challenge to the whole notion of maxims and principles. :) I read your comments and blog with interest.

I certainly empathise with your objection to applying what can feel like inappropiate and pseudo-scientific principles to management and organisations. It can feel simplistic and mechanistic and fails to take into account the fluid dynamic complexity of organisations as human systems/phenomena.

At the same time, I find it difficult if not impossible to imagine working with organisations in an OD capacity without any theory of change, no matter how implicit or explicit, intuitive or well defined, that guides my thinking and practice. In your note and blog, a number of your own principles or maxims emerge, e.g:

*Organisational issues are dependent on context
*Organisation is a fuzzy natural phenomenon with no clean edges
*Successful outcomes are a result of successful processes
*Successful processes take situational specifics into account
*Practices can be developed only through perfect practice
*Everyone has to find their own ‘swing’
*People create meaning by questions and stories

Perhaps there's a difference here in what we mean by principles and maxims and how we might apply them to practice. My own view is that is is helpful to be aware of the underlying beliefs and perspectives we hold as we work with organisations. These can be summarised into principles or maxims as a kind of shorthand/aide memoire, without applying them simplistically as 'universal solutions' to every issue or situation.

You may be intersted to have a glance at this previous blog which speaks to similar issues to those you raise here: http://www.nick-wright.com/1/post/2011/02/qualities-of-leadership.html. I would be very interested to hear what you think. With thanks again for raising this challenge and for sharing your blog on this topic too. Nick

David Hurst

15/7/2012 07:48:50 am

I liked your leadership blog and think that we are on similar tracks on the importance of context and the role of principles and maxims in OD. I certainly share your concern about abstract leadership competencies.

This discussion on principles can get complex very quickly. I am reminded of the quote from U.S. Senator Everett Dirksen: "I am a man of fixed and unbending principles, the first of which is to be flexible at all times."

This takes us into the Cretan liar paradox and other problems of logical type - Is it a principle if I say "There are no principles, including this one"?

For me the most important feature for practitioners is firstly to be aware of the abstraction process that allows us to create a map (mental model) from a territory (our experience). Then, secondly, to be aware of what is involved in using that map ("principles") to navigate in new territory (organizational issues). Yes, we all need mental models but HOW we use them is absolutely critical. Going up the ladder of abstraction is quite easy, extracting principles from the observation of organizations. Going down the ladder to "apply" those principles to new situations is hugely problematic in the social sciences because of the fuzziness of the categories that resist clear definitions.

Too many management books seem to be obsessed with the WHAT - 10 rules for this, 7 habits for that and so on. The assumption seems to be that it is just as easy to go down the ladder of abstraction as it is to go up. As a result the whole process gets far to formulaic and one ends up with management by mantra. In the worst cases, it entrenches the current power structure in organizations, making it difficult to look at the world naively with as few preconceptions as possible.

That's difficult at the best of times because we don't see the world the way it is, we see what we expect to see i.e. we use "principles" derived from our experience and our evolutionary heritage to frame the world. It would be impossible to function if we had to reparse reality from scratch every time. On a day-to-day basis this approach works just fine. It breaks down when we face truly novel issues or problems like global warming, where significant change it taking place but slowly and with erratic readings and trends complicated by other factors.

Maybe the ruling principle for dealing with principles should be doubt...

Sylvia Lee

15/7/2012 03:08:18 pm

Perhaps there are two sets of principles. The ones that form the basis for your own thinking and approach to OD, and the ones that form the basis for how you interact with your clients and colleagues around OD issues.

In terms of the latter, one of my principles is 'don't assume you have the answers' and another is related, 'the answers are inside the organization (or team or whatever) and my job is to help people find them'.

I see OD as being rather like a combination of corporate archaeology and anthropology. The archaeology is about digging through the layers, finding the context in which certain things happened, analyzing things in terms of THAT context, not in terms of how things are today, relating them to how things are to day, and starting to undertand the history and culture. This leads to the anthropology side - understanding the culture and context from a people perspective.

I don't think it's possible to have effective OD actions on a purely go-forward basis - one has to understand context, history, culture, etc.

Nick Wright

16/7/2012 04:19:45 am

Thanks for the note, Sylvia. I found your analogy of archaeology and anthropology intriguing. On reflection, I wonder whether one necessarily leads to the other or whether the two go hand in hand, like pedals on a bicycle (for which I guess 'foot and foot' would be a better expression!)?

In other words, beliefs about people and values around culture etc. influence how and the degree to which we and others may involve others in the process of 'digging', understanding and making sense of their own experience as well as creating and engaging in the way forward. With best wishes. Nick

Sylvia Lee

16/7/2012 04:58:30 am

Well that makes sense (as long as those feet stay away from mouths!) I hadn't actually meant they were sequential, it was just my thought process. And having done a little bit of archeology, I know how much patience it requires but also how absorbing it is. I was just doing some work on a doctoral paper about diversity, and writing of the need to understand others, and I like your thought about making sense of our own experience as well as understanding others.

Joe Rafferty

16/7/2012 03:38:35 am

Peter Senge has all of the ingeredients with sytems thinking at the heart. The Fifth Discipline should be should be core text for all MBAs. For me it encapsultes what OD is all about, whilst still leaving room for development.

However my favourite quote is from Lee Iaoccocca..." Start with good people, lay out the rules, communicate with your employees, motivate them and reward them. If you do all those things effectively, you can't miss."

This clarity of thought is what stabilises the enthralling flights of fancy which an OD practitioner is apt to indulge in.

The difference between OD and management consulting is creativity, fluidity and adaptability versus formula and prescrition. Guess which is which?

Nick Wright

16/7/2012 04:51:03 am

Hi Joe and thanks for the note. I remember reading and feeling inspired by Peter Senge's Fifth Discipline too, especially his emphasis on systems thinking. Did you also read Flood's Rethinking the Fifth Discipline - Learning within the Unknowable (1999)? Interesting stuff. Your final comment on the difference between OD and management consulting made me smile. :) With best wishes. Nick

Paul Heaton

16/7/2012 08:29:00 am

Management consulting is paying someone outside the organisation to tell you what you know already but sometimes wish you didn't. OD is doing actually something about it!

In answer to the question I rate Peter Drucker as a first class thinker on OD issues. Using a social ecologist perspective I like his link with developing organisations not just to help the sustainability of the organisation, but the sustainability of the world in which it operates. Much refered to as social or corporate responsibility nowadays. It is in my view just as much a part of OD as developing the organanisational processes and competencies necessary to implement the organisations strategy. Is it important? well look at banks, oil companies and supermarkets! OD can occur in a moral vacuum or be linked to important ethical principles. Drucker empahises the key role of organisational culture on OD issues. My favourite quote is "culture eats stratagies for breakfast" In the Bank's case it also has had the government for lunch and the economy for dinner.

Nick Wright

30/10/2012 07:44:18 am

Thanks Paul. I enjoyed your colourful imagery. :) I agree entirely with your view that, since there is a relationship between organisations and their wider environments, OD does well to consider the organisation's contribution and impact in the wider world. This adds a valuable and important ethical dimension to OD and I appreciate you raising it. With best wishes. Nick

Kelyn Lanier

16/7/2012 08:29:59 am

As a newcomer to the field, I found this discussion very enlightening. I tend to look at things through a systems and cultural approach (my lens). From my limited experience I can say that my guiding principles are:

within every organization there are multiple realities, and for each individual theirs is usually the right one.

from Terrence: 'remember that all solutions generate new problems'

everything on its own terms

Never assume you have the answers

When in doubt, think "simplicity"

Your job is not to force others to see exactly what/how you see but to help them see what is possible.

Sylvia, I like the analogy of corporate archaeology and anthropology. I think it's an accurate picture of one of the proper ways to approach the job.

Nick Wright

30/10/2012 07:50:08 am

Hi Kelyn. Thanks for sharing your principles. I particularly liked your emphasis on multiple realities and simplicity, although these principles can sometimes conflict. With best wishes. Nick

Terrence Seamon

30/10/2012 08:11:18 am

Kelyn, I like your guiding principles, especially the ones about simplicity, never assuming you have the answers, and seeing what is possible.

You might enjoy my blog post that this thread of Nick's inspired:

http://learningvoyager.blogspot.com/2012/07/principles-for-change-agents-part-1.html

I'll be writing Part 2 soon and I think you will enjoy it too.

Jez Ashdown MSc

30/10/2012 08:05:30 am

Many years ago while studying in Durham I did some work on Soft Systems Analysis. The one phrase the tutor used most during the sessions and which has stuck with me is 'Whats the what that this is the how of'. I don't know where he got it from (possibly Checkland) but I like to throw it into discussions now and again the get the brain juices flowing.

Nick Wright

30/10/2012 08:06:48 am

Hi Jez and thanks for the note. 'What's the what that this is the how of'. What a great question! With best wishes. Nick

Roger Long

30/10/2012 08:28:14 am

@David, I actually used your guiding principle while making a point two weeks ago, "The successful process will vary from circumstance to circumstance."

I would like to add to the growing list - "What isn't said or done also sends a message."

David Hurst

30/10/2012 08:28:49 am

@Roger

Pleased to hear that! My definition of context (borrowed from historian, John Lewis Gaddis) is "The dependency of sufficient causes upon necessary causes"

John-Miles Black EdD

30/10/2012 08:31:56 am

The best guiding principles for an organization come from the behaviour exhibited and reinforced by the leaders. The second comes from the behaviour of the change consultant/manager. These vary based on the company culture and are variably supportive or destructive. Our tools care only enablers, if the right messages come down.

Nick Wright

30/10/2012 08:33:28 am

Hi John-Miles. Sounds like you are emphasising the importance of role modelling by leaders and consultants. With best wishes. Nick

Kevin Line

30/10/2012 08:34:47 am

It is often easier to get forgiveness than permission . . . so just get on with it.

Change will take longer than you think

Looking back you tend to regret the things you didn't do, not the things you did

. . . and sometimes a sleeping dragon needs a good tickle

Nick Wright

30/10/2012 08:35:48 am

Hi Kevin. Some great principles...and especially loved the 'dragon' one. :) With best wishes. Nick