Article Review: Organizational Development and Change By Claude Faucheux, Gilles Amado & Andre Laurent

Article Review: Organizational Development and Change By Claude Faucheux, Gilles Amado & Andre Laurent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The authors of this review, Claude Faucheux, Gilles Amado and Andre Laurent discuss and compare organizational development (OD) and quality of working life (QWL). Later on they extend the discussion to the cultural foundations of OD and QWL. Last but not least, they look at a variety of developments specific to the Latin countries before attempting to broaden the perspective.
The authors cite the work of Friedlander & Brown (1974) to show how the sociotechnical approaches have been somewhat foreign to OD practice though they were nonetheless perceived as working toward similar goals. They also cite Kahn (1974) who welcomed the job design, the division of labor as a facet that will not only strengthen the practice of OD but it will also bring research. According to them, this occurrence will only bring about the long-awaited convergence. They cite Burke (1977) to reinforce their doubts as to whether QWL is the same as organizational development (OD).
Grappling with what the role of OD is going to be, the authors refer to Burke (1980a) who sees that the emerging role of the OD consultant will be to either fine tune and tinker with the system, or quit the system altogether, or attempt to fundamentally change the system itself. They reiterate the suggestion by Burke that OD consultants should also attempt to change bureaucracies in some fundamental ways.
The authors believe that collaboration between British and Scandinavian researchers led to the development of the Quality of Work Life (QWL) movement. They see that although their work was closely linked to action research or even a version of action research in reality it is more concerned with the democratization of the workplace.
Looking at planned change in the Anglo-Saxon countries, the authors single out Lewin’s conceptualization of ecological psychology as an early recognition of the open system nature of persons and groups within the social field. They cite (Katz & Kahn 1978) to argue that this formulation was attractive to the researchers of the Tavistock Institute who had gone a long way in this direction, whereas that same orientation in the US was retained by only a few. According to the authors, the Tavistock approach was not only deeper with its psychoanalytic framework, was also broader in the sense that they preserved a sociological and anthropological interest which made them sensitive to the cultural contexts in which groups and organizations found themselves. Still on this same issue, the authors are categorical in pointing out that the US government was very influential in the development of a concern for the QWL.
On the question of research on OD, the authors point at useful considerations about research methodology, stressing the distinction between implementation research and theory building research. They laud the concrete recommendations provided by an empirical study of OD in a large system (Porras & Wilkins 1980), yielding unexpected findings contradictory to the generally accepted OD theory and practice.
Moving on to the question of research on QWL, the authors note the fact that while research on OD seems to be largely critical, research on QWL projects seems to be gathering momentum (Taylor 1977, 1978). They explain that even though some sobering observations have been made by Walton (1977) at Topeka, a positive and pragmatic overall view of the work improvements over the last 10 years has been observed (Walton 1979).
On the issue of culture, the authors are of the opinion that different approaches to organizational change seem to have emerged in different cultural contexts but they should not come as a surprise since the very same cultural blindness, ethnocentrism, and claim for universality that has plagued the field of management and organization theory (Hofstede 1980) may have plagued also the field of planned organizational change.
On the question of organizational change in Latin American countries, the authors found power to be the key factor around which all major research work revolves. This fact led to the questioning of the very fundamental assumptions of OD. These include its cultural origin, presuppositions about development, organization, adaptation and change, its epistemological basis consequently, but also its methods and aims.
On the vital question of psychological intervention, the authors see that in opposition to American functionalism, to its trust in the self-regulating exchanges of a liberal economy and to its humanistic psychology, the gap had been widening and several basic assumptions of OD were exposed and seriously questioned, if not entirely rejected (Dubost & Levy, in Mendel & Beillerot 1980). The authors also proceed and say that in the institutional approach, the institution is put “in negation” according to the expression of Basaglia (1967). The institution then invades the universe of pedagogy and is espoused by pyschosociologists critical of the school of Human Relations. They also see that the goal of sociopsychoanalysis is not far from that of institutional analysis but borrows a somewhat different methodology and theory which may explain its greater success. They proceed to explain that psychoanalysis has considerably influenced research about organizations within Latin countries, France and Italy above all. In addition to this, they believe that in the US, the psychoanalytic approach is predominantly normative. On the other hand, they observe that in England, the influence of psychoanalysts from psychiatric nosography has helped researchers of the Tavistock Institute to look at the organization differently. Instead of considering it merely as a setting for self-actualization, they deal with it as a defense structure against archaic anxieties.
The authors are very pointed when it comes to design in which organizational change happens in Latin America. They stress that organization is not the primary place for social change as it is for instance in the US and also to some extent in Northern Europe. They explain that Latin social scientists favor the institutional dimension because it is there that society pervades organizations. Consequently, change is more likely to be looked for at the societal level.
In concluding, the authors assert that the innovativeness of Japanese organizations has to be understood at least as much in the context of Japanese society as in the context of industrial technology. They see Japan as the only non-Western industrialized nation that is able to compete successfully in the liberal economy game. One explanation for this occurrence is the fact that American experts have adequately transmitted statistical techniques of quality control to Japan. The authors also admit that the field of planned change, which has been commensurate with OD in the US for nearly 20 years, is now undergoing a very significant transformation. Thus is may not be an exaggeration to see in the societal system approach a new paradigm, and in QWL a significant social movement. They stress that more research of a new kind is needed before a more substantial knowledge about social change becomes available.
Central terms and their authors:
Quality of Working Life: A term that had been used to describe the broader job-related experience an individual has. Hackman and Oldham (1976)(5) brought attention to what they referred to as psychological growth needs as relevant to the consideration of Quality of working life. A number of such needs were identified; Skill variety, Task Identity, Task significance, Autonomy and Feedback. In their view, such needs have to be addressed if employees are to experience high quality of working life. On the other hand, Taylor (1979)(6) more logically identified the essential workings of Quality of working life as; basic extrinsic job factors of wages, hours and working conditions, and the intrinsic job notions of the nature of the work itself. He suggested that a number of other aspects could be added, including; individual power, employee participation in the management, fairness and equity, social support, use of one’s present skills, self development, a meaningful future at work, social relevance of the work or product, effect on extra work activities. Taylor suggested that applicable Quality of working life concepts may vary according to organization and employee group.
Socio-technical systems: Is an approach to multifaceted organizational work design that recognizes the interface between people and technology in workplaces. The term also refers to the relations between society's complex infrastructures and human behavior. In this sense, society itself, and most of its substructures, are complex sociotechnical systems. The term sociotechnical systems were coined in the 1960s by Eric Trist and Fred Emery, who were working as consultants at the Tavistock Institute in London.
Parsimonious: Parsimony is the use of the simplest or most frugal route of explanation available. The word derives from Middle English parcimony, from Latin parsimonia, from parsus, past participle of parcere: to spare. It is a general principle that has applications from science to philosophy and all related fields. (Wikipedia).
Single-loop type organizational change: Distinguished between single-loop and double-loop learning, related to Gregory Bateson’s concepts of first and second order learning- Wikipedia

GEMA ABROAD LAUNCHED!

500 Kenyans from GEMA community in the UK met on Wednesday 23rd January, 2008 in London and agreed in one voice: "WE ARE IN A SERIOUS SITUATION". The members expressed their concerns that the GEMA community in Kenya is being persecuted and the persecutors are getting away with these evil acts. "We are officially expressing our concern that members of our community are being targeted for genocide. Were also very sad as one of our brother here lost five members of his family in the last one week." one member stated. "It is mostly GEMA people who have been targeted and now we are launching "GEMA ABROAD".
They posed a big question to President Mwai Kibaki and they asked the media to communicate to the president: "WHAT ARE YOU DOING WHEN OUR PEOPLE ARE BEING SLAUGHTERED LIKE CHICKEN." "We were beaten during Moi era and now we are beaten during Kibaki's era. Our patience is over now and we are getting impatient." the group explained. "It is our property being destroyed, its our men, women and children who are being killed - our hearts are crying while abroad. We cannot hold any longer and we have to help our people back home." the group agreed. "How can one say there will be peace when Raila Odinga has explained loud and clear that Kisii community should not be killed but did not condemn the killing of other communities. What is the Kenyan government doing about this statement." the group asked.

They agreed that all GEMA community in the UK and Ireland will count themselves and everyone will have to have a number. Every man or woman over the age of 18 years will register with at least £50 and above. A committee of 12 people were nominated to be the interim committee with an additional 10 members from other UK cities with one member from Oxford, Northampton, Reading, Bristol, Nottingham, Scotland, Manchester, Coventry and Luton to make a total of 22 members. Everyone on meeting registered themselves and they were all given membership number and the will start executing their work immediately. They agreed to involve GEMA communities in USA and in other parts of the world so that we can help our community whom has become the target of the recent mass killings. Everyone should register as a member immediately because back home people are in a serious problem. The UK committee is co-ordinating with the Kenyan committee to see that the funds will not be misused. The group explained that if you don't join and register at this crucial time you are of no use to the community. The membership is to help monitor the progress of the registration and to know who is who. To register you need to text or ring the following number where you will be advised what to do. When you text you will be texted back your membership number. You will use your membership as a reference when paying for your membership. The number is 07518891930. GEMA ABROAD is registered as a community organisation in the UK.

Everyone entering the meeting had to communicate with the community language before being allowed into the meeting. The meeting became emotional when one of the members in the meeting from Molo area phone home and he put his mobile on loud speaker and you could hear the crying man back home explaining that large part of Molo was on flames. He explained that Mau Summit town has been burnt. Several members called their home area at the meeting and hundreds of houses has been burnt at Mau Summit, Molo, Njoro, Elburgon, Kipkerion, Londiani and Tomboroa which have become no gone zone, as have Subukia, Narok, Nyahururu and Eldoret. As the meeting went on a member was called from Kenya by his brotherand was told that a school in a place called Karandi in Molo is on fire. The group went wild when one member suggested that "ODM groups in Kenya are paying KShs. 200 for every GEMA member killed in the field". It was revealed at the meeting that this is the beginning of a series of meetings till peace prevails in Kenya. Most members hold the view that the atrocities commited were pre-arranged for a long time behind the scene.

A big demonstration in support of the President Kibaki and protesting against the Western Media has been arranged on Saturday 2nd February 2008. People who are expected in large numbers will be assembling outside Kenya Embassy, 45 Portland Place, W1B 1AS at 10.00 a.m. where the procession will proceed to 10 Down Street - the Prime Minister's house to present their memorandum in support of Kibaki and explaining that we cannot allow some selfish people to destroy our country Kenya.

Another urgent meeting was arranged for Saturday 26th January, 2008 in London at Memorial Baptist Hall, 395 Barking Road, London E13 opposite Plaistow Police Station as from 5.00 p.m. Those who will not be available on Saturday can join a similar meeting at 185 Hermon Hill Road, London E18 1QQ on Sunday 27th January, 2008 as from 6.00 p.m. For information you can contact 07931106692
Source: http://sylkwan.blogspot.com/2008/01/serious-hatred.html#links

Comments from KDPM:
Many people have been emailig us asking how they can join KDPM. It is very easy. Just write to: The Secretary- KDPM:Email: kdpm2000@gmail.com
KDPM is taking every precaution so as not to involve itself in any activity that will jeorpardise the peace initiatives being undertaken in Kenya. However, we also want to be pro-active by pre-empting potential catastrophies and assisting the needy in their hour of need. Thus if anyone is interested in touching the lives of Kenyans in any way or another, please get in touch with us and we will give you details of how you can do this.

Thanks,
S. Rogers
Secretary-KPDM