Page 84 - Managing Change in Organizations

CarnCh04v3.qxd 3/30/07 4:16 PM Page 67

The ‘clinical’ approach
the last twenty years? Like it or not organizations around the world are chang-
ing. So how is it that most changes fail? More of that later. For the moment we
summarize the four approaches.

The ‘clinical’ approach

Here the engagement of individuals and teams is seen as central to success or fail-
ure. Within this form of analysis themes such as resistance to change, team effec-
tiveness and dynamics as effected by changing circumstances and the leadership
dynamics of change are each important. The concept of a ‘psychological contract’
between employer and employee and the attitudes of those involved in change are
also central. Some authors associate these approaches described under the rubric
of ‘organizational development’ with planned change. Thus Burnes (2004) con-
cludes that the planned approach to change is closely associated with the practice
of organizational development (OD). He quotes what is perhaps the most widely
known text in the area in his favour. French and Bell (1995) state that:
Organization development is a unique organizational improvement strategy
that emerged in the late 1950s and early 1960s . . . evolved into an integrated
framework of theories and practices capable of solving or helping to solve
most of the important problems confronting the human side of organizations.
OD is about planned change, that is getting individuals, teams and organiza-
tions to function better.
They go on to argue that OD is based on ‘valid knowledge’ about organizational
dynamics and how to change them. For French and Bell valid knowledge derives
from the behavioural sciences such as psychology, social psychology, sociology,
anthropology, systems theory and the practice of management. To say that OD
and planned change are synonymous is to overstate the position however. Perhaps
the best longitudinal study of OD in practice in a single organization is Pettigrew’s
study (1985) of strategic change in ICI the large British chemicals conglomerate,
since it was demerged. Here various OD initiatives are described, some in pursuit
of specific change programmes and objectives but some intended to enhance

capacity and capability for the longer term. Clearly both such seek change but in
reality the former are planned changes, the latter emergent change.
What is clear is that organizational development seeks to create a credible basis
for intervening in the management of organizations, whether in pursuit of a spe-
cific planned change or in order to build capability in the organization. It seeks to
do so on the basis of valid knowledge. This knowledge primarily relates to people
and how they behave, perceive, feel and react to the organizational setting. Often
the interventions are undertaken within a process known as ‘action research’. OD
specialists, sometimes depicted as change agents, lead these interventions. Change
agents are assumed to be committed to the purpose of enhancing organizational
effectiveness but this is not clear-cut. Within the OD philosophy, as most adherents
describe it, organizations are considered to exist to meet human need. But whose
needs and in what sort of balance is the question. OD practitioners in the 1960s
and 1970s often assumed that their purpose incorporated a tendency towards the

67