fal yer20a15 r21y2vo - amber mayesambermayes.com/wp-content/uploads/odpractitioner-vol47no4.pdf ·...

Fall Year 2015 V

ol. 47 No. 4

Fall Year 2015 Volume 47 No. 4

Women’s Voices in OD 4. FromtheEditor

women’s voices in od 5. Women’sVoices:Follow-upStudyontheSecondGenerationofWomeninOD

KathrynKaplan

responses

16. ContinueAddressingtheChallengesNancySouthern

18. NavigatingOppressionAmberMayes

20. ReflectionsandRevelations:SisterhoodisPowerfulCathyRoyal

22. ReflectiononaCareerinInternationalODbyan“Elder”WomanAnnieViets

24. NavigatingthenotsoFriendlyLandscapewithGraceandSavvinessMee-YanCheung-Judge

26. MyLifeinOD:“TheLongandWindingRoad”LynneValek

28. EnduringCommitmentJudyVogel

30. ReflectionsofaGenerationXerTonyaHampton

32. Case Study:TheManleyCorporationsThereseF.YaegerandPeterF.Sorensen

36. ODisDiversity:DifferencesareattheHeartoftheFieldRobertD.GreeneandHeatherBerthoud

42. DesignThinking:AViewThroughtheLensofPracticeLisaM.Meyer

48. ManagerInfluenceonMulti-partyCollaborativeChangeInitiativesRonMilamandAnnFeyerherm

54. Book Review:The Psychology of Work: Insights into Successful Working Practices byChantalGautierReviewedbyMarjorieDerven

Journal of the Organization Development Network

Published quarterlyCopyright 2015Organization Development Network, Inc.ISSN #0256112312

Editor-In-ChiefJohn D. Vogelsang, PhD

ProofreadersLoni Davis, PhDJillian J. Gonzales

Editorial Review Board

John Adams, PhDEmeritus Professor, Saybrook University Organizational Systems PhD ProgramSan Francisco, CA

Philip T. Anderson, PhDBKD Consulting, Grayslake, IL

Marilyn E. Blair, PhDPrincipal, TeamWork Consulting, Denver, CO

Michael Brazzel, PhDExternal Consultant, Columbia, MD

Gordon Brooks, MSODIndependent Consultant

Gervase Bushe, PhDBeedie School of Business, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Steven H. Cady, PhDGraduate Faculty Member, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio

Mee-Yan Cheung-Judge, PhDVisiting Fellow, Roffey Park Managment Institute; Dean, NTL/Q&E OD certificate program

Allan H. Church, PhDPepsiCo, Inc., Pound Ridge, NY

David Coghlan, PhDSchool of Business Studies, University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

John Conbere, MDiv, EdDPresident, SEAM, Inc.; Director, SEAM Institute Minneapolis, MN

Marjorie DervenManaging Partner with Hudson Research & Consulting

Anne Gardon, MSWPrincipal, Strategies for Change Now, Poughkeepsie, NY

Tim Goodly, PhDHR Executive, Vinings, GA

Claire Halverson, PhDProfessor Emeritus, Master’s Program in Service, Leadership, and Management, SIT Graduate Institute, Brattleboro, VT

Tonya Hampton, EdDSenior Director D&I and EngagementHealthPartners, Minneapolis, MN

George W. Hay, PhDAssociate Professor, Business Psychology DepartmentThe Chicago School of Professional Psychology Chicago, IL

Alla Heorhiadi, PhD, EdDVice President, SEAM, Inc.; Director, SEAM InstituteMinneapolis, MN

David W. Jamieson, PhDAssociate Professor and Department Chair, Organization Learning and Development, University of St. Thomas, Minneapolis, MN

Judith Katz, EdDKaleel Jamison Consulting Group, Troy, NY

Anne Litwin, PhDAnne Litwin & Associates, Jamaica Plain, MA

Maurice L. Monette, EdDThe Vallarta Institute, Oakland, CA and Puerto Vallarta, Mexico

Cathy Royal, PhD Senior Consultant, Royal Consulting Group, LLC Riverdale, MD

Peter Sorensen, Jr., PhDDirector, PhD Program Benedictine University, Lisle, IL

Nancy L. Southern, EdDChair, PhD Organizational Systems ProgramSaybrook Graduate School, San Francisco, CA

Dalitso Sulamoyo, PhDPresident/CEO of the Illinois Association of Community Action Agencies, Springfield, IL

Ross Tartell, PhDIndependent Consultant, Wilton, CT

Maya Townsend, MSODLead Consultant, Partnering Resources,Cambridge, MA

Peter B. Vaill, DBAProfessor of Management,Antioch University, Yellow Springs, OH

Lynne E. Valek, PhDAdjunct Faculty, Alliant International UniversityFresno, CA

Annie Viets, EdDAssociate Professor of Management, Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University,Khobar, Saudi Arabia

Judy Vogel, MLAVogel/Glaser & Associates, Inc., Columbia, MD

Don D. Warrick, DBAProfessor, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, CO

Henry E. Williams, PhDAssistant Professor, Organizational LeadershipPurdue University North CentralWestville, IN

Therese Yaeger, PhD PhD and MSMOB-OD Programs Benedictine University, Lisle, IL

Design Whitehouse & Company, New York, NY

ProductionFrank Brayton, San Francisco, CA

OD Practitioner

Organization Development NetworkBoard of TrusteesMatt Minahan, EdD, ChairSherry Duda, Vice ChairMagdy Mansour, TreasurerYasmeen Burns, SecretaryChristina BellJaya BohlmannMarco CassoneLoretta HobbsNorm Jones, PhDMartha KeslerKris LeaZoe MacLeod

Executive Director

Gail McCauley

Director of Operations

Janet Huynh

For information regarding advertising opportunities in the OD Practitioner, please e-mail Andrew Werfelmann at [email protected]

Organization Development Network

2025 M Street NWSuite 800Washington, DC 20036

T: 202.367.1127F: 202-367-2127

E: [email protected]

www.odnetwork.org

OD Practitioner is now available to academic and corporate libraries by special subscription. We invite you to include this publication in your library resources.

Library Subscriptions USA Canada* All Other*University Non-profit $150 $160 $180CorporateFor-profit $200 $225 $255

Individual Subscriptions $90

* All prices in US funds.

Membership in the OD Network

• Individual Membership: $225

• Persons over 65: $115

• Full-time students in a degree program (employed half-time or less): $115

Please direct all inquiries to:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


www.odnetwork.org



Special Issue of OD Practitioner Summer 2016

The Global Practice of ODCall for Articles

The professional and skillful practice of OD has never been more needed than now. The world is churning with clashing narratives, accelerated change, paradigm-breaking technological development, and unprecedented access to communication, enabling the voiceless to mobilize against oppression. OD as an approach offers mindsets and means to enable groups to bridge conflict, acknowledge differences, and not only address complex human problems, but support systems in implementing the means to address such problems in the future.

Yet practicing OD skillfully in our interconnected world has never been so challenging. As OD practitioners we need to be effective in supporting our client systems in situations where we cannot assume a common value system, language, or worldview. OD, as it is being practiced all over the world, has been evolving as global practitioners adapt the values and methodologies of OD to be effective in different cultural contexts (Fagenson-Eland, Ensher, & Burke, 2004; Jaeger, 1986; Litwin, 2007, 2014; Marshak, 1993; Vonk, 2014; Zaldivar, 2008, 2010).

If we acknowledge the need to navigate worldviews and different value systems, we also must acknowledge that this navigation requires greater awareness, agility, and a deepened ability to stay grounded. We need to be aware of our own cultural context as well as the power dynamics at play around our identity and that of our client system. We need to be agile in the face of the unknown in an increasingly fast changing environment. And we need to acknowledge privilege and

oppression in the histories of our own countries and that of our client countries, which will in turn affect the nature of our dialogue.

We invite articles that shed light on and share best practices about what global OD practitioners have learned about any of the following questions: » What have been your most

important learnings and challenges as you have worked in a cultural context different from yours?

» In what ways has working as a global OD practitioner impacted your practice? Your skills? Your ability to navigate across cultures?

» How do you as a global OD practitioner ensure that interventions you utilize are culturally appropriate? What adjustments have you made for cultural fit?

» What are some examples of local OD practices you have encountered in your global OD work that you have adopted to enrich your own techniques?

» As a global OD practitioner, do you find cultural frameworks useful in cross- cultural settings? If so, what frameworks have you found useful and how have they influenced your work?

» How do you balance your own values when dealing with a culture with different values?

» How do you recognize when your own values blind you to the client situation?

» How do you make space for worldviews that are uncomfortable for you?

1TheGlobalPracticeofOD:CallforArticles

» How do you bear witness to pain, inequity, and histories of struggle?

» How do you deepen your skills and develop finesse at navigating cross-cultural situations?

» When working across cultures, what assumptions or perspectives do you hold as a guide for Leaders-Executives-Managers-Supervisors (LEMS) to view the world and engage in “human information processing” as they lead and manage change in themselves and their respective organizations?

Submission Deadline is April 11, 2016

Articles should be sent to the special issue editors, Suzanne Zaldivar ([email protected]), Anne Litwin ([email protected]), Dalitso Sulamoyo ([email protected]), Perla Riza-lina M. Tayko ([email protected]) and the Editor of the ODP, John Vogel-sang ([email protected]). Sub-missions should follow the Guidelines for Authors, which appear on page 55 of this issue of the ODP. The special issue editors will screen the articles and provide initial feedback. Final articles will be reviewed by two members of the ODP editorial board.

Special Issue Editors

Suzanne Zaldivar, MSOD, co-founder of Inspired-Inc, is an international organization development consultant who collaborates with clients around the world in managing change and creating effective and sustainable futures. She has coached hundreds of leaders and consulted to dozens of organizations in Asia, Africa, and the Americas. Zaldivar’s clients include Fortune 50 multinationals, NGOs, supranationals, as well as small companies and governments. She is also an adjunct professor with American University’s master’s program in OD and has taught at Trinity University in Washington, DC. She has published and taught about the theoretical and practical challenges and implications of practicing OD across cultures. She serves on the executive committee of the International OD Association. Zaldivar can be reached at [email protected].

Anne Litwin, PhD, has been a consultant to organizations and a coach to senior managers for more than 30 years in the USA and internationally. She has worked in China, Africa, Myanmar, Singapore, Malaysia, India, Mexico, Europe, and Canada. She has been the CEO of her family retail business and is past-Chair of the Board of Directors of NTL Institute. Her most recent book is New Rules for Women: Revolutionizing the Way Women Work Together. Litwin is also co-editor of the book, Managing in the Age of Change, and the author of numerous journal articles. She can be reached at [email protected].

Dalitso Sulamoyo, PhD, is the Presi-dent/CEO of the Illinois Association of Community Action Agencies, a mem-bership organization of 40 nonprofits and public entities that serve communi-ties and the economically challenged citizens of Illinois; and President & CEO of the Illinois Community Action Development Corporation, a statewide affordable housing development cor-poration, and the Illinois Community Action Fund. Sulamoyo is also a Senior Executive Scholar and distinguished vis-iting scholar at Benedictine University. He has been published in books and leading journals on the subject of global organization development, capacity building, and change management. He has presented both nationally and inter-nationally on his work of facilitating change within mission driven organiza-tions and the understanding of African culture within the context of organiza-tion development. Sulamoyo recently published Creating Opportunities for Change and Organization Development in Southern Africa. He can be reached at [email protected].

Perla Rizalina M. Tayko, PhD, is the OD Program and OD Institute Director of the Graduate School of Business, Assumption University of Thailand. She conceptualized and designed the underpinning frame/flow of the OD masters and doctoral programs/projects of ABAC.GSB.ODI with the collaborative support of the IODA (International Organization Development Association). This was a development initiative when she was the newly elected Vice-President of IODA. She has served as a consultant

OD PRACTITIONER Vol. 47 No. 4 20152

inspired-inc.com






inspired-inc.com



ABAC.GSB.ODI

ABAC.GSB.ODI

in various development projects of the World Health Organization in Malaysia; the Asian Development Bank in Pakistan, Uzbekistan, and Bangladesh; SEAMEO-VocTech in Brunei; and independent consulting projects in Indonesia, Myanmar, and Brunei. She has extrapolated and developed brain-based frame/flow “thinking through” processes, which she calls a “whole brain literacy” approach to “transformative learning and change” in organization development and transformation (ODT). Her three books on these processes are Whole Brain Literacy: Key to Holistic Education and Success in Today’s World (2010), On the Ball: Leveraging the Future You Want with WBL (2012), and Making It to Big Four: A Journey of a Decade (2014). She can be reached at [email protected].

References

Fagenson-Eland, E., Ensher, E. A., & Burke, W. W. (2004). Organization development and change interven-tions: A seven-nation comparison. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40(4), 432–464.

Hall, E. (1998). The power of hidden differences. In M. Bennett (Ed.), Basic concepts of intercultural communication (p. 59). Boston, MA: Intercultural Press.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation leadership and organization: Do American theories apply abroad? Organization Dynamics 9(1): 42–63.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Cultures con-sequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G.J. (2005). Cultures and organization: Software of the mind (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Jaeger, A. M. (1986). Organization development and national culture: Where’s the fit? Academy of Management Review, 11(1), 178–190.

Litwin A., (2007). OD: Dancing in the global context. OD Practitioner, 39(4), 11–15.

Litwin, A. (2014). Global OD practice: The legacy of colonialism and oppression. In B. B. Jones & M. Brazzel (Eds.), The NTL handbook of organization development and change: Principles, practices and perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 483–498). San Fran-cisco, CA: Wiley.

Marshak, R. (1993) Lewin meets Confucius: a re-view of the OD model of change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22(4), 393–415.

Vonk, A. (2014). Interactive OD interventions and the dimensions of Hofstede. Presented at the International OD Association/International OD Association of Japan Conference, Kyoto, Japan.

Zaldivar, S. (2008). International development through OD: My experience in Afghanistan. OD Practitioner, 40(1), 4–9.

Zaldivar, S. (2010). Change in Afghan-istan: Contrasting values and what is essential about OD. OD Journal, 28(2), 9–17.

3TheGlobalPracticeofOD:CallforArticles


This issue of the OD Practitioner begins

with an important research project about

the experiences of women working as

OD consultants. Eight women OD prac-

titioners respond to the research and tell

their own stories. Those responses are

followed by a case study on addressing the

gender gap in a manufacturing plant. The

remainder of this issue offers a revised

and updated article from 2007 on diver-

sity and OD, an article on design thinking,

research about the critical roles leaders

play in the overall effectiveness of multi-

stakeholder collaboratives, and a book

review of The Psychology of Work: Insights

into Successful Working Practices.

Kathryn Kaplan begins her article,

“Over twenty years ago I was searching

for some way to know what to expect

as a woman entering a new field. I was

transitioning at midcareer from occupa-

tional therapy (a healthcare field of mostly

women) to organization development.”

So began her journey of discovery and

eventual research that involved 32 women

who had succeeded as OD consultants.

Two decades later Kaplan has completed a

follow-up study to explore the participants’

personal and professional changes that

ensued since the first study, the challenges

they struggle with in practicing OD, their

contributions to the field, and the lessons

they pass on to younger women. Follow-

ing Kaplan’s article, Nancy Southern,

Amber Mayes, Cathy Royal, Annie Viets,

Mee-Yan Cheung-Judge, Lynne Valek, Judy Vogel, and Tonya Hampton respond to

the research and share some of their own

experiences as women in OD

Therese F. Yaeger and Peter F. Sorensen present a case study about a

manufacturing plant that has difficulty

retaining women employees. Jaya Koilpillai Bohlmann (a communication and OD

consultant), Meghan Wright (Visiting

Assistant Professor of Management at

Texas Wesleyan University in Fort Worth),

and Reyna Herbison (a business consul-

tant) respond to questions posed by Yaeger

and Sorensen:

1. What change communication strategies

will create the most successful outcome

for all?

2. How has Quality of Work Life Balance

been addressed?

3. As the external consultant, what strate-

gies might be most effective?

4. What quick solutions can an OD con-

sultant incorporate for a small win?

Robert D. Greene and Heather Ber-thoud state, “Failing to attend to diversity,

that is, to note issues related to race, gen-

der, sexual orientation, ethnicity, disability

and other identities can limit the effect of

organizational change processes. Practitio-

ners are too often surprised when issues

related to diversity arise in assessments,

meetings, and other interventions. This is

due, in part, to seeing diversity as a sepa-

rate specialty rather than a fundamental

area of competence critical to all dimen-

sions of OD practice.” After describing how

diversity is a fundamental part of OD, they

offer a case study on attending to diversity

in an organization and ways to develop a

diversity lens and incorporate a diversity

perspective into the OD consulting process.

Lisa M. Meyer reflects upon her

experiences practicing design thinking and

shares those aspects she believes to be of

the greatest benefit to successful OD work.

To demonstrate design thinking’s focus on

finding solutions rather than explaining

problems, she presents a case study of how

a large, complex, decentralized university

redesigned its process for awarding and

tracking undergraduate scholarships.

Over 35 collaboratives have launched

in Southern California to address issues

related to urban sustainability: improving

access to healthy food, revitalizing the Los

Angeles River, building healthy communi-

ties, and many more. Ron Milam and Ann Feyerherm share their research of the spe-

cific influence managers of collaborative

change initiatives have in shaping positive

outcomes of the collaboratives they serve.

Finally, Marjorie Derven reviews Chan-

tal Gautier’s The Psychology of Work: Insights

into Successful Working Practices (2015), a

retrospective look at theoretical models of

recruitment and selection, teams, organiza-

tional culture, and motivation and engage-

ment, based upon research involving 32

industry leaders across diverse countries

and organizations, supplemented with

qualitative interviews of 103 London-based

university students.

The guest editors of the summer 2016

issue of the ODP, The Global Practices of

OD, are hoping to capture successful prac-

tices, innovative approaches, and continu-

ing challenges for the global practitioner.

See the call for articles on page 1.

John Vogelsang

From the Editor

Former Editors

Larry Porter 1973–1981Raymond Weil 1982–1984Don & Dixie Van Eynde 1985–1988David Noer 1989–1992Celeste Coruzzi 1993–1995David Nicoll 1996–2000Marilyn E. Blair 2000–2008


ByKathrynKaplan

“Thewomeninthestudyimploreconsultantstodemonstrateempoweringbehaviorinorganizationsthatareregularlydisempowering.Theystressthatitisvitalforwomencon-sultantsnottocolludewithexecutiveswhenODvalues,fairness,and‘isms’areatstake.”

Women’s VoicesFollow-up Study on the Second Generation of Women in OD

Over twenty years ago I was searching for some way to know what to expect as a woman entering a new field. I was transitioning at midcareer from occupa-tional therapy (a healthcare field of mostly women) to organization development. At the time women accounted for about half of the field of OD, but they were not reflected equally in publications, faculty appointments, or awards. I wondered if I could find a way to learn how other women experienced OD. I particularly wanted to know what successful, experienced women consultants would say about working in the male-dominated world of consulting to organizations. I ended up interview-ing 32 women who were referred by their peers for their professional reputation and respected for having successful on going consulting practices for 15–20 years (Kaplan, 1994).

Two decades later, my motivation for doing a follow-up study is somewhat dif-ferent. Now, having worked as an internal consultant myself (and VP of OD with some external consulting and faculty work), I wanted to explore their experi-ence of aging, what had changed and what remained relatively stable in their lives and work. My intention was to compare key themes from the first and second study. Conducting the research would serve my goals to honor these women as they age,

crystalize their legacy, and capture the col-lective story of these successful women in OD. This article will begin with the meth-odology, follow with the research findings, identify the impact for myself and younger women, and end with a conclusion. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate to OD practitioners of any age, gender, and background the value of sharing genera-tional experience and wisdom.

Methodology

How Women in OD Were IdentifiedI asked Sharon Thorne, who was the director of the OD Network, if there might be women who would be interested in speaking with me about being a woman in OD. Her enthusiasm, generosity, and guid-ance led to the first 15 women I contacted. They then identified the remainder of the women, with the notion that it takes one to know one (“chain referral snowball sampling”).

In the process of getting to know the 32 women, I discovered the term “second generation” of women in OD. They distin-guished themselves from the “first genera-tion” who were the first women to join and help shape the field: Edie Seashore, Barbara Bunker, Billie Alban, Elsie Y Cross, Kathleen Dannemiller, Kaleel Jamison, Mikki Ritvo, and Alice Sargent. The second

Women’s Voices in OD

5Women’sVoices:Follow-upStudyontheSecondGenerationofWomeninOD

generation perceived them as very wise yet over-extended with requests to present and take leadership positions. Many of the second generation were mentored by them, as well as by men in the field.1 All of them found the first generation of women inspir-ing beyond measure and extra ordinary role models. I believe the story of the second generation of women will also add a perspective to the field’s history that has been largely invisible, and if not told, will be forgotten.

As representatives of the second generation, the women researched were ready to add their energy to the field, being responsible for starting and participating in the Women in OD pre-conference ses-sions. They were members of ODN and/or NTL. These were the women who came of age during the late 1960s and early 1970s and were true to their roots in the civil rights and women’s liberation movements, bringing their social consciousness to their consulting practices. They did not plan their careers. As they said: “one thing led to another,” “the right place at the right time,” “tripped backwards into the field,” “ran right into it,” “by default,” “serendipity,” and “happenstance.” There are differences with when and how they entered the field, and also how much they saw themselves as OD consultants. However, almost all of them spoke of their entry to the field as a major turning point and their commitment to OD and its values as a calling.

DemographicsWhen I first interviewed the women, they ranged in age from 42–60+ years old, aver-age 51. Now 12 are 60–69, 13 are 70–79, and 2 are 80+. (Of the original 32 women, 2 are deceased, 2 have serious health problems, and 1 could not be located.) They have been in the field from 20–50 years, with most practicing for 40 years. I sought diversity, especially with the urging of one of the White women committed

1. Robert Golembiewski is the only author I found who has written about the first four generations of OD consultants—all men with the exception of Edie Seashore. She was mentioned with her husband Charlie Seashore for their “third generation” con-tribution to the NTL internship program. Golem-biewski wrote of the “Founding Fathers.”

to eradicating and learning from rac-ism. See Table 1 for further demographic information.

The majority focus on both diversity work and large system change. Almost half do executive coaching and some training. They develop teams, leaders (focus on women but also work with men), and Boards. Some work with HR and others strongly oppose doing so. They also work with clients on organization design, “futur-ing,” strategic planning, conflict manage-ment, transitions, mergers, intergroup integration, resistance, and cultural assessment. They work with small to very large organizations representing most industries—international and domestic, for-profit and nonprofit, and sectors that span healthcare, education, government, manufacturing, technology, and finance.

They usually work at the top level of the organization, although some work with middle and senior levels or all levels. Over-all, they work to integrate organizational strategy with system and global values, creating truly inclusive cultures.

Research DesignAfter virtually no contact for twenty years, I invited the same women to participate in my follow-up study. Their commitment to the field and our connection forged in the first research project yielded enthusiastic participation in the follow-up study. In the first study women from across the country were interviewed over two–three hours mostly in person or when not feasible, over the phone. After collecting demo-graphic information, four main qualitative research questions were explored in-depth

Table1.Participants’ Demographic Information

Original Study 1994 Current Study 2015

» 26Caucasian» 4AfricanAmerican» 2Hispanic

» 21Caucasian» 3AfricanAmerican» 1identifiesasMixed» 2Hispanic

» Variousreligiousandspiritualtraditions

» Variousreligiousandspiritualtraditions

» 12WestCoast» 16EastCoast» 3Midwest» 1Trinidad

» 10WestCoast» 14EastCoast» 2Midwest» 1Australia» (8ofthemmoved)

» 11Doctorateswithtwoinprogress» 12Masters» Allparticipateinongoingeducation

throughprofessionaldevelopment.

» 13Doctorateswith1inprogress» 12Masters» Mostinvolvedinongoing

professionaldevelopment.

» Lessthanhalfweremarriedorremarried,18hadchildrenatthetime,andalthoughbusy,mostengagedwithfamilyandfriendsandnon-workactivities,suchas:politics,exercise,reading,cooking,artsandcrafts,theatre,music,gardening,collecting.

» 16aremarriedand11singleandhalfofeachgrouphavechildrenandgrandchildren.

» Continued,orevengreater,involvementinavarietyofnon-workactivitiesandrelationships.

» About70%hadsolopractices,withtherest(30%)inpartnershipsorlargerfirms.

» 67%arestillinpracticeandfourhavefirms.Onethirdareretiredordoingvolunteerworkandwriting.Sixofthoseinpracticehaveleftthefieldtodoindividualcoaching,clinicalpractice,orotherwork.


to facilitate the women telling their stories about their experiences and perceptions as women OD consultants. They were asked to describe: » The Changes they experienced over the

course of their careers. » The Challenges they encountered doing

the work of OD. » The Contributions they made to the

field. » The Lessons they learned that they

wanted to pass on to younger women in the field.

For the follow-up study, they completed an online written survey I designed on Survey Monkey, answering both demographic and exploratory open-ended questions orga-nized by the same four original research questions.

Both studies entailed categorization of key themes, while being careful to understand each woman from her own perspective in the data analysis. The heuristic research approach (Moustakas, 1990) provided the framework for my dissertation and I believe accounted for the retained con-nection of the women for the follow-up study. When I found that the detached, methodical categorization of themes dur-ing the dissertation did not match the spirit and relationship of the actual interviews, I searched for a way to be true to my passionate commitment to the research process and to capture the essence of each woman. I discovered a creative depiction of the experience by writing what I call “poem portraits” based on the individual narratives. Examples of titles include “The Woman Who Swims with the Sharks” and “Seeing Life in the Rearview Mirror.” I also created collage images of each woman as a symbolic form of data reduction. Once the women validated the truth of their poem portraits, I was able to link the previous analysis with the themes, images, and stories to synthesize the findings and com-plete the study. For the follow-up research I sought to learn if their poem portraits still rang true and had meaning today. In addition, I asked about the top issues fac-ing women OD consultants as they do their work to change organizations and if there

has been progress over the twenty years from when I first asked them to identify key issues. To set the context for the initial study I did an analysis of publications and OD membership. In the follow-up study I did a comparison of similar data. These will be discussed next in the section on research findings after first presenting a final aspect of the methodology.

Younger WomenAn additional feature of this follow-up study was to interview nine younger women in OD and related fields. The women were identified by two of the senior women in the study and my male business partner, who each thought understanding the concerns and interests of diverse younger professional women would ground the analysis of the results. In particular the question on lessons for younger woman would be enhanced by clarifying what the senior women offer with what the younger women seek. The four OD consultants interviewed are currently internal to orga-nizations. The other five younger women represent the co-workers and clients with whom the OD practitioners often work. The choice to interview one-third of the num-ber of women in the follow-up study was determined to be sufficient for the purposes of the research. The younger women were interviewed by phone and asked questions similar to the online survey, yet adapted to be engaging and relevant to them. The intention was not to replicate the depth and richness of the research with the senior women; merely to add to the understand-ing of the audience for whom this work is directed.

The younger women in my study range in age from 26 through 44. They reflect both the Millennials and Generation X, although interestingly their identifica-tion with a generation is not what defines them. What is more significant to them is their heritage, career focus, and personal/social life. Some of the women were born in other countries—India, Poland, and Rus-sia—and have indigenous, African, Irish, and Italian ancestry. Several are bi-lingual (English and Italian, Polish, or Russian), and retain an interest in the global econ-omy. Four out of the nine are single, five

are married, and four have children. There are lesbians and heterosexuals, with some of the single women wanting marriage and family and others more connected to extended family members. Four are from New York (3 in NYC and 1 upstate), four are from the Midwest, and 1 from Califor-nia. Location turned out to be a significant factor for two in the Midwest who grew up in the East and miss the opportunities and sophistication they are used to.

In terms of education, four have PhDs and one is in a PhD program. Three have Masters Degrees, and two have Bachelor’s with additional certificates. This bias in being highly educated reflects the educa-tional levels of the senior women in the study as well as the tendency for younger people to get higher degrees before they get work experience. The younger women interviewed represent broad industry experience, from academia, finance, and healthcare to manufacturing and technol-ogy. They work in private and nonprofit organizations as scientists, professors, Human Resource professionals, consul-tants, and trainers. Although all are work-ing inside organizations, previously one was an external OD consultant doing diver-sity work, and one is eager to be an external consultant and adjunct professor after she completes her OD doctoral program.

Research FindingsThe current membership of the OD Net-work includes 15% more women than men in the field than 20 years ago. ODN did not provide data on race, age, or other aspects of identity.

The publication landscape has also shifted. In a pilot study I did prior to my initial research, for instance, most of the publications I reviewed from 1985-1991 were written by men. Of the total of 1,400 articles, only 29 (2%) were written by women, and almost all focused on women in the workplace and other gender-related issues. Less than 6% were on topics of gen-eral interest to the field such as corporate culture and strategic management (Kaplan, 1995). By rough comparison (of only one journal vs. six reviewed previously), over the past six years 43% of the articles in the OD Practitioner were written by women


and 57% were written by men. Only 19 articles were written about diversity and inclusion (with some including gender). Of those articles nine were written by women, five by men, and five co-authored by a woman and a man.

These markers indicate that while there are more women in OD and more women publishing articles, the focus is now on diversity/inclusion and topics of general interest rather than on women and gender-related issues as before. Twenty years ago the women in the study were already looking beyond gender and work-ing to integrate diversity and strategy. That is why their responses to the qualitative research questions then and now provide a window on OD practice that is differ-ent and additive to the literature in the field. What is expressed here in their own words and through their collective voices is far more accessible than most reports of research findings.

Issues in ODWhen I conducted the original research, it was a year or so after “The Year of the Woman” and Ruth Bader Ginsberg became the second woman judge to be nominated to the US Supreme Court. I was focused on the intersection of being a woman in general—sexism, gender roles, and femi-nine values—and being a woman consul-tant in OD—working in male-dominated corporate cultures, in a field based on humanistic values, and needing to under-stand business and a wide range of indus-tries as well as change processes. The issues the women identified included: » Concern for women surviving in the

competitive market » Sexual bias and harassment of female

external consultants » Communication differences between

men and women » The question of what differences or

“value-added” women actually bring to the field

» Income disparities » Ageism » Lack of leadership by women in

research and publication » Ways to demonstrate women’s

strengths.

Obviously, there have been many positive changes since then, yet many of the issues persist. On the positive side the women in the follow-up study observed that more women have access to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) careers; diversity and inclusion do not need a business case anymore; emotional intelligence and people management are more mainstream in MBA programs and corporations; and women (at least White US-born) are seen in high-level roles.

On the sobering side they note there has been no progress on sexual violence. Reading the newspaper any day reveals the economic inequities locally and globally contributing to the widening wage gap between the haves and have-nots, barriers to minorities in leadership positions, and rampant injustices. As one of them said, “There has been a change in the rhetoric, but little progress in the reality of organiza-tions as more inclusive, diverse, just, and equitable.” An overarching concern is how to engage younger women in the issues of feminism and social justice, to both appre-ciate their advantages and still realize how much more needs to be done. So many of them, they told me, act as if sexism is a thing of the past. “Both women and men need to understand the ways that systems set women up to be confused and disap-pointed about what to expect from each other. Women and men need to also under-stand the ways that women’s contributions are undervalued in most organizational cultures.”

Twenty years ago in OD there was concern about what would happen as more women entered the field. Other groups—from teachers, to secretaries, to Jewish Cantors-—had experienced a loss of profes-sional status (and an exodus of men) after women joined their ranks. As one woman said, “Women have always followed the men in this field, from personnel to human resource development, and to consulting in organizations. Now men are focused on strategic interventions in the corporate world. Will women follow?”

The follow-up study occurs at a time when there are significantly more women in OD than men, and yet concern about the field losing status as a result was not

mentioned by any of them. Instead, they focused on issues ranging from social and global perspective, unconscious bias, corporate greed, and difficulty in getting organizations to get to the root cause of problems. They offered a wide variety of remedies to help leaders think systemically about complex issues in an environment of uncertainty, politics, and patriarchy. They caution organizations to use modern tech-nology without being consumed by it. They bemoan the lack of time given to develop people in organizations. While some prog-ress is noted in tackling sexism and racism, it is imperative that what is unacceptable be exposed. Still remaining are pay inequality and issues of child care and work-life bal-ance. Some of the women think progress has been made over twenty years, some of them do not or do not know, and a third of them are mixed. What they agree on is the extent and urgency of involvement by younger women to get the field and society to the next level.

The women in the study implore consultants to demonstrate empowering behavior in organizations that are regularly disempowering. They stress that it is vital for women consultants not to collude with executives when OD values, fairness, and “isms” are at stake. They see the necessity of speaking truth to power, naming White privilege, and paying attention to internal-ized misogyny and covert bullying. They encourage consultants to support marginal women in organizations and address economic disparity in communities. Just having more women at work and in leader-ship positions does not guarantee equity and social justice. Their vision of cultural sensitivity and global inclusion is not just women’s work; and in fact, as is strongly advocated by one of the women, until men do their diversity work with men, then patriarchy, sexism, male, and White privi-lege have no chance of being eradicated. Women need to speak out when they see other women sabotage each other. These are all reasons why they say it is vital that young women learn more about the theory and application of feminist methodologies whether or not they consider themselves feminists. The next level of change for true transformation requires women to access


their deep feminine power and inner wis-dom, participate fully in organizations, and express their voices in OD and beyond.

Changes and Challenges: They are Remarkable, Resilient, and RelevantWhen I had the pleasure of first interview-ing these women, what was remarkable to me was how open they were about their struggles, modest about their achieve-ments, and generous about their lessons learned. I did not expect the degree to which they would interweave their personal journeys with their experience as OD con-

sultants. What woke me up was their clar-ity about the necessity to face oppression in organizations and society and the impact of patriarchy on women and minorities. Also impressive was their conviction about the centrality of relationships in getting and doing the work of OD. They had vivid stories of getting undermined and betrayed by both men and women. Yet, they also celebrated enduring relationships with partners, mentors, and colleagues.

As I have returned to their experi-ences and perceptions, I believe the same overarching themes remain. They are still women doing the work of OD as part of their life’s journey, in the context of oppres-sion, helped and hindered by their relation-ships with both men and women (Kaplan, 2010). Now, however, what stands out is their resilience in overcoming some of the changes and challenges that have occurred over the ensuing two decades. There are ways in which they have stretched them-selves, become more attuned to who they are, and made choices to reflect changing circumstances and inner truths. Some of them have distinguished themselves and been recognized in ways not previously

evident. All have become role models as senior women aging in positive and healthy ways that they did not expect twenty years ago. Back then they worried that aging and ageism would affect their credibility, but now it seems that the intervening years have become another credential. As one of them playfully said, twenty years ago she was a “Cronette,” now at 70 she’s a real “Elderella.” At the same time, contempla-tion of and preparation for death and the fourth phase of life is a deep spiritual prac-tice that some of them, working in hospice or taking care of ill spouses and family

members, are aware is on the horizon.What is more present, as a couple of

them put it, is reinventing themselves for their “third act.” For some that means a change in how they define themselves and their practice. They represent diverse inter-ests focused on making a difference: in effective governance and American democ-racy; as a scholar in organizational studies on the simultaneity of race, gender, and class; as a leader in creating the capacity to design and host “conversations that matter” around critical strategic questions in orga-nizations around the globe; as a researcher doing foundational work on women’s relationships to women; as an advocate for a global perspective focused on the triple bottom line (people, profit, planet) and leading from ancient traditions and Earth wisdom. One woman sold to her partners her share of a profitable business she built. Facing grief and loss, it allowed her to embark on leadership coaching and begin a PhD program in her 70’s. For others the third act looks like a joyful retirement, moving across the country or globe, taking on running a family business, or spending more time volunteering and writing.

As a group they do not complain about having survived cancer, financial stresses, death of parents, and seeming bad luck that does not end. Instead, they trust the universe, reach out to longstanding women support groups, engage in therapy and spiritual practices, and always find a way to continue to give while deepening their personal development. They are becoming comfortable being viewed as wise elders and they are resilient in how they harden their resolve to keep going until a new nor-mal surfaces. They are grateful to life and their place in it, sharing how they discover great compassion for everyone’s life story.

In response to the question about whether their individual poem portraits still have meaning today, their replies validate that while their essence does not change, circumstances do. Examples of positive comments include, “I was amazed at how much it still does have meaning for me… the themes that were important to me then, still remain important in my life today.” “The essence of the poem I find even more deeply true: we know more about the women in the world and know even more about their plight.” “First I want to say that I love the poem and it is power-ful to reread it now 20 years later.”

Only three women did not identify with the poems now even though affirm-ing they were true at the time. The vastly different structure and content of their lives made one woman comment, “Reread-ing my poem portrait is like looking at an album of pictures from the past. I don’t look like that anymore.” The majority gave nuanced glimpses into how their journey has progressed and they have been trans-formed. Still committed to social justice and their values, they speak of changes they notice in themselves, such as: more anger and cynicism, more confidence, more balance, more focus on personal life, more internal and artistic orientation, and the use of different tactics in their work.

In terms of external forces the eco-nomic downturn impacted many of them in solo practice. They had to market dif-ferently, go into debt, make sacrifices, and reach out for help and support. Realizing they had to deal with factors outside of their control, some coped by getting out.

What woke me up was their clarity about the necessity to face oppression in organizations and society and the impact of patriarchy on women and minorities. Also impressive was their conviction on the centrality of relationships in getting and doing the work of OD. They had vivid stories of getting undermined and betrayed by both men and women. Yet, they also celebrated enduring relationships with partners, mentors, and colleagues.


Others were still able to accept paid work based on values rather than basic survival, and another was able to continue run-ning a business that met her standards for excellence and still be viable financially. One woman who was leading a nonprofit organization for 20 years was able to attract funding due to her persistence and willingness to develop new business models. Yet several women commented on how a change in leadership wiped out years of work and discontinued long-term contracts. One women said, “The biggest frustration was that no matter how many times we demonstrated the value of the work, only on rare occasions did it lead to the creation of ongoing structures to carry out the work.”

The overwhelming sentiment from them as a group is their ongoing commit-ment to OD principles, if not the field, and fond memories of those not still practicing. However, a subgroup of them have been disillusioned and disappointed that OD did not live up to its potential for fulfillment, whether it was people in the field who want to maintain the status quo or those in a professional association who advocated inclusion but were perceived as exclud-ing and demonizing colleagues who had a point of view different from their own.

Early on, many of the second genera-tion of women had the chance to “grow up” as OD also grew. When much of the oppor-tunity for creativity and innovation became seen as cookie cutter, it lost its appeal. International travel has broadened many of their perspectives, and as one woman put it, “the internet and social media have made my early work look quaint!” One woman was wistful about not changing the world, “I wish I could feel more positive about my career, as I certainly put a lot of energy into it.” Another lamented, “The many things that I was involved in that were very exciting breakthroughs at the time, and created bonds that felt lifelong and self-defining, in retrospect were blips on the timeline of history.” Another woman said, “In my experience OD has become irrelevant to justice and equality in organizations and has lost its cutting-edge possibilities with its turn to individual-based interventions like coaching, and

metaphors borrowed from the physical (not social) world like self-organizing systems.”

I raise these voices because the purpose of studying women as a group is to allow the diversity among them to be a source of strength and an opportunity for dialogue. It is as important to express a view of the irrelevance of OD in a changing world as it is to sing its praises and poten-tial. Critique from passionate consultants who have been involved in the field for so many years is another facet of their impor-tant legacy.

Contributions: Legacy of the Second Generation of Women ConsultantsI am aware that these women are not done yet. This review of their contribu-tions is just the beginning of attempting to crystalize what they have collectively given to the field. Many of them had difficulty with the question about their contribu-tions during the first research project, including explorations of recognition and success discussed below. They said things like the following: they were taught to be humble, they take what they do for granted because they just do it, and they did not recognize their work with politics, com-munities, and associations as a contribu-tion to the field. As one of them said, “My assumption is that everybody does what I do, everybody knows what I know, every-body sees what I see… I have not espoused a new theory or done a piece of research or written books.” However, now with more maturity and experience, they are not shy about articulating their contributions.

When asked what they are most proud of first, they emphasized their publications. The woman who twenty years ago was “too much the practical theorist to write,” today has written a landmark book on citizen engagement in governance. Some of them were publishing books when I first met them. Others have books in progress and others are getting ready to write one.

A second category of contribution was having influence and impact. Their leadership and consultation has changed education, large and small organizations, and opportunities for women’s leadership nationally and internationally. They have created programs that lasted after they

moved on, including job sharing, training in healthcare, compensation for staff and faculty, and leadership development for the next generation of government leaders. They have tackled racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination that cause harm. Through the United Nations, they have supported peace through science. They can claim to have influenced a more socially responsible tobacco industry that is now under government regulation.

The third category involves relation-ships. Through mentoring, serving as board members, and being mothers, they have perpetuated the values that were already strong in their contributions 20 years ago. While it was troubling to them back then to be undervalued profes-sionally and not receive public recogni-tion, now their own self-assessment and self-regard have taught them how much it means to raise families, strengthen busi-nesses, and encourage careers of younger professionals who expand conscious-ness. They are proud of their daughters and sons who join them in this work. Sometimes with a global reach behind the scenes, they help others open the space for important conversations and making a difference. How they remember them-selves is still more crucial to them than receiving public acclaim.

The final category of contribution is about qualities they value and how they would like to be remembered. “As an honest, authentic, funny person focused on building the talent and potential of sys-tems.” “The calm in the eye of the storm” able to help clients focus their energy and rationality to deal with the chaos and create a renewed vision for the future. “Using my voice, speaking my truth, not afraid to raise issues.” “As a kind, gentle, intelligent, risk-taking person.” “As a catalyst and learner/teacher and a connector and lover.” “Being competent, authentically caring, for being serious about the work, for exhibiting high integrity, and being truly helpful.”

RecognitionThe second generation of women in OD certainly have a lot to be proud of and deserve professional recognition in addition to the appreciation from clients,


friends, and family they say they value. It is not surprising to me that their need for recognition from external sources is not pronounced at this stage in their lives. Satisfaction in doing good work is cited repeatedly as more important to them than public recognition. Some forms of recogni-tion are inherent in being asked to speak at conferences and being selected for par-ticipation in programs. Others have noted

recognition by invitations to publish and receiving media attention. For those with solo practices, being able to be in business a long time—practically without having to market their services, and having clients express their appreciation for meaningful work is recognition enough. Seeing others they have mentored discovering themselves and achieving their own meaningful goals is profoundly satisfying.

Yet, also evident in some of their responses is regret at not getting more recognition from professional associa-tions. Whether the breach is from being a woman, Woman of Color, or the type of work not being recognized, it has caused some of the women pain and frustration. The conclusion may be to acknowledge, “The time is past to get recognition from others; it must now come from myself.” Nevertheless, there are times when public recognition they have clearly deserved has been claimed by others, sometimes men and sometimes women, who are credited for their original innovations.

Fortunately, about a quarter of these women have received numerous presti-gious awards for their work. Just a sample include: The ODN Larry Porter Award, Global Work and Lifetime Achievement

Award, and the 2014 Common Ground Award. No longer would “The Top 10 OD Consultants” be only men, as they were in 1983 to their dismay. The issue of invis-ibility is not as pronounced as it was in the first study because so many of them have taken up the mantle of writing, publish-ing, and reaching an extensive and even worldwide audience. In addition, the more mainstream acceptance of diversity and

inclusion means that differences are more often valued and sought. Of course (alas) that does not mean sexism, racism, and ageism are a thing of the past.

In relation to recognition, the main way they collectively saw their contribu-tions to OD in the past was through rela-tionships. They gave support to colleagues and provided service to their communi-ties and professional associations. They noted taking partnerships and mentoring seriously. Just the fact of being perceived as doing the work of OD as a competent woman (White or of Color) made them a role model to men and younger women. While they valued their strengths of caring and connection, the prevailing culture did not. It is here that the resentment for invis-ibility was most palpable. If the nature of the work of OD is to empower clients and then leave, then neither men nor women consultants should be seen by clients as expert gurus. Yet, at the time, men were more often perceived by them as actively seeking that role. The women more com-fortable behind the scenes and not expect-ing accolades somehow did not get the validation and respect from the field they were committed to and loved.

Fast forward 20 years and I sense

more comfort with most of them with giving and receiving credit. If it is not forthcoming because of the nature of being a consultant, I still wonder if there is suf-ficient recognition for solid work involv-ing relationships by the field that values relationships along with system change. I did not see any evidence in their responses that those who have retired or left the field made that decision based on lack of recog-nition. I think that may be because of how they defined success for themselves.

SuccessI asked them about their definitions of suc-cess in the original interviews and returned to it in the follow-up study. The definitions are multifaceted and have little to do with financial gain and the pursuit of power. The most common definitions have to do with setting their own goals and meeting them. Every one of them felt successful as defined on her own terms: a catalyst and connected to spirit, doing whatever it is they want to do with positive feelings of happiness and gratitude, making a contri-bution to humanity, helping others realize their potential, and making the world a better place. For them it is about living with authenticity, learning from work and life, and having no regrets. Coming to a place of peace inside has not always been easy, as they told me. However, looking back there is the feeling “I am living the work I came here to do and am responding to the changes in energy as a result of aging.”

I admire this woman who said, “For me, the definition of success is to realize that if I died tomorrow, I would feel more than satisfied with what I have contributed to making this world a better place. And that I have done enough, made enough, created enough, contributed enough, made enough friends, and had and given enough love—to make me now wake up each day smiling. Thank goodness I am in good health and able to enjoy most everything I want to do.”

One of the definitions I was most inspired by in the original study, I am glad to know is still true for this woman: “Suc-cess is experiencing the thing, whatever it is, and living with it until you know it is right for you.” She explains, “Whenever I

One of the definitions I was most inspired by in the original study, I am glad to know is still true for this woman: “Success is experiencing the thing, whatever it is, and living with it until you know it is right for you.” She explains, “Whenever I have felt exhausted or crazy, I have stepped back and looked at what was causing that, then made a decision to deal with it. My definition of success back then did not explicitly include my family, but it does now…. [It] feels like the best thing I ever did.”


have felt exhausted or crazy, I have stepped back and looked at what was causing that, then made a decision to deal with it. My definition of success back then did not explicitly include my family, but it does now…. [It] feels like the best thing I ever did.”

I believe their internal focus for guid-ing their personal and professional lives through their own definition of success has provided a sense of satisfaction regard-less of external recognition. While their publications, examples of influence and impact, relationships, and personal quali-ties certainly describe their legacy, they will not stop there. Also handed down is the wisdom they share as lessons for younger women in the field.

Lessons: Passing on WisdomI asked the women to share the lessons they learned that they would like to pass on to the younger women, as well as to their younger selves, if they could. I did this because I wanted to discover if the advice they had for their younger selves would be different from what they would advise younger women today. Their own advice had the compassion and humor of some-one who has learned along the way. They were reassuring to their younger selves, cautioning of what they would encounter out in the world of politics and gender bias, and realistic about what is needed to really make a difference at the system and organi-zation level. Sometimes they were practical, offering guidance, and giving themselves permission to be more of who they really are. At the same time, they did not know if they would follow their own advice if they had received it years ago, for they recog-nized that everyone has to live and learn on their own terms.

From the nine interviews with younger women I realized that the wisdom the senior women had to share would be important and relevant to the younger women’s concerns. They voiced respect for older women in their lives and were eager to learn from women who have experi-ence overcoming challenges that they are now facing at work. As the senior women expressed, most of the younger women did not identify with feminism and especially

not calling themselves feminists. They had a more humanistic orientation, wanting equality for all. In fact a Woman of Color who had been devalued because of stereo-types, expressed the common belief that age, in terms of gaining credibility, matters more than gender or race. However, two women in OD and two in academia are sensitive to not using “binary codes” for gender and they read about topics such as intersectionality for social equality. They are well versed in foundational feminist authors and activists as well as more recent voices from the transgender experience. They seek gender-neutral parenting and leadership practices.

All the younger women interviewed had keen observations about workplace dynamics and negotiations that disadvan-tage women. They share stories of frustra-tion when male bosses dominate, female bosses are not supportive of women, and co-workers engage in power plays, under-mining teamwork. When they experience gender bias, the topic seems taboo, leaving the women often feeling isolated, vulner-able, and in no-win situations.

The difference between the four younger women in OD and those five in other fields is that the latter seem to want coaching about career choice points and what to do about specific conflicts and workplace scenarios that create anxiety. They are more oriented toward getting promoted and tenure. Those in OD are eager to get mentored, learn more about contracting and use of self, and to know the resources that have most influenced the success of the senior women. All were interested in regrets the women might have and how to avoid them. Balancing work and life figured prominently as a con-cern whether caring for children or their grandparents. They struggle with their definitions of success, wanting external rewards and also personal satisfaction. However, for some their chosen careers do not support both desires.

Recognizing the particular and varied questions posed by the younger women, this study seeks to address those most common to their concerns as a group. In fact when I conducted the first study, after hearing their lessons learned I then

perceived the second generation women as a collective, not as a collection of indi-vidual women. Because of their strengths in mentoring and building relationships, they offer these lessons in general, not with the fine tuning of speaking with a specific younger woman. Included below are lessons that link what the younger women sought with what the senior women have found most valuable: doing the work of OD, gaining expertise, writing and publishing, maintaining strong relation-ships, developing yourself, and dealing with oppression.

Doing the Work of ODAs experts in OD, the senior women emphasized how important it is for younger women to always think systemi-cally and strategically. Whether focused on creating inclusive cultures or develop-ing skills like negotiation and influence, they found it crucial to focus on the client’s needs yet also trust their own assessments: » “Learn to think in multiple levels of

systems. Always select an intervention that can impact individual behavior and system change.”

» “Encourage younger women OD con-sultants to NOT think of themselves as OD consultants, but rather as strategic thinking partners and organizational strategists (or learning architects) with their clients. Also, to try to get a place in the line organization rather than an HR department!”

» “Trust the process and don’t allow the method to dictate the message. Trust yourself and allow yourself to go to the edge sometimes. If the men attempt to marginalize you, it is important to know who you are, what you bring, and continue to pay attention to the system as opposed to getting caught up in someone else’s ego to derail you. It is all about the client.”

» “Credibility and impact improve with experience. So get involved, learn what you can from the successes and the fail-ures and try to be honest about assess-ing your role in both. And do your due diligence! Regardless of where he/she sits in the hierarchy, never trust a


client’s assessment of the issue. Go out, gather data, and build your own view. Get out in the trenches—where the air isn’t too filtered and the reality quotient is higher.”

Gaining ExpertiseYounger women are concerned about how to get taken seriously; the senior women speak to how to gain expertise and respect by staying focused yet humble: » “Read some of those books about how

to get ahead, but don’t take it all too seriously. Develop a special area of skill that you are naturally good at, work incredibly hard at it, and find a job that showcases that. Do your best and look your best.”

» “Once you become ‘the expert’ you will have status in a male-dominated environment, and credibility with varied populations. However, you must never flaunt your expertise and must always meet those other groups where they are and be the one who encourages them to look at the world from another perspective.”

» “Your best shot at being respected is to do your work with great skill and to make sure the right people know about it. Take on the difficult and challenging tasks with courage and determination. If you fail, learn from it and communi-cate what you’ve learned.”

Writing and PublishingThe senior women find great value in writ-ing and sharing their experiences and have published extensively. Here they advise younger women on ways to get started: » “Write. First write for yourself. Write

about your experiences, every day. If some day you chose to write a book, that is a different and perhaps impor-tant project, but first you must write for yourself. Ideas will come on the paper or screen that you did not know were available to you.”

» “Publish. Take the time to describe methods, techniques, and what you feel is work that is contributing to the field of OD. Make writing about your work a norm.”

Maintaining Strong RelationshipsTheir advice on how to maintain strong relationships is based on learning by doing. These nuances are easier said than done, which is why experiential learning is highly recommended. With practice and mentoring, younger women can improve their relationships with clients and col-leagues by developing effective ways to deal with conflicts, politics, differences, and partnerships: » “Never whine, never blame. Challenge

assumptions and groupthink, but do so with a light touch and never make anyone look bad, wrong, or stupid if you hope to influence him or her. Call people privately on their missteps. Don’t take male dominance seriously—respect accomplishments and senior levels appropriately, but don’t be afraid to ‘speak truth to power.’ Support and mentor other women and men, espe-cially those who might find it difficult to find a mentor.”

» “Don’t shy away from politics; meet them on your terms.”

» “Do not compete with anyone. Make him or her your colleague. Get acquainted with other consultants, for example, at professional meetings that facilitate some relationships.”

» “Build strong work and personal com-munities of support and challenge. Together you keep your finger on the pulse of what needs to be done and you help each other through a strong, intentional network. Women still do not understand that the dominant group has that network without working on it, and women often think that their success has to be accomplished through their own individual stamina. Actively seek role models at every stage of life—personally and through biographical reading. Notice how they see the work, make choices.”

» “Spend learning time in experiential work with those who are different from you. Listen carefully to what others have and are experiencing.”

» “Invest in creating good working partnerships with internal and external people, so that you get honest feedback,

support, and the information you need to do good work.”

Developing Your SelfNo matter how well a younger woman is trained in OD, her instrument is her use of self. These senior women know what it takes to show up fully—by taking the jour-ney to know who you are, attend to your own needs, and express your voice for the good of all concerned: » “It is wonderfully laudable to care about

and act for the good of the whole, but you must also have a strategy about what is good for you….What matters is to stay in tune with one’s deepest yearning and spend time doing what you love.”

» “You are an extraordinary instrument. Learn that every breath, every move-ment, every expression of energy has an impact on you and others. Be all that you can be. Spend as little time in negative spaces as you can authentically manage.”

» “Relax. Pay attention.” “Be more assertive and trust your intuition.” “Be more honest about what you are experiencing.”

» “Search your hearts and minds for what you really love to do with people and organizations, and build that into your daily work.”

» “Know yourself in all its dimensions so that you have maximum flexibility in the places you use your talents. The greater your acceptance of self, the less you can be manipulated, especially with strong networks of women and men as allies who reflect reality for you and help find ways through.”

» “Learn from nature, from rhythms and cycles of the universe. Work with heart as well as head. Co-create collaborative relationships. Draw on the inner power of your soul. Approach problems of the world in a way that is not fearful; walk toward whatever it is that frightens you. Start with gratitude; acknowledging your own deep gifts. Make a shift of consciousness that will make the world possible. Tap collective intelligence and consciousness (listen and hear). Be at


peace with yourself and the world will follow. Know that we choose how we react; we are responsible for the self and our decisions and actions.”

Dealing with OppressionOne of the key findings in the first research study was the awareness and knowledge the senior women had of the impact of patriarchy in organizations and society. While these messages about oppression may seem too strong to younger women who do not identify with feminism, nevertheless they offer guidance that is well-taken when navigating the unexpected challenges of organizational dynamics: » “Recognize that you are only oppressed

to the degree you allow yourself to be oppressed in your own heart.”

» “Embrace your particular female power. Do not allow yourself to be intimi-dated. Stand tall and grounded. Learn from the successful women execu-tives—they’re the ones that are really in the line of fire and you must try to identify with that position and barrage of missiles they are subjected to from others—both men and women. You can be a model for them of retaining your ‘female’ qualities effectively. Be well educated and well-aware of diversity issues and address them head on, but effectively.”

» “Do your work on loosening the grip of the binary codes of sex and gender. Fig-ure out your politics on democracy and empire. Sort out your position of what you mean by being an ally. Have strong spiritual practices. Deconstruct your own internalized misogyny and get to the place of power equity/harmony between the male and female parts of your own psyche so you can be strong enough to not join the problem.”

» “Dismiss the belief that patriarchy, sexism, male and White privilege are going to be eradicated by you and your womyn colleagues [quote intentionally spelled that way as a political state-ment]. That is work for men to do with men. Cultivate your personal power and your relationship with courage. Think of courage (and its forms) as applied skills. Apply it to your OD work! Call

out dismissive, discounting, and sabo-tage of womyn by womyn. Consider how you may be distancing yourself from feminism and learn more about feminist methodologies and how they can benefit you and your OD work.”

ImpactAfter conducting the initial research I then embarked on my own journey of being an OD consultant absolutely influenced and empowered by what I learned from these women. They were my virtual learning

laboratory and helped me in a way that no book, class, or workshop had. With my eye on the hidden aspects of organiza-tional dynamics, I could see forces at work when power was used to dominate those who were seen as different. Especially in healthcare, where hierarchy and patriarchy have a long tradition, I could help people in the organization appreciate why teamwork was failing and help them succeed. Eager to follow their advice about relationships, I took care to build partnerships, to get and give mentoring, and to be alert to toxic interactions. I was less naïve than prior to learning from them and more confident in pulling from a wide range of resources to be an effective catalyst for leader-ship coaching, program development, navigating organizational dynamics, and culture change.

What I discovered through doing the first study was a capacity I did not know I had —to be a passionate researcher and trust my inner knowing to express what Thomas Merton refers to as the “value, rightness, and truth of the work itself.” I then applied those capacities to my work in organizations. As I progressed in my leadership roles in OD, I regularly pub-lished and presented, receiving recognition

on my impact on culture change as a Chief Learning Officer (Whitney, 2007). However, eventually I experienced what the women in the follow-up study point to when changes in organizational leadership and priorities can wipe out years of work. Returning to the research has rekindled my aliveness and inspired me to create my own third act. Further, through their resil-ience during challenging times, the study participants have offered me a window on how to move through aging with more grace and perspective.

What I learned from these women in the follow-up study is key: that younger women do not have to be demoralized when considering their own futures, as the senior women feared twenty years ago. What the second generation has contributed is a treasure trove of expert and diverse solutions for bringing about systemic change to address important problems in organizations, communities, and the world. By taking their personal and professional growth seriously, they have become more than they might have without such expert support and guidance. Now they set an example for other women to give themselves permission to invest in themselves, their careers, and whatever it takes to make a difference. I know they have affected me in the same way. And they told me that I have affected them by being a catalyst for their reconnecting as a community.

What we learn from the women’s reflections on their poem portraits is there is an essence in each of us that transcends the details of our changing situations. Sharing of our stories provides the oppor-tunity to reveal our true selves and expe-rience deeper connections so critical to diversity, inclusiveness, and the promise of

Sharing our stories helps us see that everyone struggles. Knowing this reminds us to shift from a focus on struggles to cultivating what is remarkable, resilient, and relevant in our lives. The hope, then, is that younger women are inspired to become the next generation of leaders in the workplace, field, and beyond.


OD. Sharing our stories helps us see that everyone struggles. Knowing this reminds us to shift from a focus on struggles to cul-tivating what is remarkable, resilient, and relevant in our lives. The hope, then, is that younger women are inspired to become the next generation of leaders in the workplace, field, and beyond.

Conclusion

This article provides a summary of the experiences and perceptions of success-ful women in OD with over 40 years in their own consulting practices. From the original 32 and the current 27 women from the second generation, we learn how they came into the field, the personal and professional changes that ensued over that time, the challenges they struggled with in doing OD, the contributions they made to the field, and the lessons they pass on to younger women. Two decades later they paint a vivid portrait of the issues still facing OD and the organizations in which they work.

While much has changed in society, the need for younger women of all colors and all sexual orientations to take up the banner of anti-racism, feminism, and social justice is imperative. No matter what label they apply to themselves, the work of true inclusion based on ever-growing diversity cannot be accomplished without the commitment of men and women, sepa-rately and together, challenging the status quo and holding a vision of equality for all. The women in the research are advocates for linking organizational strategy with cultural sensitivity and a global perspective.

Each of the women in this study is a role model for aging with examples of how they stay vital, are reinventing themselves, and still giving to others. Although a con-cern for ageism was evident in the origi-nal study, it has not been a theme in the follow-up. As senior women with expertise and the autonomy of business owners, they have not experienced the ageism com-mon to those employed in organizations. Whether retired, doing different work, or continuing their OD practices, these

women know what brings them satisfac-tion. At the same time, they are articulate about what has not been fulfilling about the work and the field, and some have moved on. Some are writing fiction and personal memoirs and also making sure what is important to them professionally is added to the library of scholar-practitioner contributions. Their legacy so far already includes substantial publications, a history of influence and impact, sophistication about relationships, and stellar reputations.

Deserving of public recognition, which many of them have received, they stay internally focused on their own defini-tions of success. They continue to be the same generous, honest, and accomplished business women and leaders I first had the honor to meet. An outcome of this research is validation of the continuity of who they are at the core throughout the trajectory of their careers. By focusing on the collective story of the second generation of women in OD, younger women and the field can appreciate this significant missing piece of its history.

References

Golembiewski, R. (1989). Some differ-ences between OD generations, I: Four generations and a few differentia; Some differences between OD generations, II: Socialization and Lode Stars. In OD: Ideas and Issues. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, pp. 30–41.

Kaplan, K. (1994). An exploration of the experiences and perceptions of women organization development consultants: Changes, challenges, contributions, lessons (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Dissertation Abstracts International (UMI No. 9426472).

Kaplan, K. (1995). Women’s voices in organization development: Questions, stories, and implications. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 8(1), 52–80.

Kaplan, K. (2010). Enduring wisdom from women in OD. OD Practitioner, 42(1), 10–14.

Moustakas, C. (1990). Heuristic research: Design, methodology, and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Whitney, K. (2007, October). Maimonides Medical Center’s Kathryn Kaplan: Weaving a culture for institutional lead-ership. Chief Learning Officer, pp. 30–35.

AcknowledgementsWith gratitude to the 27 women who par-ticipated in the follow-up study: Margaret Barbee, Kim Barnes, Pat Clark Battle, Carole Brantley, Juanita Brown, Nancy Brown, Diane Carter, Jeanne Cherbeneau, Aubrey Cramer, Karen Davis, Darya Funches, Jean Haskell, Evangelina Holvino, Judith Hoy, Judith Katz, Elizabeth Kirkhart, Anne Litwin, Marilyn Loden, Carolyn Lukensmeyer, Jeanie Marshall, Alexan-dra Merrill, Jo Ann Morris, Carol Pierce, Barbara Stanbridge, Sharon Thorne, Judith Vogel, and Elaine Yarbrough. Honoring additionally the women from the initial study: Ronnie Jacobs, Arleen LaBella, Nancy Miller, Michele Moomaugh, and Karen Terniko Rowe.

I also want to thank the younger women I interviewed: Marline Bellevue, Ayesha Bhavsar, Monika Borzecka, Jill Delston, Rachel Delston, M. Carmen Lane, Francesca LoPorto, Bridget O’Brien, and Svetlana Yedreshteyn.

Kathryn Kaplan, PhD,isapartnerinKaplanKnowltonandAssoci-ates,aleadershipdevelopmentandorganizationchangecon-sultinggroup.Shespecializesinhelpingwomensuccessfullynavigatechallengingorganiza-tionaldynamicsintheworkplace.Anauthoroffourbooksandnumerousarticles,Kaplanhasledsystemicculturechangeinfourmajormedicalcentersandservedonthefacultyoffiveuniversities.ShehasadoctorateinManage-mentandOrganizationBehaviorfromTheGeorgeWashingtonUniversity.Shecanbereachedatkaplan.kathryn@gmail.com



Kathyrn Kaplan’s study highlights the opportunities and challenges of the first and second generations of women in OD. As I read through the findings I could see myself responding to the inquiry in similar ways. Having been in the field of OD since 1989, I have found it to be open to women taking on leadership positions and appre-ciating the leadership we bring to boards, conferences, and educational programs. Yet, as I have felt throughout my career and as these women in the study expressed, OD as a field of study is more strongly grounded in a masculine orientation in regards to the theoretical and practice development. I have heard similar com-ments as those in the study from a number of women over the years, including some of the most recognized women. Women’s contributions do not receive the same rec-ognition as those of our male colleagues.

I was happy to see the increase in the percentage of ODP publications contrib-uted by women. Yet, as someone who has led an OD program for many years, I have found it difficult to include a good bal-ance of literature contributed by women. I do believe there are barriers for women gaining professional recognition that come through leadership, practice, and publica-tion that need to be explored. I would like to see a robust dialogue in the OD network regarding the experience described by the women in the study as “being disillusioned and disappointed that OD did not live up to

its potential for fulfillment, whether it was people in the field who want to maintain the status quo or those in a professional association who advocated inclusion but were perceived as excluding and demoniz-ing colleagues who had a point of view dif-ferent from their own.” Engaging a group of men and women who represent the past, present, and future of the field could result in greater understanding of the barriers and lead to potential change.

I was moved by the voices of women in the study who wished the field and practice focus was larger than helping indi-viduals, teams, and organizations improve. The comments about the need for a larger purpose for the work to create personal fulfillment and greater relevance seem important at this time when there is some question as to whether OD continues to be relevant. Those of us working in the field clearly see that relevance, but we need to explore why others do not. What questions need to be raised to consider where the field stands in relation to the many related professional practice arenas that have emerged over the years, such as organiza-tion design, organization systems, organi-zation learning? Is there room to expand the boundaries of OD and what would that mean in relation to integrating theory and practice from other fields? Is it time for OD to become more transdisciplinary? What additional opportunities will any expansion provide for alternative voices from young

ByNancySouthern

Continue Addressing the Challenges

“ThecommentsabouttheneedforalargerpurposefortheworktocreatepersonalfulfillmentandgreaterrelevanceseemimportantatthistimewhenthereissomequestionastowhetherODcontinuestoberelevant.”

Women’s Voices in OD – A Response

16 OD PRACTITIONER Vol. 47 No. 4 2015

people, women, and people with varied cultural backgrounds and perspectives?

As I read this study, I wondered if the emergence of the work in Dialogic OD will create more of an opening for women’s voices as this work embodies a greater relational understanding of organizations and ways to organize and work within them. This is where my work and teaching has been focused for many years and I have felt that the theoretical underpinnings of relational ways of working are more inclu-sive of a feminine perspective. In viewing the work as relational there is less focus on developing expertise and showing up as an expert, which the women in this study noted did not resonate with them and their practice. What the study showed was how these women acted as “a catalyst and con-nected to spirit, doing whatever it is they want to do with positive feelings of happi-ness and gratitude, making a contribution to humanity, helping others realize their potential, and making the world a better place.” This desire to be in service is also evidenced by the words of wisdom passed on to younger women as they build their knowledge, practice, and influence in the field of OD.

Based on my personal experience and years of educating mid-career professionals in leading transformative change in orga-nizational systems, I believe the following two points offered by the women in this study about doing this work are important to highlight. » “Learn to think in multiple levels of

systems. Always select an intervention that can impact individual behavior and system change.”

» “Not to think of themselves as OD consultants, but rather as strategic thinking partners and organizational strategists (or learning architects) with their clients.”

There is much work to do in the field of OD, in organizations, in communities, and in societies before women will find them-selves and their work equally recognized, as our organizational structures, in their many forms, are still dominated by a mas-culine orientation. It is easy to see the pres-sures on women in organizations today who desire to be leaders, but have to make sacrifices in their values and life priorities. As we hear from the women in this study, even in our field that strives for inclusion and equity, the challenges exist. Changes are taking place, as evidenced in Kathyrn Kaplan’s study and others that highlight the experience of working women. While many opportunities exist for women that did not when I started my career, those opportuni-ties need to be assessed as whether they provide the quality of life women desire and support the development of societies in which we all want to live. My hope is that the younger generations will continue to address the challenges of gender equity and that progress continues to evolve. Thanks to Kathyrn for providing this valu-able study.

Nancy Southern, EdD,hasconsultedandtaughtgraduateeducationinODandOSsince1989.Herworkfocusesoncreat-ingculturesofcollaborationinpublic,private,andnonprofitorganizationsandlocalcom-munities.Sheworkswithseniorandmid-managerstobuildtheircapacitytoengageinmeaning-fulconversations,appreciativeandcriticalinquirytocreatetheorganizationalchangestheydesire.Shehaswrittennumerousarticlesthatreflectherinquiryandworkintocreatingconditionsfortransformativelearningandchange.Shecanbereachedatnancy@collaborativecultures.com.

17ContinueAddressingtheChallenges


Reading Kathryn Kaplan’s study “Women’s Voices: Follow-up Study on the Second Generation of Women in OD” was a vali-dating experience. I found myself alone in my office vigorously nodding my head and making audible sounds of agree-ment. I was particularly struck by three of the dynamics Kaplan illustrated: the preponderance of oppressive intersectional dynamics women in OD have to navigate, the “tightrope act” of gaining recognition to further one’s career while dealing with the backlash of sexism, and the need for women to support other women.

The Complexity of Dynamics of Oppression: Is it gender, age, race, or . . . ?

I began my consulting practice at the young age of 27. Appearing younger than I actually was, the reactions I received when I walked into a Board Room were stark. Looks of surprise would register on clients’ faces when they saw me for the first time. How could this be the competent woman they had been speaking with over the phone? Over the years, I spent much of my career having to prove my compe-tence knowing that it wasn’t “a given” the way it was for my colleagues who were whiter, older, and more masculine. As a young, biracial woman I was never clear on whether the assumptions people made about my lack of competence had to do

with age, gender, or race. I was struck by the assertion of one woman in the study that youth was the variable that brought about the most oppression. One of the most common comments I hear (and just heard recently at the age of 42) is “she lacks the ‘gravitas’ we are seeking.” But is this about youth? I have heard the same comment used to devalue competent White women and Women of Color as well. I have worked with multiple teams over the years and paid close attention to the variables that add or detract from legitimacy in clients’ minds. What I can say for sure is they are all at play at any given moment and, like a kaleidoscope, one may stand out more than another given the norms, biases, and group identities present in the client system. Holvino calls this “simultaneity” (2012). As women we are faced with work-ing in systems of sexism and misogyny. Additionally, those with other subordi-nated group memberships are taxed with unraveling the dynamics of misogyny from other dynamics of oppression. Two skills become incredibly important. The first is being able to track and name the dynamics at play. The second is to be able to preserve one’s own sense of self worth in the face of discrimination and oppression, or as Kaplan’s participants note: “Recognize that you are only oppres sed to the degree you allow yourself to be oppressed in your own heart.” Both of these skills, in my

ByAmberMayes

Navigating Oppression

“Asayoung,biracialwomanIwasneverclearonwhethertheassumptionspeoplemadeaboutmylackofcompetencehadtodowithage,gender,orrace.Iwasstruckbytheassertionofonewomaninthestudythatyouthwasthevariablethatbroughtaboutthemostoppression.”



experience, make or break our ability to be effective and thrive within our client systems and the field of OD.

The Tightrope Act

Once you become “the expert” you will have status in a male-dominated environment, and credibility with var-ied populations. However, you must never flaunt your expertise . . .

This advice from participants in the study pierced my heart. It so perfectly captured the struggle I call the “tightrope act.” Navigating the sweet spot between confi-dence and humility is one of the greatest challenges faced by women in the field of OD. Years of work in the field of leadership development have provided me with much anecdotal evidence that this challenge is not one men face in the same way. The lati-tude given men in leadership and OD roles is much greater when it comes to promot-ing themselves, asserting their confidence, and taking credit for their work. Women, however, are told they should assert themselves, but when they do they are told they are doing it “too much.” This is a blatant example of misogyny. The ultimate message women take in is “you are never ‘right’ the way you are.” What results are a multitude of self-sabotaging acts such as: trying to be something you are not, judg-ing yourself harshly by metrics that don’t fit your way of being, and exhausting and depleting energy that could be used to be effective with clients. Developing vigilance in the face of these messages is incredibly important.

Women Supporting Women

Women still do not understand that the dominant group has that network without working on it, and women often think that their success has to be accomplished through their own individual stamina . . .

Ironically, the relational skills many women develop by being socialized to value relationship (in many cultures) can

get lost when they work in systems where relational power is subordinated. It is often the case that women compete with other women in patriarchal systems, believing the individualistic, competitive archetype is the only one that will lead to success. To this end, one of the most painful aspects of oppressive gender dynamics is women sabotaging other women. I can’t tell you how many times I have witnessed, been on the receiving end, or even caught myself participating in acts that keep other women down. At the same time, I can say that I have been a part of and witnessed the oppo-site behavior – women supporting women. This display of camaraderie and support is one of the most powerful acts of change within systems of sexism and misogyny. Kaplan’s study references the importance for women in OD to build strong relation-ships. It is my conclusion after 15 years of working to dismantle oppression in systems, that the relationships women have with one another are some of the most significant tools we can use to eradicate unjust systemic dynamics. This has proven true for other subordinated groups as well. Although participants in Kaplan’s study caution us to “dismiss the belief that patri-archy, sexism, male and White privilege are going to be eradicated by . . . womyn . . . that is work for men to do with men,” it is my experience that cultivating subordi-nated relational power and using it broadly (with all gender identities) is key not only to influencing client systems, but also to shifting and balancing access and equity in the organizations and communities in which we work and live.

Conclusion

As is true for many longitudinal studies, Kaplan’s work shows that over the past 20 years much has changed and much has stayed the same with regard to the experi-ence of women in OD. The overall chal-lenge of maintaining one’s identity while navigating issues of equity, inclusion, and access still persists. The specific manifesta-tion of these patterns may have changed, but the skills needed to be successful still include being able to track systemic

patterns, resist internalized oppression, and build strong relationships to garner support and influence change. Finally, it is clearer than ever that intergenerational relationships, support, and information exchange is critical to furthering the voice of women in OD.

Reference

Holvino, E. (2012). Time, space, and social justice in the age of globalization: Research and applications on the simul-taneity of differences. Practising Social Change 5, 4–9.

Amber L. Mayes, MSOD,isanindependentODconsultantandcoachwithover15yearsofexperiencesupportingthetransformationoforganizations,teams,andleaders.Shehasworkedwithclientsinthenon-profit,government,andcorporatesectors.MayeshastaughtcoursesinOrganizationBehaviorandCross-culturalCommunicationatBentleyCollege,NortheasternUniversity,andGeorgetownUni-versity.ShehasaBAfromHarvardUniversity,anMSODfromtheAmericanUniversity/NTLInstituteprograminOrganizationDevelop-ment,andanadvancedcertificatefromtheGestaltInstituteofCleveland.Shecanbereachedatamber@ambermayes.com.

19NavigatingOppression


“Women’s Voices: Follow-up Study on the Second Generation of Women in OD” by Kathryn Kaplan, is a needed revisit of the past 20 years, focusing on women in Organization Development. As I read the introduction, I recognized many of the names and felt honored to have been a col-league, a friend, a confidant, and mentee of several of the women listed.

The list, the emotions that it evoked, and the description of the research has prompted me to engage in several hours of silent reflection. The reflections and the opportunity to respond to this article come at a really lovely time for me in my life and career as an OD scholar/practitioner. I have recently found myself thinking about and missing my chats and adventures with Norma Jean Anderson and Elsie Y. Cross. I miss being in community with brilliant and patient Black women who were brave and impressive.

Kathryn Kaplan’s article made the years come to life once again. The research for this article calls up imagery from the Beaver Dam, WI conference on women, solidarity, and equality. That conference was one of the first times that the African American women spoke to White women about solidarity and support for their issues as women. Those were exciting and restless times because none of us were sure how to forge these bonds of sisterhood that “the women’s movement” spoke about. Or that

authors like, Gerda Lerner, in Black Women in White America, and Paula Giddings, in When and Where I Enter, wrote about.

In revisiting the last twenty years of being an OD professional through the lens of gender I am reminded of the beauty of working with both Black women and White women. I know this to be a place of gaiety and delight when the bond holds and when we each keep a clear eye on racism in our lives. I know this as a difficult and often fragile bond. I find myself touching an old wound that has not quite healed, it is one of those wounds that lets you know when the rain is coming, and it throbs like hell. It is also a familiar ache and somehow I have learned to live with it. The wound is the disappointment of being a Black woman in OD and believing that my White sisters could hold the container for race the same way they were holding gender. The wound also reminds me of the wisdom that I have gained about authentic friendship, and being Black and woman as I stayed in the OD field on the journey for social justice.

What is the learning from those excit-ing and interesting times? To be clear, the women who I spoke with believe the work was worth the struggle. The win column definitely has some bold accomplishments and the satisfaction of these accomplish-ments is truly gratifying. My win column includes original theory construction, rec-ognition as the Ken Benne scholar for NTL,

ByCathyRoyal

Reflections and RevelationsSisterhood is Powerful

“Womenwhoconfrontpowergetpunished.Thiswasaveryimportantlessonlearnedonthewaytothewisdom.Theimportanceofthissocialdynamicisthreadedthroughthisarticleanditshouldbelouderforthewomenwhoarestillworkinginthefieldandforthewomencomingintothefield.”



as well as contributions to the theoretical development of Appreciative Inquiry. All of my sisters lamented their losses. They also expressed sadness about the treatment that they experienced as they worked to make a difference in the field.

Women who confront power get punished. This was a very important les-son learned on the way to the wisdom. The importance of this social dynamic is threaded through Kaplan’s article and it should be louder for the women who are still working in the field and for the women coming into the field. We must also amplify the muffled screams of Black women that many fail to hear or listen for, who share time and space with White women yet often do not share access to opportunity, equity, and safety like White women.

What did the experiences over the past 20 years reveal about this bond? The expe-riences have shown me it could be done. And I salute my White sisters with whom I have those friendships. It takes a strong or brave White woman to hold the container. On most occasions the system, the men, and her other White sisters work against the partnership. And, if she persists in this bonding she will be punished. The Black women were also in grave danger, the sys-tem was suspicious of us, mistook us for the kitchen staff, and did not reward our efforts with accolades or employment. In many cases the cost was also personal, cre-ating riffs in social environments and with loved ones, separation from other Black women, and isolation in social circles. It is a difficult and often fragile bond.

And, there are still taboo discussions for Women of Color and White women. It is still difficult to discuss the devolvement or the morphing of the field of diversity from an area relegated to People of Color leading a fight for access to a field that is dominated by White women in leadership positions in corporations and nonprofits. There is still a very needed conversation on privilege that is attributed to White skin, gender, and patriarchy. We advise women to be brave and call out the oppression, yet, how do we illustrate to women that oppres-sion of Black women is a breech in the

contract and that this portal to success for White women shatters the bond of sister-hood. How do we manage the seats at the “table of access” when they are still limited and reserved for Whites only?

I have learned about my own power and my capacity for kindness and inclu-sion. This lesson was part of my work with other women of Color to understand how we can work across gender and race identities. My journey as a Black woman seeking to understand courage, invisibil-ity, and intelligence has made me a better researcher and practitioner. These 29+ years in OD have also taught me to hold onto the “current and reliable” data, call the oppression, remain focused, and stay the course. Changing the language or shifting the focus does not eliminate the problem.

In the here and now, the field of OD still makes the work of inclusion difficult. We speak of feedback and use of self and “walking the talk” but the behaviors that must change just don’t change. We change the conversation, the subject, or the focus of the inclusion tapestry. It is a rarity when we change our behavior or call others on their public or private misuse of gender privilege. It is past time “to get at this.”

Cathy L. Royal, PhD,isaSystemandOrganizationDevelopmentscholar/practitioner,withsub-jectmatterexpertiseinSocialJustice,AppreciativeInquiry(AI),OrganizationDevelopmentandTransformation,EducationLeader-ship,andActionResearch.RoyaldevelopedtheQuadrantBehav-iorTheory(QBT)©,adynamictheorythatsupportsinclusionandsocialjustice.ShepresentedherresearchonQBT,Triple3,andAIattheAppreciativeInquiryWorldSummitinJohannesburg,SouthAfricainJune,2015.SheisanadjunctfacultymemberatColo-radoTechnicalUniversityintheDoctorofManagementprogram,andNewYorkUniversity’sMas-tersofScienceinOrganizationDevelopment.Sheisamotherandgrandmotherandcanbereachedatmsroyalcat@yahoo.com

21ReflectionsandRevelations:SisterhoodisPowerful


The year was 1986. I stood before a roomful of police detectives at an upscale Welling-ton, New Zealand hotel. The pre-lunch hour audience was bored and hungry when I launched into my topic, cryptically described in the conference brochure as “Women. Who Needs Them?” For the next half hour, I elaborated upon what it was like to be a woman in a man’s business world and how their department, and so many other organizations, could benefit from the unique perspectives and contri-butions of that other segment of society: women. The standing applause at the end was affirming and several detectives stayed afterwards to continue the conversation. What I had to say was not groundbreaking but, in the mid-eighties, it was provocative and eye-opening. It touched a chord among these denizens of a traditionally very macho profession.

When I was invited to compare my own experiences as an elder OD practi-tioner with those of the women in the study, some of whom are the icons of my generation, I was honored and delighted to have an occasion to think back over a 30 year career and personal journey. Almost immediately, the conference described above sprang into my mind, likely because it marked the beginning of my awareness of myself as a pioneering representative of my gender and my profession whose voice was only just emerging and I was more

surprised than anyone else by the impact I could have.

At the time, I was an organization consultant with an international consulting firm and the company’s first female consul-tant in New Zealand. While colleagues of a similar age were collegial, the two older consultants were at a bit of a loss. “What can she possibly do?” I overheard one say, “We can’t send her to construction sites for obvious reasons. At meat packing plants they’ll look up her skirt when she climbs ladders and giving her any of our clients in places like Papua New Guinea would be crazy. She wouldn’t be safe.”

However, despite this misguided but well-meaning paternalism, I built a sizeable client base of government depart-ments seeking to consolidate and reorga-nize. This was during a period of time that New Zealand’s government was divesting itself of its commercial endeavors and consolidating what was left into policy units. Since reorganizations often lead to downsizings, I became known in the small capital community as the Angel of Death, a title that belied my commitment to the importance of what I was doing for the future of my adopted country and advocacy of practices and processes that recognized and respected all constituents. I can hon-estly say I never felt disadvantaged because of my gender. But I came from a country renown at the time for its management

ByAnnieViets

Reflection on a Career in International OD by an “Elder” Woman

“Likemanyofthewomeninthestudy,mycareerhasnotbeenplannedordeliberate.Instead,Ihavemovedfromoneprojectorprofessiontoanotheronthebasisofitsappealtomysenseofchallengeandadventure.”



practices and I had the reputation of a well-known consulting company behind me. Who knows how I might have faired as a Kiwi in solo practice.

When my daughter was almost a year old, I took an internal position with a large multinational client company to work a more predictable schedule than that of a consultant and hence have more time to spend with her. Here, after a short hon-eymoon period, during which I imagined the CEO who hired me saying to other executives, “Hey, look what I found! It’s a woman!”, unlike many of the women in the study, I did not find carrying out OD work to be easier as an internal “consul-tant” than coming in from the outside. To the contrary, as the only woman in the most senior ranks, everything I did or neglected to do was held up as an example of what all women did or didn’t do. It was an uncomfortable and stressful place to be. I discovered that political savvy and relationships with the right people were the keys to status and credibility and, as such, I learned to “embrace politics” as some of the women in the study recom-mended, to garner support for my ideas and initiatives and increase the chances of their being accepted.

At another company in another coun-try a few years later where I was responsi-ble for OD and training, the same situation presented itself but the turnover in senior management was so frequent that by the time I had obtained the support needed for an initiative or the continuation of a project, it would be time to change CEOs. In the study, one of Kaplan’s participants described this phenomenon by saying “a change in leadership wiped out years of work and discontinued long-term con-tracts.” It will be up to the next generation of OD consultants to find a way to work with and through this growing trend for short management tenure accompanied by a lack of long term perspective and commitment.

Just a few years ago, I facilitated a workshop focused on team work and col-laboration for approximately 100 interna-tional project managers at a US company. During a discussion of gender style and

preferences in leadership, several women aggressively defended their position that there is no difference between men and women and that I was being sexist and discriminatory by suggesting there could be. The men in the room appeared cowed by the outburst and shrank from the conversation. I thanked them for sharing and asked them to provide examples so we could understand their perspectives. They responded by simply standing up and walking out.

The incident has haunted me ever since. How far have we come if a group of young, highly educated and successful women feel it is important to be viewed as no different from a man? And what was it that scared the men? Clearly, there were many sensitive nerves among both the men and the women in this company that were sparked by the gender conversation, a conversation that should have been deeper and ongoing but was not. There was no time, no money, and no willingness to delve into the issues, shortages that seem to characterize OD and training projects in many companies today both in my experi-ence and that of the women in the study. So again, we bequeath this considerable challenge to our successors.

Like many of the women in the study, my career has not been planned or deliberate. Instead, I have moved from one project or profession to another on the basis of its appeal to my sense of challenge and adventure. And it is that appeal of the challenging and unusual that landed me in the Middle East about 4 years ago to teach management on the female campus of a private Saudi university. So, today, I work in an environment that is almost exclusively women among a population that is actively and rapidly finding its voice, a voice that will have a profound and positive influence on the future of the region.

It is a privilege to be in a position to mentor, coach, and encourage women who are eager to lead and influence their society in ways that are progressive and fair and respect their cultural heritage and religious beliefs. In these later years of my career, I could not ask for a more fulfilling role in which to tap the reserves of my knowledge

and wisdom while deepening my own understanding of a society that few have an opportunity to experience. I do not know if this is my second or third act but I know I am far from done. I love my work too much to think of quitting or slowing down.

The advice offered by the participants in the study to their younger colleagues is insightful and wise – as one would expect from an esteemed and accomplished group such as this. I am hard-pressed to add anything additional except to pass on an apt message for OD practitioners and adventurers of any age found in a quote by Rotana Tarabzouni, a daring young Pales-tinian/Saudi singer: “Life begins at the end of your comfort zone.”

Annie Viets, EdD,isanAssoci-ateProfessorofManagementatPrinceMohammadBinFahdUniversityinKhobar,SaudiArabia.HercareerhasincludedseniorHRandODpositionsatBen&Jerry’sHomemade,Inc.,TheHayGroupandFletcherChallenge(NewZealand)Ltd.ShehasservedonthefacultiesoftheUniversityofVermontSchoolofBusinessandtheSITGraduateInstitutewhereshewasChairoftheManage-mentDegreeProgram.Shecanbereachedatm.a.viets@gmail.com.

23ReflectiononaCareerinInternationalODbyan“Elder”Woman


At the 2013 ODN Conference, I was asked to interview four grand OD sage women – Billie Alban, Eddie Seashore, Barbara Bunker, and Brenda Jones; and they gave a terrific session for the attendees. They all shared the challenges they faced as women both in society as well as in the OD professional community “back then” and how they navigated through that terrain to get to where they are. After their sharing, a large number of younger women sought to make contact because the sage women’s determination to stay vibrant and impact-ful moved them. Twenty years on, the context has changed and the profession has more women than men and there is more room for women practitioners to thrive, yet Kaplan found some of the key issues still exist for, maybe, a different combina-tion of factors. How do we help each other navigate the not so friendly landscape with grace and savviness?

As the work world becomes more complex and as the OD field becomes a more established field, there has been a clear demand for both internal and external OD practitioners to be significant helpers and partners to organisations, hence the increased demand for effective OD practi-tioners. I believe the work is there, maybe we just need to make the stretch to have a wider portfolio.

I, as an Asian woman practitioner, have not experienced any significantly overt blockage and difficulties at work.

However, that is not because prejudice and bias have disappeared, but because I have made choices to ensure I will be the recipi-ent of the minimum amount of bias and prejudices by staying mainly in the macro, strategic areas of work within organiza-tions. Like Kaplan said, if our key portfolio is to focus on the strategic importance of what organizations need to do, there are both opportunities and work out there, and there has not been any serious barrier especially for external consultants.

However, due to the nature of the work, the key group I work with are predominantly male as that is still the profile of most top teams. In that con-text, the diversity issue often shows up in covert ways (in my case the interaction of my differences often are confusing to the client: Asian, woman, does not speak perfect BBC English, and yet obviously can hold her own intellectually) and get exaggerated or highlighted in a predomi-nantly white and male world. I am sure most of us know (even though we do not want to believe) that most people still do not know how to handle differences. Very recently, a European male board member (who is a well-meaning person) told me that my scoping report must be inaccurate because my English is not good enough to understand them, and being Chinese, I must have limited experiences in business. Hmmm . . . So the challenges for many of us is still about how to work effectively in

ByMee-YanCheung-Judge

Navigating the not so Friendly Landscape with Grace and Savviness

“Bydrillingevendeeperintopracticallywhatusing‘selfasaninstrument’means,wechallengeourselvestoachievemaximumflexibilityintheplacesweuseourtalents.Collectivestrengthwillthenbegatheredtocontinuetotackleinstitutionaldiscriminationandsupporteachothertodealwithoppression.”



organizations that do not have the diversity we come with, and how to play an educa-tional role without getting defensive. In the case of this client, after working with him and his team for four hours, he apologized for his earlier statement and asked me to support him.

What lessons have I learned and would like to pass on? The main one is to celebrate and leverage our own diversity and pay intentional attention to the journey of integration – so that we can understand who we are and what we stand for, and pro-vide a “centred” and “grounded” presence as a container to help those clients we are entrusted with to do their work. The use of self in this case includes being as fully present as we can, managing the bound-ary with intent, staying with “here and now” sensory awareness, so that in every moment we can bring our best self to work regardless of whether the environment is “alien, hostile, nourishing, easy, comfort-able, tough . . . .” How to SHOW UP is an important area for us (as woman with other diversity) to continue to pay attention to. After all, while others may intend to dimin-ish our sense of significance because of our differences, we can choose whether or not to give them permission to do so.

What contributions have I made? I think for the field to continue to thrive and grow, we women (more of us now) need to offer (whatever our circumstances allow us to – without guilt or obligation but with joy and abundance) a versatile bundle to the clients and the field – “academic-practitioner-educator-institution builder.” Whenever we can, publish something that will help the field to grow, do some low paid (compared to our consultancy rate) teaching of OD, spread the good work of OD to anyone who wants to learn, and spend some time supporting professional OD networks and institutions as the field needs such structures to support its further growth. I have been spending my time in the past 2 decades doing that – just follow-ing the footsteps of the wise, sage, front runner women. Other than some frustra-tion in the area of institution building, overall, the versatile bundle has kept me learning, growing, and feeling connected – knowing that we are continuing the torch

bearing from the founders of the field with our special innovative women’s touch.

Finally as Kaplan’s data point out, there are lots of us women, regardless of age and generation who want to build strong work and personal communities of support and challenge. This together with our commitment to develop ourselves will make us a strong force to be reckoned with. By drilling even deeper into practically what using “self as an instrument” means, we challenge ourselves to achieve maximum flexibility in the places we use our talents. Collective strength will then be gathered to continue to tackle institutional discrimina-tion and support each other to deal with oppression. As a connected network, I know collectively we crave for great impact. Many of us are addicted to impact so that, and as Kaplan quoted Thomas Merton, we together will celebrate “value, rightness, and truth of the work itself.”

Mee-Yan Cheung-JudgeisanexperiencedpractitionerservingasseniorFellowofRoffeyParkInsti-tuteinUKandtheSingaporeCivilServiceCollege.SheistheDeanoftheNTLODcertificateprogrammeinEurope,andaguestfacultyontheGestaltCertificateProgrammeinUK.ShewaspresentedtheLifetimeAchievementAwardbytheODNin2013.Shecanbereachedatlmycj@quality-equality.com.

25NavigatingthenotsoFriendlyLandscapewithGraceandSavviness

quality-equality.com

When I started reading Kaplan’s article I was overcome with a burning desire to listen to The Beatles’ White Album. My mind immediately traveled back to one of my early jobs in broadcasting as a television artist. When I started at that NBC affiliate in 1974 there was not even a restroom for women in the broadcast-ing building. As a viewer turning on your TV to check the news you could only see older, Caucasian men on the news set. And stories never showed any blood, needles, profane language, or nakedness to disturb your dinner hour. The times themselves were disturbing, and exciting enough—with social inequality, civil rights, the draft, consciousness raising, marches, and the women’s movement.

In the last month two things surprised me. First, I was shocked to learn from Kaplan’s article that I might be part of the “second generation” of Women in OD. I never thought much about where I fit into the history of OD, though I studied with Barbara Bunker, Libby Douvan, and the Seashores. Second, a doctoral student said to me that she “wanted to be me” referring to my doctorate and work in OD. I was floored. I considered myself to be somewhat of an “invisible” OD practitioner as Kaplan describes—still practicing OD some, still teaching OD in a medium-sized city in California.

I think Kaplan was “right on” about how women in OD started in the field,

because most of us who find ourselves practicing OD now, started somewhere else. Like her participants, I accidentally found OD. I found my calling in the trash can when taking out the garbage. Out of the discarded eggshells and empty cereal boxes I picked up a brochure for California School of Professional Psychology for a graduate program in organizational behav-ior that had been sent to my husband, an attorney. (Yes, that mailing list reflected the gender inequality of the times.) But, I started down that life path and never looked back.

Like many of her participants, I have had a broad range of experiences in OD. I was in that first group of women who moved into the workplace as profession-als, and even returned to work after having babies. With my education in organiza-tional studies, I became a trainer, facilitator, executive coach, organizational consultant, presenter, jury consultant, and graphic facilitator. I have managed a training center for a county, trained cannery workers, worked with family-run businesses, helped companies create teams, worked with nonprofits, was a full-time faculty member, worked globally a little, and spent 3 years in healthcare as an internal OD. For more than 20 years I taught graduate classes in organization studies in change and development, organization theory, systems, sustainability, leadership, and research. One of the best things about being an OD

ByLynneValek

My Life in OD“The Long and Winding Road”

“IparticularlyresonatedwithKaplan’sreferencetoonefinding,‘Justhavingmorewomenatworkandinleadershippositionsdoesnotguaranteeequityandsocialjustice.’Ihavefoundmyselfdespairinglatelyabouttheconditionoforganizations.”



practitioner is the flexibility one develops and the ways one can apply OD values and skills in many places and in many different ways.

I particularly resonated with Kaplan’s reference to one finding, “Just having more women at work and in leadership posi-tions does not guarantee equity and social justice.” I have found myself despairing lately about the condition of organizations. I have often asked myself, “If we are doing our job as ODs, why aren’t organizations better? Why do we still have bosses who behave outrageously toward subordinates? Why are teams still struggling to work it out? Why aren’t there better policies in organizations? Why isn’t the bottom line a better line for everyone?” My husband, an employment attorney, comes home sometimes unable to deal with hearing all day about the egregious abuse of bosses towards their employees and workers towards other employees—not only toward women, but toward other men and all ethnic groups. Are we failing our organiza-tions, or are they failing us?

I sometimes think I am alone, or just similar to my OD friends, in being frustrated about the problems in organiza-tions. I don’t feel oppressed as a woman, but I have been. Kaplan’s participants recommended that one shouldn’t “be afraid to ‘speak truth to power’,” however it still scares me. Perhaps younger women will lose that fear, but it comes with the territory of being born in the 1950s and growing up in the 1960s and 1970s.

As Kaplan pointed out, the second-generation OD women “share stories of frustration when male bosses domi-nate, female bosses are not supportive of women, and co-workers engage in power plays, undermining teamwork. When they experience gender bias, the topic seems taboo, leaving the women often feeling iso-lated, vulnerable, and in no-win situations.” I have found that having a conversation and a drink—often Starbucks—with other women friends in OD allows me to have an authentic dialogue when these situations occur. We commiserate, we laugh, we share the little stuff that makes us angry and sad, and it makes us strong enough to go back and walk the OD path again.

My first job out of high school was to work in a factory clean room welding micro-electronic modular assemblies and my second was working in a cannery canning green beans during the summers. I realize I really liked these jobs because I felt respected and appreciated by those above me, and could contribute something. The desire to make others feel good about the work they do has always been impor-tant to me. As Kaplan asserts, she “did not expect the degree to which they [the second generation women in OD] would inter-weave their personal journeys with their experience as an OD consultant.” I found that my response was to do the very same thing. It almost seems like using “self as an instrument” is just interwoven into the essence of being an OD practitioner.

Like Kaplan’s participants, I have just begun thinking about reimagining myself in the “third act” of my life, if I am so lucky to be able to do that. I am satisfied that in most cases I have done my best to do “good work” whatever I do. However what “good work” means has shifted some. My days now may start with executive coaching and facilitating a staff meeting, but may also include painting watercolors, or wearing a sparkly tiara and having tea parties with my toddler granddaughters. I agree with Kaplan’s recognition, “… it is about living with authenticity, learning from work and life, and having no regrets. Coming to a place of peace inside has not always been easy…. However, looking back there is the feeling ‘I am living the work I came here to do and am responding to the changes in energy as a result of aging’.”

Lynne ValekearnedherPhDinHumanandOrganizationalSystemsandanMAinHumanDevelopmentfromtheFieldingGraduateUniversity.ShealsohasanMSinOrganizationBehaviorfromtheCaliforniaSchoolofProfessionalPsychology.Herfirstcareerwasintelevisionbroad-castingbeforebecominganODpractitioner.Currently,ValekisaVisitingAssociateProfessoratAlli-antInternationalUniversity(CSPP)teachinggraduatestudentsinorganizationalpsychologyandonlinegraduateclassesfortheUniversityofPhoenixinpsychol-ogy.Shecanbereachedatlynne.valek@gmail.com

27MyLifeinOD:“TheLongandWindingRoad”


I was so delighted to be a part of Dr. Kathryn Kaplan’s two unique studies of second generation women – the one that took place in 1994 and one last year. Her thoughtful questions challenged deep reflections on my life and career as an internal OD consultant, manager of OD, community activist, and my subsequent 35 years as external OD consultant and partner in our firm.

Her sensitive and creative synthesis of the findings offers a window into an impor-tant part of our field’s professional journey. I enjoyed being part of her community of women, reflecting on similarities and dif-ferences, and learning from their experi-ences. I am grateful to reflect again and to comment briefly on my thoughts now.

Four aspects of being an older woman in OD engage my thinking today. First is the complex journey into old age. Now in my early 70s, I experience the growing pull to engage with the bewildering, intrigu-ing, and daunting thoughts and feelings about aging that arise unbidden. Like so many, I am perplexed at what feels like two incompatible modes of living: I feel still vibrant and resourced personally and pro-fessionally, and I want to write about what I know about organization change from the vantage of my age. Simultaneously, I feel the pull to slow down, enjoy an expansive leisure at last in the full knowledge that I have contributed a lot – maybe enough for one life time.

More than ever before, I cherish time with David Glaser, my beloved husband and business partner of many years, and with my dear family, colleagues, and friends. As people close die, I am aware as never before that one never knows how much time is left or how life will end. And I want to enjoy every day and not just hurtle from one project to another, one task to another, as I have for so many years.

It is daunting to integrate the number on my birthday cake with my continuing curiosity about organizations and commit-ment to serve them. I love Kathryn’s quot-ing one of the interviewees who described herself as a “Cronette” or “Elderella.” Me too! These whimsical titles lighten the weightiness of the existential and profes-sional challenges that are inescapable while aging – if one is paying attention, and I am! This age brings with it a new stage of inner work, to know oneself and use one-self powerfully – the next phase of under-standing the meaning of Use of Self, OD’s unique and challenging model for being a professional helper.

The second area of my current ponder-ing feels better integrated in me. It is my certainty of the value and importance of continuing to cultivate my cherished net-work of respected colleagues with whom I learn and grow as a person and as a con-sultant. This is especially true with David; we continue to be wonderful thinking partners, whether we work together with

ByJudyVogel

Enduring Commitment

“Aspeopleclosedie,Iamawareasneverbeforethatoneneverknowshowmuchtimeisleftorhowlifewillend.AndIwanttoenjoyeverydayandnotjusthurtlefromoneprojecttoanother,onetasktoanother,asIhaveforsomanyyears.”



a client or on separate projects. Providing OD services to organizations is always chal-lenging and often lonely; having trusted buddies with whom to develop new ideas and to get support has been life and career sustaining. I am deeply grateful to so many!

I rely on this community as I struggle with the persisting and escalating inhu-manity in the US and the world at large. As I watch with horror the state of race relations, the treatment of women and children, overflowing prisons, homeless-ness, world-wide poverty, environmental degradation, and terrorism, I wonder if human civilization is irreversibly dete-riorating. My usual optimism and can-do philosophy wavers. I also wonder if we have oversold to our clients OD’s capacity to make significant and sustainable posi-tive change happen; I believe we may have oversold it to ourselves and that humility is badly needed. And yet, I believe that I and my colleagues have done much of value to increase human systems’ humanity and productivity. I trust that younger practitio-ners will find new ways to continue this work and I hope they will create successes that eluded my generation. Increasingly, I am ready to hand off the baton.

The third focus of this reflection is the area of my work that has been most vibrant in recent years -- providing executive coaching and mentoring. These one-on-one relationships have been opportunities to leave a legacy in others’ lives, especially women, organization leaders, and MSOD students at American University. I get great joy providing the intimate support to their capacity to use themselves with integrity and skill in their respective systems.

Several years ago, I had the honor of having an article published in the OD Practitioner on the subject of mentor-ing. Based on interviews with 24 people of many diversities, including age, race, gender, and fields of work, it explored ways to attract a mentor, ways to work effectively with one, and ways to become a mentor as one matures. I derive satisfaction in the knowledge, or maybe just the hope, this article makes a meaningful contribution to the readers’ lives and careers and their

capacity to serve others well as leaders or consultants.

Finally, I reflect on my awareness that there is so much to know that no one can learn it all or do it all. Use of self requires focus among the many options for intervention. My knowing today is that personal presence, calmness, and curiosity are strategies of great power—greater than any model or tool. Clients are usually in some state of distress or uncertainty—and vulnerability—when they ask for help. And the consultant’s capacity to meet them with equanimity and respect provides the essential well-spring for being of ser-vice. I continue to feel honored to provide this service.

Cultivating these personal resources and using them well with clients takes many years to develop. Being older, hav-ing lived through many of life’s personal and professional challenges and having worked with many organization leaders on countless issues and opportunities has provided a valuable practice field for me; I have seen a lot and survived many bumps, learned, changed, and thrived. I believe my journey has enriched my capacity to serve my clients.

So simultaneous with the qualms and confusions of aging and the concern for the state of human existence on this earth is the calm knowledge of my seasoning and my enduring commitment to being a presence in the world for good—whether I am consulting, writing, relating to family and friends, or enjoying greater personal leisure and a smaller focus than during my years of intense engagement with issues and clients.

Judy Vogel, MA,ofVogelGlaser&Associates,hasbeenanexternalODconsultantsince1987,beforewhichshewasDirectorofODandHRDforseveralcorporationsandlargenonprofits.JudyisontheinstructionalteamforAmericanUniversity’sMSODandCoordina-torofLearningCommunityTime’sfacilitators.SheisamemberofNTLInstituteandisactiveincom-munity-basedeffortsinColumbia,MDandFortLauderdale,FL.JudyhaspublishedmanyarticlesintheODPractitionerandisontheEditorialReviewBoard.ShecanbereachedatJudy@VogelGlaser.com.

29EnduringCommitment


Reflecting on my reaction to Kathryn Kaplan’s study, I have a sense of familiar-ity and understanding as I compare some of the voices she heard to my own related life experiences. I am a certified NTL OD practitioner with an EdD in OD, who is a Generation Xer, highly influenced by Baby Boomers. A business colleague recently mentioned to me, “haven’t we all been influenced by Baby Boomers.” I responded yes because my immediate family house-hold had all Boomers. I was the youngest of the pack and my budding OD beliefs and how I am in the world were influenced by that surrounding environmental system.

Like some of the women expressed, I stepped in and out of OD work unknow-ingly until I entered a Human Resources role about 10 years ago, which is nearly the same time I joined the healthcare industry. I think this constitutes as having “tripped” upon the field or happenstance. My luck was serendipitous! I work at a large health-care organization and actively participate as a part of the top-level leadership team working on people strategies.

I find the field of OD open to women yet not kindly to Women of Color. As a Woman of Color I have been placed in multi cultural or diversity and inclusion roles. Too often, I have not received support or acknowledgement for my skills and tal-ent as an OD practitioner. Yet, my credit-ability as an OD practitioner has come mostly through the diversity and inclusion

work I have done in organizations or through my current title (Senior Director, Diversity, Inclusion, and Engagement at HealthPartners). For instance, I have been asked to speak to teams about OD issues, and one team in particular invited me to speak about Leaders and their Fears, which is included in some of my research. At the time the leader knew I was a diversity and inclusion leader for another organization but was impressed by the presentation enough to consider me as a possible mem-ber of the team as an OD professional. Equally, in my current organization, I am a diversity and inclusion leader yet asked to lead many other organization development efforts outside of my defined role.

Ironically, I believe diversity and inclu-sion is an OD intervention that can help increase the relevance of OD. I observe organizations struggling mostly with diversity. I think this is because there is a longstanding belief among some White people that they are not diverse. Therefore, I believe this is why they do not see them-selves as part of or participate in diversity and inclusion efforts. For example, I notice the difference in progress a team can make when I share a broad definition of diversity (saying it includes thinking style or we are all diverse) than when I have said diversity is defined more narrowly. Likewise, we need to educate and help all people under-stand they are diverse so that they are more willing to create a diverse and inclusive

ByTonyaHampton

Reflections of a Generation Xer

“...weneedtoeducateandhelpallpeopleunderstandtheyarediversesothattheyaremorewillingtocreateadiverseandinclusiveenvironmentandgeneratemoresocietalprogresstowardequity.”



environment and generate more societal progress toward equity.

Making OD relevant at all levels of an organization can also counter the argu-ment that OD has lost its purpose. One of the founding leaders in OD, Richard Beckhard (1969), defined OD as “an effort planned, organization wide, and managed from the top to increase organization effectiveness and health… using behavioral- science knowledge.” The only disagree-ment I have with Beckhard is that OD can start at the top of the organization but can also start with teams and individuals at different levels in the organization.

Other voices in Kaplan’s article indi-cate that OD consultants should think of themselves as “strategic thinking partners” with their clients; this resonates for me as I do my work with organizations.

As a result of the noted challenges above and others mentioned by the inter-viewees, I too have reinvented myself by committing to the OD principles. My num-ber one mission is to “Help Others.” I also focus on being humble, influencing others, making an impact, and building relation-ships. Connecting, loving others, and being grateful has become more important to me as I passed my 40s and experienced difficulties in my own life that came about more frequently – death, illnesses, triumph, etc.

I have learned many lessons and the best way to continue learning is by doing the OD work, maintaining strong relation-ships, and developing myself. I believe OD practitioners of diversity and inclusion are “modern day” civil rights and social activists. Therefore, I continue to work to change the oppressive structures and behaviors that impact both individuals and organizations. One of my mottos is: “When pain occurs, turn it into passion.”

Tonya Hampton, EdD,isastrategicdiversity,inclusion,organization,andtalentdevelop-mentleaderwithalmost25yearsHumanResourcesexpertise.Sheisacertifiedprofessionalco-activecoachandqualifiedadministratoroftheInterculturalDevelopmentInventory.SheisalsoanadjunctprofessoratSt.Catherine’sUniversityandaSeniorDirector,Diversity,Inclusion,andEngage-mentatHealthPartners.Shehasabachelor’sdegreeinPoliticalScience/Pre-LawandaMBAandEdDfromtheUniversityofSt.Thomas.Shehasspentmostofhercareerworkingwithteamsandleadersaroundtheworldfocusedonleadingchangeandorganiza-tioneffectiveness.Shecanbereachedattljhampt@hotmail.com

31ReflectionsofaGenerationXer


“Businessresearchsaysthat,whenevaluatingcompaniesaswomen-friendly,theyconsiderhowmanywomenareinleadershiproles(peoplewho‘looklikeme’)andpoliciesandprogramsaimedatpromotingwomenandworklifebalance.”

ByThereseF.YaegerandPeterF.Sorensen

The Manley Corporation has been a suc-cessful production company for nearly 100 years. It is a traditional company and is known for quality work and product. Although the culture is hierarchical and bureaucratic, most employees tend to stay at the company for decades—some for their entire working career.

However, the Manley Corporation has difficulty retaining competent women employees. Women employees have stated that Manley has become macho in the past few years. Last year, the company, at HR’s suggestion, created an OD department to address gender and Quality of Work Life issues. But before the entire OD team was hired, one woman OD colleague found it difficult herself to operate in the masculine culture, and opted for another OD position in town.

The HR Department is working hard at responding to legal (complaint) issues from former women employees. A recent illustration helped a former OD colleague understand the situation. When she approached the top HR executive regard-ing the issue, the HR executive replied that Manley was right in line with other manu-facturing organizations, citing a recent 2015 Deloitte study indicating that women make up about 47% of the labor force, but only 27% of the manufacturing workforce.

In turn, the OD team explored the research and found that once women are in the workforce, they advance in their

careers, holding more than half of all US managerial and professional positions. The OD team has made some assumptions: » Manley has difficulty retaining women

employees because of its struggle to transform its outdated culture.

» The OD team realizes that they need to start a formal strategy to create a posi-tive environment for women.

» Time is of the essence; the Legal Department is suggesting that the OD team improve the gender ratio before further legal issues arise.

The Manley internal OD team decided to work with three external OD experts with experience in gender gap issues and Quality of Work Life Balance inequities. Some questions for the external OD experts include:1. What change communication strategies

will create the most successful outcome for all?

2. How has Quality of Work Life Balance been addressed?

3. As the external consultant, what strate-gies might be most effective?

4. What quick solutions can an OD con-sultant incorporate for a small win?

We welcome the responses from our three expert respondents: Jaya Koilpillai Bohl-mann (managing director with Burson-Marsteller), Meghan Wright ( Visiting Assistant Professor of Management

Case Study

The Manley Corporation

Women’s Voices in OD


at Texas Wesleyan University in Fort Worth), and Reyna Herbison (a business consultant).

Jaya Koilpillai Bohlmann

As the OD consultant, I would first assess the situation, then recommend a communication and change plan. Busi-ness research says that, when evaluat-ing companies as women-friendly, they consider how many women are in leader-ship roles (people who “look like me”) and policies and programs aimed at promoting women and work life balance.

Knowing this, I would begin by assessing the Manley Corporation through Bolman and Deal’s (2008) human resources frame (dealing with people through training, rotations, promotions, or dismissals) and the structural frame (assumes formal roles and responsibilities will maximize job performance).

Since the head of HR is complacent about the need for more women at Man-ley, yet others on the management team have expressed urgency about that goal, a change readiness assessment of top and middle managers should be done. I recom-mend Kurt Lewin’s Force Field Analysis. For change to occur the status quo must be upset so driving forces are stronger than restraining ones. I also recommend using the Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI), a valid survey method to examine organizational culture and the desire to change, based on the premise

that every organization has its own mix of four types of organizational culture, which compete for dominance. The OCAI tests the values of flexibility and discretion, stability and control, environmental forces of external focus and differentiation, and internal focus and integration. From this assessment, I can determine if Manley is a culture typified by Clan, Adhocracy, Hierar-chy, or Market. Understanding this finding would tell me what kind of change plan to initiate, and what kind of communication to undertake. My proposed plan is based on components of John Kotter’s (1995) change plan, which include:

1. Create a theme and metaphor to describe the change, and communicate that through the organization, begin-ning with the top managers.

2. Create a transition or change team, comprised of leaders and managers. Ask them to select the most senior level woman hire, which gives them control and a voice.

3. Provide training for employees to adjust to the change and the future state.

4. Ensure resources are adequate and available.

5. Create a plan to evaluate if change has occurred in feelings, mindset/thinking, behavior, and impact.

I would include a combination of one-way and two-way communication methods, mostly in-person and from the top of the organization. These would include meet-ings led by the CEO announcing the new

recruitment program for women manag-ers, explaining the business reasons for the change, and how it will make a positive dif-ference to the company and each employee. As Coch & French (2009) state, commu-nication is crucial to change, especially if some individuals are resisting the change.

Keeping in mind the human resources frame, I would advise Manley to embark on an aggressive recruitment campaign to hire more women at the management level (offering attractive signing bonuses and referral bonuses to employees), retain them through mentoring programs and engage-ment, invest in them through training and additional benefits and compensation, empower them by making them decision makers, and promote diversity, holding all managers in the company accountable for those goals (Bolman & Deal, 2008).

Meghan Wright

Women desire work that is aligned with their value system, and is therefore pur-poseful, accompanied by some flexibility, and sensitive to family life. Addressing these issues will be critical to creating a company culture that can attract and retain highly talented women. For the Manley Corporation to continue its production company success, it will be important to be more intentional about adding gender diversity.

The internal OD team has stated some assumptions at this point that appear to be very relevant. While it is not necessar-ily time to abandon the bureaucratic style at Manley, it is indeed time to integrate characteristics of clan and adhocracy culture styles which are more in line with the values of the female perspective of quality work life balance. As with any change effort, communication will be a critical component of the change pro-cess. With multiple generations involved, some with decades of employment with the company, seeking participation from many of these groups will make the change process easier for those accustom to this embedded culture.

As a first step in the process of developing a formal change strategy, the OD team should interview women who

While it is not necessarily time to abandon the bureaucratic style at Manley, it is indeed time to integrate characteristics of clan and adhocracy culture styles which are more in line with the values of the female perspective of quality work life balance. As with any change effort, communication will be a critical component of the change process. With multiple generations involved, some with decades of employment with the company, seeking participation from many of these groups will make the change process easier for those accustom to this embedded culture.

33CaseStudy:TheManleyCorporation

have exited the company to understand what specifically women in the production industry desire for value alignment, and what was not present at Manley. Addi-tionally, collecting input from employees within the company will add an internal

perspective to the process. Communicating this information to the larger group will involve everyone in the change process, give them a chance to add potential ideas for change, and create a shared vision for the desired future state of Manley as it pertains to quality of work life balance. The applicability of quality of work life balance to both genders will surface and create a shared purpose for the change, and invoke a sense of community among the larger group.

Maintaining a communication process that is timely, frequent, with quick follow-up to meetings with leadership and/or the OD team will invoke transparency and make the change process much more effec-tive. A formal strategy developed from the above-stated events will include a timeline to allow for celebration of short wins to keep the company engaged in the process and excited about the inclusion of women in a male-dominated industry.

The Manley Corporation should embrace this opportunity to become a leader in culture change for companies in the production industry. Including more women and a shift in the company culture, will foster innovation and market anticipa-tion. As stated before, communication, continuous and frequent, will be critical to build awareness of the scope, benefits, and overall impact the change effort will have

on the Manley Corporation. Using the sug-gested “push” and “pull” combination to deliver information to the larger group of Manley, and also to gather input to inform the change strategy, will significantly help the incremental change integration.

As a final word to the OD team, it is a good idea to adopt the mindset that it is nearly impossible to “over communicate” when in the process of a change project, especially when culture is so deeply embed-ded in the organization.

Reyna Herbison

Culture change is slow and a company with a long history of success has many strongly held basic assumptions that foster an indi-vidual’s espoused values and ideals about themselves that may be out of line with actual assumptions by which they operate. With a track record of success, people will not want to challenge or re-examine assumptions since they justify the past and are the source of individual/collective pride and self-esteem. Addi tionally, these assumptions become filters that make it difficult for key managers to hear and understand alternative strategies for the company’s survival and renewal.

However, research shows when imple-menting a holistic collaborative solution, and when senior leaders are informed about what needs to change, why the change is needed, and what in their cul-ture is missing or inhibiting change, they are more open to the information, better informed, and can take action based on facts.

Surveys are useful in some situations and as Schein (2010) suggests, surveys might be appropriate when (a) determining whether a particular dimension of a cul-ture is related to performance, (b) deeper analysis of the culture is needed, and (c) educating employees about aspects that management wants to change.

Data is powerful and when trends, insight, and strategy can be supported by figures and benchmark institutions, the results can be influential and positively impact the change results. Moreover, a survey can help establish a foundation for the culture change process and aid in implementing evidence-based objectives and plans.

By augmenting the survey results with interviews and town hall and group meetings of key stakeholders, the informa-tion revealed will help test current percep-tions and help build commitment around the resulting strategy. Discovering how the organizational members envision the future look and feel of the company can also aid the deployment of a coherent and consistent approach where all action is locked into longer-term goals.

The majority of employees have worked at Manley for decades, but invent-ing a program that does not abandon prin-ciples and embodies current culture can aid the transition. Change happens quicker when the initiative has a diverse group rep-resentation in decision making and when key leaders invite others to aid the process of implementing the new strategy. Gradual and incremental change can be assisted by the systematic promotion of insiders whose own assumptions are better adapted to the new external realities. Role modeling is important, blending new external individu-als and identifying employees who match the desired culture can aid the change process. Implementing a program of early retirement, buyouts, individual counseling, and retraining sessions can also support the initiative.

Leaders clearly and visibly dedicated to change are important success factors. By consistent messaging and constant commitment to the future state, leadership can reinforce, recognize, and celebrate the process to ensure strengthening the

Change happens quicker when the initiative has a diverse group representation in decision making and when key leaders invite others to aid the process of implementing the new strategy. Gradual and incremental change can be assisted by the systematic promotion of insiders whose own assumptions are better adapted to the new external realities. Role modeling is important, blending new external individuals and identifying employees who match the desired culture can aid the change process.


attractors and eliminating others during the transition (Burke, 2011).

Repetition is the key and leadership needs to constantly source, negotiate, and align the perceptions of the group. Feed-back and adjustments to the plan need to be consistent and ongoing. When some-thing is working, the successes need to be communicated and celebrated, and when something is not working adjustments and changes need to be quickly implemented.

Yaeger and Sorensen Respond

Each of our three respondents provides us with both classic and current approaches to culture change. For instance, Bohlmann refers to the use of Kurt Lewin’s Force Field Analysis and use of instruments to collect culture data, specifically the OCAI.

Wright draws on her extensive experi-ence working with female entrepreneurs and leadership. Her strategy relies more on interviewing, specifically interviewing former and current women employees in the production industry, and she views this as an opportunity for Manley Cor-poration to become a leader in culture change in the production industry. She also stresses the central role of communi-cation in the process of culture change.

Herbison, similar to Bohlmann, rec-ommends the use of surveys to establish the foundation for the culture change pro-cess and suggests augmenting the surveys with interviews, town hall, and group meet-ings for sharing the survey results. She also makes the point that a change effort should incorporate the current strengths of the culture as they move toward the culture change. Finally, Wright emphasizes the role of leadership and reinforcing the change process.

With the help of these three respon-dents, Manley could be on the road to success, and could become the model for the industry. We thank our three expert contributors and hope the Manley case pro-vides insights for all culture change efforts.

References

Bolman, L.G., & Deal, T. (2008). Refram-ing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Burke, W. W. (2011). A perspective on the field of Organization Development and change: The Zeigarnik effect. The Jour-nal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(2), 143–167.

Coch, L., & French, J.R.P. (2009). Over-coming resistance to change. In W. W. Burke, D. L. Lake, & J. W. Paine (Eds.), Organizational change: A comprehensive reader (pp. 341–363). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kotter, J. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. In HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Change Management, 2011. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

Lewin, K., (1947). Frontiers of group dynamics. Human Relations, 1, pp. 5–41.

Organizational Culture Assessment Instru-ment (2015). http://www.ocai-online.com/about-the-Organizational-Culture-Assessment-Instrument-OCAI

Schein, E. (2010). Organization culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Jaya Koilpillai BohlmannisacommunicationandODconsultant,manag-ingdirectoratcommunicationfirmBurson-Marsteller,earningherMSMOBatBenedictineUniversitytosupplementherjournalismandcommunicationdegrees.Sheisdevotedtoboostingorganizationalsuccessbyimprovingthequantityandqualityofbrandvisibilitythroughleadershiprolesinhospitality,foodandbeverage,nutrition,andhealthcare.Shecanbereachedat [email protected].

Reyna Herbison, PhD,hasover22yearsofexperienceworkingwithFortune500and250companiesasabusinessconsultantspecializinginleadership,strategy,strategicplanning,ODandchange,marketing,andinternationalexperience.Shehasentrepreneurialexperiencewithowningandoperat-ingavarietyofprofitablesmallbusinesses.Herworkwithbusinessownersincludesassistingwithdevelopingstrategicbusinessandmarketingplans,branding,evaluatingfinancialresources,accessingmarkets,settinguplocalandsatelliteoperations,andcommercializingtechnologies.ShecanbereachedatReynaherbison@gmail.com.

Meghan C. Wright, PhD,isaVisitingAssistantProfessorofManagementatTexasWesleyanUniversityinFortWorth.Shehasoverfiveyears’experienceworkingwithwomenentrepreneursandwomeninleadership.Throughherconsultingworkshehasidentifiedbarrierstosuccessforwomenandsub-sequentlycreatedtraininganddevelopmentcurriculumforSmallBusinessDevelopmentCentersandcontinuingeducationprograms.Shecontinuestoresearchfemaleleadershipandparticipateinleadershipevents.Shecanbereachedat [email protected].

Therese Yaeger, PhD,andPeter Sorensen, PhD,aretheProfessorandDirectorofthePhDprograminOrganizationDevelopmentandtheMSMOBProgramsatBenedictineUniversityinLisleandSpringfield,[email protected].

35CaseStudy:TheManleyCorporation

http://www.ocai-online.com/about

http://www.ocai-online.com/about





ByRobertD.GreeneandHeatherBerthoud1

1. This is a revised and updated version of an article that appeared in the OD Practitioner, 39(2).

“Inthepastmostclientsmayhavecalledforabriefdiversitytraining,or,perhaps,suggestionsonhowtobuildacultureofinclusion;nowmanyareaskinghowtheycanbuildorganizationsthataddressbiasandstructuralracism.Theseclientsunderstandtheyareaskingforlongertermworkthatwillexaminedeep-seatedissuesintheirinternalandexternalpractices.”

OD is DiversityDifferences are at the Heart of the Field

After meeting with the top executive and the senior management team, Jerry, an OD consultant, designs an off-site to begin a change process for a medium size organization. The off-site proceeds apace until one partici-pant makes a statement about race that some take as charged. A heated exchange between two staff—one black, one white—ensues. Caught off-guard and not sure what to do, Jerry continues with the planned agenda, though the tension remains for the rest of the day.

The US Department of Justice issued a report in March, 2015, showing the practices of the police and courts of Ferguson, MO, predictably and disproportionately affected the Black population as the outcome of a pat-tern of civil rights violations.

The impact of historical national policies and the impact of internalized bias are receiving increased coverage in everything from criminal justice to unemployment, housing, healthcare, and technology. It is vital to recognize these dynamics in our OD work also. In the past most clients may have called for a brief diversity training, or, perhaps, suggestions on how to build a culture of inclusion; now many are ask-ing how they can build organizations that address unconscious bias and structural racism. These clients understand they are asking for longer term work that will exam-ine deep-seated issues in their internal and external practices.

This article presents a case for diver-sity2 being fundamental to OD and offers ways to foster a diversity lens and improve consultants’ work with diverse groups.

It is well understood that demograph-ics in the US are changing rapidly. It is no longer possible to assume that there is “no diversity” in organizations. And with the national discourse becoming more influ-enced by concepts of implicit bias (Banaji & Greenwald, 2013) and structural racism, it is increasingly difficult for organiza-tions and practitioners to escape their own participation in the larger societal dynamic. Failing to attend to diversity, that is, to fail to note issues related to race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, physical disability, and other identities and the relative power assigned to them socially and institution-ally can limit the impact of organizational change processes. Practitioners are too often “surprised” when issues related to diversity arise in assessments, meet-ings, and other interventions. This is due, in part, to seeing diversity as a separate specialty rather than a fundamental area of competence critical to all dimensions of OD practice.

Many OD practitioners focus on one or a few areas or approaches, such as strategic planning, appreciative inquiry, leadership

2. The word diversity, once favored, is often replaced by several others expressions—diversity and inclusion, cultural competence, equity, multi-culturalism, pluralism, and more—as practitio-ners grapple with how to name process, structure, practice, outcome, and description in a single term. In this article we use diversity though we acknowl-edge it, like all other terms, is limited.


development, etc. It is, of course, reason-able to focus on what one most enjoys and does well. Diversity is seen as one of these specialties, and many practitioners do not believe they need skill or awareness if they “don’t do diversity.”

Although we are not proposing that every OD practitioner needs to be a diver-sity “expert,” we believe it is impossible to implement OD interventions effectively in the 21st century without at least basic awareness and competence in diversity matters. The principles of diversity—broad and meaningful participation by all

members of a system in order to maximize available creativity and energy for organi-zational learning and effectiveness—are fundamental to OD. Meaningful participa-tion is constrained or augmented by inter-nalized and expressed biases and power differentials. Diversity requires looking at the impacts of any change effort on differ-ent subpopulations within the system. Too much is lost if diversity is ignored, and, in fact, it is possible for an OD practitioner to do harm in a system if diversity is not adequately taken into account.

Rather than a specialty area, we see diversity as, by definition, a fundamental part of OD. Attentiveness to diversity is critical for: taking a systems perspective, using the OD process, and maximizing stakeholder participation.

Taking a systems perspective. Understand-ing a system in its complexity is aided by recognizing multiple perspectives and the

interplay among departments, sub-units, and identity groups. By paying atten-tion to the impact of actions on different populations, we make sure we account for key aspects of the system, and, there-fore, support comprehensive and last-ing change. For us to help leaders guide change, it is critical to know if responses due to feeling listened to/ignored or highly motivated/resistant break down along the lines of identity groups. We therefore need to be “tracking”—noting the different experiences and perspectives of identity subgroups within a system. Attention to

diversity encourages us to listen to key stakeholders who might otherwise be ignored in the assessment phase of an engagement. While those in the majority may be excited by the “preferred future” identified through Appreciative Inquiry, others may feel ignored or marginal-ized (for a discussion of AI and diversity, see Royal, 2006). For example, unless intentionally engaged, an organizational restructuring may further distance sup-port staff, who in urban areas are often primarily women of color, from program staff, who are more likely to be majority White. Attending to diversity increases the likelihood that a change process will benefit the system as a whole along with its many parts. In one organization, solu-tions for how to address tensions between different ethnic and racial constituencies was a conundrum until the organization engaged staff from those same con-stituencies as content experts rather than

just implementers of strategy they were alienated from.

Taking a systems perspective also extends to understanding the larger system of which the organization is a part. For example, internal tensions among sub-groups may arise as a result of external events. The challenges faced by Muslims in the US in the wake of the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon can all-too-easily become workplace suspicion or hostility. Ignoring the larger context readily leads to a feeling of isolation for those in the minority. In one organization, the lone Person of Color on the management team found herself feeling isolated when no one in the office mentioned recent killings of unarmed Black people. Similarly, silence on the legalization of gay marriage left one staff member of another organization wonder-ing whether she was seen and valued.

Implementing the OD process from entry through closure. At each step along the way of the OD process—entry, contracting, data gathering, and analysis, etc.—OD practitio-ners must remain open to what is going on in the system from multiple perspectives and identity groups. To be blind to diversity dynamics can mean missing subtle and not-so-subtle forces driving or inhibiting change. How can we do an adequate force-field analysis if we miss important forces? There is a growing literature showing how to utilize OD to conduct diversity work (see for example, Bailey W. Jackson, 2006)—we are making a corollary point: that it is actually impossible to do OD well without attending to diversity.

Maximizing stakeholder participation. When the field now called OD was in formation, Kurt Lewin stressed that people commit to what they help create. This insight leads us to develop skills to foster maximum participation. But if participa-tion is to be meaningful, it is essential to explore who is participating, who is not, and the barriers that prevent some from full inclusion. In fact, it is necessary to watch for exclusion so that we and our clients can foster inclusion. Having people in attendance at a meeting, workshop,

The principles of diversity—broad and meaningful partici-pation by all members of a system in order to maximize available creativity and energy for organizational learning and effectiveness—are fundamental to OD. Meaningful participation is constrained or augmented by internalized and expressed biases and power differentials. Diversity requires looking at the impacts of any change effort on different subpopulations within the system. Too much is lost if diversity is ignored, and, in fact, it’s possible for an OD practitioner to do harm in a system if diversity is not adequately taken into account.

37ODisDiversity:DifferencesareattheHeartoftheField

or whole-systems event is a good start. Is there true dialogue that takes a variety of interests into account? For example, are women or people from a certain level in the organization noticeably silent? It is also important to look at how people from different groups are included beyond the meeting, and whether there is broad participation in creating strategy and driv-ing implementation. We can therefore maximize inclusion by creating space to dialogue and to demonstrate the integ-rity of the process by including often overlooked participants. For example, at a planning meeting, one participant, an administrative assistant, remained almost completely silent. At a break, when asked by the facilitator if there was anything she would like to share, she said no, she didn’t matter. Her organizational position, in combination with her race, class, and gender, rendered her silent and invisible. Others in the group were happy to talk around her. With further encouragement, she did start to participate, and by engag-ing her, not only did the group gain her insight, they also had an opportunity to examine ways they had been excluding her and others.

Important to recognize here is that the exclusion and marginalization in these examples can happen even when leaders, colleagues, and consultants are well-intentioned and value full participation (we explored this apparent paradox in a previ-ous article: Berthoud & Greene, 2014). A growing body of research documents deep-seated bias even among those who honestly profess to not being prejudiced (Banaji & Greenwald, 2013). Among major corpora-tions, Google has taken steps to explore this kind of bias (Manjoo, 2014). This is important work, as the numbers of women and People of Color in the tech workplace remain disproportionately low. And there are emerging efforts to find ways to recog-nize and address the impact of biases in policing with hopes of reducing the unnec-essary use of force (Neyfakh, 2014).

As stated above, diversity is crucial to consider throughout the OD process—from entry through evaluation. Along with cultivation of our use-of-self as an instru-ment of change, attending to diversity

opens us to tracking data we might oth-erwise overlook. Upon entering a client system, we can increase rapport and trust with a wide range of individuals by perceiv-ing accurately how people of different demographic groups commonly respond to us. For example, the authors, a Black woman and a White man, frequently notice that people from different groups respond to us differently. Furthermore, we can use how people respond to us as consultants as a guide to how they might respond to each other in the system. Attending

to diversity also impacts the choices of interventions we make and helps us more readily recognize the, possibly unintended, consequences of our choices. At each step we are working to build trust, scanning the system, and increasing our and the client’s awareness and options. Table 1 illustrates some of what is to be gained when diversity is attended to throughout the OD process (and, therefore, potentially lost if diversity is overlooked).

Returning to the first vignette men-tioned at the beginning of the article,

Table1.What is Gained by Attending to Diversity Throughout the OD Process

AttendingtodiversitystrengthensourODwork.FundamentalinformationnecessaryforasuccessfulODconsultationismorereadilyavailableateachstepoftheODprocesswhenweremainawareofdiversity.And,ofcourse,muchwillbeoverlookedifdiversityisnotintentionallytrackedthroughouttheprocess.

» Taking a systems perspective.Enhancedabilitytousemultipleperspectivestogainamorecompletepictureoftheorganization.Greaterabilitytoobservepowerinplay.Greaterattentiontotheinterplayamongdepartments,sub-units,andidentitygroupswithinasystem.

» Enhanced insight/skill in use-of-self and presence.Greaterself-awarenessandincreasedskillinusingoneselfasaninstrumentofchange.Betterunderstandingofourpresenceingroupsandthecommonresponsespeopleofdifferentidentitygroupshavetous.Increasedabilitytoreadsubtledynamics.Increasedauthenticity,includingwithpeopleofidentitygroupsdifferentfromourown.

» Making stronger connections.Enhancedabilitytobuildrapportandtrustwithdiverseconstituenciesfromfirstcontact.

» Improved intervention choices.Betterawarenessoflikelyconsequencesofchoices,includingpotentiallyunintendedconsequences.Enhancedskillinchoosingdatagatheringandgroupprocessmethodsandinterventionsthatsupportallgroups’meaningfulparticipation.

» Maximizing stakeholder participation.Greaterabilitytocreateaplacetodialogueandtodemonstratetheintegrityoftheprocessbyincludingoftenoverlookedparticipants.

» Enhanced ability to observe and affect group dynamics.Greatersensitivitytotheunsaid,covertprocesses,andthevoicesnotspeakingup.Reducedlikelihoodthatwewillimpactthegroupnegativelybyworkingunconsciouslyfromourbiasesorignorance.


a number of questions come to mind about the consultant’s preparation for the off-site and the entire change process. What happened during the contracting phase? What were the expectations shared between consultant and client? How did Jerry gather data and from whom? Who seemed open and who appeared tentative or reserved when interacting with him? Were there indicators of racial tension

present that Jerry had failed to pick up on? And why did the consultant attempt to maintain the planned agenda when the strong tensions surfaced?

So what is to be done? Practitioners at all levels of experience, whether they have developed skills and tools regarding diversity or not, have options for action at each step of the OD process. A few of the options available are listed in Table 2.

An Example of Attending to Organizational Diversity

The first vignette presented at the begin-ning of the article is a composite of situ-ations we have experienced. In contrast, here is an actual case in which the con-sultant, who is clear that she does not “do diversity,” effectively handled a challenging situation. An organization that promotes

Table2.Ideas for Action on Diversity Throughout the Organization Development Process

Regardlessofyourexperienceconsultingondiversityissues,hereisapartiallistofideasforactionfordevelopingadiversitylensandimprovingyourworkwithdiversegroups.

“Pre-Entry” (Continuous Learning)» Buildincreasedself-awarenessandskillindiversity

bydeeplyexploringyourownbeliefs,values,blindspots,andbiases.Dothisthroughreading,attendingworkshops,requestingfeedback,exploringyourownupbringingandculturalbackground.Articulatethedeepestvaluesthatmotivateyourwork.

» Joinindiversitydiscussions.Purposelyjoin(orcreate)groupswherediversityisanintentionalpartoftheconversation.Requestfeedbackaboutyourpresenceingroups.

Entry and Contracting» Noticewhoisintheroomwhendecisionsaremade.What

isthedemographiccompositionoftheclient(s)?Notingwhoisinvolvedwithgatekeepingandcontractingbeginstogivecluestopowerdynamicsintheorganization.

» Notethequalityofparticipationincontracting.Howdopartiesconverseandnegotiateexpectations?Whospeaksup?Whoappearsmotivated,ornot,toproceed?Notewhetherthedynamicstrackbyidentitygroups.

Data Gathering and Analysis» Identifythedemographicsoftheorganization.Howare

thevariousgroupsdistributedintheorganization,e.g.,arewomenlikelytobeconcentratedincertainfunctionsorlevels?Besuretoseeandhearanydiscrepanciesinviewpointsfromdifferentdemographicgroups,inadditiontoviewsfrompeopleindifferentrolesorhierarchicallevels.

» Determinewhatisrewardedintheorganization.Whatdoesittaketobesuccessful?Isthereanembeddedculturalbias,suchthatsomegroupsaredisproportionatelymorelikelytobehired,fired,mentored,and/orpromoted?

» Explorepotentialconcernsofdifferentsubgroupsthatmaybeinterpretedas“resistance.”Becarefulnottosimplyacceptonegroup’sframeofanother’s“resistance.”

Data Feedback» Makesurethatthefullpictureissharedwithall.

Demonstratetheintegrityoftheprocessbyincludingcommonlyoverlookedparticipants.

» Tellthetruth.Namewhatyouexperience.Donotignore,brushaside,explainaway,orblame.

Implementation Design» Identifywherediversityissuesmaycomeup.Consider

andplanforpotentialunintendedconsequences.» Getsupportoradditionalresources,perhapsfroma

shadowconsultant,supportgroup,books,etc.

Implementation» Watchfordynamicsinthegrouprelatedtodiversity,and

whereuseful,namewhatyousee.» Re-contractandredesignasneeded.» Ifyouwillnotorcannotdiscussadiversityissueinthe

momentitarises,emphasizethattheconcernshavebeenheardandnegotiatehowtheissuewillbefollowedup,evenifyouwillnotbedoingthefollow-upwork.

Evaluation/Closing» Includediversityaspartoftheevaluationwiththeclient.

Openlydiscusstheimpactsoftheconsultingprojectfordifferentidentitygroups.Considerwhathasbeenaccomplishedandwhatrequiresfollow-up.

» Debriefwithteammembersandcolleaguestogrowanddevelopasaprofessional.


healthcare for underserved people embarked on strategic planning with the consultant. In the course of gathering data, the consultant learned that concerns about racial discrimination in hiring, firing, and promotions were at the forefront for many staff. Rather than treat the diversity con-cerns as “off-topic,” the consultant recog-nized that unless the diversity issues were addressed, the organization’s planning efforts would rest on a shaky foundation. At the same time, she did not consider her-self skilled enough to address the diversity issues that surfaced. She re-contracted with the client to expand the consulting effort to hire additional resources to address the issues of diversity, which clearly from the initial data gathered were critical to deal with if the organization was going to be successful in moving forward.

We were then hired to work in tandem with the planning consultant. During our initial conversations with the organization’s leadership, we learned that at a full-staff retreat a few years prior, a heated, racially-charged, exchange occurred. Diversity was not a planned part of the agenda, and the facilitator was stymied. Two employees involved in the exchange left the organi-zation shortly after the retreat, sparking numerous questions. Since then, it became clear, many People of Color harbored resentment and fear for their jobs (were the retreat antagonists pushed out?) while many White people “walked on eggshells” fearing they would touch off another “explosion.”

We worked to open multiple chan-nels of communication and encourage participation in reviewing policies to break the silence about race and diversity. The exploration led to helping management recognize the staff’s frustrations with the perceived lack of advancement for People of Color in the organization. As it hap-pened, standards for advancement and mobility were not clear and paths were not widely known. This murkiness in the process advantaged those who were well-educated and/or well-connected in the system, who were typically White. A combined staff and management task force researched the options for development

and rewards, publicized them, and identi-fied processes for selection. This group also increased awareness among staff on efforts that senior management had been implementing over the past few years to increase advancement opportunities (management had been frustrated that these efforts had not been appreciated). Management and staff also increased their skill in having conversations about their cultural differences that had kept them

from these important discussions in the first place. Not surprisingly, they were also more able to address issues of difference not only in their workplace but in their work. They began to have color-cognizant conversations, and as Foley and Buckley (2014) describe, were, therefore, more able to address their own needs and those of their clients.

Concluding Points

In today’s workplace, diversity awareness is a basic competency. As demographics continue to change, diversity becomes ever more important for OD to increase its relevance and effectiveness. We conclude with three points regarding OD practice in the 21st century.

Diversity is a basic competency. While not every OD practitioner needs to focus their practice on diversity, we believe all OD practitioners must be aware of diver-sity dynamics and have skills to respond to situations effectively. In short, diversity is a basic component of effective OD. We

encourage OD practitioners to intentionally continue their diversity journeys, growing in awareness, skill, and confidence.

Diversity is critical if we are to be self-aware as practitioners. Attention to increasing awareness of presence and use-of-self are fundamental to skillful practice. If we do not become aware of how our presence affects how we are perceived by colleagues and clients of different back-

grounds, we significantly limit our effec-tiveness. Without listening to the feedback of people different from ourselves in some respects, we cannot know what we do not know. And this ignorance is the foundation for acting based on biases and prejudg-ments, which can do harm. We must learn to better understand where we sit in the multiple identity hierarchies structured into the cultures in which we operate, so we can more effectively recognize and work with the reactions we get to even our mere presence in an organizational system.

Diversity work connects current OD prac-tice with the roots of the field: social jus-tice, civil rights, and participation. We are encouraging no less than an exploration of the values in doing this work. Taking diversity seriously keeps us from offering incomplete analyses and limited solutions. Embracing diversity not only makes our work more effective, it means that we work in congruence with the traditional values of the field and provide the necessary support increasing numbers of clients are asking for.

Without listening to the feedback of people different from ourselves in some respects, we cannot know what we do not know. And this ignorance is the foundation for acting based on biases and prejudgments, which can do harm. We must learn to better understand where we sit in the multiple identity hierarchies structured into the cultures in which we operate, so we can more effectively recognize and work with the reactions we get to even our mere presence in an organizational system.


References

Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2013). Blindspot: Hidden biases of good people. New York, NY: Delacorte Press. [You can take the Implicit Association Test at: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/]

Berman, M., & Lowery, W. (2015, March 14). The 12 key highlights from the DOJ’s scathing Ferguson report. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/03/04/the-12-key-highlights-from-the-dojs-scathing-ferguson-report/

Berthoud, H., & Greene, B. (2014). The paradox of diversity in social change organizations. Practising Social Change. Retrieved from http://www.ntl-psc.org/

Foldy, E. G., & Buckley, T.R. (2014). The color bind: Talking (and not talking) about race at work. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Jackson, B.W. (2006). Theory and practice of multicultural organization devel-opment. In B. B. Jones & M. Brazzel (Eds.), The NTL handbook of organiza-tion development and change: Principles, practices, and perspectives (pp.139–154). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Manjoo, F. (2014, September 24). Expos-ing hidden bias at Google. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/technology/exposing-hidden-biases-at-google-to-improve-diversity.html

Neyfakh, L. (2014, September 21). The bias fighters. Boston Globe. Retrieved from https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/09/20/the-bias-fighters/lTZh1WyzG2sG5CmXoh8dRP/story.html

Royal, C. L. (2006). Appreciative Inquiry as an organization development and diversity process. In B. B. Jones & M. Brazzel (Eds.), The NTL handbook of organization development and change: Principles, practices, and perspectives (pp. 440–455). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

US Department of Justice. (March 5, 2015). Justice department announces findings of two civil rights investigations in Ferguson, Missouri. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-findings-two-civil-rights-investigations-ferguson-missouri

Robert Greenehasmorethan20yearsexperienceasaconsul-tant,coach,facilitator,andtrainer.Hehasworkedwithlargeandsmallclientslocallyandnationallyinthenonprofit,government,andprivatesectors.HeisalsoaLearn-ingCoachTeamLeadwithCollegeforAmerica@SouthernNewHampshireUniversity,whereheworksdirectlywithadultstudentsandtrainsandmentorsateamofcoaches.HecreatedtheNonprofitLeadershipInstituteatMontgom-eryCollege(Maryland).Greenehaspublishedarticlesandpre-sentedworkshopsandwebinarsonvariousorganizationdevelop-menttopics.HecanbereachedatBob@BGCoach.net.

Heather BerthoudhasbeenanODconsultantfor22years.Herareasoffocusincludeleadershipdevelopment,diversity,organi-zationalchange,andplanning.Sheworksprimarilywithnonprofitandadvocacyorganizations,intheUSandinternationally.Inaddi-tiontoherconsultingpractice,sheisfacultyfortheAmericanUniversityMastersinOrganiza-tionDevelopment,aProfessionalAssociateattheGestaltInter-nationalStudyCenter,aFellowattheCornellWorkerInstitute,andamemberofNTLInstitute.ShecanbereachedatHeather@BerthoudConsulting.com.


https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/03/04/the

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/03/04/the

http://www.ntl-psc.org

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/technology/exposing-hidden-biases-at-google-to-improve-diversity.html




https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/09/20/the-bias-fighters/lTZh1WyzG2sG5CmXoh8dRP/story.html



http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice




“Combiningstrategicobjectivesandtechnicalbusinessrequirementswithemotionsandconceptualthinking,designthinkingisusedtocreateinteractionsbetweenpeopleandsystems,productsortechnology,withagoalofmakingthoseinteractionssimple,intuitive,andempathetic.”

ByLisaM.Meyer

Design ThinkingA View Through the Lens of Practice

This article is an opportunity for me to reflect upon my experiences of practicing design thinking and to share those aspects of design thinking that I believe to be of the greatest benefit to successful OD work. I will also look beyond the mystique sur-rounding design thinking and explore the theoretical, practical, and philosophical linkages between OD and Design.

Not What, But How

Most descriptions of design thinking appearing in business and social media begin by making an effort to expand the reader’s view of design. This is to over-come the potential misperception that design is simply a set of technical skills. The descriptions then go on to reposition design as being a process that involves a way of thinking. But, most research-ers agree that there is no one, generally accepted definition of design thinking, and some think we should not look for one. Instead, the emphasis should be placed on where and how the concept is used in practice, and what meaning is given to the concept (Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodlilla & Mehves, 2013).

In practice, design thinking is often associated with the creation of a “designed artifact” like a new product, system, or technology. However, due to the increasing complexity of organizations and technol-ogy, the definition of design thinking has evolved and the application has expanded. Today, design thinking is being applied in a wide range of organizational settings,

including the design of business models and interventions for introducing new concepts into complex systems or gaining stakeholder acceptance for change. Com-bining strategic objectives and technical business requirements with emotions and conceptual thinking, design thinking is used to create interactions between people and systems, products or technology, with a goal of making those interactions simple, intuitive, and empathetic (Brown & Martin, 2015; Kolko, 2015).

This application of design thinking makes particular sense for how it is used in Organization Development. OD, like Design, is an applied discipline. As OD practitioners we use knowledge from the social and behavioral sciences along with contributions from management stud-ies, industrial/organizational psychology, human resources management, com-munication sociology, and many other disciplines to make meaning in our work (Jamieson & Armstrong, 2007; Anderson, 2014). Successful OD practice, like design, requires the kind of integrative thinking that the practitioner acquires through the combination of formal education, formal training, and experience.

A Third Way of Knowing

The concept of design thinking as the integration of a designer’s methods into management practices gathered popular media attention starting around 2004. Articles like Design Thinking, by Tim Brown, published by the Harvard Business


Review in 2008, captured the imagination of management leaders by introducing design thinking as a new way of thinking that designers and non-designers could use to be more innovative, to deal with com-plex reality or, as a source of imagination (Brown, 2008; Johansson-Sköldberg, et al., 2013). The business and social media’s fascination with design thinking reached a high point in 2009 (Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013) but for researchers, design thinking has been an object of study for at least 30 years (Garcia, 2012). The discourse on design thinking in the business press

focuses mainly on a way of thinking but there is a much deeper appreciation for design thinking that is put forth by Nigel Cross in his book, Designerly Ways of Knowing (2006). Cross asserts that design thinking is a way of thinking that, in its largest context, comes from a different way of knowing.

This different way of knowing refers to the way that human beings interface with their world and their desire to shape their environment. Anthropologists have found tools over 2.5 million years old that are handcrafted with materials capable of hammering, chopping, dig-ging, and cutting. Nigel Cross references these artifacts as evidence of how ancient humans, in this prehistoric way of reshap-ing their environment, were capable of a way of knowing that is older, he argued, than science and the humanities and even precedes language.

Although Cross is relating design to sciences and the humanities, he also

asserts that design cannot be classified within the realm of either science or the humanities because it exists in action (practice) and it examines what he calls the realm of the appropriate as opposed to seeking objective truth (science) or subjective understanding (the humanities). “Designers attempt to solve ill-defined problems by proposing and trying solu-tions rather than by seeking all possible information” (Cross, 2006).

This placement of design as a practice that exists separate from, but related to, science and research-based knowledge

should resonate with OD professionals who are familiar with Donald Schön’s explora-tion of this topic in The Reflective Practi-tioner and other writings. His writings on Reflective Practice formed the basis for conceiving of design as a discipline with its own forms of knowledge, awareness, and ability (Cross, 2001).

Schön was interested in the rela-tionship between practice competence (a designer’s skill) and professional knowledge (theory and science). He observed that theory, which is derived from the application of systematic, scien-tific knowledge, works best at solving prob-lems of a type that he called well-formed, instrumental problems. But, he noted, problems of real work do not present themselves as well-formed structures. In fact they tended not to present themselves as problems at all, but as “messy, indeter-minate situations” (Schön, 1987).

Schön focused his attention on the way designers deal with these messy,

indeterminate situations. He observed that designers acquire their mastery through practice, not study. It is in the doing and the thinking about the doing, that the learning takes place. He called this phe-nomenon Reflective Practice, which leads to tacit knowledge or what he called Knowing-in-Action. Tacit knowledge is the type of know-how that is revealed by doing, like for example, riding a bike. It is knowledge revealed through spontaneous, skillful execution. The knowing is in the action (Schön, 1987).

A Third Way of Reasoning

In addition to applying a different way of knowing, designers use a type of reason-ing that is different from that which is used by most managers and scientists (Garcia, 2012). This is another important contribution that design offers for integra-tion into OD practice.

In design thinking, abductive reason-ing is used to generate ideas and form solu-tions to ill-defined problems (Cross, 2006). Abduction differs from deduction and induction (the other two ways of reason-ing) in that it uses the logic of conjecture to suggest that something may be. The work-ing assumption is that a problem cannot be fully understood. Even after exhaustive analysis, there can never be a guarantee that all of the necessary information exists and that correct solutions can be found (Cross, 2006; Garcia, 2012). The focus is not on finding the right solution but on producing the most satisfactory solution to the problem.

Design thinking uses abductive reasoning as a third way of reasoning to be added to deduction and induction. A problem-solving cycle is formed, with abduction used for the generation of ideas and solutions followed by deductive reason-ing for the predicting of consequences of those ideas, and then to inductive reason-ing for the testing and generalization of proposed solutions. This problem-solving cycle generates data that is then fed back into the abductive reasoning mode for the process to begin again (Johansson-Sköld-berg et al., 2013).

Schön was interested in the relationship between practice competence (a designer’s skill) and professional knowledge (theory and science). He observed that theory, which is derived from the application of systematic, scientific knowledge, works best at solving problems of a type that he called well-formed, instrumental problems. But, he noted, problems of real work do not present themselves as well-formed structures. In fact they tended not to present themselves as problems at all, but as “messy, indeterminate situations” . . .

43DesignThinking:AViewThroughtheLensofPractice

Integrating concepts from both Cross and Garcia, Table 1 provides a simplified construct for linking the three ways of knowing and the three ways of reasoning with their respective methodologies and core values.

Design Thinking, In Other Words

Even for OD practitioners who are unfa-miliar with the concept of design think-ing, the characteristics of design thinking should seem familiar, for they are, in many ways, consistent with well-established OD methodologies. For instance, in his extensive writing on process consultation, Edgar Schein introduced a philosophy of helping and a methodology of how to be helpful that includes ten principles that he calls the essence of process consultation. The ideas behind the ten principles of pro-cess consulting have a strong relationship to the principles of design thinking. As an example, in the discussion of the first principle, Always Try to be Helpful, Schein wrote about understanding the nature of a situation. He asserted that information based upon past conceptions or psycho-logical needs can get in the way of making a wise choice for how to best help in the current moment. He goes on to say that the client and consultant can approximate how their current assumptions and perceptions create their reality and how they can best deal with that reality in terms of the client’s intentions to improve the situation (Schein, 1999). This description matches the concept in design thinking that a problem is approached through assumptions and abductive reasoning rather than the analy-sis of observations and conclusions from past data (Razzouk & Shute, 2012).

Design thinking is most often inte-grated into OD interventions as tacit knowledge that has been learned through practice and experience. When asked to reflect on the relative importance of formal knowledge, skill, and tacit know-how in process consultation, Schein responded that all three are relevant to the creation of a helping relationship. He believed that “the consultant should always select whatever intervention will be most helpful at any given moment, given all one knows

about the total situation” (p. 245). He further asserts that knowledge of many dif-ferent kinds of interventions does not sub-stitute for the know-how of sensing what is needed right now in terms of facilitating forward movement in the relationship (Schein, 1999). With this, Schein elevates tacit knowledge, as a contributor to suc-cessful OD interventions, to be on par with formal knowledge and formal training. He opens the door to visceral “gut” feelings and hunches being as useful in OD inter-ventions as theories and techniques.

Design in Practice

A few years ago, when rising college tuition and increased student debt brought attention to the need for higher levels of financial support for undergraduates, I became the organizer of a project for redesigning the process for awarding and tracking undergraduate scholarships at a large public university.

Undergraduate scholarships are important strategic tools for universities. They are used for purposes that include recruiting a diverse class of academic achievers, supporting students with financial need, attracting student athletes, and for student activities such as march-ing band and the school newspaper. There are many different funding sources for scholarships including Federal and

State government, private philanthropic organizations and individuals, and the university itself.

Leading up to this project, the uni-versity had employed several means for increasing the dollars available for under-graduate scholarships, and as a result many more scholarships were being awarded throughout the entire university. Under-graduate scholarships were being awarded by centralized admissions and financial aid offices and by decentralized campuses, col-leges, and departments. With over 40,000 undergraduates enrolled in over 150 majors in 14 colleges on five campuses, there were literally hundreds of “checkbooks” for scholarships across the university. But, along with this increase in student support, came the need for improved processes for awarding scholarships and better account-ability for how scholarships were being utilized. There was no systematic way for tracking, in the aggregate, how many stu-dents received scholarships, or how much they received. As a result, there was no way of knowing if the system as a whole was succeeding in the collective mission.

Decentralization was a complicating factor. Each campus, college, and depart-ment had developed its own procedures for distributing scholarships with differ-ent timing, different tracking, and dif-ferent accounting systems in place. As one administrator said “all the pieces are out

Table1.Situating Design as a Way of Knowing with Science and the Humanities

Ways of Knowing

Operative Realm

Means of Showing and Testing

In Search Of… PrimaryApplied Reasoning

Science NaturalPhenomena

ControlledExperiments,Classification,andAnalysis.

ObjectiveTruth,Rationality,andNeutrality.

InductiveDeductive

Humanities TheHumanExperience

Analogies,Metaphors,andEvaluations.

SubjectiveUnderstanding,Commitment,andConcernfor“Justice.”

DeductiveInductive

Design ACreated,ManmadeArtificialWorld

Visualization,Mock-ups,andPrototyping.

Practicality,Ingenuity,Empathy,andConcernfor“Appropriateness.”

AbductiveInductiveDeductive


there, we just can’t put them together.” There was no reliable means of seeing the “big picture.”

A Messy, Indeterminate Situation

It was critical for the leadership of the university to have a full picture of finan-cial support for undergraduates. This was needed to track progress toward a goal for increased student support and to partici-pate in the national conversation regarding the cost of higher education and student debt. Yet, there was no consensus as to who

at the university owned the problem, much less who was responsible for “fixing” it.

This is characteristic of what Schön called a messy, indeterminate situation also sometimes known as a “wicked” problem, defined by Richard Buchanan as a class of social systems problems without a single solution and where much creativ-ity is needed to find solutions (Johansson- Sköldberg, et al., 2013).

I led the project team that was assem-bled to address this “wicked” problem. The team consisted of myself and four other university leaders, from financial aid, information systems, communications and marketing who, due to their role at the university, also had responsibilities for the stewardship of scholarship fund-ing. They were all skilled, collaborative, design thinkers.

Having a team that was skilled at design thinking proved to be a criti-cal success factor. Schön writes that in complex situations, competence takes on

new meaning. Existing knowledge matters less and reflection is necessary, reflection on the meaning of the situation (Schön, 1987). Rather than focus on analyzing the complexities of scholarship system, what Schön would call the surface features of the problem, the project team had to adopt what Cross calls a conjectural approach to framing the problem, approaching the task through solution conjectures, rather than through problem analysis.

This application of design thinking is consistent with what Johanansson- Sköldberg, et al. call using design thinking

as a problem solving activity. Design situa-tions are intuitively or deliberately shaped, identifying the views of all participants and the issues of concern. The interven-tion then becomes a working hypothesis for exploration and development, thereby letting the problem formulation and the solution go hand in hand rather than as sequential steps (Johansson-Sköldberg, et al., 2013).

Schön wrote that in order to formulate a design problem to be solved, the designer must frame the situation, set its boundar-ies, and impose a coherence that guides subsequent moves. He also pointed out that the work of framing is seldom done in one burst at the beginning of a design process, which was true for the scholarship project. We found that problem-framing activities re-occurred periodically through-out the project, which is consistent with the opportunistic nature of design thinking.

Phase one of what was ultimately a three-phased project utilized the Lewinian

method of getting the whole system in the room. Over 50 individuals who were involved in awarding scholarships at the university including fundraisers, accoun-tants, information systems managers, financial aid officers, and admissions spe-cialists were gathered for a half day dialog and workshop. The purpose was to raise awareness for the strategic importance of scholarships to the university and to gain appreciation for the size and scope of the scholarship accountability problem.

Working with strategic marketing con-sultants, the team collaboratively designed a facilitated intervention with the goal of gaining a better understanding of the dif-ferent lenses through which the partici-pants view undergraduate scholarships, not in a technical sense, but as users of scholarships, focusing on their user experi-ence, especially the emotional aspects of the experience. Techniques included a World Café in which participants shared stories of the many different ways they were involved with undergraduate schol-arships at the university and a picture sorting, visualization exercise designed to generate metaphors and elicit emotional language (desires, aspirations) from partici-pants as they described their experiences working with scholarships.

This is consistent with the application of design thinking for what Johansson-Sköldberg, et al. refer to as a way of making sense of things. The intervention was designed to make sense of and general-ize from observations, and find patterns that are grounded in practical experience and can be described through practical examples.

Through this process a vision for undergraduate scholarships was formed that contained three key concepts: » Scholarships can be used to benefit

many important goals of the university. » The University can be a better steward

of the funding it receives for scholar-ships from private donors, state, and federal sources.

» Scholarships should be viewed through a student-centric lens, instead of the separate lenses of each office, campus, college, and department.

Schön wrote that in order to formulate a design problem to be solved, the designer must frame the situation, set its boundaries, and impose a coherence that guides subsequent moves. He also pointed out that the work of framing is seldom done in one burst at the beginning of a design process, which was true for the scholarship project. We found that problem-framing activities re-occurred periodically throughout the project, which is consistent with the opportunistic nature of design thinking.


With this, we had begun to capture the benefit of design thinking.

Following the intervention, the project team gathered to review the outcome of the workshop, and to design a plan for phases two of the project. The vision of being student-centric provided a key insight into the systems view we were taking. We asked, what if we view scholarships through the student systems lens instead of a university accounting lens? How would that change what we are doing? The ensuing discus-sions led to the idea of approaching the problem not as an accounting problem, but as an information problem. With this insight, we employed more design thinking tools; visualization and prototyping, and collaboratively designed mock-ups for a suite of reports that visualized the manage-ment information we desired and how we would want it organized. This represented our desired state.

With the clarity provided by the proto-type reports we could then ask whether the student enrollment system could provide the information we were seeking. Essen-tially, we wanted to know, for each enrolled student, whether the student received a scholarship or scholarships, if so, how much support was received, and what were the sources of the scholarship funding. We found that approximately 70-80% of the information we desired existed in the student system and, with additional effort and systems work, that percentage could be increased. We concluded that this approach would be an appropriate and satisfactory solution to our information problem.

Phase three of the project was oppor-tunity to use the scholarship informa-tion obtained from the student system to address the issue of accountability. This final step would prove to be extremely ben-eficial to the university and its students.

There is a phenomenon in scholarship awarding where, for various reasons, not all the awarded scholarships are actually used by the students. Scholarship administrators generally manage budgets using an “allot-ment mentality,” counting each scholarship award as spent, whether it actually was or not. By linking the utilization informa-tion from the student system back to the funding source of the scholarship, it was

possible to “balance the checkbooks.” As a result scholarship administrators could determine how much was actually available to spend (rather than budgeted) and pre-vent the accumulation of unspent balances. This substantially increased the efficiency of the awarding process, resulting in more money in the hands of more students every year, year after year, all with relatively mod-est systems modifications and training.

Through the application of design thinking, the project team was able to achieve strategic alignment with the inde-pendent units of the university and create

a satisfactory solution that did not require changes in monolithic organizational systems, processes, and structures. This is an example of using design activities in the way Worley and Mohrman describe: to flexibly manage a loosely connected and dynamic portfolio of recurring and emer-gent collaborations among stakeholders (Worley & Mohrman, 2014). With each sub-sequent cycle, the scholarship administra-tors became more proficient at their work and the process of awarding scholarships becomes even more efficient and effective.

Design Thinking: Helpful and Useful

Thus far, I have intentionally avoided refer-ences that serve to elevate designers to a special status or infer that design think-ing is limited to those who practice in the profession of design. That view is, to me, counter-productive to appreciating design thinking as Nigel Cross described it; a com-mon human skill with a focus on human capacity and a human way of knowing

(Cross, 2006). Furthermore, design think-ing should not be thought of as a toolbox with specific techniques to be taken out of context, as tools ready for use. The error of this thinking is as damaging to design thinking as it is to the practice of OD. The person using the tools must have the knowledge and skill to know when to use them (Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013).

Both OD and Design share a focus on human needs and take a human-centered approach to their work (Worley & Feyer-herm, 2003; Brown, 2008). The OD values of respect, inclusion, and collaboration

are compatible and complementary with the design values of practicality, ingenuity, empathy, and a concern for “appropriate-ness” (Anderson, 2014; Jamieson & Worley, 2008; Garcia, 2012).

One of the more important shared characteristics of OD and Design is the natural and ubiquitous human activity of problem solving. Both OD and Design practitioners enter a system because of some dissatisfaction with the current state. Both address the situation with a determi-nation that some action must be taken to solve the problem or create change. In that view, many OD practitioners have been practicing design thinking without being aware of it (Razzouk & Shute, 2012).

Design thinking is focused on finding solutions rather than explaining problems. It is protection from “analysis paralysis.” In design thinking, problems are looked upon as system problems with opportu-nities for systemic solutions involving different procedures and concepts to create a holistic solution (Razzouk &

One of the more important shared characteristics of OD and Design is the natural and ubiquitous human activity of problem solving. Both OD and Design practitioners enter a system because of some dissatisfaction with the current state. Both address the situation with a determination that some action must be taken to solve the problem or create change. In that view, many OD practitioners have been practicing design thinking without being aware of it . . .


Shute, 2012). In the case of the university scholarship project, finding the appropri-ate solution depended upon maintaining a focus on the big picture and empathy with the users’ needs, and not on analyzing the myriad complicating factors within the accounting systems of a large, complex, decentralized university. The opportu-nity for a systemic solution was found in viewing what was initially conceived as an accounting problem through a different lens, an information lens, and using the student enrollment system to provide the information needed for a holistic solu-tion. Design thinking helped produce a satisfactory, appropriate, iterative solution for more effective and efficient awarding of scholarships that continues to improve with repeated application.

A Lifelong Practice

My experience in design thinking came first in corporate work as a professional in marketing and communications where design thinking is routinely put into practice for developing creative solutions to client problems. I use it now as a doctoral student in Organization Development where I apply design thinking to my work and study in OD.

I have collaborated with many talented designers and through these experiences I have come to appreciate the principles of design thinking and the potential for their application in OD. Integrating design thinking into an OD practice brings many benefits to the OD practitioner includ-ing the ability to better understand the nature of the problem, to be simultane-ously analytical and conceptual, and to not lose sight of the big picture. Through the application of design thinking, I am better able to act in context, to respond propor-tionately and to be concerned with inclu-sion and universality. This is the essence of design thinking when viewed through the lens of practice, appropriateness, sensing, and solution-based. It is what works right now.

References

Anderson, D. L. (2014). Organization devel-opment: the process of leading organiza-tional change (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brown, T. (2008, June). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–96.

Brown, T., & Martin, R. (2015, September). Design for action. Harvard Business Review, 93(9), 58–64.

Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of know-ing: design descipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55.

Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of know-ing. London, UK: Springer Verlag.

Garcia, L. M. (2012). Understanding design thinking, exploration and exploitation: Implications for design strategy. IDBM Papers, 2, 152–161.

Jamieson, D. W., & Armstrong, T. R. (2008). Client-Consultant Engagement: What it takes to create value. Paper presented at AOM Management Consult-ing Conference.

Jamieson, D. W., & Worley, C. G. (2008). The Practice of Organization Devel-opment. In T. Cummings (Ed.), The handbook of organization development. San Francisco, CA: Sage.

Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodlilla, J., & Mehves, C. (2013). Design thinking: past, present, and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146.

Kolko, J. (2015, September). Design think-ing comes of age. Harvard Business Review, 93(9), 66–71.

Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it impor-tant? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–347.

Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflec-tive practitioner, toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Schein, E. (1999). Process consultation revisited: building the helping relationship. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Tischler, L. (2009, January 14). Design thinking: A designer takes on his biggst challenge ever. Fast Company.

Van De Ven, A. (2007). Engaged Scholar-ship, A guide for organizational and social research (reprinted in 2013 ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Worley, C. G., & Feyerherm, A. E. (2003). Reflections on the future of organiza-tion development. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(1), 97–115.

Worley, C. G., & Mohrman, S. A. (2014). Is change management obsolete? Organi-zational Dynamics, 43(3), 214–224.

Lisa M. Meyer’scorporatecareerincludesseniormanagementpositionsatCarmichaelLynchAdvertising,MarquetteFinancialCompanies,RiverRoadEnter-tainment,andtheUniversityofMinnesotaFoundation.MeyeriscurrentlypursuingadoctorateinOrganizationDevelopmentattheUniversityofSt.ThomasinMinnesota.OtherdegreesincludeaBAinmusiceducationfromtheUniversityofNorthernIowa,andanMFAinartsadministrationfromtheUniversityofIowa.Shecanbereachedatlisameyer@att.net.



More than 35 collaboratives have launched in Southern California to address issues related to urban sustainability: improving access to healthy food, revitalizing the Los Angeles River, building healthy communi-ties, and many more (Milam, 2015). Like many collaboratives around the country working on addressing complex social issues, each has its own origins, funders, membership dynamics, and impact on the community. The majority of these collaborative change initiatives designate an individual to serve in a “manager” role (often called different names such as “ facilitator” or “coordinator”). Individu-als serving in this leadership capacity play critical roles in the overall effectiveness of the multi- stakeholder initiatives they manage. Yet, little research exists on the dynamics that these managers create, which, in turn influence positive out-comes for the collaborations they serve. The research shared in this article aims to uncover the specific influence managers of collaborative change initiatives have in shaping positive outcomes of the collab-oratives they serve.

Background

Since the 1970s, academics and practitio-ners have explored collaborative change initiatives involving multiple organiza-tions working together to accomplish something beyond what each organization on its own could not have done. While numerous books and articles exist on the subject of managing collaboration, there is not yet consensus on how individuals in a

manager role can most effectively influence the collaborations they serve.

Some work has alluded to possible roles of the manager. In her foundational book Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multiparty Problems, Gray (1989) noted that the potential value of a “third party” (p. 161) is to help during the various stages of collaboration. This role potentially includes establishing a climate of trust, modeling openness, designing and manag-ing the negotiation process, and getting consensus.

Huxham and Vangen (2005) took it a step further in Managing to Collaborate by proposing that effective management includes managing agendas, negotiat-ing processes, understanding member-ship, coping with trust, using power, and clarifying identity. All of these are potential guideposts for anyone seeking to manage a collaborative. Huxham and Vangen (2005) noted, “In many collaborations the indi-vidual playing the most significant role in leading the collaborative agenda is the part-nership manager, director, or chief execu-tive, who, strictly speaking, is usually not a member of the collaboration” (p. 207).

In “Managing Collaborative Inter-Organizational Relations,” Hibbert, Huxham, and Smith Ring (2008) further elaborate by defining management in a col-laborative context as “a series of processes undertaken by a team of individuals, with various skills and capabilities, that are focused on defining both the direction to be taken by an inter-organizational entity and the allocation and implementation of resources towards those ends” (p. 391).

ByRonMilamandAnnFeyerherm

Manager Influence on Multi-party Collaborative Change Initiatives

“Often,conflictarisesoutofamisunderstandingbecauseorganizationsnaturallydothingsdifferently.Amanagercancreateprocessesfororganizationstobetterunderstandeachotherandbettercommunicatewitheachother,whichoftenhelpsimproverelationsandhelpparticipatingorganizationsdevelopacommonagenda.”


They noted that management takes places at the micro-scale (management prac-tices), the macro-scale (structures), and an intermediate scale (processes). They noted seven different ways in which to concep-tualize managing collaboration, which in turn provide approaches for how one might lead and manage.

Gray (2008), Schuman (1996), Plas-trik and Taylor (2006), Kania and Kramer (2011) and Holly (2012) all discuss the role of the facilitative leader in a collaborative context. Gray (2008) provided the most detailed and specific list for facilitation processes and suggested specific strategies for convening, problem structuring, reflec-tive intervening, process design, conflict handling, and internal brokering.

Based on the existing literature, mul-tiple perspectives exist about how manag-ers can influence positive outcomes for the collaborations they lead. While numerous authors looked at the role of managers in collaboration (Gray, 1989; Huxham & Van-gen, 2005), few went into great detail about the specific influence managers have and how their specific influence translates into positive outcomes for the collaboration.

Purpose and Significance of the Study

While the existing research gives general direction for managing collaboration, this research study aims to uncover the specific influence managers of collaborative change initiatives have in shaping positive out-comes. Specifically, what influence does a designated and paid manager of collabora-tive change initiatives have?

This research further develops a criti-cal aspect of a growing movement towards collective change-making. With the grow-ing popularity of collaboration and collec-tive impact, more funders and local leaders are calling for collaborative initiatives to address challenging social issues, some-times without a full understanding of the complexities, challenges, and frustrations associated with effectively getting organiza-tions to work with each other. An increased understanding of how managers effectively influence collaboration will help increase their overall value. By understanding how one can influence collaboration in a

specific role, the intention of this research is to serve as a guide both for managers and funders of collaborative change initia-tives, along with OD practitioners serving collaboratives.

Methodology

Using semi-structured individual inter-views, one of the co-authors individually interviewed 11 managers and funders from six collaborative change initiatives in Southern California (see Table 1). These collaboratives were chosen because they address a broad set of issues related to urban sustainability. Interview questions were related to general background of the collaboration, personal background of the manager, general influence, influenc-ing tactics, and decision-making of the manager. From these interviews, consistent themes were noted, and for verification, the results were reviewed with the managers.

Results

This research highlights three specific ways in which managers themselves generate influence on the collaborations they serve: 1. Relationships They Cultivate2. Membership They Support and

Empower3. Processes They Manage

The third way, “Processes They Man-age,” encompasses some of the most visible methods managers use to influ-ence collaborations. This article dives into these methods—spaces they create, gatherings they facilitate, and agendas they manage—in depth.

Relationships They Cultivate

Managers play a critical role in cultivating positive relationships both internally within the collaboration and externally within the larger environment. As one funder noted referring to the manager, “They are really good at developing collegiality amongst partners, developing a strong collaborative that is based on relationships.” The stron-ger these relationships, the more effective members are in working with each other.

Effective managers understand the influence of trust in creating positive work-ing relationships among members. In col-laboratives, managers build trust through a series of small steps. One manager noted a specific way in which relationship build-ing was built into a meeting agenda: “we had an agenda, we let each group present on what their project was, and then we let everyone go around the room to say ‘this is my project, here is how I think you could help me.’” This not only helps members of the collaborative build their understand-ing of each other, but it also deepens the relationship managers have with members of the collaborative.

Managers also leverage their relation-ships to help them serve the collabora-tion. As one funder noted, the managers “know enough about the people in the organizations to see how they can make connections between the work. They are able to identify what the motivators are for different people around the table and connect the agendas to a larger vision.” Managers have a variety of options for how they both build relationships directly and also create a space for relationships to flourish. These actions make connections within the network; and the stronger these relationships, the greater chance there is for trust, understanding, and positive work-ing relationships.

Membership They Support and Empower

Managers play a role in influencing the development of engaged, empowered, and effective members who ultimately own the direction of the collaboration. As one manager noted, “The only way we can achieve anything that’s sustainable is by broadening the engagement and broaden-ing the ownership.” The same manager built on this concept: “And that, I think, is the secret of an effective manager, is that, to every extent, you’re lifting up the work of your partners.” Creating the space for engagement and lifting up the work of partners is amplified by building members’ capacity.

As one funder noted, “So I would say their role has been to really help build the skill level of the collaborative and really

49ManagerInfluenceonMulti-partyCollaborativeChangeInitiatives

build the community building within the groups; that’s really critical.” Managers influence the direction of capacity building and delivery for members. This includes trainings on a variety of topics such as conflict resolution, community organizing, and community relations. What a manager thinks will build membership capacity, who the manager brings into that, and how the capacity building is done all influence the collaboration itself.

Beyond building capacity, manag-ers work to engage members. As one manager put it, “That I need to work like hell to create that space so that they make the decisions, they stick to the decisions, so that they feel engaged by the deci-sion. But you’re trusting them with the decisions.” This quote clarifies that the manager is not making the decisions for the members of the collaboration, but rather the manager creates a space for

members to become engaged in the col-laboration by making decisions related to the collaborative.

Managers understand that they help build membership capacity and create a space for engagement. The more mem-bers are engaged with the collaborative, the more likely they are to work towards a collaborative agenda in addition to their own organization’s agenda. Managers have choices in how they will build capacity and

Table1.Description of Characteristics from the Six Collaboratives Studied.

Building Healthy Communities: Long Beach

Little Green Fingers

LA2050 Los Angeles Food Policy Council

Los Angeles Regional Collaborative for Climate Action and Sustainability

Northeast Los Angeles Riverfront Collaborative

Manager(Fullorparttime)

Fulltime Fulltime Fulltime Fulltime Fulltime Parttime

Numberoffunders

One One One Many Many One

Leveloffundersinvolvement

High Medium High Medium Medium Low

Members(numberoforganizations)

50-100 8 10 100 25 7

Membership(type)

Communityorganizationsandresidents

Communityorganizations

Citizens,stakeholders,andorganizations

Communityorganizations,farmers,academicinstitutions,andgovernmentagencies

Municipalgovernments,utilities,agencies,universitiesandcommunityorganizations

Communityorganizations,citydepart-ments,andacademicinstitutions

Membership(openorclosed)

Open Closed Closed Semi-open Closed Closed

Aremembersfunded?

Somefunded Allfunded 10granteesfunded

Somefunded Notfunded Allfunded

Yearlaunched 2010 2011 2011 2009 2007 2012

Geographicfocus

Oneneighborhoodinamidsizedcity

EightneighborhoodsinLosAngelesCounty

Onelargecity SouthernCaliforniaRegion

LosAngelesCounty

SeveralcommunitiessurroundingtheNortheastportionoftheLosAngelesRiver


ownership, whether directly or indirectly, through creating a space for it. Much of the managers’ work to build capacity and engagement also occurs in the various pro-cesses they steward (see “Processes They Manage” section). The quality of members’ capacity and commitment they bring to the collaboration can influence positive outcomes for the collaboration.

Processes They Manage

Managers influence the collaborations they serve through the processes they manage. Though managers often take the lead in managing these processes, they also sup-port members to manage these processes as well. While the manager stewards a process, members of the collaborations primarily do the work of deciding the direc-tion they want to go. Processes are where the major work of the collaboration takes place, and therefore, the processes are fur-ther elaborated here into three sub-areas: spaces they create, gatherings they facili-tate, and agendas they negotiate.

Spaces they create. Managers have an influence in deciding who to convene for what purpose. One manager shared:

I think a large part of our influence is creating, facilitating, co-creating spaces for leadership to be actualized, and that happens through the talking and listening, which in and of itself would really build one’s impact to show up for the work and to be able to be an engaged stakeholder.

Oftentimes managers themselves “create” or convene the space. Another manager gave more detail as to what this space looks like:

So much of it is how do you create a space that feels safe enough so that everyone feels like they can put their true thoughts and feelings out there, because everyone has to feel like they participated, they have to feel empow-ered, because that’s what keeps them coming back and being enthusiastic to participate.

The managers’ intimate knowledge of what is going on in the collaboration gives them a sense for what needs to happen moving forward. Reflecting on the influ-ence a manager has in creating the space, one manager noted:

That’s probably the most manipula-tive influence I carry is my ability to convene the space, to give attention to particular things. And that’s a lot of power right there in and of itself. I say, “Well, this is important, let’s cre-ate the space around it.” That’s hugely influential. What I choose to give attention to and not give attention to is definitely my influence.

As the manager noted, facilitators of collab-oratives have a large influence in deciding what to give attention to, whom to invite to be a part of that conversation, and how they will hold the space they create. Because managers have relationships with all stakeholders, they have a greater capacity to convene, and these gatherings often set the direction for the collaboration itself.

Gatherings they facilitate. All of the managers interviewed for this project serve their membership in the capacity of a facilitator. Managers often set the agendas for meetings and facilitate those same meetings. As facilitators, they work to help members of the collaborations they serve build trusting relationships, discuss important issues, and make decisions. Good facilitation skills create a space where all members can participate in the conversation.

One funder noted the manager’s influ-ence on setting meeting agendas:

Obviously as a facilitator and setting the agenda, they have a lot of influ-ence on what gets on the agenda, how the meeting gets run, even though I know they are trying to bring in the committee members more.

By setting the agenda for meetings, man-agers are influencing what gets talked about and how the collaboration ultimately moves forward.

As one funder put it, “They all have good facilitation skills. When people are around the table, they know how to man-age a conversation and draw out of people productive comments to move things forward.” To ensure effective meetings, managers need to be thoughtful about how and when they intervene in the meet-ing process. It is during these gatherings that managers help members negotiate multiple agendas and develop a common collaborative agenda.

Agendas they negotiate. In the previous section on “gatherings they facilitate,” the term agenda referred to meeting agendas. This section, “agendas they negotiate,” relates to the actual goals and strategies of organizations and individuals that make up the collaboration’s membership. These goals and strategies may be similar in some categories and very different in others. The work to develop a common agenda among participants that aligns with organizational and individual agendas can be very chal-lenging, but it is critically important in order for the collaboration to succeed.

This area of influence generated a healthy amount of discussion from man-agers who are tasked with having to man-age multiple and often competing agendas, including their own. Oftentimes, these discussions can be tense, as one funder noted:

It was kind of a power struggle, because there were lots of things we can do with this collaboration, this thing that was being funded, this start-up. We had some pretty tense discussions about it and some people quit and left. It was clear that they weren’t going to get their thing.

Managers need to understand power dynamics within the collaborative they serve. In their work to help collaboratives form a common agenda, they also recog-nize the possibility that some members may choose to opt out of the collaboration if it doesn’t demonstrate value to them.

One manager shared a strategy for navigating these power dynamics, referring to the members they serve by saying:


It’s understanding [sic] they have an agenda, and that’s okay. Everyone has an agenda. They have particular needs for the organization. So it’s accepting that fact that’s a reality and then say-ing “How can we capitalize on that? How can we make this a win-win, you know, for you, for the organization, for the whole collaborative?”

Managers influence the creation of a collab-orative-wide agenda and often work to great lengths to do so.

As one manager noted, “I think part of it is also stepping in and reminding people not only at a group level, and also on that one-on-one level, that there is a larger goal, collaborative goal.” The negotiation is ongoing and involves managers com-municating the value proposition of the collaboration: the reality that members are able to accomplish something for their own organizations that they would otherwise be unable to accomplish on their own by participating in the collaboration. One manager noted a way to do this: “so kind of leveraging opportunities to showcase the work of members is how I’m trying to dif-fuse the competition amongst them.”

Part of the messiness of collaboration is the various motivations members show up with at the table. Some may respond to the funding possibility but have existing tension with other members in the col-laborative space. Managers recognize these currents and work to transform them. A funder from a different collaborative put it this way:

They understand what their intrinsic motivations are, what their organiza-tion motivations are, and they can get to the core of what makes people tick and take a leadership role that’s maybe a vocal leadership role when it needs to be, but they also know when to step back and let other people lead the work.

This demonstrates how managers can help negotiate agendas and empower members to develop their own collaborative leader-ship simultaneously.

The negotiation of agendas also includes incorporating manager’s own personal agendas into the mix. On one end of the spectrum, managers work to indirectly influence the outcomes of the collaboration:

My passion is around the . . . [name of policy] piece and so, and that created, I didn’t push that agenda, I think having . . . [name of member] con-nected, . . . the one pushing it. I was supporting . . . behind the scenes and then when there were conversations . . . it was helping . . . [name of mem-ber] navigate those waters behind the scenes, and not being seen as the one pushing that.

Another manager took the opposite approach:

He probably thought “I wonder if . . . [manager name] had engineered this.” Now if I had, that would have been a disaster in terms of his trust and others’ trust in me. So there’s no way I could, I think you just kind of trust a group process. You see, I don’t engi-neer things that way. And I think to the extent as the central coordinator, the manager, to the extent that you do try to engineer it, you’re not fostering the capacity for the organism to deal with it yourself.

Another manager shared a middle ground:

It’s not about having an agenda and pushing it, even though I might have an agenda secretly, but your commu-nication style and commitment in the context where there is a conflict hap-pening is not to push your agenda, even if you have one, it’s actually about, a little more surrender, and willingness to be fluid…really listen-ing and reflecting back.

Conflicting agendas combined with a mix of personalities usually create a healthy level of conflict. Managers influence posi-tive relationships by identifying potentially

destructive conflict, managing it, and ide-ally transforming it. One manager noted:

We’ve been asked to kind of hold space to reconcile some difference of opinion across different sectors of the work. It hasn’t always been very explicit, but I do think it’s been there, and we’ve been able to play that role, and it’s helped kind of air some things out.

Managers with an awareness that tension is normal in negotiating a common agenda are more prepared to deal with it.

Because of their role, managers are in a position to manage and potentially transform conflict using a variety of methods. They can help groups find their common interests, instead of focusing only on their positions. Managers can also help organizations better understand each other. It is quite normal for organizations with very different organizational cultures and assumptions to participate in the same collaboration. Often, conflict arises out of a misunderstanding because organiza-tions naturally do things differently. A manager can create processes for organi-zations to better understand each other and better communicate with each other, which often helps improve relations and help participating organizations develop a common agenda.

Conclusions

This research aimed to build upon the existing literature by investigating an aspect of managing collaboration: influ-ence. The majority of the findings relate to existing research and elaborate on the concepts, with specific examples shared directly by managers and funders of col-laborative change initiatives themselves. These themes came out not by asking man-agers how they manage collaboration but, rather, how they influence collaboration.

In many ways, managers can serve collaborations by functioning as the glue to help keep it all together. The best practices identified in this research—specifically the relationships they cultivate, membership


they support and empower, and processes they manage—provide the environment for a collaboration to flourish. Given the agendas that members bring to collabora-tions they participate in, managers are in a better position to serve as the glue for collaborations they serve. It is hoped that the more managers understand that their influence is essential for the collaborations they serve, the more they will focus their energies into a set of practices that have the greatest positive impact.

Of course, these findings are all from cross-sector partnerships that were designed to solve some pressing environ-mental, social, or economic challenges experienced in the Southern California region. While businesses and govern-ment participated in these collaborations, the majority of members came from the nonprofit sector, giving the role of the funder much more influence. Collabora-tions between companies would likely yield a different but related set of dynamics.

As this research was conducted, it became clear that managers for collabora-tive change initiatives often act in isolation from other managers. While all managers mentioned the web of relationships they connected within their own collaborations, only one manager mentioned having rela-tionships with other managers of collabora-tive change initiatives, and that was within a network his collaboration participated in. Such a network of collaborative managers could provide a useful source of support and guidance for these people who were paradoxically somewhat isolated.

For research on collaboration, it is hoped that this study contributes to the dia-log, specifically around influence, that con-tinues in a number of formats, including among managers themselves as they reflect on their practice. Considering collabora-tion appears to be growing as a strategy to address society’s most challenging issues, further research is needed to help maxi-mize its impact, specifically around the role of manager.

While there are many co-creators in any collaborative space, there are usually only one or a few people who play the manager role. If this role with its many

challenges and pitfalls could be played more effectively, then the collaborations they serve would likely increase their impact. Given the scale of problems these collaborations aim to transform, even an incremental increase of a manager’s impact will help the overall collaboration create more sustainable communities.

References

Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding com-mon ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gray, B. (2008). Intervening to improve inter-organizational partnerships. In S. Cropper, M. Ebers, C. Huxham, & P. Smith Ring (Eds.), The Oxford hand-book of inter-organizational relations (pp. 664–690). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hibbert, P., Huxham, C., & Smith Ring, P. (2008). Managing collaborative inter-organizational relations. In S. Cropper, M. Ebers, C. Huxham, & P. Smith Ring (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of inter-organizational relations (pp. 391–416). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2005). Manag-ing to collaborate: The theory and practice of collaborative advantage. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

Holly, J. (2012). Network weaver handbook (A guide to transformational networks). http://www.networkweaver.com.

Kania, J., & Kramer, M. (2011). Collec-tive impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 9(1), 35–41.

Kania, J., Kramer, M., Turner, S., Merchant, K., & Martin, E. (2012). Understanding the value of backbone organizations in collective impact, Part 1-4. Stanford Social Innovation Review (blog posts). Retrieved from http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/understanding_the_value_of_backbone_organizations_in_collective_impact_1

Milam, R. (2015). 40 collaborative change initiatives in Southern California (blog post). Retrieved from http://ronmilam.com/2013/06/17/21-collaborative-change-initiatives-in-socal/

Plastrik, P., & Taylor, M. (2006). Net gains: A handbook for network builders seeking social change. http://www.networkimpact.org

Schuman, S. (1996). The role of facilitation in collaborative groups. In C. Huxham (Ed.), Creating collaborative advantage (pp. 126–140). London, UK: SAGE Publications.

Ron Milamservestheleadershipofcollaborativechangeinitiativesasanorganizationdevelopmentpractitioner.HeholdsaMastersofScienceinOrganizationDevelop-mentfromPepperdineUniversitywherehewrotehisthesisoncollaborativechangeeffortsinSouthernCalifornia.Since2005,Ronhasconsultedforover140organizationsandcollaborativesworkingtobuildsustainablecommunities.Hecanbereachedatrpm@ronmilam.com,www.ronmilam.com.

Ann Feyerherm, PhD,isaPro-fessorofOrganizationTheory&ManagementatPepperdineUniversityandteachesintheMSODprogram.BeforeearningherdoctorateatUSC,shewasanODmanageratProcter&Gamble.Feyerhermconductsresearchontheroleofleader-shipinnegotiatingregulatorypolicy,emotionalintelligence,anddevelopingorganizationchangecapacityandhasbeenpub-lishedinnumerousjournalsandbooks.ShecanbereachedatAnn.Feyerherm@pepperdine.edu.


http://www.networkweaver.com

http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/understanding_the_value_of_backbone_organizations_in_collective_impact_1




http://ronmilam.com/2013/06/17/21

http://ronmilam.com/2013/06/17/21

http://www.networkimpact.org

http://www.networkimpact.org


www.ronmilam.com

www.ronmilam.com


Gautier has tackled a timely and impor-tant topic: the identification of factors that drive successful working practices. With the book’s primary value being a retrospec-tive look at theoretical models of recruit-ment and selection, teams, organizational culture, and motivation and engagement, Gautier has also collected research from 32 industry leaders across diverse countries and organizations, supplemented with qualitative interviews of 103 London-based university students. However, it would be useful to understand the criteria the author used to select respondents (e.g., exemplars, accessibility, or other factors). We are left to surmise why these individuals in particular have been included for Gautier’s research. Moreover, this book would benefit from updated insights in today’s unprecedented focus on human capital, employee engage-ment, and skill shortages by business leaders, researchers, government agencies, news media and others.

Offering a useful survey of major theorists examining the world of work, Gautier frames the historical context well, describing the transition from farming to the Industrial Revolution, which spawned pioneering thinkers, including Frederick Taylor and his concept of “scientific man-agement” of work production. From there, Gautier shifts to a discussion of the limita-tions of Taylor’s perspective and how other theorists (including Mayo, 1945; Jones, 1990; Karasek, 1979), offered an alternate view, considering motivation and emo-tional factors that shape work performance.

With influences from the Humanistic Movement (Rogers, 1951; Maslow, 1954), Gautier charts the rise of human resource management, exploring how recruitment and selection has evolved, highlighting job analysis, quantitative questionnaires, and job descriptions. Gautier shares a fasci-nating history of the origins of selection, dating back to 605 AD in China, with an imperial examination used to select state bureaucracy administrators. Other meth-ods cited for recruitment and selection include the bio-data approach; assessment centers; psychometric tests, such as the Wechsler Adult Intelligent Scale (WAIS) and the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB); along with personality tests, such as Eysenck Personality Questionnaire and the Hogan Personality Inventory; and of course, interviews. Gautier offers a thorough explanation of the comparative strengths and weaknesses of the behav-ioral, unstructured, and causal-sense making interviews. However, this chapter would have been greatly enriched by a dis-cussion of current context to supplement the historical view: Issues such as global-ization; skill shortages; the aging of the populations in the developed world, con-trasted with youth in emerging markets; and current uses of technology in recruit-ment and selection. An updated perspec-tive would increase the relevance to today’s issues, a recommendation that also applies to the following chapter on Employability.

Gautier cites research that higher edu-cation is critical for social mobility, yet the

“Withthebook’sprimaryvaluebeingaretrospectivelookattheoreticalmodelsofrecruitmentandselection,teams,organizationalculture,andmotivationandengagement,Gautierhasalsocollectedresearchfrom32industryleadersacrossdiversecountriesandorganizations,supplementedwithqualitativeinterviewsof103London-baseduniversitystudents.”

Book Review

The Psychology of Work: Insights into Successful Working Practices

By Chantal GautierLondon, UK: Kogan Page. (2015) 200 pp.

ReviewedbyMarjorieDerven


challenges that young graduates entering the job market confront is a pressing social and economic concern. While her sample of job seekers is quite small and homoge-neous, she found that 33% did not feel that they were well prepared for work (p.43). She asks, “Should students select courses on the basis of market skill shortages or should they choose them on the basis of their personal interests?” (p. 32).

She then contrasts the job seeker per-spective with the employer perspective and identifies a “gulf between the expectations of employers and graduates” (p. 48). In her conclusion on this topic, Gautier suggests that there should be better linkage between academic curricula and what employers are seeking, which she summarizes as: “openness, flexibility, willingness to learn, resilience, passion, and hunger” (p. 50).

Gautier emphasizes the importance of teams and teamwork in EU countries (pp. 52-53) and discusses many leading theorists, such as Tuckman and Jensen’s five stages of team development (1977); Lacoursier’s group cycles (1980); Tjosvold’s team organization model (1991); and Dyer, Dyer, and Dyer’s four Cs: context, compo-sition, competency, and change (2007). Gautier’s suggestion here is that “graduates might consider ways to develop best prac-tices and work on the attributes that are said to promote good team leaders” (p. 67).

Gautier continues her discussion of teams in her chapter, Barriers and Intricacies, describing the dangers of Groupthink, “social loafing” or “the free-rider effect” (p. 85), which she observes includes: “ Disengagement, defensiveness, missing deadlines, non-communication, lack of interest, aloofness, and passive aggressiveness” (p. 85).

She argues for the need to balance the degree of heterogeneity, “because indi-viduals find it difficult to share common ground” (p. 87). Conflict resolution is a key requirement for success:

High performing teams need a well-balanced mixture of people, roles and viewpoints as well as a degree of homogeneity…High performance teams thus need to equip themselves with conflict resolution skills to

facilitate personal and/or task-related matters.” (p. 91)

While Chapters 3 and 4 provide a thorough treatment of team theory and barriers, teams do not exist in isolation. A significant gap in this chapter is consider-ation of the broader context of how teams function in the current work environment, examining such factors as the overall enterprise structure, rise of virtual teams, competing priorities, and prevalence of con tin gent workers.

Gautier next focuses on organizational culture, and she posits that:

Just as there are cultural differences between nations, there are cultural differences between organizations; the culture of an organization affects the behaviour of each individual in it and defines the environment in which work takes place…thriving organiza-tions foster cultures that are support-ive and empowering, and are open and receptive to change. (p. 93)

I found this chapter on organizational culture the strongest in the book. In addi-tion to a survey of leading theorists, includ-ing Schein (2010) and Goffee and Jones (1998), Gautier discusses the impact of global cultures and varying perceptions of time (Hall 1994). Particularly crucial, she cites the factors that promote a learning organization, which are essential to foster-ing agility in our rapidly-changing world. An overview of theorists that include Senge (1990) and Morgan (1998) is enhanced with a discussion of other important fac-tors, such as job demand (Karasek & Theo-rell, 1990; DeJong & Kompier, 1997), as well as decision making processes (Vroom & Jago, 1998). The theory presented in this chapter is nicely illustrated with excerpted quotes from Gautier’s research with lead-ers in diverse industries.

In her chapter on leadership, Gautier categorizes leadership theories into six taxonomies: Trait Theory (Stodgill, 1948), Style Theory (Lewin, Lippitt, & White, 1939), Behavioral Theory (Fleish-man, 1953), Contingency Theory (Fiedler, 1967), Situational Leadership (Hersey &

Blanchard, 1988), and Leader Member Exchange Theory (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). She discusses the perennial nature vs. nurture debate and includes Blake and Mouton’s Leadership Grid (1964), contrast-ing concern for people with concern for production. Gautier rightly describes lead-ership as multi-faceted and intersperses the theoretical with excerpted quotes from her primary research.

Primay motivation and engagement are the focus of the final chapter, including a discussion of Theory XY from McGregor (1960), Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory (1954), the psychological contract (Rousseau, 1995; Blau, 1964), with insights about emotional intelligence as central to effective leadership. She also provides a brief discussion of generational differences in the workplace.

This final chapter would be strength-ened immeasurably with a survey of the current research on employee engagement (see Adkins, Gallup Research 2014; Rice & Marlowe, 2012; Kruse 2013; Pahari, 2013). As a topic that has been exten-sively researched, ranking high in global CEO’s key concerns (Ray & Van Ark, The Conference Board, 2014), this is a significant omission for a book published in 2015.

Gautier’s closing plea, that we “press the pause button” (p. 175) to reflect on ways that we can make the workplace more humane, is certainly a goal to which all OD practitioners can aspire.

Marjorie DervenisfounderofHUDSONResearch&Consulting,Inc. (www.hudsonrc.com)andaSeniorFellow,HumanCapitalPrac-ticeatTheConferenceBoard.Herfirmprovidesresearch-basedODinterventions,leadershipdevelop-mentandDiversity&Inclusionsolutionsacrossabroadrangeofindustries.Shehaswrittenmanyarticlesonthesetopicsandisafrequentpresenteratglobalconferences.Dervenisamemberofthe OD Practitioner’[email protected].

55BookReview:The Psychology of Work: Insights into Successful Working Practices

www.hudsonrc.com



Guidelines for Authors

Journal Information

The OD Practitioner (ODP ) is pub-lished by the Organization Develop-ment Network. The purpose of the ODP is to foster critical reflection on OD theory and practice and to share applied research, innovative approaches, evidence based practices, and new developments in the OD field. We welcome articles by authors who are OD practitioners, clients of OD processes, Human Resource staff who have partnered with OD practitioners or are practicing OD, and academics who teach OD theory and practice. As part of our commitment to ensure all OD Network programs and activities expand the culture of inclusion, we encourage submissions from authors who represent diversity of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious/spiritual practice, economic class, education, experience, opinion, and viewpoint.

The Review Process

The ODP is a peer reviewed journal. Authors can choose between two review processes and should notify the Editor which they prefer when they submit an article:

Process 1 (open peer review): Submit articles with a cover page with the article’s title, all authors’ identify-ing and contact information, and a 50– 80 word biography for each of the authors; also include any acknowl-edgements. Two members of the ODP Review Board will review the article. They will recommend accepting the article for publication, pursuing publication after suggested changes, or rejecting the article. If they decide

the article is publishable with changes, one of the Review Board members will email or call the primary author to dis-cuss the suggested changes. Once the author has made the changes to the satisfaction of the two Review Board members, the ODP Editor will work with the author to prepare the article for publication.

Process 2 (double blind peer review): This option is offered to meet the standards for academic institutions. Submit articles with a cover page with the article’s title, all authors’ identify-ing and contact information, and brief biographies for each of the authors; also include any acknowledgements. Provide an abbreviated title running head for the article. Do not include any identifying information other than on the title page. Two members of the review board will independently receive the article without the author’s information and without knowing the identity of the other reviewer. Each reviewer will recommend accepting the article for publication, rejecting the article with explanation, or sending the article back to the author for revi-sion and resubmittal. Recommenda-tions for revision and resubmittal will include detailed feedback on what is required to make the article publish-able. Each ODP Board member will send their recommendation to the ODP Editor. If the Editor asks the author to revise and resubmit, the Edi-tor will send the article to both review-ers after the author has made the suggested changes. The two members of the Review Board will work with the author on any further changes, then send it to the ODP Editor for prepara-tion for publication.

The ODP Editor makes the final decision about which articles will be published.

Criteria for Accepting an Article

Content » Bridges academic rigor and

relevance to practice » Accessible to practitioners » Reflects critically on issues related

to the current practice of OD » Presents applied research, innova-

tive practice, or new developments in the OD field

» Includes cases, illustrations, and practical applications

» References sources for ideas, theories, and practices

Stylistic » Clearly states the purpose and

content of the article » Presents ideas logically and with

clear transitions » Includes section headings to help

guide the reader » Is gender-inclusive » Avoids jargon and overly formal

expressions » Avoids self-promotion

If the article is accepted for publica-tion, the author will receive a PDF proof of the article for final approval before publication. At this stage the author may make only minor changes to the text. After publication, the Edi-tor will send the author a PDF of the article and of the complete issue of ODP in which the article appears.

(continued next page)


Join Mee-YanCheung-Judge, co-author ofOrganizationDevelopment, for her session “CulturalCompetence andthe OD Journey”

on October 17 from 2-4pm

Join RupertMorrison, author of Data-DrivenOrganization Design,for his session “Data DrivenOrganization Design:Sustaining the

Competitive Edge through OrganizationalAnalytics” on October 20 from 1–2:30pm

Kogan PageAuthors at

OD Network2015

www.koganpageusa.comSign up for our monthly Newsletter!

For more Kogan Page OD, change management, and talent development books,

stop by the Conference Bookstore

KP_ODPractitionerAd0915v2.qxp_Layout 1 9/3/15 4:32 PM Page 1

Guidelines for Authors (contd.)

Preparing the Article for Submission

Article LengthArticles are usually 4,000 – 5,000 words.

Citations and ReferencesThe ODP follows the guidelines of the American Psychological Associa-tion Publication Manual (6th edition). This style uses parenthetical reference citations within the text and full refer-ences at the end of the article. Please include the DOI (digital object identi-fier; http://www.apastyle.org/learn/faqs/what-is-doi.aspx), if available, with references for articles in a periodical.

GraphicsGraphics that enhance an article are encouraged. The ODP reserves the right to resize graphics when neces-sary. The graphics should be in a program that allows editing. We prefer graphics to match the ODP’s three-, two-, or one-column, half-page or full-page formats. If authors have ques-tions or concerns about graphics or computer art, please contact the Editor.

Other PublicationsThe ODP publishes original articles, not reprints from other publications or journals. Authors may publish materials first published in the ODP in another publication as long as the publication gives credit to the OD Practitioner as the original place of publication.

Policy on Self-PromotionAlthough publication in the ODP is a way of letting the OD community know about an author’s work, and is therefore good publicity, the purpose of the ODP is to exchange ideas and information. Consequently, it is the policy of the OD Network to not accept articles that are primarily for the purpose of marketing or advertising an author’s practice.

Submission DeadlinesAuthors should email articles to the editor, John Vogelsang, at [email protected]. The deadlines for submit-ting articles are as follow: October 1 for the winter issue; January 1 for the spring issue; April 1 for the summer issue; and July 1 for the fall issue.

57OD PractitionerGuidelinesforAuthors

http://www.apastyle.org/learn/faqs/what-is-doi.aspx

http://www.apastyle.org/learn/faqs/what-is-doi.aspx



Practicing OD

Guidelines for Authors

Request for Submissions

Practicing OD is a quarterly online journal that provides Organization Devel-opment practitioners an opportunity to share useful ideas, lessons learned, innovative methods and designs, and practical suggestions for dealing with the day-to-day challenges of doing OD. Practicing OD encourages OD consultants to share real OD examples from their lived experience with clients along with advice and insights gained from those experiences.

We welcome short articles on a wide range of thematic topics such as and not limited to OD and Gender; Dialogic OD methods; Transformational Consulting; Racial Justice and Racial Healing; Polarity Thinking; or articles focused on working in the public, private, or nonprofit sector; or based on experiences working with labor, INGOs, multinationals, and health care.

Submission Guidelines

» Articles should be practical and short (900–1200 words; 3–4 pages single-spaced)

• Write in your own (first-person) voice using simple, direct, conversational language.

• Focus on what you are discussing, how it works, or can be used, and why it works (what you believe or how theory supports it).

• Use bulleted lists and short sections with subheads to make it easier to read.

• Include everything in the text. No sidebars. No or very limited graphics.

• Don’t use footnotes or citations if at all possible. Citations, if essential, should be included in the text with a short list of references at the end of the article.

» Articles can be written from various perspectives, including but not limited to:

• Brief case studies that highlight useful concepts, applied theories, lessons learned, and implications for future practice.

• Guidelines and tips for applying proven or cutting-edge methods, principles, processes, practices, interventions, and tools.

• Though-provoking essays on practice-related challenges, questions that emerged from a client engagement, or new trends and technologies that will influence the practice of OD.

» Include a short (25–50 word) author bio with your email so readers can contact you.

» Submit Microsoft Word electronic copies only to: Beth Applegate ([email protected]) and Tim Lannan ([email protected]).

• Include your name, phone number, and email address.

• If your article is accepted for publication, you will be notified via email.




Products and Services

Publications

» OD Practitioner, the flagship publica-tion of the OD Network, is a peer-reviewed quarterly journal.

» OD Seasonings is an online jour-nal highlighting the experience of seasoned practitioners.

» Practicing OD, our online ezine, provides practice-related concepts, processes, and tools in short articles by and for busy practitioners.

All three publications and their submis-sion guidelines are available online at http://www.odnetwork.org.

Member Benefits

Low annual dues provide members with a host of benefits:

» Free subscriptions to all three of our publications.

» Free access to online job ads in the OD Network Job Exchange.

» Discounts on conference registra-tion, OD Network products (includ-ing back issues of this journal), Job Exchange postings, professional liability insurance, books from John Wiley & Sons, and more.

» OD Network Member Roster, an essential networking tool, in print and in a searchable online database.

» Online Toolkits on action research, consulting skills, and HR for OD—foundational theory and useful tools to enhance your practice.

Professional Development

OD Network professional development events offer cutting-edge theory and practice. Learn more at http://www.odnetwork.org.

» OD Network Conferences, held annually, provide unsurpassed pro-fessional development and network-ing opportunities.

» Regular webinars include events in the Theory and Practice Series, Conference Series, and OD Network Live Briefs.

Online Resources

In addition to the online resources for members only, the OD Network website offers valuable tools that are open to the public:

» Education directory of OD-related degree and certificate programs.

» Catalog of OD professional develop-ment and networking events.

» Bookstore of titles recommended by OD Network members.

» Links to some of the best OD resources available.

» E-mail discussion lists that allow OD practitioners worldwide to share ideas.

» Lists, with contact information, of regional and international OD networks.

» Case studies illustrating the value of OD to potential client organizations.

59OrganizationDevelopmentNetworkProductsandServices

http://www.odnetwork.org

http://www.odnetwork.org

Human Resource Management is changing. Moving beyond basictransactional functions, your role as an HR professional has nowevolved to working with executives and managers to set priorities andguide change for your organization. Drawing upon the research andpractice of seasoned Organization Development professionals,Handbook for Strategic HR collects articles found in the esteemedjournal OD Practitioner to give you a full overview of the coreknowledge and skills you need to play a trusted advisory role in yourorganization.

A compendium of the best thinking on the subject, Handbook forStrategic HR supplies you with methods to help you: see the bigpicture, think systemically, and strategically identify where best tofoster change in your organization; team up with consultants andsenior level staff in leading change projects; put employeeengagement to practical use in the important work yourorganization is doing; operate effectively in cross-cultural andvirtual working situations; and much more.

Featuring 78 articles containing creative approaches, practicaltips, and proven methods that will help you add value to yourcompany, Handbook for Strategic HR is the gold standardresource on the important topic of organizational development.

Things are changing in theworld of human resources.

Acompendium of the best thinking on the subject, Handbook for Strategic HR includes 78 articlesfrom the renowned OD Practitioner. It introduces readers to core organization development strategiesand skills, giving them creative approaches, practical tips, and proven methods to help them:

• See the big picture, think systemically, and strategically identify where best to foster change in theirorganization

• Team up with consultants and senior-level staff in leading a change project

• Put employee engagement to practical use and involve “minds, hearts, and hands” in the importantwork of the organization

• Operate effectively in cross-cultural and virtual working situations

Comprehensive and practical, this forward-thinking book enables readers to become key partners inleading their organizations forward.

About the Editors:

OD PRACTITIONER is the quarterlyjournal of the OrganizationDevelopment Network, aninternational association whosemembers are committed to practicingorganization development as anapplied behavioral science.

The Handbook for Strategic HR isedited by: John Vogelsang, MayaTownsend, Matt Minahan, DavidJamieson, Judy Vogel, Annie Viets,Cathy Royal, and Lynne Valek

ISBN: 978-0-8144-3249-5Hardcover, $60.00 US

THE BOOK PUBLISHING DIVISION OF

AMERICAN MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION

Single copies available at your favorite online retailer or bookstoreGreat discounts on bulk purchases, starting at 40%!For details, call 1-800-250-5308 or email: [email protected]

Register today for the OD Network │ IODA Annual Conference!

http://www.odnetwork.org/?page=2015AnnualConfer

2025MStreetNWSuite800Washington,DC20036

fal yer20a15 r21y2vo - amber mayesambermayes.com/wp-content/uploads/odpractitioner-vol47no4.pdf ·...

Documents