Content area
Full Text
Currently, organization development (OD) seems to be languishing. Hardly any new technology has emerged in recent years. It is also puzzling that large consulting firms are doing well but OD as a field is not. One reason may be that OD is less connected with its roots, especially those grounded in academia, namely, theory and research where new ideas often emerge. Another reason may be structural. Most internal OD practitioners today are buried within the human resource (HR) function. Five structural models are considered: traditional (OD within HR), independent (a freestanding unit), decentralized (part of a business or regional unit), integrated (every HR person an OD practitioner and vice versa), and strategy (OD being an integral part of the strategic planning function). Advantages and disadvantages of each of these models are explored. Finally, a position is taken that OD could serve the organization most effectively by being integrated with strategy.
Keywords: organization development; structure; internal OD; role
Much is currently being discussed and written about problems lacing the field of organization development (OD) (see e.g., Bradford & Burke, 2005). Although empirical data are difficult to find, it nevertheless seems to be that large consulting firms such as Accenture and Mercer Delta are doing well while at the same time the field of OD is languishing. Little is new with respect to social technology (large group interventions have now been around for quite some time; so has appreciative inquiry), related theory, or research that could directly affect OD practice. Assuming that this assertion is at least partially true, why might this be so? One reason no doubt is the insufficient linkage today of OD practice with theory and research from the academic world (see the Bunker, Alban, & Lewicki article in this special issue where they suggest that current scholarly work on virtual teams, conflict resolution including negotiation and mediation, work group effectiveness, social network analysis, and trust hold promise for future practice). The roots of OD are grounded in scholarship, but these ties now are nowhere near as strong as they were in the 1960s, which may account in part for the lack of new technology at the present time.
Another reason may be structural. Most internal OD practitioners today are buried within the...