In this article, the authors describe characteristics of design science as a type of organization development (OD) intervention and as an approach to actionable theorizing. The authors discuss ways that design science approaches are typically but not necessarily consistent with OD’s values as well as the types of intervention motors they typically use. That is, they often reflect humanistic values, but they need not necessarily do so. Design science typically uses action research and participation intervention motors but does not include as much self-reflection as is the case in much OD work. Design approaches focus much more on action than do most current OD interventions; thus they add an important dimension to OD practice. In addition, they suggest ways of linking this focus on action with hypothesis testing and theorizing more than do most current OD interventions. Thus, they offer the possibility of revitalizing OD.
Andriessen, D. (2007). Designing and testing an OD intervention. Reporting intellectual capital to develop organizations. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43, [THIS ISSUE, PLEASE ADD]
2.
Argyris, C. (1970). Intervention theory and method. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
3.
Argyris, C. (1996). Actionable knowledge: Design causality in the service of consequential theory. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32, 390-406.
4.
Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & McLain Smith, D. (1985). Action science: Concepts, methods, and skills for research and intervention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
Austin, J., & Bartunek, J. (2003). Theories and practices of organization development. In W. Borman, D. Ilgen, & R. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 12, Industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 309-332). New York: John Wiley.
6.
Banathy, B. H. (1991). Systems design of education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
7.
Bartunek, J. M. (1983). How organization development can develop organizational theory. Group and Organization Studies, 8, 303-318.
8.
Bartunek, J. M. & Louis, M. E. (1996). Insider/outsider team research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9.
Bartunek, J. M., Austin, J. R., & Seo, M. (in press). The conceptual underpinnings of intervening in organizations. In T. G. Cummings (Ed.), Handbook of organization development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Bate, S. P. (2004). The role of stories and storytelling in organisational change efforts: A field study of an emerging community of practice within the UK National Health Service. In B. Hurwitz, T. Greenhalgh, & V. Skultans (Eds.), Narrative research in health and illness (pp. 325-348). London: BMJ Publications.
11.
Bate, S. P. (2006). Ethnography with “attitude”: Mobilising narratives for public sector change. In M. Veenswijk (Ed.), Organising innovation: New approaches to cultural change and intervention in public sector organizations (pp. 105-132). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
12.
Bate, S. P., & Robert, G. (2007). Towards more user-centric OD: Lessons from the field of experience-based design and a case study. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43, [THIS ISSUE, PLEASE ADD]
13.
Beckhard, R., & Harris, R. T. (1987). Organizational transitions: Managing complex change. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
14.
Bennis, W. G. (1966). Changing organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill.
15.
Bevan, H., Robert, G., Bate, P., Maher, L., & Wells, J. (2007). Using a design approach to assist large-scale organizational change: “Ten High Impact Changes” to improve the National Health Service in England. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43, [THIS ISSUE, PLEASE ADD]
16.
Boland, R. J., & Collopy, F. (2004). Toward a design vocabulary for management. In R. J. Boland & F. Collopy (Eds.), Managing as designing (pp. 265-276). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
17.
Boyce, M. E. (1995). Collective centering and collective sensemaking in the stories of one organization. Organization Studies, 16, 107-137.
18.
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 141-178.
19.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289-325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
Bunker, B. B., & Alban, B. T. (1996). Large group interventions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
21.
Burke, W. W. (1992). Organization development: A process of learning and changing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
22.
Coughlan, P., Suri, J. F., & Canales, K. (2007). Prototypes as (design) tools for behavioral and organizational change: A design-based approach to help organizations change work behaviors. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43, [THIS ISSUE, PLEASE ADD]
23.
Cobb, P. (2000). Conducting teaching experiments in collaboration with teachers. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 307-333). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32, 9-13.
25.
Collier, J. (1945). United States Indian Administration as a laboratory of ethnic relations. Social Research, 12, 275-276.
26.
Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O’Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22). New York/Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
27.
Collins, A. (1999). The changing infrastructure of education research. In E. C. Lagemann & L. S. Shulman (Eds.), Issues in education research. Problems and possibilities (pp. 289-298). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
28.
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 15-42.
29.
Collins, D. (1998). Organizational change: Sociological perspectives. London: Routledge.
30.
Confrey, J., & Lachance, A. (2000). Transformative teaching experiments through conjecture-driven research design. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 231-266). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32, 5-8.
32.
Dunphy, D. C., & Stace, D. A. (1988). Transformational and coercive strategies for planned organizational change: Beyond the OD model. Organization Studies, 9, 317-334.
33.
Emery, M., & Purser, R. E. (1996). The search conference: A powerful method for planning organizational change and community action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34.
Endenburg, G. (1998). Sociocracy as social design. Delft, the Netherlands: Eburon.
35.
French, W. L., & Bell, C. H. (1995). Organization development (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
36.
Frost, P., & Egri, C. (1994). The shamanic perspective on organizational change and development. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 7, 7-23.
37.
Gottlieb, J. Z. (1998). Understanding the role of organization development practitioners. In R. W. Woodman & W. A. Pasmore (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (Vol. 11, pp. 117-158). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
38.
Greiner, L. E., & Cummings, T. G. (2004). Wanted: OD more alive than dead! The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40, 374-391.
39.
Loh, B., Radinsky, J., Russell, E., Gomez, L. M., Reiser, B. J., & Edelson, D. C. (1998). The progress portfolio: Designing reflective tools for a classroom context. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 627-634). New York: ACM Press/Addison-Wesley.
40.
O’Connor, E. S. (2000). Plotting the organization: The embedded narrative as a construct for studying change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36, 174-192.
41.
Pasmore, W. A., & Friedlander, F. (1982). An action-research program for increasing employee involvement in problem solving. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 343-362.
42.
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.
43.
Plsek, P., Bibby, J., & Whitby, E. (2007). Design rules grounded in the experience of managers: A system for organizational learning and pilot study of practical methods. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43, [THIS ISSUE, PLEASE ADD]
44.
Porras, J., & Robertson, P. J. (1987). Organization development theory: A typology and evaluation. In R. W. Woodman & W. A. Pasmore (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (Vol. 1, pp. 1-58). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
45.
Radinsky, J., Loh, B., Mundt, J., Marshall, S., Gomez, L. M., Reiser, B. J., et al. (1999, April). Problematizing complex datasets for students: Design principles for inquiry curriculum. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
46.
Romme, A. G. L. (1997). Organizational learning, circularity, and double linking. Management Learning, 28, 149-160.
47.
Romme, A. G. L. (1999). Domination, self-determination, and circular organizing. Organization Studies, 20, 801-832.
48.
Romme, A. G. L. (2003). Making a difference: Organization as design. Organization Science, 14, 559-573.
49.
Romme, A. G. L., & Damen, I. C. M. (2007). Towards science-based design in organization development: Codifying the implementation and experimentation process. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43, [THIS ISSUE, PLEASE ADD]
50.
Romme, A. G. L., & Endenburg, G. (2006). Construction principles and design rules in the case of circular design. Organization science, 17, 287-297.
51.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
52.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday Currency.
53.
Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., & Smith, B. J. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook. New York: Doubleday Currency.
54.
Seo, M., Putnam, L., & Bartunek, J. (2004). Dualities and tensions of planned organizational change. In M. S. Poole & A. H. Van de Ven (Eds.), Handbook of organizational change and innovation (pp. 73-107). New York: Oxford University Press.
55.
Shrader, G., Lento, E., Gomez, L., & Pea, R. (1997, March). Inventing interventions: Cases from CoVis. An analysis by SES. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
56.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
57.
Trullen, J., Bartunek, J. M., & Harmon, M. (in press). The usefulness of design research in elementary and high schools for management education. In S. K. Piderit, R. E. Fry, & D. L. Cooperrider (Eds.), Handbook of transformative cooperation: New designs and dynamics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
58.
van Aken, J. E. (2004). Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: The quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. Journal of Management Studies, 41, 219-246.
59.
van Aken, J. E. (2005). Management research as a design science: Articulating the research products of mode 2 knowledge production in management. British Journal of Management, 16, 19-36.
60.
Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20, 510-540.
61.
Watkins, M. M., & Mohr, B. M. (2001). Appreciative inquiry: Change at the speed of imagination. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
62.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
63.
Weisbord, M. R., & Janoff, S. (1995). Future search: An action guide to finding common ground in organizations and communities. San Francisco: Berrett-Kohler.
64.
Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14, 490-495.
65.
Woodman, R. W. (1989). Organizational change and development: New arenas for inquiry and action. Journal of Management, 15, 205-228.
66.
Worley, C. G., & Feyerherm, A. E. (2003). Reflections on the future of organization development. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39, 97-115.
67.
Worren, N., Moore, K., & Elliott, R. (2002). When theories become tools: Toward a framework for pragmatic validity. Human Relations, 55, 1227-1250.
68.
Worren, N. A. M., Ruddle, K., & Moore, K. (1999). From organizational development to change management: The emergence of a new profession. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 35, 273-286.
69.
Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
