The intent of this paper is to present a specific methodology for organizational diagnosis, which in order to be successful, requires that an interventionist as a third-party facilitator attend to many very specific (though sometimes subtle) process aspects. The traditional techniques used for organizational diagnosis-questionnaires, interviews, and participant observationare criticized as being content-influential. The process-oriented methodology presented involves the interventionist with the client in designing groups that represent four different constituencies of a particular organization unit. The initial diagnosis and the initial intervention is achieved by conducting a problem diagnosis workshop. Pragmatic aspects concerning an effective diagnostic intervention have been learned through extensive research experience, some of which the authors report.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alderfer, C., & Brown, R.Understand the impact of survey feedback. In W.W. Burke and H. Hornstein (Eds.), The social technology of organization development. Fairfax, Va.: NTL/ Learning Resources Corporation, 1972.
2.
Argyris, C.Intervention theory and method: A behavioral science view. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1970.
3.
Bartee, E.A holistic view of problem solving. Management Science, 1973, 20 (4).
4.
Bowers, D. ODtechniques and their results in 23 organizations: The Michigan ICL Study. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1973, 9, 21-43.
5.
Bowers, D., & Franklin, J.Survey-guided development using human resources measurement in organizational change. Journal of Contemporary Business, 1972, 1, 43-55.
6.
Buchanan, P.Crucial issues in OD. In H.A. Hornstein, B.B. Bunker, W.W. Burke, M. Gindes, and R.J. Lewicki (Eds.), Social intervention: A behavioral science approach. New York: Free Press, 1971.
7.
Crozier, M.Le Phenomene Bureaucratique. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1963.
8.
Dalton, G.Influence and organizational change. In G. Dalton and P. Lawrence (Eds.), Organizational change and development. Homewood, Ill.: Irwin-Dorsey, 1970.
9.
Delbecq, A., & Van de Ven, A. Agroup process model for problem identification and program planning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1971, 7, 466-492.
10.
Eisen, S.A problem-solving program for defining a problem and planning action. Washington, D.C.: NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, associated with The National Education Association, 1969.
11.
Festinger, L.A theory of cognitive dissonance. New York: Row-Peterson, 1957.
Greiner, L.Patterns of organizational change. Harvard Business Review, 1967, 45, 119-128.
15.
Heyns, R., & Lippitt, R.Systematic observation techniques. In G. Lindsey (Ed.), Handbook of socialpsychology, Vol. 1. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1954.
16.
Klein, J.Working with groups. London: Hutchinson and Company, Ltd., 1966.
17.
Levinson, H.Organizational diagnosis. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972.
18.
Likert, R.The human organization. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
19.
Lorsch, L., & Lawrence, P.The diagnosis of organizational problems. In J Thomas and W. Bennis (Eds.), Management of change and conflict. New York: Penguin Books, 1972.
20.
Matarazzo, J., & Wiens, A.The interview, research on its anatomy and structure. Chicago: Aldine (Atherton), 1972.
21.
Miles, M., Hornstein, H., Callahan, D., Calder, P., & Schiavo, R.The consequences of survey feedback: Theory and evaluation. In W. Bennis, K. Benne, and R. Chin (Eds.), The planning of change, 2nd ed.New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969.
22.
Neff, Frank W.Survey research: A tool for problem diagnosis and improvement in organizations. Applied sociology. New York: Free Press, 1965.
23.
Peak, H.Attitude and motivation. In M. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska, 1955.
24.
Simon, H., & Newell, A.Human problem solving, the state of theory in 1970. Proceedings of Annual Convention, American Psychological Association, Miami, Florida, 1970.
25.
Taylor, J., & Bowers, D.Survey of organizations. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 1972.
26.
Tichy, N., Hornstein, H., & Nisberg, J.Organization diagnosis and intervention strategies: Developing emergent pragmatic theories of change. Paper presented at the NTL Institute Conference on New Technology in Organization Development, New Orleans, February 1974.
27.
Van de Ven, A., & Delbecq, A.Nominal versus interacting groups for committee decision-making effectiveness. Journal of the Academy of Management, 1971, 14 (2).
28.
Zajonc, R., & Wolfe, D.Cognitive consequences of a person's position in a formal organization. Human Relations, 1966.
