Organizational development means a comprehensive system of actions aimed at improving decision-making processes, implementing these decisions, improving the overall structure and organization of work in the company, increase efficiency, diagnostics, and management of the organization.
This implies improving communications, receiving and transmitting information in both directions.
Decision for change and development of the organization
When a decision is made to change and develop the organization, the following tasks are set:
1. To change the values and attitudes, the evaluation criteria; getting to know and taking into account the role of the human factor in the organization. Reference: “Evolution of the concept of Human Resources Management (HRM)“, https://www.mu7club.com/evolution-of-the-concept-of-human-resources-management-hrm/
2. Improving the interactions between the working teams, and the structural units, to reduce the tension, of possible reactions against the change, the interpersonal and intergroup conflicts. Reference: “Development of the Human Resources Management (HRM) concept“, https://customer-service-us.com/development-of-the-human-resources-management-hrm-concept/
3. Improving communication skills, human relations, and social competence of staff.
4. Increasing managerial competence at all levels of government.
5. Focusing on both economic and social issues.
Organizational development requires continuous improvement of the qualities of the organization itself and the human relations in it.
The basis of the development of each organization is the care of management and staff for:
– improving production efficiency;
– increasing the empathy of employees to the common goals of the organization;
– providing greater flexibility of the organization and opportunities for adaptation to changing external and internal conditions.
Planning for change and development of organizations
The following hypotheses are usually based on planning change and development of organizations:
1. With strong integration of people around the goals of the organization, the trust in the leadership is greater, the responsibility in the work is strengthened, and hence – the effectiveness of the organization.
2. In internal control of work (in people themselves), when people are accountable to management and themselves for the results of their activities, the effectiveness is greater than in a situation of continuous external control (although it is not avoided, especially at the beginning of the work).
3. Creating conditions for greater and more responsibilities in employees results in higher efficiency than in the absence of such responsibility.
4. Decisions that are made by more people are easier to implement than a decision that is “dropped” and taken by a minimum number of people.
5. The distribution of leadership (more leaders for different things) integrates the group more than the centralized power of one leader. Read more: “Objectives of Human Resources Management (HRM)“, https://www.powerhp.net/objectives-of-human-resources-management-hrm/
6. Leadership that focuses on communications and interactions between groups is better than leadership that focuses on power within itself.
7. Control in many areas of personal responsibility is much better than in just one chain (eg supervisor).
8. Enriching everyone’s work, including new functions, responsibilities, and rights, integrates more than simplifying work.
9. Depending on the results of many studies, it has been shown that it is better for change to work in small groups than to do it in isolation from a large group of people.
Any answer about the need for change in the organization requires a forecast of what, after the change, behavior the organization will have in the changed conditions and what needs to change.
There are different theories on how to make forecasts (there is no one accepted theory). Katzl argues that “organizational theories try to be normative, and this is contrary to the requirements of scientific theory.
The theory should allow for variability in the choice of organizational decision, depending on the variety of conditions in which each organization exists. “(There must be an arsenal of solutions, but what exactly they will depend on the conditions).