Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

1/32

MODULE 1

ON

ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEM

Submitted to

SOUTHEAST ASIA INTERDISCIPLINARY DEVELOPMENT

INSTITUTE School of Organization Development (SAIDI School of OD)

By

FR. JUBLAS NOLASCO, APRIL 20, 2012

1

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

2/32

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3

Chapter 1. The Development of OD?-------------------------------------------4

1.2 - The Forerunner of OD? --------------------------------------------------------5

1.3 - The Early Practioners of OD? -------------------------------------------------6

1.4 - Definition of OD?---------------------------------------------------------------6-8

1.5 Various Definitions of OD-------------------------------------------------------8

1.6 OD as Science----------------------------------------------------------------------9

Chapter 2. What is organization?----------------------------------------------10

2.2 Types of Organization-------------------------------------------------------10-11

2.3 Classification of Organization------------------------------------------------11

2.4 The core and elements of Organization----------------------------------11-12

2.5 - The Images of Organization------------------------------------------------12-14

2.6 - The Dream Foundation as an Organism Organization---------------14-16

2.7 - The Organizational Life cycle and the Current State of

Dream Foundation ----------------------------------------------------------17-19

2.8 - The difference between Organizational development vs

Organization development?--------------------------------------------------20

2.9 Organization Theory and Various Systematic Theories-------------21-23

Chapter 3. What is Theory?---------------------------------------------23-24

3.2 - The Various Theories on Organizational Development------------24-26

Chapter 4. System approach and its relevance to the Dream

to Study Foundation-----------------------------------------------------------26-31

Bibliography-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------32

2

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

3/32

INTRODUCTION

The (SAIDI) Southeast Asia Interdisciplinary Development Institute School of OD

is using a modular approach in a self-directed program of study on Organization

Development. As a student, I received a module 1 and 2. This module 1 introduces mylearning to organization development by pointing out two purposes: First is to discover,

analyze and synthesize the origin and development of OD. Second is to learn, appreciate

and relate the basic principles of General systems theory and applicability to the particularorientation of my profession as a priest and the Dream To Study Foundation as an

organization.1

As a student of OD, it is presupposed that any scientific study underlies anunderstanding of philosophy to any theory. This module will discuss the concept of

organization development, the various definitions of OD, the precursor to OD and trends

affecting organizations from which OD as a concept developed into a scientific endeavor.

Generally, the understanding on OD is relatively new. It is common knowledge that

the field is an open arena of experimentations, discoveries and realizations oforganizational processes that delve into the complexity of relations of multiple influencing

factors affecting organization. Therefore, OD is an evolving science. It is constantly

demanding adaptability to changes in time and situations.

In OD, there are various theories applied to effect change in an organization. This

module will discover, analyze, and synthesize the meaning of an organization, types,

classification and images of an organization.

Specifically, the generally system theory or systemic approach will be given

importance and light in this module as a significant theory that will be applicable anduseful in the organization of Dream to Study Foundation, Inc.

1DOD 1 or MOD 1 MODULE ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS. SAIDI MODULE PROGRAM:1

3

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

4/32

Chapter 1: Development of Organizational Development

The Discovery of OD can be clearly linked to different historical trend some time inthe 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. This timeline emerged from the different backgrounds and

perspectives in the claim of one theory according to Thomas Cummings & Edgar Huse.

They say that OD has emerged from four major developments:

1. Laboratory Training: The National Training laboratories (NTL) development

of training groups known assensitivity trainingorT-groups. Laboratory Training began in1946 when Kurt Lewin and his staff at the Research Center for Group Dynamics at

Massachusetts of Technology MIT were asked by the Connect Interracial Commission and

the Committee on Community Interrelations of the American Jewish Congress for help ontraining community leaders. A workshop was developed for the leaders to learn about

leadership and to discuss problems. At the end of each day, the researchers discussed

privately what behaviors and group dynamics they had observed. The leaders asked

permission to sit in on these feedback sessions. Reluctant at first, the researchers finally

agreed. Thus the first T-group was formed in which people reacted to information abouttheir own behavior. T-group is the first discovery on the intervention of an

organizational development. It is called now in our modern language team building

2.Survey Research Feedback: Kurt Lewin formed the Research Center for Group

Dynamics at MIT in 1945. After he died in 1947, his staff moved to the University ofMichigan to join the Survey Research Center as part of the Institute for Social Research. It

was headed by Rensis Likert, a pioneer in developing scientific approaches to attitude

surveys.2 Survey feedback premised that a development of an organization itself is highly

influenced by industrial psychology. The method of survey feedback seeks to determine

perception and attitude towards leadership and management; motivation to work and

environment in the workplace.

3

3.Action Research: In the 1940s, Kurt Lewin discovered that research needed to be

closely linked to action if organizational members were to use it to manage change. Actionresearch has two results: 1) organizational members use research on themselves to

guide action and change, while 2) researchers were able to study the process to gain

new information. There are two noted action research studies was the work of Lewin and

his students at the Hardwood Manufacturing Company and Lester Coch and John French'sclassic research on overcoming resistance to change.4

4.Productivity and Quality-of-Work-Life (QWL): This was originally developed

in Europe during the 1950s at the period of the rise of technical innovations and inventionsthat gave way to the use of machineries. Kurt Lewin and his colleagues at the Tavistock

Institute of Human Relations in London developed system theory. This approach

examined both the technical and the human sides of organizations and how they are

interrelated. The premise was that an organization is simultaneously both a social and

2Thomas Cummings & Edgar Huse,Organization Development and Change (St Paul, MN: West

Publishing Company, 1989): Pp. 5-13.3

Thomas Cummings & Edgar Huse (1989): Pp. 5-13.4

Thomas Cummings & Edgar Huse (1989): Pp. 5-13

4

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

5/32

technical system. This meant that the workers comprised of the people and machines

which is the technology are integral in the system approach of an organization.5

OD on the Emergence of Space Age

Another concept on the development of OD is from the emergence of space ageaccording to Leonard Nadler in his bookThe Handbook of Human Resource Development.

He claimed that 1960-1970 was a period of rapid movement in high technology because of

the space battle due to Soviet Sputnik challenge. In the history of the Human ResourceDevelopment, this was the time when their efforts increased as they moved into project

groups and task forces to cope with the challenge of new technologies. Behavioral science

was brought into the work place, and a new term appeared Applied behavioral science.

This provoked a term that became known as OD, due in part to the reaction HRD programsappeared to be effective, but had little or no impact on the work place. That is, HRD

programs were based upon sound learning principles, and people learned, but the learning

often failed to be applied to the work place.6

Therefore, understanding this historical trend, the term OD has its roots linked to

the human relations movement that existed in 1950s, 60s, or 70s. In general point ofview, OD existed because of the emergence of self-expression, the release of human

potential, expectations for human growth in the work, individual group or team group in

line of the development in behavioral sciences. It is worthy to note that in the developmentof OD, an important figure arose in the person of Kurt Lewin known to be the forerunner of

OD.

1.2. The Forerunner of OD

Few social scientists can have received the level of praise that has been heapedupon Kurt Lewin. Tolman, in giving his memorial address for Kurt Lewin, stated that

Freud the clinician and Lewin the experimentalist these are the two men whose names

will stand out before all others in the history of our psychological era. Edgar Scheinreferred to Lewin as: the intellectual father of contemporary theories of applied behavioural

science.7

At the heart of Lewins work is his humanitarian commitment to build civil societyby resolving conflict whether religious, racial, marital or industrial. The key to resolving

social conflict, according to him, was to facilitate planned change through learning, and so

enable individuals to understand and restructure their perceptions of the world aroundthem. His first major theory is Action Research. Other concepts he contributed are group

dynamics and force field analysis.

5Thomas Cummings & Edgar Huse (1989): Pp. 5-13

6Leonard Nadler. The Handbook of Human Resource Development. (New York: John Wiley & Sons,

1984): p.12.

7Joan V. Gallos. Organization Development. (CA:John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 2006) P: 2:1

5

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

6/32

1. 3. The Early Practitioners of OD in their perspectives

It is noteworthy that academics and early practitioners in the field of OD in the

persons of: Chris Argyris, Abraham Maslow, Douglas MacGregor, Edgar Schein, andRensis Likert. These brilliant men supported the value of learning from experience and

framed the significance of ideas and action. That is why, OD has distinctive dual focus on

understanding how organizations can and should operate by working to improve them.Today, the study in the field of organization development requires knowing something

about this history.8

Curious as a researcher, the question is lingering on how was the wordorganizational development was coined. Richard Beckhard and his colleague, Robert

Tannenbaum gave the field its name in the 1950s while sitting around a kitchen table

according to the legend. Their reasoning went something like this: ifindividual

developmentis the term for human growth and change in response to challenge andopportunities, then the growth and development of organizations and large social systems

logically should be called organizational development.

1.4. Definition of Organizational Development

In the early 1960s, organizational development was implemented in organizations

through consultants. However, OD was relatively not popular as a theory of practice and no

common definition among its practitioners. The classic definition that has been used andpopular until now is taken from Richard Beckhard, an authority on organizational

development and change management.

Organizational development is as " (1) a planned effort; (2) organization-wide; (3)

managed from the top; (4) to increase organization effectiveness and health;

(5)through planned interventions in the organization's processes, using behavioral-

science knowledge".9

1. It is aplanned changeeffort. An OD program involves a systematic diagnosis ofthe organization, the development of a strategic plan for improvement, and themobilization of resources to carry out the effort.

2. It involves the total "system" as organization-wide. An OD effortis related to a total organization change such as a change in the culture or the

reward systems or the total managerial strategy. There may be tactical efforts thatmight change the subparts of the organization but the "system" to be changed is a

total and what affects the parts affect the whole relatively autonomous organization.

This is not necessarily a total corporation, or an entire government, but refers to a

8Gallos, P: 1:3

9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Beckhard

6

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

7/32

system, which is relatively free to determine its own plans and future within very

generalconstraints from the environment.

3. It is managed from the top. In an OD effort, the top management of the system hasa personal investment in the program, process and its result. They actively

participate in the managementof the effort. This means that they must have bothknowledge and commitmentto the goals of the program and must actively supportthe methods used to achieve the goals.10

4. It is planned to increase organization effectiveness and health.An ODs effectiveness should come from a right understanding of its goals of what

an "ideal" effective, healthy organization should be. An effective organizationshould be the following:

1. The total organization, the significant subparts, and individuals manage theirwork againstgoals andplans for achievement of these goals.

2. Form follows function (the problem, or task, or project determines how thehuman resources are organized).

3. There is a shared value and management strategy to support it, of trying to helpeach person (or unit) in the organization maintain his (or its) integrity and

uniqueness in an interdependent environment.

4. The organization and its members operate in an "action research" way. Generalpractice is to build infeedback mechanisms so that individuals and groups can

learn from their own experience.

5. It isplanned interventions using behavioral-science knowledge. A tactic is

developed of intervening or moving into the existing organization to examine its presentways of work, norms, and values, and look at alternative ways of working, or relating, or

rewarding. The interventions used draw on the knowledge and technology of the behavioralsciences about such processes as individual motivation, power, communications,

perception, cultural norms, problem-solving, goal-setting, interpersonal relationships,

intergroup relationships, and conflict management.11

It is important to understand that all organizations, regardless of size and type,face two types of Problems:

First; continuous external adaptation to a rapidly changing environment;

Second; corresponding internal integration that will support the success of the

external adaptation according to Edgar Schein. He declared the organizations ability to

cope with changes and adapt effectively the adaptive coping cycle, which is a sign of

organization effectiveness.12

10Richard Beckhard. Organizational Development: Strategies and Models. (Addison-Wesley Publishing

Company. 1969) P.911

Beckhard, p.912Edgar H. Schein. Organizational Psychology (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, NJ, 1988) P.27

7

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

8/32

1.5. The Various Definitions of OD:

The following definitions uncover the heart of the practice of OD, which is to develop the

working of individuals, teams and the total organization:

OD is a systematic process for applying behavioural science principles and practices in

organizations to increase individual and organization effectiveness (French and Bell,1999).

OD is a complex strategy intended to change the beliefs, attitudes, values, and structure

of organization so that they can better adapt to a new technologies, markets and challenges.

(Warren)

OD is a process (and its associated technology) directed at organization improvement

(Margulies,1978).

OD is about building and maintaining the health of the organization as a total system

(Schein, 1988).

Organization revitalization is achieved through synthesizing individual, group andorganizational goals so as to provide effective service to the client and community whilefurthering quality of product and work life (Lippitt and Lippitt, 1975)

The goal of OD is to enhance organizational effectiveness by attending to both human

and organizational needs (Rainey Tolbert and Hanafin, 2006).

OD is an organizational process for understanding and improving any and all substantive

processes an organization may develop for performing any tasks and pursuing any

objectives (Vaill, 1989)13

Now, I will attempt to put together a set of characteristics of OD based on the

discussion above and its enumerated definitions in a simplistic way by the basic question

WHAT is OD and its acronym WHAT? What, How, Action, Time/Treasure orValues:

What is OD: A behavioral science or a field of knowledge that guides thedevelopment of organization effectiveness.

HOW? Using a group and dynamic processes from behavioral applied method,

research, theories to facilitate movement of groups and organizations.

Action? To improve the effectiveness and health of an organization and the people

that work within in a sustainable way

Values? Respect for human differences and belief in a lifelong learning on the

renewal of self and the organization.

1.6. OD as a SCIENCE

13Gallos: P: 2:3

8

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

9/32

A remarkable transformation in prevailing views about how organizations can

improve their effectiveness has occurred in recent decades. Organization development is as

a top management-supported, long-range effort to improve an organizations problem-solving renewal processes, particularly through more effective and collaborative diagnosis

and management of organization culture, with special emphasis on formal work team,

temporary work team, and intergroup culture - using the assistance of a consultantfacilitator and the theory and technology of applied behavioral science, including action

research.

Unlike many of the approaches of planned change for solving immediate and

specific problems, OD is a longer term, more encompassing and complex approach to

moving the organization to a higher level of functioning while greatly improving its

members performance and well being given changing problems and opportunities.Although OD frequently includes structural and technological changes, its primary focus is

on changing people and the nature and quality of their working relationships. OD ought to

be a top management-supported effort. Therefore, leaders awareness of change and

renewal is necessary for its success. Subsequent to this felt need comes effective andcollaborative diagnosis of management culture. Greater subordinate involvement in

decision-making toward effective teamwork is acknowledged as an important ingredient ofmodern participatory management.14

OD has come to occupy commanding heights in behavioral science literature astheorists and practitioners appear to be unfailing in their zest to design strategies to

improve organizational effectiveness in various parts of the world. Interestingly, OD now

represents the finer points of applied behavioral sciences. In fact, the foundations of OD are

an amalgam of interpretative contributions made by some of the best-known behavioralscientists in areas like psychology, social anthropology, sociology, psychiatry, economics,

and political science.

It is therefore in this context we can say that OD as a behavioral science, it

concerns with the application of psychological, sociological and anthropological theories,

research methods, and intervention strategies to workplace issues. This inter-discipline isgenerally called Industrial and Organizational Psychology. It focuses organizational

productivity and efficiency while ensuring workers are able to lead physically and

psychologically healthy lives. It deals on the areas of motivation, personality, learning

theories, group dynamics, general system theory, leadership and power, research andexperimentation on organizational design. It is based on relatively well-established

principles about individual, groups, and people in organization.15

Chapter 2: What is an organization?

Organization is a general term that has created different definition from various

authors and discipline. For Academic purposes, we will understand organization ondifferent concepts:

14French and Bell, P.85

15Edgar F. House. Organization Development and Change; 2nd Edition. (West Publishing Company; St. Paul

Minnesota, 1980): P. 29-30

9

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

10/32

The etymological meaning of Organization came from the Greek workorganon,which means a compartment for a particular job.

Wikipedia defines organization as asocial group, which distributes tasks for a

collective goal.16

A new-classical point of view, organization is a group of persons with commonobjectives.

According to Herbert Hick, organization is a structure process in which individuals

interact for objectives.17

The OD authors defined organization as a social entity, goal directed, designedand deliberately structured, and coordinated activity system is linked to the external

environment. When people interact with one another to perform essential functions that

help attain goals, organization thrives. In an organization, they have to adapt to and

influence rapidly in changing environment. They have to cope with and accommodate

challenges of workforce diversity, growing concerns over ethics and social responsibility to

motivate the workers to accomplish their organizational goals.18

It is therefore a logical ideato postulate that there are various reasons for the existence of an organization. This need or

limitation of individuals might be emotional, intellectual, spiritual, economic or other validsocial reasons. According to Chester Barnard, organizations are designed by people to

overcome individual limitations and this is bet met collectively.19

2.2 Types of Organizations

Organizations are basically classified on the basis of relationships. There are two

types depending upon the degree to which they are structured.

1. Formal Organization means a structure of well-defined jobs. Each bearing a

measure of authority and responsibility. There is a conscious determination by the peopleto accomplish their goals through observing the norms laid down by structure. This kind

of organization is subjective set up in which each person is responsible for his

performance. The formal organization has a formal set up to achieve pre-determined

goals.2. Informal Organization is a network of personal and social relationships,

which spontaneously originates within the formal set up. It is loose, flexible, and ill

defined. It develops relationships that could be built on likes, dislikes, feelings andemotions. Therefore, the network of social groups based on friendships can be called

informal organizations. There is no conscious effort made to have informal organization.It emerges from the formal organization and it is not based on any rules and regulations asin case of formal organization.20

16http://wikipedia.org/organization

17Herbert Hicks and Ray Gullett. Management of Organizations. 3rd Edition (USA: McGraw-Hill

Inc. 1976): P.1318

Richard L. Daft Organization Theory and Design. (South-Western College Publishing, Ohio, 1998.) P: 2519

Hicks and Gullet, Pp.6-8

10

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

11/32

Another way to clarify organizations as primary or secondary ones, according to the

emotional involvement of its members:

Primary organizations claim the complete, personal and emotional involvement of their

members. They are characterized by personal, direct, spontaneous, face-to-facerelationships. They are based on mutual expectations rather than upon precisely defined

obligations. The members are willing to commit total personal efforts.

In Secondary organizations, relationships are intellectual, rational and contractual.

Relationships tend to be formal and impersonal with explicitly defined obligations. In

secondary organizations, personal involvement is only partial.

2.3 Classification of Organization

Organizations are classified according to their principal objective. Everyorganization is formed to achieve some purposes, which can be broadly described as

satisfying the wants, needs, desires,or objectives of its members.

1.Service organizationsstand ready to assist persons without requiring full pay of their

services (charities, public school boards, parks, others).2.Economic organizationsprovide goods and services in return for some form of

payment (corporations, proprietors, partnership, enterprises).

3.Religious organizationsprovide for the spiritual needs of members (churches, sects,

congregations or orders).4.Protective organizationsprotect persons from harm (police departments, the military,

fire departments, rescue teams).

5. Government organizationssatisfy the need for order and continuity (federalgovernments, states, cities, courts, parliament, congress).

6.Social organizations that serve the social needs of persons for contact with others,

identification, and mutual support (fraternities and sororities, clubs, teams).

Generally, organizations have synergetic effect. Their outputs may differ from the

sum of their inputs. These classification scheme overlap and an organization can be place

in all three categories.21

2.4. The core and elements of Organization

20http://organization_classification.htm

21Hicks and Gullet, P15

11

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

12/32

Every organization has a system of human activities acted by persons. The

working elements are:

1. The human resources are the members, their talents and personal influences(human resources are abilities and capabilities in managing organizations)

2. The Non-human resources are the free and economic goods; and theconceptual resources of a group by members and managers. Non-humanresources include the nature itself that are tangible by human nature like

assets, capital and etc.

Chester Bernard said that without human intervention and participation in settinggoals for non-human resources, an organization does not exist. Thus, the persons are the

core elements of all organizations. All persons have personal objectives, and organization

are both result of these objectives and the mean by which person attain them.22

2.5. The Images of Organization

Gareth Morgan, in his book Images of Organization contributes to our

understanding of organizations by suggesting that it is vital to view organizations through

multiple metaphors or images. He articulates, Metaphors create insight. But they alsodistort. They have strengths. But they also have limitations. In creating ways of seeing,

they create ways ofnotseeing. Hence there can be no single theory or metaphor that gives

an all-purpose point of view. There can be no 'correct theory' for structuring everything we

do."23

1. Organization as machines this meant that an organization is viewed asrational,clear, and effectively structured to attain the goals and objectives: (a) when there isa straightforward task to perform; (b) when the environment is stable enough to

ensure that the products produced will be appropriate ones; (c) when one wishes to

produce exactly the same product time and again; (d) when precision is at apremium; and (e) when the human "machine" parts are compliant and behave as

they have been designed to do."24

This image of an organization was popular since the industrial revolution and it hasbrought enormous benefits and growth in productions of goods. In fact, this image

of mechanistic model has spectacular success in some organization like McDonalds

22Hicks and Gullet, Pp.13-32

23 Gareth Morgan. Images of Organization: The Executive Edition. (Berrett-Koehler publishers, Inc. and

SAGE Publications, Inc. 1998): P.17

24Morgan, P.17

12

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

13/32

and many firms in the fast-food industry.

2. Organization as organisms. This meant that the organization is viewed on the

adaptability in a changing environment. This image is helpful in an organizationthat allows free flowing in view of change. This image helps us understand that

organization is a cluster of interconnected human, business and technical needs,inspires people to learn the art of survival and develops vibrant organic system

open for new challenges. This metaphor articulates the powerful ways of thinking

about strategy and organizational design.25

3. Organization as Brains. This meant the brain has been compared with aholographic system. When it comes to brain functioning it seems that there is no

center of point of control. The brain seems to store and process data in many partssimultaneously. Pattern and order emerge from the process; it is not imposed. Butthe holographic explanation can go too far in that it underplays the fact that despite

the distributed character there is also a strong measure of system specialization. The

brain, it seems, is both holographic and specialized.

The metaphor (brain) invites us to rethink key management principles in a way that

lays the foundation for a completely new theory of management. Consider, forexample, how an understanding of the functioning of the brain challenges

traditional assumptions about the importance of strong central leadership and

control; about the wisdom of setting clear goals and objectives; about the role ofhierarchy; and about the concept of organizational design; and the wisdom of trying

to develop and impose systems from the top down.26

4. Organizations as Cultures. This meant simply that the societys values, rituals,ideologies, beliefs, traditions and practices play an important role in the shape of

an organization. In this metaphor, we see variations in cultural style, we see

individual organizations may also have their own unique cultures, and we realizethat the growth of an organization is the product of the reflections of the cultural

mindset of people. This metaphor will teach us to rethink the corporate functioning,

strategy, structure, design and nature of leadership. It is important that uponunderstanding of cultures influence on workplace behavior, we can approach in

25Morgan, P.35

26Morgan, P.69

13

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

14/32

this metaphor.27

5. Organizations as Political Change. This meant that organizations are being

viewed in the lens of politics like the patterns of competing interests and power-plays dominate scene. In this metaphor, we see different styles of government

management process, we observe that organizations becomes politicized because ofdivergent interest of individuals and groups, and we analyze organizational politics

in a systematic way by focusing on relations among interests, conflicts, and

power.28

6. Organizations as Psychic Prisons. This meant that organizations are being seenin psychic level. Psychoanalytic behavior such as; obsessions, narcissism, fear ofthe unknown, strong emotions and defense mechanism are common observations

that can come out in an organization. This metaphor articulates the concept that

organizations are created and sustained by the conscious and unconscious process

with the belief that people can become imprisoned in and confined in images, ideas,and thoughts and actions that such processes arise.29

7. Organization as flux and transformation. This meant that organizations areexpressions of deeper processes of transformation and change. This is not just by

their external appearances through the fundamental nature of change and the newand powerful views on intervention, images of spirals, loops, and contradictions to

help organizations shift from one pattern of operation to another.

The whole idea that change is an emergent phenomenon offers a powerful mind-setfor managing change. It encourages us to gain a reflective understanding of the

logic driving the flux around us and to nudge and shape the logic wherever we can.

Yet it also requires us to recognize that we can never be "in control." The messageis that, even though our actions shape and are shaped by change, we are just part of

an evolving pattern.30

27Morgan, Pp.111-112

28Morgan, Pp.147-153

29Morgan, Pp. 213-214

30Morgan, P.259

14

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

15/32

2.6. - The Image of Organization as Organisms in the Dream Foundation

Morgan explores the metaphor of organizations as organisms that view

organizations as living or open systems. Organizations as organisms recognize the impact

and importance of the environment to organizations.

Morgan examines three variations of the organism metaphor.

The first is the Contingency Theory, which focuses on adapting the organization

to fit the environment. Here leaders are trying to find a good fit, ever conscious of thedynamic environment and understanding there is no one way to best organize.

The second theory of organizations as organisms is that of Natural Selection, an

application of Darwins theory. This theory focuses on the dependence of adequate

resources and engages in competition. In this view, the environment has more control over

the outcomes than individual organizations.

Third theory is the organizational ecology perspective focuses on the idea of a

web of organizations not as individual organizations separate from the environment. An

ecology perspective embraces complexity and seeks out patterns of evolution, thusrecognizing that organizations affect and interact with environments at the same time

environments affect and interact with organizations.

Organism as a theory

What motivates one person doesn't always motivate the next. To look at an

organization as if it were an organism is an interesting theory. An organism is a living

thing that is always changing and growing. An organism is one part of a complex system.People who work in an organization are one part of what can also be said to be a complex

system. Just as organisms have complex needs to survive, people also have complex needs

to survive and thrive. I believe that what motivates most people hinges on allowing peopleto achieve rewards and to develop interpersonal relationships along with leadership roles

that are meaningful to them and to the organization as a whole.

In Peter Senges, The Fifth Discipline, Senge outlines five key disciplines that areneeded to create a learning organization. Senge states that learning organizations are

organizations in which people continually expand their capacity to create the results they

truly desire. Senge speaks to the idea of interdependency where he states we live our

lives in webs of interdependence. If Senge is correct when he says that we live our lives inwebs of interdependence then I believe that individuals depend on other individuals, just

like biological organisms, within the system for many types of support andmotivation. Senge speaks to a systems theory where I believe the leader needs to

understand the system in which they are operating from within.31

Roles of environment in an Organization

31http://www.audubon-area.org/NewFiles/sengesum.pdf

15

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

16/32

In the metaphor of organizations as organisms, the environment plays a significant

role in the success of an organization. Environment plays the only role in the NaturalSelection sub-metaphor, whereas the Contingency and Organizational Ecology metaphors

recognize the organization as having a role in the outcomes of the organization. In contrast

to organizations as machines where roles are tightly defined within the organization, theorganism metaphor treats roles as dynamic, changing in order to meet the needs of the

organization in order to achieve survival.

Role of a leader in an organization as organism

Using the metaphor of organizations as organisms requires a different leadershipmode. The leadership must be dynamic in order to find the best fit in changing

environments. In finding a best fit in terms of hiring or adding to the organization the

leader must know the strengths and weaknesses with in the organization. Organizations

consist of organizational subsystems that pose the question of what the best fit is.

For example: In the Dream Foundation as an organization has many

subsystems. We have different committees. Those committees are one piece of theorganization. The committees can sometimes work as separate entities of the whole in

terms of the organization. Within committees we typically have committees chairpersons

who oversee that aspect of the organization and act as a type of conduit for disseminatinginformation and decision-making when combined with other committee chairpersons and

the board of directors.

One job of the leader is having the ability to diagnose problems with in theorganization. Just as a doctor will diagnose an ailment when dealing with a person, the

leader must also have this ability. When diagnosing a problem the leader must be able tolook at the organizational subsystems, gather data, and look at how these subsystems areworking together toward the greater good of the organizational whole.

The culture in an organization

I believe that the culture of the organization may be one of the most importantvariables in the success of the organization. The culture of an organization is many times

created by those who lead it. It is a caring culture or one where the focus is strictly on the

end result where strategies that are employed are a means to an end. The culture of anorganization speaks directly to the beliefs and practices that it holds to be true. When

thinking about culture a leader must help define why the organization exists and to lead by

example.

The relations between organizational and environmental characteristics will also

define what type of culture an organization has. The task of the leader in developing the

culture of an organization will depend on how the variables of core values, beliefs, andorganizational structure are in alignment. Organizational harmony relies on human decision

making, action, and the ability of its leaders in developing shared or common values.

16

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

17/32

The environment in which one works will also shape the culture and will play a role

in which organizations will succeed. The culture of an organization is a socially

constructed idea. Organizations are products of visions, ideas, and beliefs, whichfundamentally depend on each other for life and success.

The image of Organization as organisms in the Dream Foundation

The image of Organization as organisms is fitted in the Dream Foundation asdiscussed in the presentation on the three varied theories on organism. Obviously, Dream

Foundation is new and it is still adapting to its environment for survival. Morgan said: this

image suggests that different environment favors different species of organization based ondifferent methods of organizing. Therefore, congruence with the environment is the key to

success. For example; a stable environment needs a more rigid bureaucratic environment

likely will prosper. However, in a more fluid environment, a less structured type oforganization will likely survive. This is exactly image of Dream Foundation as an

organization that allows free flowing in view of change. This image helps us understand

that organization is a cluster of interconnected human, business and technical needs,inspires people to learn the art of survival and develops vibrant organic system open for

new challenges.32

2.7 The Organizational Life Cycle and the current state of Dream Foundation

Most organizations evolve through a life cycle, a series of developmental stages

that can be traced through four stages:

1.Entrepreneurial stage 2. Collectivity 3. Formalization 4.Elaboration.

This life cycle will demonstrate the current state of the Dream to Study Foundation.

1. Entrepreneurial stage - this is a stage of new ideas that is put together to make anOrganization.

As the founder of the Dream Foundation, we have gone through this stage and still

perhaps in this stage and hoping that will continue to grow. As a young priest, I wasassigned in the mission. I have experienced the poverty of the people in the Mountains. I

have witnessed young boys and girls in the Mountains of San Carlos in Negros Occidental

are not schooled. In fact, some girls are already carrying babies at ages 16 to 20. Some

have finished elementary and have never been in high school.

The reasons why these kids dont go to school: 1. The Public High School is onlyoffered in the city. 2. Their parents are very poor. In other words, poverty, lack of t

motivation, and other factors are the valid reasons that these kids would stay in the

mountains and have let go of their dream to finish school. Considering this alarmingsituation, I have thought that there is a need to create a group who believe in helping out

32Morgan, Pp.35-40

17

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

18/32

this young boys and girls for a more descent life through education. Education is a way to

alleviate poverty. The young boys and girls will have better opportunities once they are

educated.

Believing in this dream, in this vision, in this mission, and in this goal; we created aDREAM and a HOPE FOR THE CHILDREN. This is the NEW IDEA and thus, we

created a new organization that will make a commitment to a particular direction and begin

our initial planning to make it operational.

As a founder, there are many things I have to consider in the implementations; such

as; the committees, the volunteers, the school, the funds, and many other factors to

implement our objectives: eventually, we have established and expressed in the following:

1. To provide financial assistance to poor but deserving students who are willing

to obtain education in High School and College levels.

2. To economically assist the student beneficiaries by providing them financial

assistance. As needed; pay their tuition fees, buy them school uniforms &school supplies and give them monthly allowances for food and lodging.

3. To extend to them values formation seminar and other necessary trainings thatwill enhance their preparedness and be able to be competent students in their

schools so that they will be socially responsible and become future leaders of

the society.

4. To provide parents of the beneficiaries technical assistance and skills trainings

on cooperatives, cosmetology, dressmaking, computer literacy, construction

works and other livelihood projects that will help them earn extra income fortheir food, education of their other children and other expenses needed by their

child-scholar.

5. To work hand in hand with local, regional, national and international agencies

and non-government organizations with regards to financial assistance program

for economically depressed and poor children.

6. To receive gifts, donations, contributions and financial assistance from any

source whatsoever subject to the provisions of existing laws and to make use ofthem in operating and maintaining activities and programs necessary to carry

out the objectives of the organization.

7. To raise funds from time to time in order to support the different activities,projects and programs of the organization.

Therefore, the Dream Foundation is new and still adapting to the challenges of theenvironment. We cannot claim any success because we are still learning and

continue to develop our ideas.

18

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

19/32

2. Collectivity Stage this stage an organization typically experience rapid growth known

as success stage. While innovation and expansion continue, some attempts to stabilize androutinize the organization begin. In the case of a business company, normally the owner

decides whether to stabilize the company at its present size or strive for more growth.

Although the founding and early members of the organization remain committed to it, overtime their involvement depends on the non-financial incentives offered: like challenging

varied tasks, growth opportunities in the organization, and receive frequent, quality

communication from top management.

3. Formalization Stage the maturation of the organization signals its complete

movement from entrepreneurial to professional. In this takeoff stage, the director or

founder or manager must address the structured level of responsibility from top to thebottom and acquiring enough resources and funds for the growth of an organization. This

stage emphasizes formal planning and goal setting. Increased formalization may cause

more entrepreneurial, innovative workers to leave the organization to seek new outlets for

their creativity. Employees whose goals and orientations fit better with the stabilization andformalization processes replace them.

4. Elaboration stage this stage is the maturation of an organization as it strives to adapt

to changing conditions, renew itself, and seek continued growth opportunities. The

organization must consolidate its growth. It expands its management staff and capabilities.

Diagnosing an organizations position in its life cycle provides managers with data

to use in designing an effective structure. Young organization requires flexible structure

that can accommodate innovation and respond to uncertainty.

Looking at the view point of the Dream Foundation, there is awareness that when

the organization moves into the collective or success stage, the founder or director considerthe formal procedures and policies that will be expressed and articulated, but overall the

organization likely retains relatively informal communication and structure.

As the organization matures and formalizes, top management typically introduces

systematic planning, evaluation, and rewards systems. Functional structures with

centralized decision making often fit with the control, specialization of tasks, authority, and

stability required at this stage. An organizations ultimate survival, however, increasinglydepends on having adaptable and flexible structure.33

This Figure will illustrate the organizational life cycle

33Judith R. Gordon. Organizational: A Diagnostic Approach, 7th Edition. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002):P.444

19

FormalizationStable StructureInstitutionalProceduresEfficiency/Maintenance

ElaborationDomain ExpansionDecentralizationAdaption/renewal

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

20/32

The Dream Foundation is Entrepreneurial Stage andmoving forward to the Organizational Life Cycle

2.8 - What is the difference between Organizational

Development vs Organization Development?

Organization Development practitioner is to an organization as a physician is to a

human body. The practitioner "diagnoses" (or discovers) the most important priorities toaddress in the organization, suggests a change-management plan, and then guides the

organization through the necessary change. There are different definitions and views onhow the change should occur.

The difference between "organizational development" and "Organization

Development." The former phrase refers to the nature and scope of change in

organizations, i.e., the change is to the entire organization or to a significant portion of the

organization. The latter phrase refers to a field of well-trained people with expertise inguiding successful organizational development.

The system of organizations is very similar, if not the same as, the system of human

beings -- after all, organizations are made up of humans! Therefore, when trying tounderstand the field of organization development, it might be useful to compare aspects of

the field of organization development to aspects of the field of medicine.

For example, the study of the theories and structures of organizations (often incourses called "organizational theory") is similar to the study of anatomy and physiology of

human systems. Similarly, the study of organizational behavior is similar to the study of

psychology and sociology in human systems. Finally, the study and field of organizationdevelopment compares to the study and field of medicine regarding human systems.

That is, in OD, practitioners might work in a manner similar to "organizational

physicians" intending to improve the effectiveness of people and organizations by:

1) Establishing relationships with key personnel in the organization (often called "entering"

and "contracting" with the organization);

2) Researching and evaluating systems in the organization to understand dysfunctions

and/or goals of the systems in the organization ("diagnosing" the systems in the

organization);

20

EntrepreneurialMarshalling ofresourcesLots of IdeasFormation of aniche

CollectivityInformal Communication andStructure/Sense of mission

Innovation/HighCommitment

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

21/32

3) Identifying approaches (or "interventions") to improve effectiveness of the organization

and its people;

4) Applying approaches to improve effectiveness (methods of "planned change" in the

organization),

5) Evaluating the ongoing effectiveness of the approaches and their results. 34

2.9 - Organization Theory and Various Systematic Theories

We view the world as a complex organization where impact of changes has affected

our culture and views, values both personal and as a group and stance on issues. We

become more aware of our roles in a given situation or in an organization.

In the process of becoming more aware of our roles in an organization, theories are inplaced to explain and predict organizational situation. Rubenstein and Haberstroh

articulated, that useful theories of organization should help us explain, observe

organization behavior, predict future organizational behavior and influence it.35

Theories of organizations are attempts to present a systematic view of organized

systems, or some of its dimensions through development of concepts, which appropriates

elements of organization, its relations to each other and its connection to the output of theorganization.

Some theories of organizations are compatible with and built upon others

explanation or prediction on the aspects of organizations they consider important, themethods for studying organizations that work well, and their assumptions about

organizations and the world at large from which they are created. They use the same

language or jargon. These groupings of compatible theories and theorists usually are calledalternately schools, perspectives, traditions, frameworks, models, paradigms, or

occasionally, eras of organization theory.

Organization Theory

Organization theory is descriptive and or predictive. It is concerned with what an

organization is and what will occur under certain kinds of structural or structural-

interpersonal arrangements. It tells what is and/or what will be. It tells what to do.Organization theory may then be described as a set of related statements and hypothesis

about 1) a set of variables which describe the parameters of organization, and perhaps

organization behavior, and 2) a series of if and then statements which predict the effect

34http://managementhelp.org/organizationdevelopment/od-defined.htm35Henry L. Tosi, Theories on Organization. (Chicago:St. Clair Press, 1974.) P: 5

21

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

22/32

of certain structural arrangements on performance and behavior.

Organization Theory is a macro-examination of organizations. It analyzes the wholeorganization as a unit. It is concerned with people aggregated into departments and

organizations and with the differences in structure and behavior of the organizational level

of analysis.

Having explained above, it is sufficient to say that organization theory is a set of

interrelated products (concepts), definitions, and propositions that present a systematicview of behavior of individuals, groups, and subgroups interacting in some relatively

patterned sequences of activity, the intent of which is goal oriented.36

Various Theories of Organization

As Henry Tosi said organization theory is not a homogeneous science based on

generally accepted principles. Various theories of organization have been, and are beingevolved.37There are three concepts that have considerable influenced in the management

of thought and practice.

1.Classical Doctrine as its name implies, was the first theory of its kind, is considered

traditional, and continues to be the base upon which other schools of organization theoryhave built. An understanding of the classical organization theory is essential not only

because of its historical significance but also more importantly, because subsequent

analyses and theories presume knowledge of it.

There are four pillars in the classical organization theory namely: the division of labor, the

scalar and functional processes, the structure and the span of control from which elements

of classical organization theory can be derived.

1) The division of labor, as the word implies, pertains to the specific task assigned to an

individual or a group. It is without doubt the cornerstone among the four pillars. From it,other elements flow as corollaries. Organization structure is naturally dependent upon the

direction which specialization of activities travels in company development.

2) Thescalar and functional process deals with the vertical and horizontal growth ofthe organization. The scalar process refers to the growth of the chain of command, the

delegation of authority and responsibility, unity of command, and the obligation to report.

The division of the organization into specialized parts and the regrouping of the parts intocompatible units are matters pertaining to the functional process. This process focuses in

the horizontal evolution of the line and staff in a formal organization.

3) Structure is the logical relationship of functions in an organization; arranged to

accomplish the objectives of the company efficiently. Structure implies system and pattern.

Classical organization theory usually works with two basic structures, the line and the staff.

36Tosi, P7

37Tosi, P11

22

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

23/32

However, such activities as committee and liaison functions fall quite into the purview of

structural considerations. Again, structure is the vehicle for introducing logical and

consistent relationships among the diverse functions comprising the organization.

4) Thespan of controlconcept relates to the number of subordinates a manager can

effectively supervise. The span of control directs attention to the complexity of human andfunctional interrelationships in an organization.38

2. Neo-Classical theory of organization. The neo-classical theory of organization

embarks on the task of compensating for some of the deficiencies in classical doctrine. The

neo-classical school is commonly identified with the human relations movement.Generally, the neo-classical approach takes the postulates of the classical school, regarding

the pillars of organization as givens. But these postulates are regarded as modified by

people, acting independently or within the context of the informal organization.

The introduction of behavioral sciences in an integrated fashion into the theory of

organization is the main contribution of the neo-classical school. Using these sciences,behavioral scientists demonstrate how the pillars of the classical doctrine are affected by

the impact of human actions, which thereby influence the formal structure. The neo-

classical approach to organization theory gives evidence of accepting classical doctrine, butsuperimposing on it the modifications resulting from individual behavior, and the influence

of the informal group.39

3. Modern organization theory. The distinctive qualities of modem organization theoryare its conceptual-analytical base, its reliance on empirical research data and, above all, its

integrating nature. These qualities are framed in a philosophy, which toes the premise that

the only meaningful way to study organization is to study it as a system.

According to Henderson, the study of system must rely on a method of analysis

involving simultaneous variations of mutually dependent variables. System analysis has itsown peculiar point of view and treats organization as a system of mutually dependent

variables. As a result, modem organization theory, which accepts system analysis, shifts the

conceptual level of organization study above the classical and neo-classical theories.

Modem organization theory asks a range of interrelated questions which are not seriouslyconsidered by the two theories.

Key among these questions are: what are the strategic part of the system? What is thenature of their mutual dependency? What are the main process that link the parts together?

What are the goals set by the system?40

Chapter 3. What is Theory?

38Tosi, pp12-13

39Tosi, pp13-14

40Tosi, pp17-18

23

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

24/32

We learned already different concepts on the development of OD, the trend of OD?

And what is OD? We also explained what is organization, types of organizations and the

images of an organization? Now, we are going to understand the theories in OD?

First, OD is an applied behavioral science field. This simply means we

accumulate our knowledge base from a wide range of theories. Each theory offers a certainperspective to guide our work based on the practioners of OD. We must realize however

that few practitioners are pure subscribers to one theory. It is common knowledge that the

every client situation is so unique that we take whatever we need from various theoreticalperspectives in order for us to create a composite perspective to work.

According to Richard Burke, in his work on OD theories, Burke said that there is

no single theory or conceptual model that is representative or by itself encompasses

the conceptual field or the practice of OD. Instead a series of mini theories have made

an impact on OD consultative practice. He made reference to the word mini not because

he thinks these theories are conceptually small or light.41 As a matter of personal opinion,

each helps to explain only a portion of organizational behavior and effectiveness. So, if oneis being asked to explain generally the theories, the researcher could not just imagine that it

takes lots of effort to be able to explain in details all these theories. So where does onestart?

As a neophyte student of OD, he believes that to discover theories on OD, heidentified theories that have significant impact on OD. For academic purposes, the

researcher has no intention of declaring exclusivity, except to say these theories are for my

academic requirements. He is sure that as he continues to study and research on OD, his

theoretical basket gets fuller as many other theories offer unique insights to help him get abetter grasp of human nature and system dynamics and offer him psychological insights in

supporting people through tough changes. In this context, he will try to discuss briefly the

Action Research Theory, then, Lewins change theories on Field Theory, Group Dynamicsand Three-Step Model of Change. Most importantly, he will focus the discussion on the

General System Theory.

3. 1 - Various Theories in OD

Action Research Theory

Kurt Lewins planned approach to change comprised four elements: Field theory,

Group Dynamics, Action Research and the Three-step Model of Change.

His first major theory is Action Research theory, which became a cornerstone of

Organization Development, underlying both the theory and practice of the field. Lewin

believed Action Research would address several needs an individual has during changesimultaneously.42

41Gallos, pp.13-38

42Kurt Lewin.Frontiers in group dynamics II: Channels of group life: Social planning and Action Research, HumanRelations (New York: 1947): Pp 14353

24

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

25/32

the pressing need for greater knowledge about the causes and dynamics of social

issues;

the need to understand the laws of social change;

the need for greater collaboration and joint inquiry between the practitioners and

those who are experiencing the change (system members);

the need for richer data about real-world issues to increase motivation for change; the need to discover workable, practical solutions to problems that are owned by

those who are affected; the importance of staying in the learning stance throughoutthe change

In this theory, action research is reiterative, cyclical, four-step process: diagnosing,

planning, action research and evaluating action. This process proceeds in a spiral ofsteps, each of which is composed of circle planning, action, and fact-finding of the results

of the action. It is in this iterative process that research leads to action, and action leads to

evaluation and further action.

In practice, the words action research are reversed. The research is conducted firstand followed by action as the direct result of what the research data are interpreted toindicate. Therefore, action research attempts to meet the dual goals of making action more

effective and creating or building a solid foundation on the knowledge around the action.

The action here refers to the interventions, the programs, the systems designed toenhance the conditions and solve the problems. Therefore, the process is collaborative.

Those who are consulting will work with members of the organization in a joint democratic

inquiry. Importantly, the leaders, members and people around the organization can create amaster plan that will be able to discuss in a proper context.

Lewin advised, no action without research; no research without action. Thesignificance of this theory is hard to comprehend until you come face to face with its

practical utility in intervention. Almost nothing works as well as interventions derived from

this theoretical perspective.43

3.2 Lewins change theories Field Theory; Group Dynamics; Three-Step Model of

Change

Lewin was the first psychologist to write about group dynamics and the

importance of the group in Shaping the behavior of its members. The word dynamics

comes from a Greek word meaning forces. So Group Dynamics refers to the forcesoperating in groups. It is the studying of these forces what gives rise to them, whatconditions modify them, what consequences they have, etc, that makes up the theory of

Group Dynamics.

Lewins pioneering work on Group Dynamics not only laid the foundations for our

understanding of groups but also helped us recognize the need to provide a process

43Lewin, Pp. 14353

25

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

26/32

whereby the members could be engaged in and committed to changing their behavior.

Field theory is an approach to understand group behavior by trying to map out thetotality and complexity of the field in which the behavior takes place. Lewin defines the

term force from a psychological construct. He believes that individual behavior is a

function of the group environment or field. Consequently, changes in behaviour will stemfrom changes in the forces within the field.44

Lewins Three-step Model unfreezing, movement, refreezing is highly relatedto Field theory. Lewin believes that our behaviour was based on a quasi-stationary

equilibrium supported by a complex field of driving and restraining forces. The equilibrium

needs to be destabilized first (unfreezing) before new behavior can be adopted. So the

concept includes unfreezing (destabilizing the status quo), movement (creating themotivation to learn aided by Action Research approach), and then refreezing (seeks to

stabilize the group at a new quasi-stationary equilibrium in order to ensure that the new

behaviors are relatively safe from regression).45

Chapter 4 The General System Theory

Ludwig Von Bertalanffy first articulated the principles of general Systems theory in

1950. , and Katz and Kahn were the first to apply open Systems theory to organizations in

1966. According to French and Bell, Systems theory is one of the most powerfulconceptual tools available for understanding the dynamics of organizations and

organizational change.46It is therefore important to understand basic concepts and we ask

the most basic question to put us into proper perspective; what is a system?

In OD terminology, it can be an individual, a team, a sub-unit, a unit, a division or a

total organization. However, in order to study and understand how systems operate, we

have to see them in relationship to each other. The following definitions of system help

to clarify the concept.

A set of objects together with relationships between the objects and between theirattributes (Hall and Fagen, 1956).

An organized, unitary whole composed of two or more interdependent parts, components,

or subsystems, and delineated by identifiable boundaries from its environmentalsuprasystem (Kast and Rosenzweig, 1985).

A system is an arrangement of interrelated parts. The words arrangement and

interrelated describe interdependent elements forming an entity that is the system. Thus,

when taking a systems approach, one begins by identifying the individual parts and thenseeks to understand the nature of their collective interaction (Hanna, 1988).

A system is defined by von Bertalanffy as "a set of elements standing in interaction" -- in

44Lewin, Pp. 143-53

45Lewin, Pp 143-53

46Wendell L. French and Cecill H. Bell, Jr., Organization Development (Englewood:Prenctice Hall, 1984)p.84

26

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

27/32

other words, a group of things which have something in common. This includes any

grouping with any sort of relationship - a collection of people, a forest, the planets, rabbits

on a hill-side, a pile of rocks, or anything else -- if it is possible to identify a group ofthings, this cluster can be seen as a "system.47

Having this concept all together, we can understand system theory is a series ofinterrelated and interacting technologies used to analyze, evaluate, design and

engineer a total system. Therefore, system approach is a way of thinking about the

dynamism of complex human relations and endeavors. It is a process of breeding thewhole to enable the change person to acquire a better understanding of the behavior of the

whole system by studying the behavior and interactions of its parts.48

To state this simply, system theory maintains that everything is related toeverything else. A good example is the human body made up of a digestive system, a

circulatory system, a respiratory system, a nervous system, etc. When the environment is

warm, a variety of sub-systems come into play and the body perspires. It does not take

much imagination to see that closing down the nervous system will have a big impact onthe other parts of the body or system. Therefore, system theory can be conceptualized as

an organization made up of systems and sub-systems. Within in this context there areinputs, a transformation process and an output. All of this takes place within the framework

of an interacting environment.

To understand this better: we will explain terminologies that will be used on system

theory:

Environmental Factors: the environment could be either external or internal and includesa social, political, technological and economic forces. The environment could be broad

and general or very specific and task related.

Sub-system: all systems have sub-systems; a sub-system is a part of the whole system

Inputs: every system or sub-system has inputs and outputs. Inputs are usually thought of asresources such as financial, human, material, information or technology.

Transformation: The transformation process is the most easily illustrated as a business

which various resource inputs and transforms them through operations, management,efforts of labor or technology into outputs of goods or services. Transformation can come

in many ways but usually means some action upon the input.

Outputs: outputs can be more than goods or services and are usually the results of action

taken upon some input.

47Mee-Yan Cheung-JudgeandLinda Holbeche, Organization Development: A Practitioners Guide for OD and HR.

(Philadelphia:Kogan Page Limited, 2011): ebook thru Vancouver public library: 2;33http://library.books24x7.com/assetviewer.aspx?bookid=43122&chunkid=1&rowid=2 (accessed on April 11, 2012)

48Saidi Module 1

27

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

28/32

Close vs Open system: An open system is one that responds to its environment and the

other does not.

Feedback: the open system receives feedback from its environment as a result of its

output. In most instances, feedback is a form of communication. For example; a customer

survey.

Boundaries: the concept of boundaries helps us define how to keep our system open.

Boundaries can be concrete, clearly defined and determined by an organization, or theymay be abstract, artificial or unauthorized. It may be thought of as limits or barriers.

Entropy: entropy is a process by which systems decay. Entropy is best understood as a

process of slowing down or breakdown.

As stated very generally, a system is defined by a boundary that contains many subsystems

and that also separates the system from its environment.49(See Figure 1)

Figure 1: Visual Depiction of a System

49Gary N. McLean, Organization Development: Principles, Processes, Performance. (Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2006.)

P:3:4

28

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

29/32

Within any system or subsystem, we will find inputs, being acted on by processes,producing outputs, with a continuous feedback loop to the inputs,50

as depicted in Figure 2

The inputs are human or other resources like information, energy, and materials coming into the system or subsystem. Input may directly come from the environment or

suprasystem or from one or more subsystems within the system; Operations are theprocesses of transforming inputs into other forms; and, Outputs are the result of the

processes done to inputs, which are ready to leave the system. This is precisely every

system is open and dynamic.

Using this system theory in the context ofDream to study Foundation, Inc., the

scholarship organization is the system and comprised of interrelated and interactingsubsystem. We constantly interact with the surrounding environment. For example, we

have a president and the board of directors interacts with marketing or outsourcing

department and screening and evaluating committees are interacting with other committees.Now, we have agreed among the board of directors and members to consolidate our

resources, such as people, money, time, and other fundraising activities to finance theobjectives. In system theory, this is called inputs.

Now, every system transforms inputs into outputs. Since one of the objectives of

the foundation is to help the poor but deserving students. These inputs are the resourceswill be combined or transformed into having a beneficiary student in a school. This

now becomes the output in the process of the system theory.

50McLean, p.3:4

29

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

30/32

The figure 3 below shows the inputs into outputs in Dream to study Foundation, Inc.

INPUT

---------------------Transformation Process ----------------- Output

Every system seeks to maintain balance. An organizations that receive new inputs and

transformation seek stability because when they become unbalanced, such as when changesin the environment or organizational practices make current resources inadequate, the

organizations attempt to return to the original. They use information about their outputs,

called feedback, to modify their resources to result in more desirableoutcomes.51

This figure shows the Dream Foundation Organizational System

51Judith R. Gordon. Organizational: A Diagnostic Approach, 7th Edition. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002):

P.21

30

Resources:MoneyTimeTalentsPeople

BeneficiaryStudent/ScholarshipProgramin Mission

People/Staffcombine allresources

More Demands forScholars and their needs

Problem experience/complaints

FEEDBACK

GENERAL ENVIRONMENTEconomic FactorsTechonologyPolitical and Legal ConsiderationsSociocultural factors

DREAM FOUNDATION

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

31/32

An organization as a system composed if interacting subsystems exist in an environment orsuprasystems and is characterized by management in its inputs, operations, outputs, and

feedback mechanisms within a defined organizational boundary. The illustration provided

above gives an idea of the interactions or interrelations of these characteristics in a given

organization. Thus, the Dream Foundation as an organization and as system allows theinteraction of system and subsystems. For example, the economic conditions will certainly

have influenced in the finance committees and the finance is interconnected with other

committees as well. Therefore, we can conclude that there is a need of completeunderstanding of the interrelationships between organizations and their environments. It is

essential, when applying system approach to study of an organizations and their

management, that we begin with an understanding of the external and internal environment.Action based on this understanding will be productive.

Bibliography

Beckhard, Richard. Organizational Development: Strategies and Models. Addison-Wesley

31

POLITICALECONOMICENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT

TECHNOLOGICALSOCIOENVIRONMENT CULTURAL

ENVIRONMENT

DREAMFOUNDATIONPRES/BOARDDIRECTOR

FINANCECOMMITTEE

S

SCREENINGCOMMITTEES

COMMUNICATIONCOMMITTEES

EDUCATIONCOMMITTEES

8/2/2019 Module 1 by Fr. Jublas Nolasco1

32/32

Publishing Company, 1969.

Cummings, Thomas & Huse, Edgar.Organization Development and Change. St Paul, MN:

West Publishing Company, 1989.

House, Edgar F. Organization Development and Change, 2nd Edition. West PublishingCompany; St. Paul Minnesota, 1980.

Judith R. Gordon. Organizational: A Diagnostic Approach, 7th Edition. Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002.

Lewin, Kurt.Frontiers in group dynamics II: Channels of group life: Social planning and

Action Research, Human Relations. New York: New York Press, 1947.

Nadler, Leonard, The Handbook of Human Resource Development. New York: John Wiley

& Sons, 1984.

Newstrom, John & Davis, Keith Organization Behavior: Human Behavior at Work. New

York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.

Schein, Edgar H. Organizational Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, Nj: Prentice Hall, 1988.

Tosi, Henry L., Theories on Organization. St. Clair Press, 1974

Wendell L. French and Cecil H. Bell, Jr., Organization Development. Englewood: Prentice

Hall, 1984.

EBOOKS SOURCES:Gallos, Joan V. Organization Development. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 2006

McLean, Gary, Organization Development: Principles, Processes, Performance. Berrett-

Koehler Publishers, 2006.

Mee-Yan Cheung-Judgeand Linda Holbeche, Organization Development: A Practitioners

Guide for OD and HR. Philadephia: Kogan Page Limited, 2011.

SAIDI Module 1

INTERNET SOURCES

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Beckhard

http://organization

http://www.audubon-area.org/NewFiles/sengesum.pdf Peter M Senge

http://managementhelp.org/organizationdevelopment/od-defined.htm

32