environment. Strategic organization development might be better understood as an ongoing process of evaluation in order to mitigate problems, whether systemic or environmental, before they become unmanageable. Such an approach will limit the need for large-scale restructuring within an organization based on a singular precipitating event. Reflections: Thomas C. Head, Ph.D., provides an explanation of why strategic organization development understood as, “the complete transformation of all systems in a coordinated fashion,” is in fact a failure of the standard organizational development model (p 21). He asserts that the usual precipitators for such a wide-spread reinvention of an organization should, under normal circumstances, be anticipated and avoided. Head focuses on six “disturbances” that precipitate the need for strategic change: the lifting of regulatory requirements, introduction if a new CEO, new technologies, competitive changes, changes to product life cycles, and changes in size (p. 22-24). While each of these factors have their own unique variables, the common
Review: STRATEGIC ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT: A FAILURE denominator in each is a failure of the organization to plan for change. In essence, the “disturbances” merely reveal the systemic issues within the organizations that require modification rather than cause problems.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 4 pages?
- Spring '19