Organizational Effectiveness & Development: The HR Blueprint for a Healthy, High-Performing Organization

 

Organizational Effectiveness & Development

In its role as a consultant to the organization, HR may be called upon to act in the capacity of an "organizational" physician, requested by organizational leaders to examine the health of the organization, assess its ability to function at a level needed to attain strategic goals, and recommend and possibly implement improvements to the organization's "effectiveness."

Organizational effectiveness and development (OED) can be seen as a process or tool to fulfill this role-to identify and remove internal obstacles to the organization's strategic goals and continuous improvement. The skill of asking questions is critical in OED, and the questions should start with "Where are we now?" and "Where do we want to go?" and "What is keeping us from getting there?" This is the effectiveness part of OED. The development part comes with the next question: "How must we change to get onto the right path toward our goals?"

OED identifies and addresses organizational performance issues through planned interventions that engage stakeholders in information gathering and solution design and implementation. Interventions may focus on organizational or team performance issues. Organizational interventions may result in changes in structure, culture, competencies, technology, or processes. Team interventions focus on developing more unified and focused teams and helping dysfunctional teams move past conflict and toward accomplishment.

Organizational Development

Organizational effectiveness and development (OED) focuses on the structure and functionality of the organization to increase the long-term and short-term effectiveness of people and processes. The term organizational development (OD) refers to an organizational management discipline used to maintain and grow organizational effectiveness and efficiency through planned interventions.

Organizational Theories

If organizational development is comparable to conducting a medical examination, organizational theories help to explain how the organization functions, including its parts and how they interact.

A number of organizational models have been developed, such as the McKinsey 7-S Framework, Kotter's eight-step change model, and Lewin's change management model. The terms may be different, but what these models propose is very similar. In order for an organization to implement its strategy successfully, it must align its various components. For example, its structure must suit the strategy. If it does not, the structure or the strategy must be changed.

the major organizational elements that must be aligned with strategy include:

      Structure-the way the organization separates and connects its pieces.
 Systems-the policies that guide behavior and work, the processes that define how tasks will be performed, and the technology or tools used to support that work.
Culture-the set of beliefs, attitudes, values, and behaviors shared by members of the organization and passed on to new members.
 Values-principles that the organization and its leaders have explicitly selected as a guide for decisions and actions.
Leadership-the model of behavior that leaders set for the rest of the organization.

The way these elements are implemented and aligned can affect:

• ·          The motivation employees apply to their work.
• ·          Employees' engagement or identification with their work and the organization's goals.

·  Performance levels and results-the effectiveness and efficiency in reaching goals for the entire organization, for its structural pieces (such as divisions, functions, teams), and for individual employees.

·          Governance-the organization's ethical and legal compliance and its approach to managing risk.

HR professionals will apply their Consultation competency to understand their organization according to this model and then to evaluate its ability to meet the strategic goals the organization has set. HR will deliver a diagnosis or assessment and then a course of treatment or interventions that will be taken to correct performance obstacles.

OED Interventions

An OED intervention can be seen as stepping in to interrupt the status quo or the current state in order to examine a situation more closely and make changes that could improve outcomes. Interventions are often described as "structured activities," in the sense that an intervention may involve multiple actions that are each focused on the same objective, organizational performance improvement.

A business case will likely need to be made in order to begin an OED intervention. The business case should use data to illustrate the need for the intervention and should outline KPIs that will be used to track the intervention's success at achieving its outlined goals. OED interventions that begin based on conjecture and that do not outline metrics are difficult to evaluate, leaving the organization unable to determine if the intervention was actually successful or if additional changes are needed. The goals should work toward enabling the organization to better achieve its strategic goals and should be determined collaboratively between HR and the internal client needing or requesting the intervention. The goals may also examine the efficiency of resources used to create value.

The actual OED intervention includes both the tools used to examine the issue and the change or solution that will be implemented. For example, HR may be asked by management to find out why it takes so long to implement strategic initiatives. In the course of the intervention, HR may conduct multiple interviews and focus groups and determine that problems primarily occur in departments that have recently undergone a change in leadership. After more interviews and reviews of personnel files, HR determines that the issue is caused by a weak succession planning system that does not adequately prepare for transitions in leadership. A program to improve succession planning is developed and launched. HR meets with all departments to explain the new process and calm employee fears. A year later, HR reviews data on recent initiatives, focusing on their start-up times and delays that might have been caused by leadership problems.

Since organizations are systems, solutions must address root causes and contributing factors for dysfunctions and, for strategic changes, overall goals and key performance indicators. Changes proposed in one area must be analyzed for possible effects on other parts of the organization. The complete answer may be an OED strategy composed of multiple interventions, aimed perhaps at different audiences or scheduled for different stages in an extended period of change.

HR professionals may be involved in OED interventions directly as internal consultants to the organization, or they may participate indirectly with third-party consultants, contributing their knowledge of the organization, its people, and its processes and their expertise in managing workforce capabilities and productivity. HR managers may apply OED principles to increasing the effectiveness of the HR function.

groups and determine that problems primarily occur in departments that have recently undergone a change in leadership. After more interviews and reviews of personnel files, HR determines that the issue is caused by a weak succession planning system that does not adequately prepare for transitions in leadership. A program to improve succession planning is developed and launched. HR meets with all departments to explain the new process and calm employee fears. A year later, HR reviews data on recent initiatives, focusing on their start-up times and delays that might have been caused by leadership problems.

Since organizations are systems, solutions must address root causes and contributing factors for dysfunctions and, for strategic changes, overall goals and key performance indicators. Changes proposed in one area must be analyzed for possible effects on other parts of the organization. The complete answer may be an OED strategy composed of multiple interventions, aimed perhaps at different audiences or scheduled for different stages in an extended period of change.

HR professionals may be involved in OED interventions directly as internal consultants to the organization, or they may participate indirectly with third-party consultants, contributing their knowledge of the organization, its people, and its processes and their expertise in managing workforce capabilities and productivity. HR managers may apply OED principles to increasing the effectiveness of the HR function.

Proactive Interventions

Proactive OED interventions identify and correct potential problems before they begin affecting performance. They may also prepare the organization to take advantage of anticipated opportunities. For example, OED can help organizations that must compete in a rapidly changing marketplace to develop:

·          Communication networks that allow critical information to be exchanged quickly, free of hierarchical structures that slow communication.

·          Structures that allow employees to make decisions quickly and independently.

Remedial Interventions

Remedial interventions make changes that bring an organization back on course toward its strategic goals. They are typically intended/designed to resolve a problem or issue that is current or newly discovered and to bring about a long-term positive impact on the organization and its function. Assessing the success of a remedial intervention can be easier than for other interventions. Simply put, was the problem or issue resolved?

Here are five ways in which remedial interventions can impact an organization:

• ·          Increase efficiency.
• ·          Reduce employee burnout.
• ·          Improve product performance.
• ·          Shift from reactive to more proactive strategy.
• ·          Address budget deficits.

Characteristics of Effective OED Interventions

Effective OED interventions share certain characteristics. Some of these characteristics are described in Exhibit below

                    Exhibit: Characteristics of Effective OED Interventions

Characteristics	Importance
Strategically aligned	Helps ensure that plans reinforce, complement, and build on each other and support overall organizational goals and strategies
Collaborative	Facilitates discovery of causes and development of solutions with critical input from those most closely involved (managers, supervisors, and employees) in intervention area
Supported by top management	Helps reduce resistance to eventual change
Producing sustainable results	Changes that can continue to deliver long-term results, perhaps because of management preparation or group involvement and acceptance of new processes and success criteria
Supporting continuous improvement	Aims at strengthening the organization in an ongoing manner by identifying weaknesses and opportunities and engaging employees in performance improvement (Continuous improvement is a basic tenet of the quality management programs to which many organizations today have committed.)
Using common tools	Allows for easy comparisons and collation of data
Using common language	Avoids confusion and misunderstanding
Explicit assumptions	Allow the validity of underlying assumptions to be challenged
Fact-based	Clarifies the difference between what is known and what is supposed
Evidence-based	Uses current best evidence to identify problems/ issues specific to the organization through a commitment to continuous, up-to-date information and knowledge gathering and analysis
Oriented toward systems and processes	Uses systems theory to analyze problems (discussed elsewhere in further detail).
Flexibility	Recognizes and accepts that assumptions are likely to change
Multiple perspectives	Provides access to diverse perspectives

 

Assessing OED Interventions and Why They Fail

OED interventions must be assessed once they are concluded, so time must be allowed following the intervention to accurately measure its efficacy. The measurement should use KPIs that track the process or unit that underwent the intervention to determine if it actually succeeded at achieving its stated goals. Measuring too soon, or without using quantifiable data, may result in the organization being unable to accurately determine if further action is required to address the identified issue.

In addition to measurement of the intervention itself, the client's perception of the experience is also an important part of the assessment. Clients may be surveyed or interviewed about whether their expectations were fulfilled. Were objectives achieved? Did HR communicate the process well during the planning phase and then throughout the process? Did HR involve and listen to stakeholders (such as employees)?

Finally, HR should assess its own effectiveness and efficiency in conducting the intervention. Did HR achieve its own quality goals throughout the intervention? Did members of the team execute their roles properly? Were commitments to the client met in terms of project deliverables (such as written reports) and promised delivery dates?

The results of this assessment process can guide steps forward for the organization and encourage continuous improvement for the OED process. Not every assessment will be successful, so it is important to remember all the difficulties that can surround an intervention as it is planned, implemented, and sustained.

Some interventions fail because they never get started. Those involved may be afraid of the effect of change on the organization and may hold back. They collect data, they analyze it, they discuss possible actions, but in the end they fail to act. This is often called "analysis paralysis," but the analysis is not the problem. The real issue is a reluctance to take reasonable risks. Some other interventions fail because they are not based on data but on conjecture. This happens when insufficient or inappropriate data is collected or if no data is available.

Other interventions fail because their objectives are too grand or the number of changes necessary is too great. The hurdles may be limited resources or an organization that is not skilled at change. The requirements for the objectives to be met may not have been thoroughly defined, and therefore the organization is not prepared or equipped to implement the changes. The impact of external forces may be underestimated. The gaps between the current and envisioned organizational cultures may be too great to overcome in the amount of time allocated. Small steps may be required rather than great leaps.

And sometimes interventions fail because the planners focus on their solution and not on the people who will make the solution work. Interventions involve change, and implementing change involves the entire organization. Some of the specific communication pitfalls and possible remedies for them are the following:

·        Leadership does not get involved. Sometimes decisions about major organizational changes are made at the top management level and then news is allowed to trickle down to employees. As a result, why and how the organization is changing may be unclear. Leaders and HR professionals should roll out a clear, universal, consistent message to everyone in the organization at the same time, even across multiple sites and locations.

·    The wrong messengers are used. Studies have found that employees tend to trust information from managers. Understanding the organization's culture will indicate who is the best messenger for change-the manager, the senior executive team, or HR. Middle and front-line leaders are the primary communicators to employees; communication from them should be frequent and consistent. Everyone affected by the change needs to know what it entails, why and how it is happening, and what's in it for them. Don't impose change; engage employees in a conversation about it. Ask them what they think and how they are feeling. They will talk if you listen.

·     Communication is too sudden. Leaders and managers need to prepare employees for change, allow time for the message to sink in, and give them an opportunity to provide feedback before a change is initiated.

·     Communication is too late. If anxieties are not managed in a timely manner, it will take longer for changes to be accepted, and, during this period, productivity and employee engagement will suffer. To avoid this problem, HR should be involved in change planning early to help motivate employees to participate. While the solution is being developed, HR needs to develop a plan for communicating the program to the organization-both the content of the message and the way in which it will be communicated. Change-related information should be communicated to employees via multiple forms (for example, e-mails, meetings, training sessions, internal social media, press releases).

·    Communication is not aligned with organizational realities. Messages should be honest and include the reasons behind the change and the projected outcomes.

·    Communication is too narrow. If the communication focuses too much on detail and technicalities and does not link change to the organization's goals, it will not resonate with employees.