According to theorist Joan Gallos, all theories, regardless of their focus, present two challenges:
1. choosing the appropriate theoretical approach to apply to a specific situation;
2. avoiding narrow or overly simplistic interpretations of complex organizational processes (i.e., narrowing the focus of your analysis before the entire situation has been considered).
The theoretical approach Gallos developed is called “Reframing” because it was developed in an attempt to avoid the myopic view that can naturally develop from the application of any single theory. In addition, it provides a practical diagnostic form which can be used by an OD practitioner to categorize aspects of any organizational problem which is uncovered.
In any typical organizational analysis, aspects of situations and problems that are uncovered are multifaceted. In addition, during the course of interviewing and evaluating data to get to the heart of the initial challenge, unrelated issues are often uncovered which need to be addressed by the organization at some point, even though they may not be part of the focus of the investigation. The approach she developed helps to record and categorize every pertinent issue which is uncovered.
She describes Reframing as “the practice of deliberately and systematically examining a complex situation from multiple perspectives.” This requires an understanding of the components of each frame and practice in applying each of them in an organizational environment.
Any “narrowing” of focus too soon can completely miss the target. If the symptoms of an issue, potential problem or opportunity are not analyzed and evaluated completely, the focus of any applied response may be completely off target as well.
The example offered on p349 of the Gallos text details a common situation between two coworkers and their verbal battles at work. This is a good way to illustrate the difference between inappropriately jumping to conclusions about what the root of problem is versus viewing the situation from each frame to see what could be the essence of the problem. The danger in narrowing one’s focus too soon is that the recommendations and any changes that result may not solve the existing problem at all.
When we address a situation like this, our tendency is to default to the HR frame to view this situation. When we jump to this conclusion, it often unwisely becomes more about finding the one(s) to blame, train, reposition or fire. The problem with this working bias is obvious—this often does nothing to fix the situation and the impact on the people involved is significant.
The essence of Reframing holds us accountable to ask, “what else could the verbal disputes be due to?”
From the Structural frame we determine that it could be due to overlapping job responsibilities. This situation is fairly straightforward to address. It may mean rewriting job descriptions; clarifying job duties and eliminating any overlap, etc.
It could be Political, rooted in favoritism shown to one of the employees by a clueless boss who has unknowingly created a competitive work environment where the powerless grasp at any small share of he turf. If this is the case, the problem that needs to be addressed is with the manager.
The final possibility is Symbolic. It could be culturally acceptable to spar with one another (as it is in the culture of some families, groups of friends, etc.). The Symbolic frame focuses on the meaning of organizational events to insiders and suggests ways to support the development of a healthy organizational culture.
Although any of the frames may account for what’s happening among those two coworkers, it is hard to know which one really does without first looking at them all. Any one frame may oversimplify a complex reality or send us blindly down the wrong path, squandering resources, time, and the change agent’s credibility along the way. (Gallos, p351)
A comprehensive diagnoses is launched with the following questions:
Ø What is going on Structurally?
Ø What is happening from a Human Resources perspective?
Ø What is going on Politically?
Ø What is happening in the culture (Symbolically)?
The author states, “Without a larger integrating framework for both diagnosis and intervention, OD risks becoming a series of incomplete or disconnected practices.” (Gallos, p357)
Each frame has “tensions” that need to be watched. We all have political leanings, values and biases that will tend to send us to one end of the continuum or the other. These competing forces must be balanced as Organizational Development professionals work with decision makers within an organization. We need to watch our own tendencies to jump to conclusion and lead others down that path.
In summary, each of the four frames suggests an area of specialized attention and intervention for OD professionals. Natural specialization in this industry tends to develop as people move into the OD consultant role from other areas of focus (e.g., being promoted into OD from an HR Generalist position brings a natural predilection favoring the HR frame and an understanding of the central tensions that are prevalent in it). The advantages of specialization are that change agents can know more about a selected area, develop stronger skills in facilitating frame-related processes and diagnoses, and reflect their own values and talents. Although specialization may be natural, Organizational Development exists to broaden the view of an integrated, multifaceted organization, which often suggests the need for dynamic, comprehensive interventions.
Bottom line: Each of the 4 frames has its own purposefully limited view of the organization. For this reason, you must use all four frames or none. Remember that organizations are complex, functioning in all of these frames at once.
To better understand the perspective inherent within each frame, take careful note of Figure 16.1, pages 347-348, especially focusing on the underlying assumptions that are often part of each frame.
Table 16.2, page 352, has been converted to a diagnostic form which is available for you to download under Section I. Not only will it be helpful to you as you review the assigned case study, Computer Services at Avionics, but I encourage you to keep a copy to utilize later in your work as an OD Practitioner.
Teaming with you,
Diane Waisner
No comments:
Post a Comment