to thes; changes. OD is rumeu J.f .

--~isational members.
at enhancing the development o org
Denning Organisation Develop~ent (OD) .
. I d approach to improve employee and 0
In its widest sense, O~ is _a P anne. · s in those processes and structures
effectiveness by conscious intervenuon f th ganisation. The fact that th
d. b ·
1mme 1ate earmg on
the human aspectS O
.. O
f OD 0 nly accentuates the eme ere
e or
·
as many definitions as there are practinoners . k . . ·• IY&.l:111'..
· d ·f h r.ess • n _ not necessanly a drawbac considering
an d adaptmg mo e o t e _prorc 10 . OD
adaptation and change are among the key foa of · . .
· th t process or result of furtheri ng, advancing or promoting the
OD 1s e ac , , • • B h. d
an organisation. OD is anything done to 'better' an organisation. ut .t 1s '
broad and all-inclusive. The term organis.1tion devdopmcn t must be given added
ii:
must refer to something more specific, productive di~co ursc o~. the subj~
· Another way of defining OD is to cx.1m1nc the fc>llow1ng dcfin1t1ons, which
suggested in the literature.
OD is an effort I) planned 2) org-Jniution wide and 3) managed from the-
increase organisatio~ ·etfecrivcncss and health through 5) planned intcrven •
organisations "processes,, using beha\'ioral science knowledge (Beckhard, 1969),.
OD is a response to change, a complex educational strategy intended to change
attitudes, values, and srrucrure of organisarions so that they can better adapt to new
markets, and challenges, and rhe dizzying rare of change itse1£ (Bennis, 1969)
OD is the strengthening of chose human processes in organisations, •
the functioning of the organic systems, so as to achieve its objectives. (Lippitt l
. In the behavioral sci~nce and perhaps ideal, sense of the term, organisation
1s a_ Iong-rang_e effort to improve an organisations problem- solving and Ji
p~1cularly _through a ~ore effective and collaborative management of 01:·a111•
- wuh special emphasis on the culture of formal work reams - with the
change agenr, or catalyst, and use of the theory and technologies of 2.DI,_
scir.nce, including action research. (French & Bell, 1978)
 ~· n u•w -···r--··-

Characteristics of OD
~v
1
Ucl..>ter their
• nun-.. c....
-~,,~~
-- -.a.~ piace , the syste m memb er must
- ---- Q.I..IU

, number of ,pedal c.haracterinic.s together distingu· h OD r h ·

/\managmg
. an J 1mprov1ng
. . org.in1\.Jt1on.il
. . . functioning. ts rrom ot er approaches to

1 OD ii a plAnn,d 11""'-"'V '-" /ni,,, 11bo111 o,..11niultio .. Al h OD

, 1 . .J 6 · 6' ,... c ange: programmes are
plannt"J, 11~ t_ a.cu , t"ntal - ' ~ "l'ICl<tlt a dclibcr.itc entry of either an OD consultant
or O[) ac11vn1c:, uuo chc <lamt 1)-Uan.
2, OD t1lu•ay1 inroalrw • twll.J..rr,,;~ •/'r-,,cb to chtinge: In OD the consultant seeks
and maimains a ,-.11lal-,r-a1h-c 1-r~1ionJiip of relative equality with the organisation
mcmht"rs, Collahora1ion ft\t".ati. •10 labor 1ogcthcr•- essentially it implies that consultant
docs not Jo all 1bc wo,1. "'hilc 1hc dien1 sysiem passively waits for solutions to its
rrohlrans; ~nd it n,c=-~ns th~t ,h~ client system docs not do all the work while the
consultant is a Jisintc-intcd obscnu. In OD, consultant, and clients co- labor.
3. OD pro,.rw,,,.s i""""1,r - na,lwis • W!JIS to improve anJ enhance peefonnance: OD
l'fOSrams and dfons arc designed to produce organisational effectiveness and heal~,
~tttr
' S)~t('m functionin~ greater ability to achieve objeaives and so fonh. The basic
ain,s of OD arc •

(a) ~nhancing congruence 'bct...-cen organisari,,nal structure. processes, Sttategy, people,

, ,nd cultu~;
 186 • Organisation Change and Development
. anisations solutions; and .
(b) developing new & creative org .
. . If-renewing capacity. (Beer M., 1976)
(c) developing the organisations se . . . .
that seem particularly distinctive in
It is these self-renewa1 outcomes ·
Development process. d ·
, t •c values about people an organisatio'lii,
4. OD rel(es on a set 0/ hu;;;~~t value-laden assumption of what consd~
normative process ~ro~n l th 'Development' for the OD practi'ti'
· d' 'd l usat ona grow ·
1
Otti
m ivr ua or orga~ d' 'd l d organisations in certain directions con,'
the movement of m rv~ ~a salan and ideals, such as autonomy, self -
democratic and humam snc v ues fjr · • •
· t gaining more e recttve organisation by
and democracy. OD also arms a 'al
.. r . d of human potenti .
new opportunmes ror mcrease use .•
5. OD represents a Sl]Stems Atpproach·· Although OD practtttoners . .
1. .may foeus
't f an organisation, there 1s an imp 1c1t recognit
t he other aspect or um o .
· f the organisation. As a social system, an organisation
systemic nature o l • al d h
different subsystems such as task, structural, techno ogtc an uman (~VRB
inter-linked by various processes. The organisation as a whole also inte
the external environment including the larger society and its smaller.CQ
Any change is one part or process has implicat_ions for other pa~ts _or
relevant to the system. Recognition of the systemic_ na~ure ~f o~ganisanon-
0D approach a methodological flexibility even while 1t mamtams same ·
rigidity in terms of values. ·
6. OD is based upon scientific approaches to increase organisational effecti
an applied field in which theories, concepts and practices from sociology,
social psychology, education, economics psychiatry & management edu
brought to deal with real organisational problems.
As an applied behavioral science approach, OD follows the action f'ese!Lra
½.ction research is a data-based, problem-solving model that replicates the steps •
the scientific method of inquiry' (French & Bell 1991). The action research m.~-
a systematic process of diagnosing problems, through data collection and an
the data back to the members of the client group, discussing the findings,
collaborative actions and ~:!Ilplementing proposed solutions. ·

The Evolution of Organisation Development

A brief explanation of the evolution of this field may give a better understanding ofits
today. OD has evolved over past 60 years from the applications of behavioral sdCll00
and techniques to solving organisational problem. What has become OD today sta111•
at ~IT and is deeply r~ted in the pioneering work of applied social scientist
Lewin and also strongly -~uenced by the work of psychologists like Carl
Maslow. The term orgarusaaon development is widely attributed to Robert ..,_.._,,.
& Herbert Shephard; however, Richard Beckhard claims this distinction as
who coined the term first, It emerged is about 1957 and is generally con««4
aom twO basic sources: the_application of laboratory method by National ,
 - .. w,..., ... , v vrgani1ation Developmtnt - An Introduction • I 81

d che Survey Research methods originated by h S

~)~;~rr pioneered both the methods in about 1945 ~ e urvey Rcstarch Center. Kurt
i,&7111 .
LABORATORY TRAINING MftHODI
r4fL - 1940's and early 19S0's laboratory • ,
he lace bh . . . - training methods were developed and
In c. _,l by a groups of e avioral scientists at Bethel Mai' D ·g1 M G (Th
}leu ki •h . ' ne. ou as c regor cory
apP d Theory Y), wor ng wit Richard Beckhard ·began appl . I bo . .
'/. all • · ' ymg a ratory - tmnmg
echods co Industry, at General
h Mills in 1956 &.at Union Carb'd · 57 A umon
1 e m 19 . t
·
~rbide, M~Gregor & Jo n Paul Jones_(an inter~al cons~t~t) formed the first internal
OD consulung group. . ..., . . .
About ~e same_ time,_ Herbert_ Shephard Robert Blake were.initiating a series of
applied behavioral science mtervent1on at _Es~~, ~ainly Iab~ratory-training techniques to
improve work team processes. These earl~ uammg sessions provided the basis for what ........_
Blake & Mouton later _developed as _an instrumented training system they called the
. The success of these programmes _led to a 'dissemination of such dfons to
Managerial Grid. . .

other corporauons.
"

SURVEY RESEARCH It FIIDIIACK : . .

About the same time, a group at·th~ survey ~ch Center at the University of Michigan
began to apply to organisation·the action resear~ modd of Kun Lewin. Remis Liken &
Floyd Mann administered an organisation .:.. wide survey ·to Detroit Edison Co.• involving
the systematic feedback of data to participating departments. They used what is termed a1
'Interlocking series of
conferences; .feeding .data back to the top management group and
then down to work teams throughout the organisation.
Since ~t time, ~y or~tlo~ had used the survey feedback approach. General
Motors for example, had reponed success in applying ~ert,s survey feedback approach to
organisation improvement. · ·
N'fL In summary, the major science of current OD practice was me pionffliag woat ar
and Survey Research Center. · . ·
! .. __
 ·no10g \,Jl<-'••t,""' VlfyU llsations I .
, •. u •- ....._.J 1ocus
bfl tr l b' . t mvol es on use of .
chieve a goa or an o Jective which is also ves development of _action orientation
10 a . called as . specific steps nerp.. .,,.
1./2 f OD • action plan. ~ry
~ 0 uel o · Action Research
ba$ic model underlying most OD activ· . .
A l. . .Jd th ttles is the acti
oblem so vang mou at replicates the St . . . 1 ?n research model - a data based
pr . I - .J • h cps mvo ved in th . .C'.
hc proces~ invo v~ 1.n t e action t ~ - L
'
d- e sc1ent1nc method of inquiry.
r • 1 • T\.u are: ata coll · fi db
theclient, and action p1ann1ng bbed on data (Beckh~d ect,:o11.1_ ~e _ a~k ..9f.
roach ro prohlcin .&0lving ... a modd or a ~nd~- , .969). Action research 1s both an
1
aPp • •. r....... 1g.tn - and a problem 1 ·
series of act1v1t1es a,nd cv-enu. so vmg process - a

The_ action
. rc.-sr.u (.:h model
• f~
• on pbnncd changes as a eye1·1cal process ·mvo1vmg
·
collaborataon between orgal\t$QUOn4l m(mbtrs and OD practitioners. It places heavy
emphasis on data gntheri1,g and di.igllosi.s pnor to aaion planning and implementation, as
wd\ as careful cvaluarion of resula lfter me aaion is taken. Action research is aimed both at
hdpir\g a specific org.inisation increase itS effectiveness and at developing new knowledge
that can be applied in other sen:in&5 (Sunman & Evered, 1978).

Action Research as a Process

• . oing series of events and actions.
...L- - .
Acnon rcse~uch is described as a process, l.114t is, as an °~ •
esearch data about
Attion R~arch cm be defined as a process of systemeucally collecting r .
 an ongoing system relative to some objective, goal or ne_ed of t~e ~tem; feeding
back in the system; talcing actions by altering selected variables w!tlun the S}'steJn I,..~
on the data and on hypotheses· and evaluating·the results of action by collecting~ ~
(French & Bell, 1978). This d:6nition characterises action rese~ch. in terms of th Jllore.
comprising the process: 6rst a static picture is taken of an organisation on the L
. . h . ·ca11 U"8JS 61
exists; hunches and hypotheses suggest actions; t ese actions ?'P1 Y entail . "~
some variable in the system that is under the contract of the actJon researcher; ~ "
· picture
stanc · is taken of the system to examme · the enects
II.
of the actions
· taken. tcra · ~·~
Several authors have noted the importance of viewing action research as
Stephen Corey, an early advocate of action research in education, states that, "
by which practitioners attempt to study their problems scientifically in order 111
i pr'
co~rect and evaluate their decisions and actions is what a number of people h
action research" (Stephen Corey, 1953) Elsewhere Corey defines action researc:ve
t ~ _of a ~ractitioner's tools: "Action research in education is research undcU: ii
pracaaoner m order that they may improve their practices" (1953). Ji,

F I 9 u r e 6.1
J Aaion Research Model

Joint action
Perception of planning New
problems by (setting Action
key individuals objectives and
goals)

New data
Consultation gathering
with Action
as a result
behavioural of action
science expert

. Data
Data gathering
gathering and after action
Rediagnos;s
preliminary
of situation
diagnosis by
consultants Feedback to the
client group by
consultant
Feecl>ack to
the key client
or group
· osis
 IS Of THE MODIL
I shoWS the cyclical phases of pl
t. ..iie F. nch & Bell, 1978)). There a anned change as ,
r!t~ ( re re seven 111 , "'~ fro L
b[e,n Identification: This st atn steps, fll '"' atth>tt ,_.
pro age Usual! b
l· rganisation or someone With power and . y cgins \tihcn a
0
or more problems that might be ll , influence senses h ~cy ctetutift in tit
one .h b a e\'tated w· h h t at the °'Pnila
consultation wit a ehavioural science tt t c htlp of an Ob ..
z, sulcant or change agent and the di e~ptrt: During th . ~Hill
con his or her own normative dev lent carefully ~ist each ~nitiaf COfttNct, dw
h9as74) and must be conscious ~f thee opmental theory or frarno r.f'fht c'-lt .,.
1 h b . se assumpti C O ttfettnu m:..t-
anager from t e egmning establish ons and values. Shari -"~ ...,,,
f1l • es and open an II bo ng u1a11 wld. ct.
n,,tA nathertng and preliminary J• • co a rativc a~
v-- 1:, • ritagnosts' Th· •
5- consultant, often m conjunction with ot .' . ts stage is usually com..J..J t.... ...._
. d . . ganisattonal m be ,,~,cu .,, UK
ofgathenng ata are: mterv1ews, process 0 b . em rs. The four basic mrllods
· servat1on •
performance data. The most effective d'
1C
. : questtonnaires, and OtM11o....:...-t
d. . tagnos1s begins with bse . --D-_,.,.•
semistructure mterv1ewe and conclud . h . o rvanon, Procceda co a
'd 'fi . es wu a quest .
the prob lems l enu 1ed by the earlier t "Th' tonairre to mcaswe 118ri-'-
moving from emphasis on 'bandwidth' to
s\eps ts sequ 'd
h . en~ prOVt cs a funnel cfm,
r---,
(Beer, 1976). _ , emp asis on fidelity' of mcasumncm •
4 Feedback to the Key client or group: Since action res ch . bo .
. the data are rdb. k . .
re ac to the client usually in a ear isacoa
k 11 ranvc~
--···r
- ck . h. h th . ' . group or wor team meeting. The
feedba step, m w 1c e group 1s given the information thcred b th comuham,
hdps the group determine the strengths and weaknesses : the o~U:tion or me
department under study. .The consultant provides the client with all relevant and
useful data. Obviously, the co,nsultant will protect those sources of information and
will, at times, withhold data if the group is not ready for the information or if the
information would make the client overly defensive.
5. Joint Diagnosis ofproblem: At this point, the group discusses the feedback. add·mt
focus returns to research as the change agen! ~d .the members of a group disam
whether this is a problem on which the group intends to work. A cl• rdatiomhip
exists among data gathering, feedback and diagnosis because to the bask dara &om .
the client have been summarized by the consultant and presented t? the group b
validation and further diagnosis. It is important to point out, as ~em
the action research process is very different from the doc~or - patten~ who
the consultant comes .m, makes a d'1agnos1·5 and prescribes a solution.
1 , •ell ____noces
.._.:..
that the failure
. .
to establish a common ira r. me of reference m the ent • \,W lllftlllll
. . heteb • dical .
relationship may lead to faulty diagnosis or a commumca~10n gap. w. • Wicve&
is sometimes "unwilling to believe the diagnosis or accept t eulprescr•pt: loa4Dd ._
that ,, most companies have drawers full of reports by consd ood tants,
or Q01 ...,
"'
diagnosis and recommendations which are ei ther not un erst
6 the 'patient'," (Schein, 1969), , . I agree Oil funb« IGlioa IO bo
' Aaion: Next, the consultant and manage~ent JOIDt y the CJlllllltatlon lllO\'CII IO •
taken. This is the beginning of the unfreezmg process, as
 • , nd ~pment
192 • Organisation Cha~ a
. . uilibrium, At this stage, one cannot he·*
different quasi - stat1ona?' eq h. depends on the culture, values and
the action to be taken, .sinfceht is blem; and the time and expense of th ~orlllt
· · . the diagnosis o t e pro . . c Ut
orgamsat1on, . s· e action research ts a cycl1cal process d
7. Dlltll gathering aftn' 11.ctton.' b me taken in order to monitor, measuce' ~~dta
be gathered afre r act1.
• ·on has. d keend the results back to the organisation.
· ' ....
,.,_, .
the effi:cts of the act1on an e
may lead to rediagnosis and new acuon.
.
r.,
.a llJI, 11-t.,

FEATURES OF ACTION RESEARCH . .

. . d 1 eveals several charactersttc of this approach J\
h
An analysis of acoon researc mo e r . · .,....
of the characterstics is presented below:
(a) Probl.nn focus: Action research begins with a problem from the field. Kurr t..... '
(I 946), widely considered to be one of the fo~nders of the field of orgais·
behaviour, kit that scientific research was often chvorced from the real _ lilt
encountered in various subsystems that we are mem~er of, often pur~uing .....
=:::
of little i11;terest to practitioners. The r~spon~e to the madequacy of sc1entiflc - - .
was .action research, which always begms with a problem.
(h) Action Oriented: The focus is not only of maximising the knowledge of un~
of a phenomenon, but also a concerted attempt to take concrete actions to c:h.mge•
situation. The actions taken may range_ from steps to ~ed~ce empl?ye~ res~ .
change, increase employee involvement m problem solvmg m orgamzattoned 00 •
or actions to transform the quality of life in a community context. . ·.
(c) Cyclical Process: The mode of inquiry is cyclical and leads to change_as well as • •
generation of new knowledge. The iterative process starts with problem
and one cycle ends with the action taken. The second cycle begins with the evaft rit'P
of the results and a reassessment of.the problem. The knowledge generated in dltlr3
cyd: is empl?yed again to i_ntro~uce s~me change, if necessary, and the PfOC!'L
contmue~ until the problem 1s sattsfactonly addressed. · , . ·. .':ftill
(d) · Collahorative:·It is a collaborativepr<?cess in which both the consultants and ~ -
contribute thei~ ¤ 'fh1s·1sbasea ·orf tne ··assumptioii that dllallif ~iii;
consu tants ring in their expertise in the process of organisational inquir). .,,
organisational members bring in their rich insights into . the nuances of11t
organisational problems, and collaboration is to achieve the best of both worlds.
(e) !xperi,ne:ztal: Action researc~, being an organic or cyclical process, inv~ tM
mttoductJon of a change, examination of its effects, and subsequent modificatiOl tf
., ~ - Experime°?'tion is inherent to the approach and the knowl~ is
, ind~ve. Often, experiments may fail and produce unanticipated or undesired ~
Action
A • .
· e ower of learning
· · t,eiof 1
by doing, experimentatton
.... route towards its attainment
~Lettming C4p4 billty b~lldi~g ;,~ckle future problems: The action res~
JQtervenes 10 the problem situation
· · m • order to improve
. the self-heIP and •
°'!11 pfifhe in~ividual (Susmen & Evered, 1978) as well as _
~
r ChaPt" 6
. .onal learn_ing (Argyris & Schon 197 - Ar. • I1l
isac1 h ·1· . d , 8D 1
o~calls on bot c ient an consultant t , e, 978). It i~ a ~It ..
Jl:i.c ing so derived can result in c o ~xarnint thtir ac~· . cdrmul "PP~h
'[be Jearn . . orrect,ve action. Mn• "" -'••11minit'1n•.
JHD HO~ TO U~I ACTION • ..__.
.,...,.
,,. 0 proce
ss is basically an action research p
. . tograrn tn
. Ill . .
eO . ing of that orgamsatton. F.ffective irnp.. an organi~ation dt',irt'd M impmv\!
'(Ii cr,on . h l . ,overnent p
J.t ftlll chat ,s, t ey re y on systema_ttcally obta·, d rogrami almo,t alway, l'll"w'lni~
w b:i.se, al . . ne ern . ·c.a1 . --•
Jit:l . and ev uatmg action. Action resea h Pitt racu for plannintt actinn
•" cuon, . . fo . re suppl' . " '
~pg and utilizing m rmauon about the ste . •es tn approach and a Fmctt• fur
.,e11er3011g ram- sy rn itself that will provide a ba~ fur tht'
fJ • 11 prog . • . .
10
jCf collaboranve mqmry features of act"
fhe d . b"l' " ion research
alike the esua 1 uy ror jointly' d . , suggests to practitionen and
. rsons . eterm1ning cent I d ..
la)?: · heses and actions. The potential . ra nee s, crmc.a( problems.
J hypot . . experimental nat f . . .
,11°. n research provides
.
a different 'set' of 1· "
. .
.
nrormatton fo
urc o actions inherent in
th
aet1° Viewing problems m cause-effect t ·· . d . r ~anagers as cy try co solve
blems. . . erms an v1cwm I . b(
pro ion. The systematic collection Of da b . g so utions to pro ems u
ply :lfC act a out variables l ed th
\_,r1' - which many lay persons are only nowta coming to VI,.
· ·
re a~ to e odrpnaz:inons
cwl""- d · h rr · cw as unponant ctcmunants
·f nerformance - an testmg t e euects of managerial action on th ·-LI a._
o r- d d' · •
· 1 for un erstan mg organization ynamics · ·All th r d esc van;w
fi "th cs om:r new
tOO s . . . • ese reatures It wt a program to
iJnprove the organization. ·
The nat~res of ?Dand action research are very similar. They arc both variants of
applied behavioural sc1e~ce, they are ?o:h action oriented; they are both data they
both call ~or _collabor~non b~~een msider and outsider; and they arc both problem _
solving social mtervent1on. This 1s why a sound organisation development program rests on
an action research model. ·

SOME IMPORTANT CHOICE POINTS

There are some contentious issues usually faced by action researchers. Obviously. no standard ·
solution can be offered to handle these dilemmas. The discussion is intended merely to
sensitize the OD ·practitioners. (Sendil Kumar & Ramnarayan S., 1998)
(a) .Extent of Involvement: The extent of i~volvement of the action researcher is akin to
walking the tight rope. Without external help the client system may be handicapped
in SUCcessfully implementing change and solving the problem. At the same time there
is a potential danger of the client system becoming overly dependent on the action
researcher. Given the objective of improving the self-help ·competency of the client

.:s
rt~, it would be important to strike a balance between_ increased involvem~nt to
about effective change on the one hand and reduced mvolvement for mu.uuum
-~nt _learning on the other, · _
~km Solving versus learning: One criticism of actio~ research i_s that it i.s ini~t~
tn ~ponse to a problem ·and ends when the prob~em ts _solved. Smee the p~bl..:11 tS
\lniquc to the context, no generalization usually ts poss~ble. In other words, ttSults
Clnn.ot he applied in ot~er settings. But this argument ts untenable as although no
 , generalisation is possible, but there are two important learnings to he . •
the client system learns from the experience and within the in
generalisation is possible to some extent. Second, the method emplo;:~~al
definition, date gathering, analysis, interpretation, action planning, and •~
eo,
can be -applied in different settings and can be an important learning :;1~
both the client system and for other organisati~n facing similar proble111s~it
care needs to be taken to ensure that the acuon research project is not-~~
merely a problem - solving ~ercise, but also fulfilling a larger objective of co~
learning of the client system in particular, and management in general. · ·. ft~
(c) Action or research: This is a dilemma often difficult to resolve in pra~icc,
of the situation may require quick action to be taken, whereas the canons of~
research may require more data to be collected and sophisticated analyses toft
performed before any action is take?. }'1c action rcsearche~ has to constantly inaica
trade - off between these two confl1ct1ng dcn1ands. A possible resolution of tbc iat
could be through the development of research expertise in the cHent system ibcl
Research competency in the client combined with in-depth knowledge of the coaa
will help in reducing the impact of the trade-off between research and aaion.
(d) Values: Value can be defined as enduring beliefs that certain acts or behaviows•
preferable to other for example, profits not at the cost of customer dissatis&criooi~
value. Values may be an important source of conflict between the client aais
action researcher.
 f t.hies mOrgam~tion~I ~opment IOD) reter:s to the PlincJples and standards that guide 1he
COMud·and iKtiOM Of profesw>nals
thk · · involved in itnpnmng t>teanizations. It is aseM:ia·I to atv...-
...,, wvC-h
.. WOft among ethital framework tn ensure int~grtty., fairness; and resr,omit:Jfe benilVior.Here
are some tey aspem Of ethics in organizational development:
CoM'identiality:
. - . > - . . -
00 pltidittoners
- ., ...__ - - - - . ,., .
often deal with sensitive information about indivicloals, teams, and
orpmt.atiofts.. It•~ cruaat to respect confidentiality and maintain the privacy of individuats and
·oreanitattonal data.
Respect for Atitonomy:OD Practitioners should respect the autonomy and seJf-determinatiOn of
,iftdwiduals and organizattons. They shoukJ involve stakeholders in decision-making processes and
avoid impos'ing their own v_alues or agendas on the organization.·
Cordna of Interest: 00 professionals should b e aware of potential conflicts of interest and take steps
to tna;Aage or •avoid.them. They should disclose any personal., finam:;ial, or professional relation:Ships
. that COUid compromiSe their objectivity or independen~ ·· · ·
l 11Wdt:csivity :I nd Diversity: Ethical oo practices embrace cfntersity and promote inclusivity wtthin
111

· :

011anizations. Pra~ners Shou~ strive to create- a sate_ and re~I erwircfJnent.

1
_
•Continuous Leaming and Profe~t0nal Development: Ethical 00 pracnnoners shou1d seek ongoing
professional development opportunities, participate in relevant communities of practice, and :adhere
to 1profe:s:sional codes of conduct and ethical guidelines esgbfashed by relevant industry associations:.
Impact Assessment and Evaluation: 00 interventions shoufd be irounded in rigorous researdh ,and
evidence-based 'prarnces. They .should b.onestty communica~ e outcomes and limitations ,o f their
work# a~iding exaggerated cl.aims or misleading repTese!Jtations.
Social Responsibility: Ethical OD practitioners recognize the broade~societal impact of theirr wort.
They should consider advocating for ethiq9I buSiness prac:tices, environmental stewardship, and ·
corporate social re'Siponsibility inlirdatives.. :• t··

Or:ganizilli~al I~• rning ~efers ti,J

!process t hrough whiOI an organization acquires koowll!dge l!'A;
impro~e its:;perforrn~nce and bc1a~~tbi\changes in its environment. It involves t!he coHective leam1ng ·
of j,n dividUiB,~ ~ithio,, the,i org~h,i:9 tlon a:nd the integration of that knowledge into the orga nizatlon•s
systems, pr,oc~sses, and practices! 1:t focuses on how organizations learn from their experiences,: both
successes, a,111d tJit~re:s, and h,ow t hey use that learning to make better decisions and enhance t heir
overall performance.

~~t,~::
I

tea~r'i:ng Org~ni.zation is an organizati,~n d"ev-elope~ the capacity to continuous.ly learn,

da .t and innovate. A le~rning orgamzatilon ere.ates an environment t hat encourages
a ,P . .,.....
expertmentauon, . .ction, ·ami ..the
refle• ' ' . . exchange
·. open ,. . 'm1deas.
. .. It.fosters . . of learning
. a. culture .. and
' . · .d
lknor.vle · crea n:·on
. ge .. whe
. .· re
.. e"~·eru-o.
., .ne""-· - =".' ·:c:d •in •i..mprov
. '.i.· s~erf~ge. . mg
, .· . ,= . the orgamzatton
. s effecnveness and
ac:!hiev.in g jts goals~ ~-=-~::: '¥' _
1

• •. · ~onat-tt aming referJ~iith,e p rocess of J.earning within an organrzation, while a

In summ.ary, organ1ia~u-. -· -,~~,;; 0 . • £ ••• , .•·. .
. . . . . .
• . _ . . . • .

. . . · •. .• . · ·
a n,,,.rig. an•z. at1·.
leammg o.rgamzanorn s _.. "" . • , .. · ~, .. . . . , "'''' .· · "'o n't''1i
af n
."
v
. a
.
. s . ·,. d.
te.. ~•. o ;
n. ed. the c;ap.ac1ty fo
. r. contmuous..
. ~earning,
, . . ·. - ·- . d ·• ~.·
adapt.anon, ijn . JIH}OV@iiyl} • ... - -~ ~ :.. "'Scliri
0
eamin~
- - ·. ·
orga:rnM
,p . ,: ' .
1.t iiar1, prprnotes
"Y . ' I .
a •
C Uiture of teammg and embeds
&ea;nin_g -proc6~ J ntQ lJs qver~U stral ef;' ~~·4. ~!pij~ati ~P s· ,
. ~• ' ,,,.... 1 '
i• ·!.