Search results

The purpose of this paper is to encourage innovation in our thinking about future organisation effectiveness. It is premised on the argument that the neo-liberal context that has dominated much of our thinking over the last 40 years is under pressure, with increasing polarisation and questioning about globalisation, and concern over our neglect of ethics and the environment. This questioning of business and society, and the development of digitisation in particular, will impact the way we should study organisation effectiveness. Notions such as flexibility, talent and organisation agility are themselves embedded in this macro context and in need of revision.

The paper takes our notions of agility and resilience, and breaks them down into their related components of change. The notion of agility – defined as the capacity to respond, adapt quickly and thrive in the changing environment – can be captured through five key components of future focus, customer-collaboration, iteration, experimentation and empowerment. Such a notion of agility must come hand in hand with resilience, and its related concepts of involvement, shared purpose, renewal, learning, risk management, networks and engagement.

We are moving beyond a search for greater flexibility at greater speed, towards a search for organisational agility itself. The dominant model of focussing on “hard” output measures (such as productivity, financial results and shareholder value) and enablement through internal alignment is being brought into question, as is the role of the HR discipline. Definitions of organisation effectiveness will need a stronger focus on the “means” to a different set of “ends”. The changes in the means are fundamental. Constructs such as agile structures will mean changes in work processes, structures, skills requirements, management practices, technological elements and cultural practices.

Despite many pressures for change, shareholder value thinking and related practices still appear to prevail. The traditional long-term employee value propositions that are derived from these practices are ill-matched with current employee desires for self-management of data, fair pay and opportunities for development, and more accessible styles of management and leadership. We should however expect different outcomes for the three different employee segments of elite and high-skilled employees, a squeezed middle of white collar and professional staff, and low-skilled workers.

The paper captures recent questioning about the role and purpose of business in the neo-liberal economy and uses it to highlight some of the tensions; consequently, this affects the way we think about organisation effectiveness. By deconstructing the discussion of concepts such as agility and resilience, it focusses the research and practice agenda on some of the necessary means that have recently been neglected in much of the organisational effectiveness literature.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an interview with Mee‐Yan Cheung‐Judge and Linda Holbeche, co‐authors of Organizational Development.

The authors provide practical advice on using diagnostics techniques to identify an organization's needs and explain how to use them across a range of areas.

Mee‐Yan Cheung‐Judge is the founder of Quality & Equality Ltd and the author of many organizational development articles. She speaks, writes and delivers most of the organizational development (OD) training programmes in the UK and was voted one of the 25 most influential thinkers in human resources (HR) by HR Magazine in 2008. Linda Holbeche was previously Research and Policy Director at the CIPD and is currently an independent consultant and researcher in the fields of leadership, human resources, change management and sustainable high performance. Both authors use their expertise to advise companies who are looking to implement OD strategies within their business.

In this ruthless downsizing cost cutting environment, OD is an indispensable field for leaders and internal change agents because OD can provide tools and processes to help leaders to navigate through complex disturbance changes with sustainable outcomes.

Workplace culture is all‐enveloping, so much so that it can become invisible to people working in the organization. It affects how people feel and work. OD can be a means of stimulating new practice and knowledge‐sharing across the sub‐cultures so that organizations are more than the sum of their parts.

Written by two of the leading experts in the field, Organizational Development defines OD and describes how it can be used effectively in today's economy to create organizations which maximize organizational capability.

Describes the differences between “conventional” mentoring and peer mentoring. Highlights the increasing relevance and need for peer mentoring in changing organization structures where management support may be disappearing or non‐existent. Outlines various approaches to establishing peer mentoring relationships, whether this is at the initiative of individuals or of the organization. Identifies some of the potential pitfalls, as well as the key benefits of peer mentoring relationships.