The System Design Approach to Organizational Development: The University of Arizona Model

Summary

---

LEADERSHIP IN THE DESIGN OF ORGANIZATIONAL SYSTEMS is the primary focus of an organizational development (OD) position. The OD consultant (internal or external) guides the leadership group to understand the complex nature of human organizations and the need for creation of systems and processes that support the mission, values, goals, and vision of the organization. As organizational structures change to adapt to new environmental challenges and development of a new culture is required, the approach to, and design of, new organizational systems will be critical to the success of the organization. This article will define for OD practitioners, human resource professionals, and library leaders some of the myriad organizational support systems that must be created and integrated to support new, postmodern organizational structures where collaborative learning, participative decision-making, and shared accountability can ensure adaptability, flexibility, and the potential for future success. The author's experience in the University of Arizona (UA) Library over the past ten years will be used to articulate potential approaches while sharing personal views of the successes and challenges.

See the full content of this document

Extract

---

The System Design Approach to Organizational Development: The University of Arizona Model

INTRODUCTION

Over the past ten years, the University of Arizona (UA) Library has been a laboratory for learning about organizational change. This article does not intend to advocate for any particular change model but rather to share observations from one individual who has played a leadership role in that change process and to frame those observations within a developing theory that organizational change is best studied and assessed through the lens of system integration.

Certain organization researchers will be central to the exposition of theory embraced in this article. The work of W. Edwards Deming, Peter Scholtes, and Peter Senge form the core of the systems theory presented here. Deming defines a system as "a network of interdependent components that work together to accomplish the aim of the system. . . . An example of a system, well-optimized is a good orchestra" (1994, p. 50). Scholtes notes, "Systems consist of subsystems or, if they're small enough in scope, processes. What is the point at which something is no longer a system or a subsystem but becomes a process? I don't know. (When does a ship become small enough to be called a boat?)" (Scholtes, 1998, p. 58).

In this article the term "system" will be operationally defined as the network of processes that provides the infrastructure or framework that supports the actual work of an organization, the Gemba, as Scholtes calls it. "The Gemba is the assembly of critical resources and the flow of work that contribute to those efforts that directly add value to the customer" (Scholtes, 1998, p.76). The infrastructure systems described in this article are non-Gemba; rather they are those that exist to support the Gemba: the leadership system, the team system, the planning system, the communication system, the process improvement system, the performance effectiveness management system, the compensation and reward system, and the recruitment and hiring system. While this article focuses on several important systems, there are other systems that are also crucial to library organizational success, especially the management information system, the technological system, the budgeting system, the fundraising system, and the marketing system.

Deming believed that most problems in an organization can be attributed to a system, not to people. "In my experience, most troubles and most possibilities for improvement add up to proportions something like this: 94% belong to the system (the responsibility of management); 6% are attributable to special causes" (Deming, 1994, p. 33). Scholtes adds his viewpoint on the importance of becoming knowledgeable about organizational systems and identifies what is wrong with our present systems. Among a long list of current systems issues, which he calls "brainshakers," he includes the following:

We look to heroic efforts of outstanding individuals for our successful work. Instead we must create systems that routinely allow excellent work to result from the ordinary efforts of people. . . . Changing the system will change what people do. Changing what people do will not change the system. . . . The greatest conceit of managers is that they can motivate people . . . attempts (they make) will only make things worse. . . . Behind incentive programs lies management's patronizing and cynical set of assumptions about workers . . . Managers imply that their workers are withholding a certain amount of effort, waiting for it to be bribed out of them. (Scholtes, 1998, p. ix-x)

Senge's works, The Fifth Disdpline(1990) and The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook (Senge et al., 1994), also have greatly influenced the theories put forward here. Senge brings together the need for systems thinking with the practice of other disciplines. "The organizations that will truly excel in the future will be the organizations that discover how to tap people's commitment and capacity to learn at all levels" (Senge, 1990, p. 4). His five disciplines outline practices that will enable continuing reflection, research, and learning about organizational systems and human development that can result in continuous improvement. Viewing the organization as a system within systems and made up of systems (systems thinking), supporting people in gaining proficiency and pursuing personal visions (personal mastery), making conscious our deeply held beliefs and assumptions and examining their appropriateness (mental models), developing the capacity to hold a shared picture of the future we seek to create (shared vision), and using dialogue to increase the capacity of groups to learn and discover new insights (team learning) are the five key practices that can unleash the potential for organizational learning (Senge, 1990, pp. 5-12). These practices or disciplines must be embedded in the systems we design to support organizational success.

In a recent essay Senge emphasizes that "Purpose is emergent. It can never be specified by design. . . . Emergence alters design. As purpo...

See the full content of this document

---