Organizational Development Strategy Proposal:
Organizational Development Strategy Proposal:
Whole Systems Predictive Modeling
Team B
ORG502 Human Relations and Organizational Behavior
June 1, 2004
Proposal
For the past two years the public school systemsave onehas failed to meet the minimum standards required for the No Child Left Behind program. This coming year will be the final year for the public school system to meet the standards or it will lose its charter and the program will be taken over by state officials or privatized. There are four basic strategies that could be implemented ¯ Action Research, Appreciative Inquiry, Future Search and Whole Systems Intervention. Because of the infrastructure difficulties and cultural changes that need to be addressed, as well as the large number of employees and parents involved and the variety of their concerns, it is our contention that the Whole System Predictive Modeling approach would be the most favorable methodology to remedy this situation. This proposal will describe the basic ideologies of the four interventions and explain why we feel the Whole Systems Intervention model is our preference.
Organizational Strategy:
Whole Systems Predictive Modeling
In order to fully understand Whole Systems Predictive Modeling (WSPM), and why we chose it as our intervention strategy, it is important to first describe the three interventions we did not choose and why. This will provide a better understanding of Organizational Development (O.D.) as a whole and help provide the foundation of why we chose our particular intervention strategy.
The three intervention strategies that were researched, but not chosen are Action Research, Appreciative Inquiry, and Future Search. We will begin with Action Research (AR), which was designed by O.D. theorist Kurt Lewin as a way to dig deeper into an existing problem in order to seek out not only the underlying problem but the issues and
concerns that surround the systems and the individuals involved. The
Whole Systems Predictive Modeling
Team B
ORG502 Human Relations and Organizational Behavior
June 1, 2004
Proposal
For the past two years the public school systemsave onehas failed to meet the minimum standards required for the No Child Left Behind program. This coming year will be the final year for the public school system to meet the standards or it will lose its charter and the program will be taken over by state officials or privatized. There are four basic strategies that could be implemented ¯ Action Research, Appreciative Inquiry, Future Search and Whole Systems Intervention. Because of the infrastructure difficulties and cultural changes that need to be addressed, as well as the large number of employees and parents involved and the variety of their concerns, it is our contention that the Whole System Predictive Modeling approach would be the most favorable methodology to remedy this situation. This proposal will describe the basic ideologies of the four interventions and explain why we feel the Whole Systems Intervention model is our preference.
Organizational Strategy:
Whole Systems Predictive Modeling
In order to fully understand Whole Systems Predictive Modeling (WSPM), and why we chose it as our intervention strategy, it is important to first describe the three interventions we did not choose and why. This will provide a better understanding of Organizational Development (O.D.) as a whole and help provide the foundation of why we chose our particular intervention strategy.
The three intervention strategies that were researched, but not chosen are Action Research, Appreciative Inquiry, and Future Search. We will begin with Action Research (AR), which was designed by O.D. theorist Kurt Lewin as a way to dig deeper into an existing problem in order to seek out not only the underlying problem but the issues and
concerns that surround the systems and the individuals involved. The
References: Cady, S. H. (Winter, 1998). Whole System Predictive Modeling: An integrated approach to designing an effective high-performing organization. Organization Development Journal, 16(4), 43. Cady, S Charlotte, D. S, Mindi, K. M., John, R. D. (2002). Leading in the age of paradox: Optimizing behavioral style, job fit and cultural cohesion Cooperrider, D.L. & Srivastva, S. (1987) "Appreciative inquiry in organizational life". In R McShane, S. & Von Glinow, M. (2002). Organizational Behavior (2nd ed.). McGraw Hill. Watkins, J. M., Cooperrider, D. (2000). Al: a transformation paradigm. O.D. Practitioner, 32(1), 6-12.