Introduction
Organizational change is inevitable in today’s dynamic business environment. Such change usually involves a research process consisting of different stages. One of the most important stages in such a change situation is organizational diagnosis. Organizational diagnosis can be considered as a special branch of organizational research leading to a set of statements about design options and recommendations for change.
Organizational diagnosis is important as it helps diagnosticians to make a leading statement about the functioning of the organization or a part of the organization related to the problem area of interest. Often, these statements lead to recommendations to improve organizational efficiency, organizational effectiveness, or flexibility. They use the results of organizational diagnosis to initiate interventions leading to organizational change, for example, reorganizations, business process redesigns, outplacements, management buy-outs, strategic alliances, or mergers. Less critical organizational improvements, such as internal communication improvements and reduction in absenteeism, may also be the outcome of organizational diagnosis. Finally, organizational diagnosis as a research activity contributes to change processes and to learn processes within organizations (Harrison, 1987). Thus in layman’s terms, organizational diagnosis shows the current state of the organization and therefore provides information necessary for problem-solving or future organizational development.
Discussion of the Models – Critical Appraisal/ Evaluate
Diagnosis models are an important tool for conducting a diagnosis activity. According to Brakes (in Howard & Association, 1994) the different ways where models come handy for diagnoses are:
- Models help to enhance our understanding of organizational behavior.
- They help to categorize data about the organization.
- They help to interpret data about the organization.
- They provide common short-hand language.
Falleta (2005) has discussed various models developed to aid the diagnosis of organizations. The models primarily can be distinguished as the ones which take the open system is an assumption and the others which do not. For instance, models like Leavitt’s Model (1965), Likert System Analysis (1967), McKinsey’s 7S Framework (1981-82), and High-Performance Programming (1984) do not consider the external environment as a variable that can induce organizational change. In discussing Leavitt’s model we see that that there exists interdependency between the organizational variables (task, structure, technology, and people) but fail to show, due to its simplistic nature, in which direction the effect of change occurs.
Likert identified four management systems viz. exploitative-argumentative, benevolent-argumentative, consultative, and participative group, on the basis of seven variables. He suggested questions for each variable to ascertain the management style but the questions did not come out of the model itself, rather from Likert’s consulting experience. Even if we assume that external factors do influence the functioning of the organization, this model will not help in successful diagnosis. McKinsey’s 7S model is a more comprehensive model, with the variable interdependencies clearly defined. The model shows that all the seven variables need to be changed to bring about a change in the organization. This is further exemplified by the examples of American and Japanese companies. The former lays unsuccessful stress on the structure, strategy, and systems for bringing about change but the latter stresses on these along with the other soft variables. This model when applied in a situation where the external forces are not considered can bring significant effect.
The other models which like, Force Field model (1951), Weisbord’s model (1976), Congruence model (1977), Tichy’s framework (1983), Diagnosing Individual and Group Behavior (1987), and Burke-Letwin’s Causal model (1992), all consider an opens system where environment have their influence. Weisbord first introduced the concept of fro mal and informal systems. The lesser the gap between them, the more effective is the organization. This concept has been used further by Nadler-Tushman in their Congruence model. Their model says that as long as the parts of the organization are well-fitted there will be a greater level of congruency and thus lead to a better functioning organization. Tichy and Nelson-Burn’s theory assumes that the output is performance and their performance gives feedback to the input in form of history and feedback from the environment as to what should be their next throughputs. Burke-Letwin’s model is the most comprehensive of all the models. Being a relatively new model, it draws from all the previous models, empirical research as well as from their OD practice a model that covers all aspects of the diagnosis problem.
The major similarity among all these models is that they follow the basic concept of input – throughput – output. All lay stress on the organization’s mission and structure along with human resources. Their dissimilarities lay in their treatment of the variable and from the angle the view organizations. For instance, Tichy analyzed all variables from technical, political, and cultural views, Nelson and Burns in their High-performance model stressed the study of the current level of performance of the organization in order to plan intervention to transform the organization into a high performing system.
Organizational Models and Starbucks
Starbucks is a leading US coffee chain. It is a member of one of the most dynamic industries which are influenced by both internal and external variables. Further, it is a performance-driven company that aims for a quick response to market changes. Thus implementing the models which do not consider external influence as a factor that induces a change in the organizational framework is difficult to use as Starbuck’s operations are all based on inputs and feedback from the environment. The only model which can still be used is the one developed by McKinsey as its variables are well defined and there lies a lot of interrelation amongst them. The models which presume an open system are apt for implementation in Starbucks. Some of the models which are determined by the performance of the company are tailor-made for Starbucks. Models of Burke –Letwin are easy to implement in Starbucks as they describe all the variables very systematically and the direction of effect of flow also are clearly defined.
Reference
Falletta, S. V. (2005). Organizational Diagnostic Models: A Review & Synthesis, Leadersphere, Inc.
Harrison, M.I. (1987). Diagnosing Organizations: Methods, Models, and Processes. Sage Publications.
Thompson, A. A. & Gamble, J. E. (1997). Starbucks Corporation. Web.