Organization Development in the Public Sector

mattednearAI and Robotics

Dec 1, 2013 (3 years and 4 months ago)

62 views

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


1







Organization Development in the Public Sector

Richard
H.
Carson

Washington State University



Author Note


Richard H. Carson,

is an

Individual Interdisciplinary Doctorate Program

(IIDP)

student at
Washington State University.

This research was conducted with the assistance of
Dr. Lee
Bolman,
Dr. David G. Carnevale, Dr. Thomas G. Cummings,

Dr. Jerry

D.

Goodstein,
Caryn
A.
Tilton
,

and Dr. Christopher G.

Worley
. Thanks to everyone for the assistance.

Correspondence concerning this

article should be addressed to Richard

Carson,

12920
NE 227
th

Avenue, Brush Prairie,
W
A

98606.
Email:
richcarson@q.com

.

This paper is written as required by the American Psychological Association
style guide
.



July
2
6
, 2013
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


2



Abstract

This is

a 600

level

course

paper completed at

Washington State University

Vancouver in
Summer 20
13
. Washington State University

defines a 6
00 level course
as an “
independent
study,
special projects, and/or internships.


I am a

doctorate student in the
Individual
Interdisciplinar
y
Doctorate

Program

(IIDP)
.

My

doctorate degree research proposal is

Does the effectiveness of
public agencies, in communicating and managing
relationships with internal and external
stakeholders, increase the likelihood of successfully managing organizational change?

This
paper defines the field of public sector organizational development
historically
,
explores
how it
is being implemented
,
and

assesses

whether
it
is
succeed
ing

in achieving

its goals.

One of the major finding
s

of this paper is that while there is some consensus about what
organizational development is in general, it is viewed very differently by academics and
practi
ti
oners.

So the research is

not about explaining a universal theory of organizational
development. Rather it is

about finding the commonalities
of

i
ndividual perspectives

in this
new
and growing field.

Keywords
: organizational development,
municipal

government
,
communication
,
stakeholders


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


3



Introduction
to

Organizational Development

in the Public Sector

Definition

There are as many definitions of organizational development as there are authors who
wrote books about the subject. As a term, the phrase goes back to
the early 1900s. However, the
term took on a more sociological meaning. For the purposes of this paper the definition is the one
used by Cummings and Worley

(2005)
:

Organization development is a system
-
wide application and transfer of
behavioral science kn
owledge to the planned development, improvement,
and reinforcement of the strategies, structures and processes that lead to
organization effectiveness.


It is important to keep in mind that other definitions also emphasize technology,
research, problem
-
sol
ving, plann
ed

interventions, data collection, diagnosis, self
-
renewing capacity and collaboration.


David Carnevale (2005)
explains that organizational development
a
s a philosophy

that
says:

OD…manifests a normative
,
re
-
educative education philosophy becau
se it
encourages individuals and groups to reexamine core values, beliefs, and
operating assumptions about themselves, other people, and the way their
organizations function.

Introduction

and

Purpose

The purpose and goal of the study is to create
an understanding of organizational
development
that local governments can
utilize

in the pursuit better managing organizational
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


4



change. It will provide a qualitative
review

by which
local governments can

achieve change and
a quantitative process to measure

and monitor such change.

This research project is a
n extension of

my WSU doctorate research question. The
Individual Interdisciplinary Doctorate Program (IIDP) “Proposed Plan of Study” asks the
Research Question,
“Does the effectiveness of public agencie
s, in communicating and managing
relationships with internal and external stakeholders, increase the likelihood of successfully
managing organizational change?”

This is the research question approved by the IIDP Advisory
Committee and the WSU Graduate Scho
ol.

My personal interest in this topic is both professional and academic. I have spent 30 years
work
ing

at the city, county and state government level in Alaska, California, Oregon, Utah and
Washington. Most of this time was spent as a top level government

manager. For the last five
years I have worked as a consultant, working with local government on creating organizational
change that leads to greater efficiencies and communication.
M
y academic interest is an
extension of my professional interest.

Revisin
g the Research Question

The first task was to change the research question
to

one that was more concise and

t
hat
lent itself to an improved research project.

I
t is important to note that I have made some changes
to my initial research question.
The second task was to do so in manner that conforms to the
norms of
academic

research terminology and practice.

The proposed new research statement is now

Do m
unicipal corporations that

effectively

communicate with their stakeholders better manage organi
zational change
?


It is shorter and
more specific
, and
will make for a better research result. I have reduced the scope from “public
agencies” to “municipal corporations.” In political science terms this means that federal, state,
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


5



regional, county and city

governments are now limited to city and county governments. I think
this will limit the research because municipal corporations operate differently and at a different
scale that state and federal agencies.

The phrase “communicating and managing relations
hips” is changed to “communicate.”
“Managing relationships” is no longer an explicit consideration. This is not a concern since it
could end up as a recommendation or consideration of the research.

The topic statement phrase “effectively communicate” is ch
anged to “communicate” and
“successfully manage organizational change” to “better manage organizational change.” It is
easier to demonstrate an action without using
nebulous
adjectives

like “effective” or
“successful
.


The terms “internal and external stakeholders” have been aggregated to just
“stakeholders.” There is a discussion to have about who is or is not an appropriate stakeholder in
such research. Whether this is a real reduction in research effort is questionabl
e.
T
he research

will

still have to address both the internal and external groups
.

It could certainly limit the inquiry
to one or the other.
The question
is
one
more or less significant in terms of understanding
outcomes?

Research Method
ology


There are three
academic
research methods used in the examination of organizational
development in the public sector. First, there is
the
literature review. Second, is

an

inventor
y of

best organizational manag
e
ment practices
conducted

by

several
consulting firm
s
.

The latter
reports are all a matter of public record.
This consisted of
numerous

city and county
organizational audits. Third, structured interviews

were conducted

with open
-
ended questions

(see Appendix
A
)

of five of the leading organiza
tional development experts in the United States.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


6



History of Organizational Development



Three Perspectives

Early History of Organizational Development

T
he need to address organizational change is as old as human society itself. Organized
society dates back some 2.6 million years ago to the
Paleolithic

Era.
D
ealing with

unanticipated

events
is ongoing

because human life is full of imperfections and unfores
eeable events.
Managing organizational change
wa
s hi
storically a reactive necessity rather
than a proactive
strategy.


One of the interesting findings I made was that organizational change
wa
s usually
pre
c
eded by the publication of some book or treatise.

Four

are provided here to underscore the
long history of public sector organizational development

in the pre
-
industrial age
.

Understand
that this is not a
n exhaustive or

comprehensive list of the forerunners to organizational
development.

It is a

short summary of some of the major people who, wittingly or unwittingly,
helped create the field of organizational development.

One of the earliest publications was
The Art of War

by Sun Tzu who lived from
544

496
BC (Cleary,
1988
). This was primarily an
instructional guide for warfare. In it he spent a lot of
time discussing strategic planning. However, much of his advice was equally applicable to
organization
al

management. Many of today’s business publication
s

dutifully quote him because
his ideas are st
ill relevant. For example, he said:

Plan for what is difficult while it is easy, do what is great while it is small. The
most difficult things in the world must be done while they are still easy, the
greatest in the world must be done while they are small.

The Prince

written in
1513

AD

by Niccolo Machiavelli
,

provided guidance on how to
publicly govern.

It had extensive advice on how to manage change.

One example of
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


7



Machiavelli’s organizational development advice on bureaucratic complacency and the status
quo is:

For such a prince cannot rely upon what he observes in quiet times, when
citizens had need of the state, because everyone agrees with him… Therefore
a wise prince ought to adopt

such a course that his citizens will always have
need of the state and

him, and then he will always find them faithful.

(Marriott,
1992
).

Charles Darwin (1809
-

1882) commented that “It is not the strongest of the species that
survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change

(Darwin, 1859)
.”

Of
course he was speaking biologically, but it still resonate
s

politically.


Fredrick Taylor
w
rote

an essay for

Scientific Management

in 1911. Taylor established
four principles: data gathering, worker selection and development, integration of science and

the
trained worker, and redivision of the work of business). What is so important about Taylor’s
work is that he focused on organizational work. Today’s concepts of reengineering and process
engineering are attributed to him (Burke, 2
002
).

All of this adv
ice could be
found in any

modern organizational development text. The
point here is that organization development
as a concept
is not recent
, but the actual practice is a
a 20
th

century innovation
.

Private Sector
Perspective

Being proactive and managing
organizational development, commonly referred to as OD,
is a recent innovation of the post
-
industrial revolution. With the advent of scientific management
in the early 1900s, a more systematic approach for managing business organizations evolved.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


8



The
private sector initiative came from several directions.

In 1982, Thomas Peters and
Robert Waterman published the
ir

ground breaking book
In Search of Excellence
.

Their basic
message was th
at

“Innovative companies are especially adroit at continually respond
ing to
change of any sort in their environment. They

said that
the “The nature

and

use
s of
communication

in the excellent companies are remarkably different from those their
nonexcellent peers
.


They
went
on to say that “The intensity of communications is
unmistakable
in the excellent companies” (Peters
& Waterman, 1982
). I will explain how this applies later in
the report.

Also in 1982,
W.
Edward
s

Deming published
Quality, Productivity and Competitive
Position
. This too would become became a national
business trend setter. Deming had long been
ignored by American industry and early on took his message to Japanese industry. It was only
when the Japanese started taking American market share in durable goods that American
industry took notice of him. Demi
ng

s focus was quality control and statistical analysis. (Walton,
1986
)
. He is considered the father of Total Quality Management.

He also created the Fourteen
Points and Seven Deadly sins (Cummings

& Worley
,
2005
).

He said that
“The prevailing style of man
agement must undergo transformation. A
system cannot understand itself. The transformation requires a view from outside”

(Walton,
1986
).

In organizational development terms this is called an intervention.

Public Sector
Perspective

The public sector response to
In Search of Excellence

was slow. It was
eleven
years later
that Osborne and Gaebler published
Reinventing Government

(1993). Even then the public sector
was not too enthused about embracing its tenets. The title’s subheading
was “How the
entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector.” The authors spent a lot of time talking
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


9



about privatization and using business practices. The former meant a loss of government jobs
and the latter meant a fundamental change in how go
vernment does business.

The application of organizational development in the public sector took longer
historically because of perception
and reality
that private sector and public sector institutions
were functionally and

normatively different. Public
sector organizations
a
re more concerned with
fairness than with competitiveness.

There
are
important distinction
s

between political democracy and corporate capitalism

(
Cummings

and Worley
,

2
005
)
. These are values and structure, multiplicity of decision
makers,
stakeholder diversity and intergovernmental relationships.

Values and structure.

In the private sector, profit and competition are the primary
drivers. In the public sector it is governing for the greater good and responsiveness to the public.
The
latter includes representation, respect for individual rights and social equity. Public entities
are more transparent and must provide open access to the public and especially the media.
Private companies are competitive, but public entities must be fair t
o all citizens and be
consistent in that fairness. So they are not allowed to be flexible and must abide by a strict set of
policies, rules and procedures. The only commonalities between the two are a desire for
efficiency and customer service.

Multiplicit
y of decision makers.
For any given public policy there are multiple decision
makers. For example, water quality is regulated by several federal government agencies, state
agencies, the local government and a water district. So the citizen has access at va
rious levels to
seek redress or
receive

answers. The private sector is much more singular in its decision making
and does not have to answer to the public at so many levels.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


10



Stakeholder diversity.

Public entities deal with numerous stakeholders. There are
the
various levels of governments in terms of agencies and elected officials: special interest groups
representing citizens, environmentalists and businesses; internal groups like unions and safety
committees; and various non
-
profit partners that they cont
ract with. All of these groups have
complete access to documents and records. The private sector has a lot less stakeholder
interaction.

Intergovernmental relationships.

As noted, governments share responsibility with
many other groups on any given issue.

C
oordination is imperative for the efficient
implementation of any program. This also included shared and intermingled funding sources that
often come with numerous reporting requirements and spending limitations.

The current trends to improve government c
ommunication and organizational
performance can be traced historically back
twenty
years to
Reinventing Government

(1993).
This book was followed by
Improvement Driven Government

(Carr, 1995). Both books were
basically operationalized by the National
Performance Review process during the Cli
nton
-
Gore
administration (Carr & Condon, 1995
).

It is important to keep in mind that
t
hese antecedents proposed to transform the public
sector through a private sector model (Osborne

& Gaebler
,
1993
). It has only be
en in recent
years that the efficacy of this transformation has been questioned. That is why I have placed
special emphasis on organizational change strictly in a public sector setting and in explaining the
historical context of its evolution and its separ
ate evolution in the field of organizational
development (Carnevale,
2005
).

I need to point out that improvement driven government is not a new concept. In fact, it
was President Woodrow Wilson who
was a
forerunner

to

Fredrick Taylor’s ideas on scientific
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


11



management.

When he taught at Byn Mawr College he wrote an essay for Political Science
Quarterly (1887). In it he said that in terms of bureaucracy, there should “be a science of
administration which shall seek to straighten the paths of government, to mak
e its business less
unbusinesslike…” He went on to say there was a need to “expand into efforts to improve, not
only the personnel only, but also the organization and methods of government offices.”

Professional Perspective

Today’s organizational
development practice was initially practiced by human resource
specialists
, applied social scientists
and behavioral scientists (French,
1999
). The field itself grew
out of five backgrounds. These
we
re the growth of the National Training Laboratories and t
he
concomitant
development of training groups (a.k.a., T
-
groups, sensitivity training groups), action
research and survey feedback, the normative view that espoused a participative management
framework, focusing on productivity and quality of work life, an
d strategic change and
organizational transformation (Cummings

& Worley, 2005
) . I will explain much of this
terminology later in the paper.

What is unique about the field of organizational development is that i
t was

the first
attempt to actually study the

organizational change process. The forerunners to organizational
development were such endeavors as scientific management, the Hawthorne studies, survey
feedback, sociotechnical systems and industrial psychology (Burke,20
02
).

The field also philosophicall
y grew out of three schools of thought. These were the
Classic School of Thought, Human Relations School of Thought and the Human Resources
School of Thought (Rothwell,
Sullivan & McLean, 1995
). A generalization of these schools of
thought are:

Classic Sch
ool of Thought:

Work is inherently distasteful to employees

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


12



Human Relations School:

Employees want to feel useful and important

Human Resources School:

Employees want to contribute to meaningful goals


Today the field is transforming into
the

second genera
tion. This transformation is driven
by the frenzied activity that occurred in the 1990s where there were increased mergers and
acquisitions, technical innovations, leveraged buyouts, downsizing and changes in law. The
second generation relies heavily on th
e theories and practices of the first generation, but had to
adapt new tools to address the changing landscape. The new organizational development
included interest in organizational culture, learning organizations, total quality management and
visioning
(
French

& Bell, 1999
).

Much of
the
ground work for organizational development was created by
Kurt Lewin

(1898

1947)
. He

is recognized as being the founding father of organizational development.
Lewin came up with the ideas of
group dynamics

and
action research

which are the basic
foundation of the organizational development process.

Lewin

played a key role in the evolution
of organization devel
opment as it is known today.

Lewin experimented with a collaborative
change process using a three
-
step process of planning, action and measuring. This was the
beginnings of action research. Lewin participated in the beginnings of laboratory training (Child
,
2005
).

Literature Review

There are numerous papers and studies about the separate research topics of municipal
corporations, communication with stakeholders and managing organizational change. The most
important material addresses the point that among mu
nicipal corporations, the greater the level of
communication with stakeholders, the greater
the
level management of organizational change.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


13



In the process of this literature review there are three objectives
to keep
in mind. First,
there is the issue of voc
abulary to sort out. The variables proposed are municipal corporations,
communication, stakeholders and managing organizational change. The first step of the research
task is to find corollary terms in the literature that will lead to relevant research. Th
e second step
is evaluating the relevance of the material in explaining the phenomenon. Finally, the review will
be to discover if there is any relevant statistical data.

Communication

George Bernard Shaw (1916) said that “The single biggest problem with communication
is the illusion that it has taken place.” The
point being

that

most

local government
s

exists with
the illusion that that they are communicating with their constituent stake
holders and believe that
they understand what their stakeholders want from their government. But it is an illusion because
they don’t document this hypothesis.

There is a qualitative study published by
The Journal of Change Management

in which
interviews were conducted with 25 employees from a range of organizations. The limitation here
is that these were not specifically public sector employees, so the questions need more scrutiny.
The result did produced
a better understanding of how

employees process information about
organizational change
. Three examples are that line employees prefer information from their
direct supervisors, senior managers prefer more strategic information, and that employees who
believed they received quality ch
ange information accept the change better

(Allen,
Bordia &
Irmer,
2007
)
.

The University of Nebraska conducted a study on public input methods in order to gain
trust and confidence. Their methodology consisted of telephone surveys and face
-
to
-
face
discussio
ns, and an on
-
line survey. One of their questions was does it make a difference which
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


14



methods are used to solicit information. The findings were that the participants rated face
-
to
-
face
higher in terms of procedural fairness and trust/confidence. However,
the variance was so
insignificant
as to be negligible (Tomkins, 2010).

The same university group did a similar study with interesting results and said that “the
study design is correlational rather than experimental and data were not originally gathered to

test the identified hypothesis”

(PylikZillig, 2012).

Organizational Change

In 1999, Linkage, Inc. conducted a study regarding organization and human
resource development.

A survey asked human resource and organizational development
professionals which of five categories had the highest demand with organizations they
worked with. The results were Organizational Development and Change (4.6),
Leadership Development (4.5), Rec
ruitment and Retention (4.27), Performance
Management (4.24), and Coaching and Mentoring (4.03). Clearly there is a demand for
organizational change (Carter
, Girber & Goldsmith
,
2001
).

There is an article in
Public Administration Review

(2006) that focused

on the related
public sector information (Fernandez and Rainey, 2006). In this article Fernandez and Rainey
talk about the streams of research that contain various models and frameworks, and claim there
are empirical studies supporting them (Fernandez and

Rainey, 2006). However, the article did
not provide findings. The authors say:

The public
-
management literature contains evidence of the importance of determining the
need for change and persuasively communicating it through a continuing process of
exchan
ge with as many stake
-
holders and participants as possible.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


15



Another study done by Kuhn and Corman (2010), specifically did
research

“using
interviews, observations, and a unique discovery processing technique, a nine month case study
of one division of a
municipal government organization
.
” Their study found that “traditional
examinations of organizational change overlook the complex interactive, structural, and
contextual forces that influence planning change” (p. 224). This study is by far the most
thor
o
u
gh

and well
-
documented reviewed.

There is a lot of literature on the topic of organizational development and change. The
research measures and methods are
easy
to identify. Cummings and Worley (2005) provide such
information in their book Organizational De
velopment & Change. The section on Collecting and
Analyzing Diagnostic Information is especially useful. It is worth noting that I have
corresponded with both of these professors and they are most helpful.

Cummings and Worley
(2005)
summarize data collect
ion methods such as
questionnaires, interviews, observations and what they call unobtrusive measures. They also
describe specific measurement categories such as strategy, technology, structure, measurement
systems, human resource systems and culture.

It sh
ould be noted that much of the literature review findings related to organizational
development is to be found in the other sections of the report and did not require being repeated
here.

Performance Review

Perhaps the best opportunity to statistically
document and validate the research
hypothesis will be through the use of performance review data. There has been a great deal of
effort placed on measuring

and

monitoring
in order to
improv
e

government performance at the
city, county, state and federal lev
el.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


16



For example, the U.S. National Performance Review program has morphed over time, but
still keeps vast amounts of data. Similarly, the International City/County Manager Association


which I am a member


has its own Center for Performance Management th
at maintains a huge
data base on city and county performance programs. Terminology is important here because the
study is looking for data on program performance and not personnel
performance
.

Stakeholders


The stakeholders are a key public participation v
ariable that allows municipal
governments to translate perception into organizational change. Work done by the Institute for
Food Research took a look at public participation methods and evaluated them (Rowe

& Frewer,

2000). The source is not tied directly

to municipal government, but their research

is

applicable to
any stakeholder/public participation process.

There is a very interesting publication by the United Nations Development Programme
titled Multi
-
Stakeholder Engagement Process. It details a number

of non
-
U.S. cases studies of
using a “structured processes that can be used to ensure participation on specific issues that are
based on a set of principles.” (UNDP,
2006
).

Technology

Another prevalent theme in the transparency discussion is the use of te
chnology to
better engage and communicate with the public. The technological argument focuses
mainly on the use of the Internet to provide data transparency, open participation and
improved

collaboration (Foxworthy

& Bingham
,

2013
).

Alfred Tat
-
Kei Ho (2002
) of Iowa State University says that the e
-
government
initiative “emphasizes coordinated network building, external collaboration, and
customer services.” In his study, he did both content analysis of city Web sites and
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


17



survey
ed

w
eb development officials. He was particularly interested in both internal and
external communication processes. His survey focused on 55 cities nationwide that
ranged in size from 300,000 to 7,300,000. He focused on
w
eb management
characteristics such as c
itizen feedback and improving customer service.

It is important to note that technology and e
-
Government take in numerous
opportunities such as government websites, social media and electronic surveys. For
example, a social media exploratory study was cond
ucted in 2012 in order to understand
social media use by government specifically for managing crisis situations (Kavanaugh,
Fox & Sheetz, 2012
). This is exactly the type of information that can inform the study
research.

Transparency

Most of the current literature talks about
transparency
in government. A recent PA Times
essay by Catherine Howard (2013) typifies the current concepts:

The performance management process is inherently a change management process and
highlights how, by int
egrating change management, performance management is
enhanced add supports not only achieving performance goals, but also goals related to
transparency, openness, collaboration and accountability.

In her essay, Howard lays out a five
-
stage process to achi
eve this goal. This
includes testing and the need to “conduct statistical analysis to determine correlations


or the lack thereof as a means to validate
.


She says that the organization needs to
develop the strategy statement, translate and communicate th
e strategy, plan the
operations in terms of human and monetary capital, monitor and learn about the change
process, and then test and adapt the strategy.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


18



Another study done through the University of Illinois explores the relationship
between transparent an
d participative government in the United States.
Although the two
would ideally go hand
-
in
-
hand, the reality is quite different. In a study of five local
governments, it was found that the police departments had the lowest levels of both and
the parks depa
rtment had the highest levels of both. This raises the question of whether
this is because of the internal agency culture or the external public perception, or both
(Welch,
2012
)
.

Organizational Development Best Management Practices

This is a review

of

some of the

best organizational management practices conducted
by

several consulting firms. The latter reports are all a matter of public record

and
consist

of
numerous city and county organizational audits.

I
nterdepartmental/Interdivisional Coordination

Recommendation

1
:

Eliminate organizational silos between departments.
i


Recommendation

2
:

Make staff pro
-
active participants in meetings.
ii


Recommendation

3
:

Create a “one
-
stop shop”
application

center.
iii

Management Support

Recommendatio
n

4
:

Direct the
department d
irector to discuss and consider adoption of
the best management practices identified in th
e

report.
iv

Customer Service Improvements

Recommendation

5
:

Establish an ongoing customer service program.
v

Recommendation

6
:

Institute an
u
nanticipated
s
ervice program.
vi

Recommendation

7
:

Hold employees accountable to meet
process

times, and other
standards, such as returning phone calls with 24 hours.
vii

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


19



Recommendation

8
:

Adopt a consistent policy for how fast
line staff a
nd supervisors
respond to phone
calls and emails.
viii

Recommendation

9
:

Beat the competition with a high
-
level of customer
communication.
ix

Recommendation

10
:

Institute a program where
employees
“listen, hear, and appreciate
what their customers
are sayin
g.”
x

Recommendation

11
:

All staff and

particularly managers should be required to make a
few random phone calls to customers to look for important issues.
xi

Recommendation

12
:

Institute effective performance measures in order to gauge
customer satisfaction.
xii

Communication Improvements

Recommendation

13
:

With the assistance of a technical writer, provide a booklet
that clearly explains what the applicant can expect during the development review process, the
planner’s role, and the decision
-
making body that must approve the application.
xiii

Recommendation

14
:

Avoid technical and bureaucratic jargon in all publications,
public notices and other communications.
xiv

Recommendation

15
:

All handouts should be reviewed on an annual basis. Handouts
should immediately be amended whenever new changes
occur.
xv

Regulatory/Policy/Procedural Improvements

Recommendation

16
:

Empower representatives attending meetings with the authority to
solve development issues and make commitments for the Department.
xvi

Recommendation

17
:

Develop an organization
-
wide sense
of urgency and timeliness of
the processes; encourage, support, and promote staff that embraces this philosophy.
xvii

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


20



Recommendation

18
:

Develop a
p
rocedures
m
anual, which provides checklists for each
agency
process.
xviii

Recommendation

19
:

Develop a systematic
procedures manual training program.
xix

Recommendation

20
:

Expand the range of procedure manuals and checklists to
encompass all of the major processes undertaken by the department.
xx

Recommendation

21
:

Update the procedures manuals and checklists on an ongoin
g
“Continual Improvement” basis; keep it on the Department staff meeting agenda.
xxi

Human Resource Improvements

Recommendation

22
:

Redeploy professional staff in order to provide meaningful and
effective support to customers and stakeholders.
xxii

Recommendation

23
:

Identify, empower and reward results
-
oriented employees across
departmental lines.
xxiii

Recommendation

24
:

Conduct a new equity study to ensure salaries are reasonable with
the responsibilities they perform.
xxiv

Recommendation

25
:

Conduct a training

needs assessment for the
Department.
xxv

Recommendation

26
:

Establish professional development expectations for each
employee
, including cross
-
training and career development.
xxvi

Recommendatio
n

27
:

Work the basics of environmental reviews in each

employee
’s
professional development program.
xxvii

Recommendatio
n

28
:

Conduct performance evaluations consistently and at regular
intervals.
xxviii

Recommendation

29
:

Substantially increase the use of consultant/contract services to
manage workload.
xxix

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


21



Performance Measures and Mo
nitoring

Recommendation

30
:

Develop a set of meaningful performance measures directly linked
to cycle time performance indicators.
xxx

Project Management/Case Management Systems

Recommendation

31
:

Institute effective performance measures that relate directly
to
customer satisfaction with regard to timeliness and clarity.
xxxi

Recommendation

32
:

Ensure an effective project management approach for project
review.
xxxii

Recommendation

33
:

Develop and implement a system to ensure that mitigation
measures are passed through

from project approval to later stages of subsequent permits
throughout the organization.
xxxiii

Recommendation

34
:

Designate a
p
roject
m
anager immediately and prepare a
timeline/milestone project
-
tracking document.
xxxiv

Technological Improvements/Systems

Recommendation

35
:

Move to online application and payments

Recommendation

36
:

Prioritize ongoing training of employees on the
computer
processing s
ystem.
xxxv

Recommendation

37
:

Increase client communication through the website.
xxxvi

Facility/Building Improvements

Recommendation

38
:

Institute a modern one
-
stop shopping center.
xxxvii

Recommendatio
n

39
:

Design a
n application

center with both customer service and
the

process in mind.
xxxviii

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


22



Recommendation

40
:

T
he
agency

should do a space inventory to see how spaces could
be better utilized.
xxxix

Document Management Systems

Recommendation

41
:

Ensure that once a file is ready for close out, that all documents in
the files are scanned to provide electronic copies (and access)
for easy reference.
xl

Recommendation

42
:

Pursue funding to more aggressively scan files for the last 5
-
10
years so they are readily available to staff.

Recommendation

43
:

Secure existing files into the
f
ile
r
oom/
r
ecords
c
enter.
xli

Recommendation

44
:

Until files can be scanned and maintained in the
f
ile
r
oom/
r
ecords
c
enter, relocate various files in one location so all files for a given year are together.
xlii

An
Organizational Development
and Change Blueprint


This section reviews the basic practice
s

of organizational development as
they

can be
adapted to public sector use.

The program

example

set forth in this paper is

based on the
literature search, a review by the professional interview panel and the author’s experience as an
organizational develop
ment practitioner.
It is a sequential

10
-
step


program that
is
comprehensive in scope. However, it may include more steps than would normally be utilized in
an average intervention.

It
should

be understood as a
n illustrative

series of tools in the
organizational development toolbox.

Step 1.
Problem Identification


There needs to be an initial meeting with the organization’s elected and/or appointed
officials to ascertain what they think the problems are and what their expecta
tions are in terms of
the intervention. It is important to keep in mind that their perceptions of what is working and not
working maybe total erroneous and based on a political agenda and bias. Elected officials are
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


23



especially prone to getting elected on a

set of propositions that may not be true or effective.
Appointed officials suffer from a similar bias in that they believe any organizational problems
are being caused by someone else internally or externally.

Step 2. Program Kick
-
Off

Initial Group Meeti
ng
. It is important to pull together

all

members of the organization
early in the process. This is an opportunity to explain what will happen and when, and to allay
any
fears that the process is meant as
either
retribution or
as
a method to purge
unproductive

or
unwanted

employees.

It provides for a common set of expectations.

Setting Ground Rules
. It is important that a set of ground rules be established and
explained to the employees. These are rules that involve behavior and process expectations
.

Employee Involvement
. Knowing what is expected and when things will happen will
alleviate a lot of the pessimism.
So will
knowing that the

employees

will be intimately involved
i
n the process and provide input during the process.

Step. 3
Data
Collection/
Assessment/
Analysis


Exi
s
ting Vision, Mission, Strategy
. This needs to be documented with the understanding
that there is both a written and unwritten sets of goals for the organization.


Human Dynamic
.

There needs to be a thorough understand
ing

of the roles and
responsibilities of
individuals, groups

and the overall

organization
al

culture
.

It is also important
to focus on the interaction between groups that work on specific processes.


Document Review
.

It is important to collect and cataloque

all policies, procedures and
other written documentation th
at

guides the organization
’s operation
.


Performance Measures
. Progress cannot be measured unless a
baseline

is first created

regarding existing processes
.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


24



Step 4.
Stakeholder Feedback


Surveys
.

Surveys are especially effective at gaining an understanding of the
organizational perceptions of
internal and external
groups of people. Such surveys can be done
by mailing or electronically. The challenge is to conduct a scientifi
cally valid survey that

reflects
a useful sample population

(Singleton, 2010)
.


Focus Groups
. These are useful for getting input from large groups of external
stakeholders. When it comes to municipal government the external stakeholders are usually
citizen activists, property ow
ners, environmentalists, and business interests like retailers and
developers
. Such groups are most effective when limited to 10
-
12 people. It is best to have both
a separate moderator and a note taker (Singleton, 2010).


Structured Interviews
. There are a
lways key individuals who are internal and external
to the organization who are better interviewed alone and not in a group. This is especially true of
the organization’s staff. They have the greatest insight into the organizations operations and
managemen
t, but may not be forthcoming in a group setting

(Singleton, 2010)
.

Step 5.
Preliminary Diagnosis


The major objectives are to understand and validate the issues and needs, identify
resistance and support, and clarify competence and commitment. So it is
a matter of asking what
is the problem, what are the causes of the problem, what is the current situation and how do
people feel about it (Rothwell, 1995).

Step 6
.
Planning Change/Designing Interventions


It is important to development the need for change,

establish a relationship between the
change agent and the client organization, and determine how to work toward the change

(Burke.
2002)
.


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


25




In terms of the actual intervention, it is important to determine how the various units and
individuals will be inv
olved. It is a matter of time and money. Some staff merely need to be
informed and other actively engaged at some level (Rothwell, 1995).

T
his is more art than
science.


Step 7.
Implementing Change
/
Action


Mapping

of

Process
es
, Procedures, Manag
e
ment

Practices
. Systems cannot be
improved until they are understood. It is often the case that the staff doesn’t really understand or
agree on the existing processes.


Reengineering Process
.

Once the current practices are understood and agreed to, then
the staff can proceed to reengineer the processes to make the
m

more efficient, cost
-
effective, less
time consuming and transparent. The major complaints from customers have to do with cost of a

process, length of time it takes and not being able to understand what i
s

wanted.

Step 8.
Restructuring Organization/Managing Change

Mixed Implementation Teams
. It is best to create teams to undertake specific areas of
the organizational change implementa
tion. It is also important to create teams from different
units and with different levels of authority. Having implementation teams of like minded
individuals can result in the same set of problems being
continued
.

Strategic Planning
.
There is a enormous b
ody of literature on this subject but here are
some

basics.
A multi
-
year action plan and budget are needed to move forward. All of the
changes needed to achieve organizational change can
not

be created immediately.

So a plan must
be established identifying what can be done in 3 months, 6 months, 12 months or in future years.
It is also important that one or more persons be assigned and held accountable for individual
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


26



actions. It
is
important to dedicate human and mo
netary resources commensurate to the
successfully completing or undertaking the task.

Step 9.
Institutionalize Change


Employee Training and Development
.

E
mployees
must be trained
in the new policies,
processes and programs.
Everyone needs to be on the sam
e page and have a common
understanding in terms of organizational expectations.

Executive Leadership Coaching
. Coaching the leadership is different

from employee
training. The leadership needs to know what the organizational change
s
are and how to motivate

and lead the change.

Bolman and Deal (1991) say that “success depends on developing the right
blueprint for the relationship between their organization’s structure and strategy, as well as on
finding

ways to get that blueprint accepted.”


Cross Functional

Training
.

Where possible and feasible, employees should be trained
to do more than one function. The fact is that employees go on vacation, get sick or take
maternity leave. Even having one employee out sick and another on a break creates a problem
when a

customer has to wait 15 minutes

to get an answer.

Customer Service Training
.

Not everyone is born with the innate ability to relate to
other people and be an active listener. Customer service training is essential to mak
e

sure that the
customer feels the employee is listening to their concerns and wants to help them. Too often an
employee’s
answer

is simply “No, you can’t do that.” There is no excuse for this. Like it or not,
there is always a process, however onerous, tha
t the customer can pursue to achieve their goal.
This may include trying to convince the elected officials to legislate a change in process

(Carson,
2004)
.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


27



Team Building
.

This is important because too often individuals in a group create
problems by not par
ticipating in decision making about a process or implementing it
consistently.
They can also be a disruptive influence if they don’t participate as part of the team.

Procedures Manual
. It is important to document exactly how the new processes work
for two
reasons. First all staff must understand the need for consistency. One of the major
complaints from citizens is the inconsistency of decision making from on
e

staff person to the
next. In fact, some customers shop staff based on the

customer’s
perception of

how a staff person
makes decisions. A manual is also important in order to train new staff on how processes work.


Establishing Performance Measures and Expectations
.

Once the reengineering is
complete, it is important to establish clear performance measures and expectations
for

all
employees. The use of a procedures manual is very important.

L
eadership
needs to
take
ownership of the organizational changes and make it
clear to both mid
-
managers and front line
employees that these changes are to be taken seriously and will be part of future performance
reviews.

Performance Appraisal
. Performance reviews are not the favorite t
ask

for any manager
to do. In many cases perfo
rmance reviews either don’t occur or they are cursory a
t best
.
Consistent and comprehensive performance reviews will result in better employee performance
and better organizational operations.

Total Quality Management
.

Attention
to quality in terms of serv
ices.

Step 10.
Maintenance

Monitoring Performance
. In Step 3 a measurement baseline was establish
ed
. The
saying is that
“What measured get
s

done.”

It is important to continually measure performance.
How often any activity gets measured depends on the circumstances. It could be daily, monthly
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


28



or annually.

Today there are numerous software packages that actually measure time spent on
specific process
tasks. This can be useful in determining if a particular step in the process is
taking too long or if a particular employee is having problem completing the task in a timely
manner and needs
further
training.


Sustaining Change
.

Working the strategic plan
is paramount. Unfortunately, most
organizations create a strategic plan and then put it on a shelf. The most effective way to
guarantee implementation is to appoint one person to manage the strategic plan. This person will
monitor action deadlines and deli
verables and
provide written
report
s

to management on a
monthly or quarterly basis. This person needs to attend all executive team meetings and report on
progress, or the lack thereof, on specific items.

This puts everyone on notice that they will be
held
accountable for their performance and that it is being documented. If what get measured
gets done, then what gets reported also gets
completed
.

Continuous Improvement
.

It is important to revisit and review processes and
procedures on an establish schedule. The work environment is constantly changing because of
technology, elections, state and federal legislation and current events. Continuing to operate
under the status

quo is a recipe for disaster.

The
Structured
Interviews

T
he emphasis of the paper
so far ha
s

been

given
to

the literature review and history of
organiza
tional development. Now the paper will provide the reader with
the opinions of the
leading academic and

practitioners in the field of organizational development

(see Appendix B)
.
E
ach interviewee

was asked
the same questions, but they were opened
-
ended

in terms of survey
research questions.
The survey questions were conducted
from
July 12
-
22, 2013


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


29



This is
the most interest
ing

part of the report because there are no boundaries
or

restrictions

on their answers
. I
t was important to
limit questions to specifics

in order to achieve a
level of both consistency and comparability
.

The

dilemma was to summarize what
they said to
me or just let quote what they said. So I de
c
i
de
d

not

to translate what they said. I
t display
s

what
they really think.

At the end of the paper,
the author
will summarize
his

thoughts about what they
said. I
t is important to
say upfront that
the paper d
o
es

not speak for them.

The following are the
email responses exactly as sent:

Lee Bolman

(July 22, 2013):

1.

Do you think that organizational development and change has been successfully
implemented in the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why n
ot?

There have been successes and failures, as in the private sector, but I don’t know
how to quantify the balance.


2.

In general, which best management practices (please choose 3
-
5) do you feel have the
most significant impact on organizational change in th
e public sector?

I don’t know how to get my head around this question.


3.

Can you give me a couple of examples of local governments that have successfully
implemented organizational development?

Sorry, but this isn’t an area where I know enough to make a
sensible answer.


4.

How important is communication with stakeholders in terms of the effective management
of public sector organizational change? What factors are most critical to effective
communication with stakeholders during the organizational change pro
cess?

It’s vital, as in other sectors. It’s essential to hear from and communicate to the
right stakeholders with the right message, and keep at it.


5.

Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead
to negative and inc
onsequential outcomes in the organizational change process?

I don’t really know how to answer this question. If you don’t communicate
enough, or if you communicate the wrong message to the wrong people, your chances of
success decline.


6.

Do you have any oth
er thoughts about the importance of communication in the public
sector organizational development process?

Probably.


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


30



7.

How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the
organizational development process?

That will depend on a

number of things, such as how quickly people see positive
results, how much people feel better or worse off as a result of the changes, how
confident people feel that they know how to be effective in the new world, etc.


8.

How do you change attitudes about
good customer service in an organization that lacks
it?

As with most of your questions, this is so broad that my mind boggles at trying to
answer it. There are many possible ways to change attitudes on this, as on just about
anything else you might want to

change. You can put people in contact with customers,
give them more information about customer experiences, train them in ways to serve
customers better, change their perceptions of what they’re rewarded for, etc.


9.

Are there any future trends in
organizational development that you feel will be of
particular importance and relevance to the public sector?

I don’t know.


David Carnevale

(July 13, 2013
)
:

Before you get too far, you need I believe to note what change is for you.

There is everything
in OD from helping just a leader for example to full system change, total transformation.

You might note that change agents can come from an internal Human Resources
Administration unit to, what I am used to, the work of an external a
gent or external team of
agents.

My experience is that there are precious few inside units facilitating change and
most often the degree of change the employer seeks almost always underestimates the
degree of change necessary to achieve organizational end
s.

It is good to note that change efforts are in the end less about techniques to realize
goals than the reality always is political and deals with power relations which being
disturbed bring forth the greatest change, and the most significant problems for

the change
agent.

"It all starts at the top" which means for me that no real change is possible without
the support of the top executive in charge. It is important that the change agent have the
visible support of the "boss."

You already raise a good poin
t that needs to be dealt with
--

sectorial differences
matter
--

dealing with a public agency as opposed to a private company are in several ways
different.

Jumping ahead I feel that communication is the essential variable affecting degree of
change and t
hat is especially true when one takes the position, as I do, that it is all about
process and process and process why communication, openness, transparency and
maintain a good public visible profile is the heart of the matter.


The first change effort cent
ers around analysis of what is, and based on that
diagnosis choosing where to start and with what techniques to bring to bear. The initial
diagnosis is to likely change as the agent goes forward but getting in, working one's way in
provides a solid feet on

the ground dimension, then going forward from there.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


31



Most important change agent skills
--

facilitation, expertise brought to bear
concerning group dynamics, and, again, political skills. In some way the agent is always
"running uphill in the agency or unit" and is alone privately in her thinking save what s
he can
share with other members of the external team of agents.

Trust is always in play. No change is possible if the agent(s) don't or can't generate
trustworthy relations inside and throughout the unit seeking OD facilitation. If they don't
trust you, l
eave, or stay in the toxic low trust atmosphere.

In the public sector, so unionized as it is, the agent needs the support of union
leaders before really engaging things. This of course is a trust problem. So, no change is
possible without union support and

it truly impossible if change ideas are generated outside
of the bargaining relationship between the parties. If a labor contract negotiations overlap
with OD initiatives, then the agent needs to be at the table observing as a neutral. Getting
welcomed is

hard since the OD agent is seen as a creature of the boss and suspicion of her
motives is always in play with the union. They will take the position that if these things are
so important why is management not bringing to the table? Why is a "consultant" b
eing used
to affect change when the bargaining process can, and should, be the focus of change
initiatives? In the City of Norman, I had OD program invited by the city manager. Three labor
contracts were being bargained at the same time I tried to enter th
e group. I had to behave
as a mediator in the labor talks if I wanted to be accepted as "an honest broker" in the OD
program. Again, public labor representing police, firefighters, teachers, and general unit
personnel is quite strong. Ignore it at your per
il.

The worst thing an OD agent can do is to concentrate at the top of the hierarchy,
which has several implications, not necessarily good, about power in the organization. Start
at the top and try to have change, the acceptance that change is necessary, c
ascade down
from the top. It is a disaster in the making. I learned the hard way in the State Department
of Health that, in the end, starting bottom up would have been better than my trying to
make acceptance by the power elite my initial goal. OD really d
emands starting with
employees down the line. Not to do that presents systemic trust problems. I learned my
les
s
on in this case, not a happy journey being wrongheaded at the outset.


Tom Cummings

(July 22, 2013):

1.

Do you think that organizational developmen
t and change has been successfully
implemented in the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why not?

Yes, Bob Golembiewski

has done reviews of public sector OD efforts and generally they
are no more or less successful than private sector OD projects. There is a fairly long history
of OD in the public sector and there is growing competence in this area both in internal and
ext
ernal OD consultants. Also, public services more and more face competition with the
private industry delivering these services; this opens the public sector to market forces which
should push it more and more to get more efficient and change itself.


2.

In ge
neral, which best management practices (please choose 3
-
5) do you feel have the most
significant impact on organizational change in the public sector?


High
-
involvement work practices; team
-
based work practices; service quality
interventions; process inter
ventions
.


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


32



3.

Can you give me a couple of examples of local governments that have successfully
implemented organizational development?

Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, which implemented strategic changes
(strategy, structure, etc.) to make it
more adaptable to changing conditions including rising
fiscal demands and more diverse public needs.


4.

How important is communication with stakeholders in terms of the effective management of
public sector organizational change? What factors are most critic
al to effective
communication with stakeholders during the organizational change process?

Participation and active engagement of multiple stakeholders is particularly essential in
the public sector; must go beyond communication to get stakeholders involved

in all stages of
the change process. Also, must account for shifting power of different stakeholders in the
public sector as the governance process changes.


5.

Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead to
negativ
e and inconsequential outcomes in the organizational change process?

Top down, one way communication; dialogue not communication
.


6.

Do you have any other thoughts about the importance of communication in the public sector
organizational development
process?

Communication needs to account for multiple, conflicting values of different
stakeholders; cannot assume shared values
.


7.

How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the
organizational development process?

By putting

in place an ongoing learning process which periodically cycles through
change
-
feedback
-
learn/adjust processes as normal part of organization functioning

8.

How do you change attitudes about good customer service in an organization that lacks it?

Strong leade
rship, explicit service goals, contingent reward practices, and training and
development.


9.

Are there any future trends in organizational development that you feel will be of particular
importance and relevance to the public sector?

Almost all the current
trends in OD (more strategic, more multiple stakeholders, more
learning by doing, etc) are relevant to public sector
.


Caryn Tilton

(July 22, 2013):

Here are my answers. Please keep in mind that 90% of my public experience is with local
government (city, c
ounty and district).

Regarding OD, I think there are huge opportunities to be had. But unfortunately, most local
governments do not have the systems in place to take advantage of these opportunities. They
continue with what is familiar avoiding the discom
fort that could inspire badly needed change.


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


33



1.

Do you think that organizational development and change has been successfully
implemented in the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why not?

No. Very few government entities have the systems, programs and/or technology in place
to take advantage of opportunities, efficiencies, and ongoing process improvements. They
have many challenges including a diverse group of stakeholders, multiple layers
of
management, politics, and governance in part by unskilled leaders.

2.

In general, which best management practices (please choose 3
-
5) do you feel have the most
significant impact on organizational change in the public sector?

The following “best manageme
nt practices”
could have

a huge impact on organizational
change in the public sector if they had the skills, knowledge and abilities to take advantage of
them:

Process Reengineering

Performance Management

Strategic Planning



3.

Can you give me a couple of ex
amples of local governments that have successfully
implemented organizational development?

Aztec, New Mexico


Strategic Planning (Mayor Sally Burbridge)

Madras, Oregon


Currently making strides in the area of Performance Management and
Strategic Planning (City Administrator, Gus Burril)

Boring Fire District


Strategic Planning (Council President Les Otto)

Sadly, due to lack of accountability, lack of lea
dership, failure to govern
appropriately, and outdated and ineffective performance management programs most
local governments are incapable of the efficiencies necessary to take advantage of OD.
Some public entities like Aztec, NM have pockets of producti
vity but in my experience (30
years), I can’t name one single public organization that successfully undertook the task to
develop all employees, the organization and the governing body to capitalize on existing
opportunities.

4.

How important is communicati
on with stakeholders in terms of the effective management of
public sector organizational change? What factors are most critical to effective
communication with stakeholders during the organizational change process?

While OD needs the support (maybe the di
rective) of the governing body, they are not the
ones who will implement the changes. I think you should communicate anticipated outcomes
to stakeholders (citizens, elected officials, special interests) and do it in a way that removes
any risk from decisio
n making that may be connected to the change. However, I think it is a
mistake to involve stakeholders with methods, tools and strategy at the organizational level.
Administration and the workforce will be the drivers of meaningful, interdisciplinary chang
e.
Effective change will most likely require culture change, behavior change, and measurable
competencies at the individual, team, department, and organizational level.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


34



5.

Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead
to
negative and inconsequential outcomes in the organizational change process?

Communication that is untrue

Communication that creates unrealistic expectations. When the expectations are not met,
trust is lost and credibility dissolves.

Communication that
is selective


passed on to a select few

Communication that is not transparent

Communication that is not complete or thorough


6.

Do you have any other thoughts about the importance of communication in the public sector
organizational development process?

Communication is the life blood of change. Thorough communication at all levels of the
organization is imperative, it is critical, and your success absolutely depends upon it.


7.

How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the

organizational development process?

Process Reengineering is the silver bullet to continuous improvement and generally
involves these steps:

Identify your customers (those who depend upon you or your team for products,
information, or services) and their
expectations

Interview key customers to rate (1. How important on a scale of 1
-
7 is this product,
information, or service to you or your team? 2. On a scale of 1
-
7 what is the
effectiveness of our delivery?

Identify the steps in your current process.

Condu
ct process analysis exercises

Redesign your process

Determine process and end result measures and data sources

Measure and continuously improve


8.

How do you change attitudes about good customer service in an organization that lacks it?

It’s as easy as
1
-
2
-
3!

Hire the best

Provide a work environment that supports individual success

De
-
hire those who don’t measure up

Every public organization should have a Customer Service Policy and Program
including customer service standards for all positions.
Employees should first learn about
customer service and what the expectations are for their contribution during their on
-
boarding. Going forward, employees should be held accountable to meeting the customer
service standards for their area and position. Li
ke other expectations, failure to meet them is
cause for progressive corrective action up to and including termination.


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


35



9.

Are there any future trends in organizational development that you feel will be of particular
importance and relevance to the public se
ctor?

No future trends that I am aware of….

Christopher Worley

(July 22, 2013):

I Should Open With A Disclaimer…I Do Not Have Much Experience In Government Od. You
Might Want To Contact Ray Patchett
…Former City Manager For The City Of Carlsbad, Ca.
Who Practices Od And Writes The Section On Od In The Public Sector For The Od Textbook
That Cummings And I Write
. Ray Patchett <patchettr@aol.com>


1.

Do you think that organizational development and change h
as been successfully implemented in
the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why not?

In General, No.

First, For All The “Transparency” About Government Affairs And Processes,
There Is A Fair Amount Of Information Hoarding


Information Is Power


And That Fundamentally
Works Against Some Of The Core Values Of The Od Process. Second, Most Governments Are
Under Cost
Pressures And Cannot (Or Will Not) Justify The Costs Of An Od Internal Function


2.

In general, which best management practices (please choose 3
-
5) do you feel have the most
significant impact on organizational change in the public sector?

Again, N
ot An Expert Here… My Best Guess


Depending On How You Define “Management
Practices” Would Be 1) Strategic Planning, 2) Process Improvement Technologies, 3) Organization
Design


3.

Can you give me a couple of examples of local governments that have
successfully implemented
organizational development?

City Of Carlsbad, Ca


See Reference To Ray Patchett Above


4.

How important is communication with stakeholders in terms of the effective management of
public sector organizational change?

Sorry, rich, this

seems like an odd question… of course it’s important. I don’t understand what
you are trying to get at.


What factors are most critical to effective communication with stakeholders during the
organizational change process?

Clarity Of Message

Timing Of

Message

The Medium (Face
-
To
-
Face, Email, Public, Private)

Level Of Trust Between The Parties


5.

Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead to
negative and inconsequential outcomes in the organizational change proc
ess?


Blast Email


6.

Do you have any other thoughts about the importance of communication in the public sector
organizational development process?


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


36




7.

How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the
organizational development
process?

Rich, i’m struggling here. First, the question assumes that things will be sustained. In a world
that is changing faster and faster, i find the notion of
institutionalizing

change (refreezing) an almost silly
idea. Second, there are a ton of conti
nuous improvement methodologies


six sigma, total quality
management, lean, and so on that would work fine. I’m still not understanding what you are looking for.


8. How do you change attitudes about good customer service in an organization that lacks it?

Whose attitudes? The workers? The public’s?

There is a whole literature on attitude change in social psychology… my own approach would be based
on a combination of social learning theory and socio
-
technical work design.


9. Are there any future trends in
organizational development that you feel will be of particular
importance and relevance to the public sector?

I would go to ray’s section in the od text… i think he does a good job describing the
current state of the field in public sector organizations.


Organizational Development Trends

The need for organizational development evolves with societal change. The following
trends and potential issues are ones identified through the literature review, structured interviews
and discussions with colleagues.
Thes
e observations were put forward by Cummings
and
Worley
(2005).

Global,
C
ultural
I
nterdependencies

The globalization of politics means that organizations must become more sensitive to
ethnic and cultural difference when it comes to communication and
interactions. Knowing about
your counterpart is extremely important in order to make sure that understanding is not lost in
translation.

Ecological
Awareness

Society is becoming more aware of the human impact on the environment. Government
institutions are

specifically charged with taking a leadership role in addressing climate change,
resource conservation, recycling. The organizational development practitioner needs to keep
pace with such issues.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


37



Social
J
ustice

and
R
esponsibility


There is a growing desir
e on the part of employees to contribute more to society than just
their daily labor. Some organizations encourage and financial support community action and
participation by their employees.

Age,
G
ender,
L
ifestyle

and

E
thnicity

The workforce is aging and
there will be more retirees. This require
s

a succession
strategy component.

There are also changing lifestyle expectations by the incoming younger
generation and the outgoing older generation to consider. The population is experiencing a
growing ethnic mix

and minorities are becoming the new majority.

U
nderstanding cultural
expectations and traditions of the minority groups is important.

Technological Change


The speed of technological change

and improvements

is accelerating. We have moved
from type writers, to punch cards, to personal computers, to lap tops, smart phones and tablets.
There is no way of knowing what will come next, but it will come. This also has a generational
impact when it comes to employee
s and their acceptance of new technology in the organization.

Employee
E
xpectations


There is a trend toward creating new and innovative employee reward systems beyond merit
pay. Employees are begin
ning

to expect more non
-
monetary personal fulfillment.

New

Economy

The new economy is characterized by layoffs, downsizing, mergers and acquisitions. This
leads to people working p
art
-
time, unemployed

or

underemployed
. This means that
organizational development must now take into account these impacts on the organization.

Improve
E
mployee
H
ealth

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


38




More and more employees expect on
-
site facilities to keep healthy. This is also a concern
for employers who want to reduce
the health care costs.

Systems Integration

There is an increasing trend toward integrating administrative, human and technological
systems that the practitioner needs to keep pace with.

Best Practice

Solution

Given the changing organizational trends, it is

difficult for organizational development
professionals to keep pace with the need for information

and cutting edge solutions
. One
answer

is to first conduct a situational analysis and then create teams of professionals who understand
the separate and spec
ific issues that need to be addressed. For example, if an organization has a
large ethnic group involved, then someone with experience working with such a group would be
extremely useful.

So the future of organizational development is that it will become m
ore
interdisciplinary.

Summary

This paper began with the premise that
the research thinking
and
the conclusions would
be based on the literature review. However, the structured interviews we
re

the
very

insightful.
These are consulting and academic professionals on the cutting edge of the new world of public
sector organizational development.

So they became the academic heart of
the

paper.



Organizational development in the public sector has its roots g
oing back
centuries. However, the modern day field of organizational development is only starting to
impact the public sector organizations like municipal corporations. Part of the problem is that
they are considered rule
-
bound. But many, if not most, of t
he procedures are simply historical
antecedents and not organizationally logical in terms of performance.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


39



As a 30
-
year government manager and a current doctorate student in organizational
development, I struggle with the reality th
at

municipal governments
are regulatory machines that
grind on daily without ever questioning what they are doing. Reality is that the management of
municipal governments change on four
-
year elections cycles. The staff does not.

So the challenge of public administration is the
theoretical fire
-
wall between public
policy by elected officials and public management by appointed officials does not exist at the
municipal corporation level. The opportunity for long
-
term organizational change and
development is often challenging at bes
t.


I have provided a 10
-
step plan for long term organizational development and
change. The challenge is to find political leadership to implement it over time. That will be
difficult depending on the situational analysis of any municipal corporation. It i
s often said that
you get what you pay for. In local government, you get who you elect. So the question goes back
to my doctorate thesis. The question is

Do m
unicipal corporations that

effectively

communicate
with their stakeholders better manage organizational change
?



I believe the answer is yes.


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


40



Appendix A

Structured Interviews

Introduction Script

Thank you for taking the time to answer a few questions about public sector organizational
development. I have 10 questions and this will probably only take about 15 minutes.

Please note
that all answers are confidential and I will not be

attributing answers to anyone I interview.

Inte
rview Questions

1.


Do you think that organizational developm
ent and change has been successfully
implemented in the public sector? If yes, why? If not, why not?

2.


In general, which best management practices (please choose 3
-
5) do you feel have the most
significant impact on organizational change in the public sec
tor?

3.

Can you give me a couple of examples of local governments that have successfully
implemented organizational development?

4.


How important is communication with stakeholders in terms of the effective management of
public sector organizational chan
ge? What factors are most critical to effective
communication with stakeholders during the organizational change process?

5.


Are there any communication approaches you would caution against using that could lead to
negative and inconsequential outcomes in

the organizational change process?

6.

Do you have any other thoughts about the importance of communication in the public sector
organizational development process?

7.

How does an organization sustain continuous improvement after going through the
organizational development process?

8.

How do you change attitudes about good customer service in an organization that lacks it?

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


41



9
.

Are there any future trends in organizational development that you feel will be of particular
importance and relevance to th
e public sector?



ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


42



Appendix B

Dr. Lee G. Bolman,

University of Missouri
-

Kansas City
, Bloch School of
Management
. Author

of
Reframing Organizations
: Artistry, Choice and Leadership
.

Education:
Yale University, Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior and Yale Law School.


Dr. David G. Carnevale
, Florida State University.
Education:
Ph.D. in public
administration from Florida State University.
Author of
Organizational Development in the
Public Sector
.
Professor Carnevale has served as the Samuel Roberts Noble Presidential
Professor at the University of Oklahoma, where he is currently a Professor of Human Relations
and Political Science.

Dr. Thomas G. Cummings
, University of Southern Calif
ornia.
Co
-
author of
Organization Development and Change
.
Thomas G. Cummings,
is

chair of the Department of
Management and Organization

and

executive director of the Leadership Institute
. Education:

MBA from Cornell University and Ph.D. socio
-
technical systems University of California at Los
Angeles.

Caryn
A.
Tilton
. Caryn is President of CT Consulting and
has owned and operated CT
Consulting since 1984 providing programs and supporting services

in management consulting,
organizational development
,
employee training
,
board development, strategic planning,
performance management, executive coaching, and process re
-
engineering.

Dr. Christopher G. Worley
, Pepperdine University. Dr. Worley consults w
ith
organizations

in the health care, high technology, and natural resource industries on strategy and
organization design. He is the co
-
author of
Organization Development and Change
, the largest
selling textbook in the field of organization development.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


43



Attachment C



Richard H. Carson

12920 NE 227
th

Avenue

Brush Prairie, WA 98606

Phone:

(360) 635
-
8161

Email:

richcarson@Q.com

Internet
:

www.richcarson.org




June 25, 2013



To:


My name is Richard Carson and I am a doctoral student at Washington State University. I am currently
working on a research paper in preparation for my dissertation.

The goal of the
dissertation
is
to
construct a framework that local governments can
apply
to
better
manag
e the process of
organizational change. It will provide a qualitative road map by which to achieve
the desired organizational
change
s

and a quantitative process to measure and monitor
the results of these
changes
.

The research question

I am
pursuing is
,

Does the effectiveness of public agencies, in
communicating and managing relationships with internal and external stakeholders, increase the
likelihood of successfully managing organizational change?


My personal interest in this topic is bot
h professional and academic. I have spent 30 years
working at the city, county and state government level in Alaska, California, Oregon, Utah and
Washington. Most of this time was spent as a top level government manager. For the last five years I have
work
ed as a consultant, helping local governments create organizational change that leads to greater
efficiencies and communication.

As part of my research, I would like to conduct several structured interviews with academic, non
-
profit and for
-
profit professi
onals who are working in the field of public sector organizational
development. In light of your experience and insight in this field, I would like to be able to interview you
if you are available. The interview consists of 10 questions and I expect the ti
me commitment will be 15
-
20 minutes. The interviews can be done in one of two ways. I can arrange to call you at your convenience
and ask you the questions. I can also send you the questions by email and you can return your responses
to me by email.

I woul
d like to schedule my interview with you before July 12th. I will email you the questions in
advance. You can also return the email questionnaire back by July 12
th
. Thank you in advance for your
time and consideration and I look forward to hearing back fro
m you.


Sincerely,




Richard H. Carson


ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


44



References


Allen, J., Jimmieson, N., Bordia, P., Irmer, B (2007). Uncertainty during Organizational Change:
Managing Perceptions through Communications.
Journal of Change Management
.
7
, 187
-
210.

Bolman
, L., Deal, T. (2001). Reframing Organizations. Artistry, Choice and Leadership. Josey
-
Bass,
San Francisco, CA. 434.

Burke, W. (2002).
Organization Change: Theory and Practice
. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

19
-
20, 21
-
26.

Carnevale, D. (2005).
Organ
izational Development in the Public Sector
. Boulder, CO: Westview
Press.

1
-
2, 21
-
26.

Carr, D., Littman, I., Condon, J. (1995).
Improvement Driven Government: Public Service for the
21
st

Century
. Washington, D.C.: Coopers and Lybrand.

42

Carson, R., (December 2004). Changing the Culture of “NO”,
Planning
,
70
,16
-
19.

Carter, L., Girber, D., Goldsmith, M. (2001).
Best Practices in Organizational Development and
Change
. San Francisco, CA: Jossey
-
Bass/Pfeiffer.

xii
-
xiii.

Child, John

(2005).
Org
anization
:

Contemporary Principles and Practice
,
Hoboken, NJ, Blackwell
Publishing, 292.

Cleary, T. (1988).
The Art of War
. Boston, MA. Shambala Publications. 2.

Cummings, T., Worley, C. (2005).
Organization Development & Change
.

Mason, OH: Thomson
-
Southwestern
,
6
-
7,

13,

91, 114
-
131,320, 597
-
602, 611
-
625,

661
-
670.

Darwin, C. (1859).
On the Origin of Species
. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

http://www.iveybusinessjournal.com/topics/strategy/adapt
-
or
-
die

Fernandez, S.,
Rainey, H. (2006 April
-
March). Managing Successful Organizational Change in the
Public Sector.
Public Administration Review
. 168
-
176.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


45



Foxworthy, S., Bingham, L. (2013 Jan/Feb/March). Open Government 2.0


Creating a Model for
Transparency in Government.
PA

Times
.
3
.

3,
27

French, W., Bell Jr., C. (1999).
Organization Development: Behavioral Science Interventions for
Organization Improvement
(6
th

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

46
-
48.

Ho, A. (2002 July/August). Reinventing Local Government and t
he E
-
Government Initiative.
Public
Administration Review
.
62
, 434
-
444
.


Howard, C. (2013 Jan/Feb/March). Enhancing Transparency through an Integrated Performance and
Change Management Process. 14
-
15

Kavanaugh, A., Fox, E., Sheetz, S., et al. (2012 October)
. Social media use by government: From the
routine to the critical.
Government Information Quarterly
.
29
,
34,
480
-
491.

Kuhn, T., Corman, S. (2003, September).The Emergence of Homogeneity and Hetergenity in
Knowledge Structures During a Planned Organization
al Change.
Communications Monographs
.
198
-
229.

Osborne, D., Gaebler, T. (1993).
Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is
Transforming the Public Sector
. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

3.

Marriot, W. (1992). Niccolo Machievelli


The Prince
.
New York, NY. Random House, 47.

Peters, T., Waterman, R. (1982).
In Search of Excellence
. Harper and Row. New York, NY. 12,121
-
122.

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2010, April 18).
The People and Their
Government: Distrust, Discontent, Anger and Partisan
Rancor.
Retrieved from
www.people
-
press.org

on March 14, 2013.

13,15, 19.

PytlikZillig, L., Tomkins, A., Herian, M. et al. (2012). Public
input methods impacting confidence in
government.
Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy. 6
, 92
-
111.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


46



Rothwell, W., Sullivan, R., McLean, G. (1995).
Practicing Organization Development
. San Diego,
CA: Pfeiffer and Company.

14
-
18, 23.

Rowe, G.,
Frewer, L. (2000 Winter). Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation.
Science Technology Human Values
.
25
, 3
-
29.

Shaw, G.

Pygmalion
, (1916).

Singleton, R., Straits, B. (2005)
Approaches to Social Research

(5
th

ed.)
.

New York, NY, 2010,
Oxford University Press, 325, 309
-
353.

Tompkins, A., Zillig, L., Herian, M., Abdel
-
Monem, T., (2010, May 1). Public Input for Municipal
Policy Making: Engagement Methods and Their Impact on Trust and Confidence.
Public Policy
Commons.
41
-
50.

United Nations Development Programme (2006 November).
Multi
-
Stakeholder Engagement
Processes.

Conference Paper #7.

4.

Walton, M. (1986). The Deming Management Method. Putnam Publishing. New York, NY. __, __

Welch, E. (2012 March). The relationship b
etween transparent and participative government: A
study of local governments in the United States.
International Review of Administrative Services
.
23,
93
-
115.

Wilson, W. (1887),
The Study of Administration
,
Political Science Quarterly
,___.



ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


47



References

(reviewed but not cited)

Barnes, C. (2000 Autumn). Information and Communication Technologies: assessing public attitude
and local government resolve.
Public Policy and Administration
.
15
, 20
-
31.

Bryson, J. (1988).
Strategic Planning for Public and
Nonprofit Organizations
. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey
-
Bass Publishers.

Chadwick, A. (2006
). Internet Politics. States, citizens, and New Communication Technologies.

New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Coleman, B. (2013, March 7).
Old ways of local governme
nt communication not enough in today’s
society
. State and Local Connection. SAS Software.
http://blogs.sas.com/content/statelocalgov/2013/02/15/

David, F. (1991).
Strategic Management
(3
rd

ed.). New York, NY. Macmillan Publishing.

Hahn, D. Dudley, P. (2004
) How Well Does Government do Cost Benefit Analysis?
AEI
-
Brookings
Joint Center Working Paper No. 04
-
01.

Lerner, A., Wanat, J. (1992).
Public Administration: A Realistic Reinterpretation of Contemporary
Public Management
. Edgewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice
-
Hall
.

Miller, K. (2011).
Organizational Communication: Approaches and Processes
(6
th

ed.). Belmont,
CA: Thomson
-
Wadsworth.

Morgan, G. (1997).
Images of Organizations
(2
nd

ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage Publications.

Nutt, P., Backoff, R. (1992).
Strategic Manag
ement of Public and Third Sector Organizations
. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey
-
Bass Publishers.

Perrow, C. (1986).
Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay
(3
rd

ed.). New York, NY. McGraw
-
Hill.

Prachett, L. (1999, December 22). New Technologies and the Moderniza
tion of Local Government:
An Analysis of Biases and Constraints.
Public Administration
.
77
, 731
-
751.

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


48



Steiner, G. (1979). Strategic Planning. What Every Manager Must Know. New York, NY. The Free
Press (Macmillan Publishing).

Taleb, N. (2010).
The Black Swan
: The Impact of the Highly Improbable

(2
nd

Ed). New York, NY.
Random House.

Tushman, M., O’Reilly III, C., (2002).
Winning Through Innovation: A Practical Guide to Leading
Organizational Change and Renewal
. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

United States Census Bureau (2010).
City and County Data Book
. Washington, D.C.

Wohler, T. (2008). E
-
Government: Trends and Sophistication at the Local Level of Government.
Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics.6,
49
-
55.

Wong, W.,Welch, E. (2004, April).
Does E
-
Government Promote Accountability? A Comparative
Analysis of Website Openness and Government Accountability.
Governance, 17
, 275
-
297.




i

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

ii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

iii

Prothman Associated, City of SeaTac
-

2010

iv

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

v

Citygate

Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

vi

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

vii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

viii

Management Partners, City of SeaTac
-

2007

ix

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

x

Bruce McClendon, Mastering
Change
-

1972

xi

Paul Zucker, The ABZs of Planning Management
-

1983

xii

Richard Carson, Tips for Planning Agency Managers
-

2009

xiii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xiv

Elaine Cogan, Successful Public Meetings
-

1992

xv

Paul Zucker, City and Borough

of Juneau
-

2009

xvi

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xvii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xviii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xix

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xx

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

200
8

xxi

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxiii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-
2008

xxiv

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxv

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxvi

Citygate

Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxvii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxviii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxix

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxx

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxxi

Citygate Associates, Sac
ramento County
-

2008

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC
SECTOR


49









xxxii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxxiii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxxiv

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxxv

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxxvi

Citygate

Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxxvii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxxviii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xxxix

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xl

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008

xli

Citygate Associates, Sac
ramento County
-

2008

xlii

Citygate Associates, Sacramento County
-

2008