An interesting exchange ensued among OD consultants with whom I associate. If we are shareholders of a company (not the company with whom we are consulting, of course), when we advocate change, can we live with the manner in which the change is implemented?
<br> <p><font size="2">An interesting exchange ensued among OD consultants with whom I associate. If we are shareholders of a company (not the company with whom we are consulting, of course), when we advocate change, can we live with the manner in which the change is implemented?<br>
<br>
My caveat about not being a shareholder in the company with whom we consult is an "of course" because such a relationship is fraught with the potential to be perceived as a conflict of interest or an ethics violation. Notice I said potential and perceived. Neither term means "is" or "reality", yet we, as Organizational Development consultants entrusted with an organization´s proprietary information, must avoid even the perception of impropriety.<br>
<br>
That said, I go back to considering whether we can live with the manner in which the very change we recommend is implemented. As OD consultants, we may advocate change that management implements by eliminating departments, distributing business elsewhere, and getting rid of people. Our training in theories and processes enable us to view people as resources to be managed-one way or another. By the way, our same training-plus our humanness-also causes us to consider the human impact of the change we recommend and temper management actions accordingly. Yet, the ultimate change implementation is carried out because of, or in spite of, our recommendations.<br>
<br>
The economic irony of change that includes losing people is that when more people are employed, there is more "production". I place this word in quotes today because production means far more than goods (which was its limited definition during the industrial period in<br>
the USA). Production today may include goods, services, knowledge tools, and any other value-based "products". </font></p>
<p><font size="2">Anyway, with more production, people are more efficient. Profits are greater. Employers are better off. Higher profits may lead to more investment. More investment leads to more production. (Simplified, from:<br>
<a target="_blank" href="http://william-king.www.drexel.edu/top/eco/EPE/coord/Chapter30.pdf">http://william-king.www.drexel.edu/top/eco/EPE/coord/Chapter30.pdf</a> ? among other Economics 101 sources.) As stakeholders, we care about profits. (Again, an over-simplification.)<br>
<br>
The exchange among consultants resulted in more "Mmmm, something to think about"s than answers. For each individual, the answer is unique and personal. The question gives one pause for thought and introspection. It also makes us examine our values and intent when we engage in the consultation process. Examining values and intent is a good thing for anyone to do.<br>
Sylvia<br>
</font></p>
