I have a severe addiction. I read the Economist weekly. I have been doing so for decades. In the October 25th 2014 edition, Schumpeter writes: “The best way to understand a system is to look at it from the point of view of people who want to subvert it.” (page 63)
During my 9 kilometre walk today, I thought how useful this sentence is for those of us who deal with change, be it as OD consultant or as change manager.
In the last decade, the powers that be have tried to enlist the change professions to serve as Vaseline to force the wrong changes, such as reorganization number 3 in as many years. Or an employee engagement project in a government bureaucracy. Or implementing a “customer intimacy program” in a organization governed by a dictatorial IT process.
Generally , “Change Management” prepares a deck of 70 slides to explain how any change can be managed, so clearly they are blind to what Schumpeter suggests. On the other hand, professional OD looks at any change via the lense of “why won’t this work”. Hence OD’s value-the underlying dynamic!
And when management insists on implementing silly plans whilst HR wow wows and kowtows to the system, the OD consultant must stand his/her ground. The ensuing dialogue between what management wants to happen, and the perspective of possible subversion, is the very heart of the OD dialogue.
Furthermore, the wow wow HR cheer leading and the OD perspective is the source of the tension between the professions.
And once again, there is nothing like the Economist. It is proof positive that there is still a brand of journalism that is non sensationalist.
Follow me @AllonShevat
Dear subscribers, In order to clean up the spam, all blog subscriptions were deleted and a new subscription system installed. Please re register on the right side, or below and sorry for the trouble.