Client Articles: Beyond Teams
Contrasting Organization Development And Transformation by: Max Elden
One thing that is special about the Magma model is its difference from other models of planned change that organization development tends to rely on. This does not mean that one model is good and another bad. A model is not right or wrong as much as it is more or less useful for a particular purpose. We should also note that these three, different responses to the need for change that we have postulated are not mutually exclusive. But the Magma model of invention contrasts sharply to the conventional rational model in at least three significant ways. First, goal thinking is very different than possibility thinking when considering alternative futures. Both share a purpose of impacting on what will occur, but the goal thinking and languaging emphasizes "optimal" or reasonable challenge. Too little challenge does not provide sufficient stimulation. Too much challenge turns people off. The main assumption here is that people will not work hard to achieve a vaguely defined future state that appears to be unattainable through reasonable effort. The possibility model makes the opposite assumption. It starts with commitment to unreasonable aspirations.
Second, in the rational model, one is committed to a particular plan. It is a calculative, reasonable agreement to act made after one is clear about how one is to get the job done. Commitment to act in the Magma model occurs much earlier in the process before (or even in the absence of) any rational plan. The commitment is beyond rational calculation: it is a "leap of faith." It calls forth other, additional energies and action possibilities compared to the rational model.
Third, the barriers to progress, and what dealing with them leads to, are very different in the two models. In the rational model the assumption is that one implements the plan on a direct path toward the goal. Difficulties that arise underway are the exception-they should not occur if the plan is any good. They are classed as problems to be solved and dealt with so that progress according to the plan can continue (See Figure 3 with the dotted line looping through problem solving [the exception] and the solid line from implementation and assessment to results). In Magma's invention model breakdowns are expected, even sought after. After all, a leap of faith combined with a strategy of "aim, fire, ready" should naturally lead to breaks in the action. What else should one expect without a rational plan? These breaks in the action are useful. They function as a diagnostic. They help identify barriers that indicate what needs to be changed if one is to realize possibility. Encountering one leads back to commitment (see Figure 3) and another round of invention.
In short, in the Magma model you expect things to get much worse before they get better. A phase of chaos is part of the act of creation. To cope with this requires more than rational commitment and thinking only of one's own self-interest. People at Magma have begun to aspire to creating together new ways of working that make sense to them at the same time that they improve business performance.
Introduction
Magma-A: Part I
Magma-A: Part II
Research Issues & Designs
Findings: Generating A Culture of Invention
Invention As A Practice Theory For Organizational Transformation
Contrasting Organization Development And Transformation
Summary, Acknowlegements And References
Second, in the rational model, one is committed to a particular plan. It is a calculative, reasonable agreement to act made after one is clear about how one is to get the job done. Commitment to act in the Magma model occurs much earlier in the process before (or even in the absence of) any rational plan. The commitment is beyond rational calculation: it is a "leap of faith." It calls forth other, additional energies and action possibilities compared to the rational model.
Third, the barriers to progress, and what dealing with them leads to, are very different in the two models. In the rational model the assumption is that one implements the plan on a direct path toward the goal. Difficulties that arise underway are the exception-they should not occur if the plan is any good. They are classed as problems to be solved and dealt with so that progress according to the plan can continue (See Figure 3 with the dotted line looping through problem solving [the exception] and the solid line from implementation and assessment to results). In Magma's invention model breakdowns are expected, even sought after. After all, a leap of faith combined with a strategy of "aim, fire, ready" should naturally lead to breaks in the action. What else should one expect without a rational plan? These breaks in the action are useful. They function as a diagnostic. They help identify barriers that indicate what needs to be changed if one is to realize possibility. Encountering one leads back to commitment (see Figure 3) and another round of invention.
In short, in the Magma model you expect things to get much worse before they get better. A phase of chaos is part of the act of creation. To cope with this requires more than rational commitment and thinking only of one's own self-interest. People at Magma have begun to aspire to creating together new ways of working that make sense to them at the same time that they improve business performance.
Introduction
Magma-A: Part I
Magma-A: Part II
Research Issues & Designs
Findings: Generating A Culture of Invention
Invention As A Practice Theory For Organizational Transformation
Contrasting Organization Development And Transformation
Summary, Acknowlegements And References