This lesson explores the following three models for organizational diagnosis: force field analysis, Leavitt's model, and McKinsey's 7-S framework for organizational analysis. Activities for this lesson will help you understand the models effectively and explore their application. A few examples are provided so that you can apply similar steps for other diagnostic models.
Lesson Objectives
After successfully completing this lesson, you should be able to do the following:
conduct a force field analysis by assessing driving forces and restrain forces;
describe the four elements in the Leavitt’s diamond model and explain how to apply them in organizational diagnosis; and
apply the McKinsey 7S framework for organizational diagnosis from the perspective of OD.
Lesson Readings & Activities
By the end of this lesson, make sure you have completed the readings and activities found in the Lesson 4 Course Schedule.
Organizational Diagnosis Model 1: Force Field Analysis (1951) (2 of 6)
Organizational Diagnosis Model 1: Force Field Analysis (1951)
Organizational Diagnosis Model 1: Force Field Analysis (1951)
Kurt Lewin developed the force field analysis model in 1951 to effectively diagnose organizations in the change context.
Using force field analysis, it becomes easier to understand the current situation and desired future.
Identifying driving forces and restraining forces for a current state helps one understand what prompts the need for change.
Figure 4.1. Force field analysis.
Force Field Analysis Process
The following are steps to follow when conducting a force field analysis:
Begin by clearly defining the current state. This is important, as it serves as a target for the analysis.
Examine the driving (helping) forces and the restraining (hindering) forces for the current state.
Compare the two different forces, prioritize their impact, and develop a goal after this analysis.
Determine what, if any, sub-goals should be included. Driving forces can be strengthened by setting sub-goals that maintain or intensify them. Likewise, restraining forces can be avoided by making up for them. For example, if a restraining force was a lack of communication, a goal would be to facilitate communication.
Once goals are identified, the final step is to develop strategies that minimize restraining forces and increase driving forces.
Again, OD practitioners facilitate the analysis process so that a maximum level of employee input is gathered, a consensus is reached, and strategies are developed by the members of the client group.
Video: Using the Force Field Analysis
This video clip is about how to use force field analysis, with an example of sales employees' performance issues.
Using the Force Field Analysis
Organizational Diagnosis Model 2: Leavitt's Diamond Model (1965) (3 of 6)
Organizational Diagnosis Model 2: Leavitt's Diamond Model (1965)
Organizational Diagnosis Model 2: Leavitt's Diamond Model (1965)
Compared to the force field analysis model, Leavitt's model specifies four important variables to assess within organizations rather than driving and hindering forces to the current state.
These variables include task, structure, technological, and human variables. They are further explained below:
Task variables refer to activities that employees are expected to perform in order to deliver products and services.
Structure variables refer to any structure (organizational chart, communication norm, work process, etc.) that employees are expected to follow within the organization.
Technological variables refer to all tools, machines, and equipment that support employees' tasks.
Human variables refer to the people who implement the tasks that are relevant to the organization's goals.
The arrows in the model indicate the nature of interdependence among the variables. For example, if a new task is defined, an organization must find a suitable person for the task and provide tools to carry out the task (technology). In some cases, introducing a significant technology may prompt the organization to adjust its workflow (structure).
Figure 4.2: Leavitt's diamond model.
In the model itself, environmental factors, inputs, and outputs are not considered (unlike other open systems models).
This model operates similar to the Nadler-Tushman congruence model, which you will learn about in the next lesson.
When applying this model in organizational diagnosis, it is essential to examine changes in each element and their impact on other variables.
Vadi, M., & Roots, H. (2004). The Estonian Organization—The Subjects of Transformation. Centre for the Study of Economic & Social Change Europe.
A Case Applying Leavitt's Model (4 of 6)
A Case Applying Leavitt's Model
A Case Applying Leavitt's Model
The following is an example of an OD project that employed the Leavitt model to a Moroccan hotel. The purpose of the project was to conduct an organizational diagnosis to understand the different factors (internal or external) affecting the organization's performance, assess their impacts, and identify approaches or models that would help the organization develop appropriate and innovative plans for the future. To do so, an external OD consultant first gained access to the hotel and reached a consensus regarding the change effort; top management was on board and allowed the HR department to collaborate with the consultant as a change team.
Before beginning the organizational diagnosis, the consultant introduced the change team to different diagnostic models so that they could identify a best-fitting model. As a result, they reached a consensus to use Leavitt's model for diagnosis. It is important to note that they integrated the PESTEL analysis into the Leavitt mode in order to include environmental effects on the business in the diagnosis. (To learn more about the PESTEL analysis, see Lesson 12.)
After identifying the model, they examined the four key elements of the model carefully, and the consultant facilitated the process of developing interview questions with the intent to identify a gap between the desired status and the current status of the hotel. Please read the questions below carefully and determine which are relevant to the current state and which are relevant to the desired state.
Interview Questions
Tasks
What are the deliverables (services and products) that your unit/team/department is required to provide? How do you deliver them?
How do your tasks affect the performance of the organization?
What would you like to change about your current tasks and duties?
What kinds of resources do you need to perform your assigned tasks? How do you get them? How would you like to get those resources in the future?
Structure
How do you operate within your unit/team/department? How do you communicate with coworkers? What kinds of changes are needed?
How is the organization currently structured? How would you describe an ideal hierarchy within your organization?
How are decisions made in your unit/team/department? In the organization? What impact do they have on the organization's performance?
What kinds of changes would you like to see in the decision making process?
Technology
What types of machines and equipment do you need for your job? How necessary are they for your organization's performance?
What equipment do you think will need to be changed or removed in the future?
In what way do you think technology helps the organization and you? What about in the future?
People/HR
How would you describe the current arrangement of the human capital within your organization? What changes do you think are necessary?
What kinds of activities are conducted within your organization to enhance your performance or improve working conditions? What improvements do you think need to be implemented?
How do these actions influence your organization's performance?
What other factors affect your performance and the organization's?
The change team conducted series of interviews after the consultant ran a short training. After collecting answers, the team identified the gaps between the desired and current states of the hotel. Furthermore, the congruence among the four elements was examined in order to identify additional needs.
Vadi, M., & Roots, H. (2004). The Estonian Organization—The Subjects of Transformation. Centre for the Study of Economic & Social Change Europe.
Organizational Diagnosis Model 3: McKinsey 7-S Framework (1982) (5 of 6)
Organizational Diagnosis Model 3: McKinsey 7-S Framework (1982)
Organizational Diagnosis Model 3: McKinsey 7-S Framework (1982)
The 7-S framework was developed in the late 1970s by McKinsey & Company and published in book format in 1982, generating a lot of interest among consultants and business people. It is still used today.
The 7-S framework examines the elements that give a holistic understanding of an organization, including
strategy, a course of anticipated actions that allow an organization to achieve a competitive advantage;
structure, the way in which tasks or chains of command are distributed;
systems, which support the structure's effective functioning (for example, a performance management system allows management to ensure that outcomes are delivered in a quality manner);
skills, or the individual and institutional skills within the organization;
style (sometimes referred to as organizational culture), the way in which work is done in the organization;
staff, the employees in the organization; and
shared values, or what the organization is exerting to achieve. Shared values represent the essence of what the members in the organization believe.
When comparing the 7-S model with Leavitt's model, you will notice that most of the models' elements overlap, though the 7-S model addresses more elements from a strategic perspective. Both models emphasize the congruence among elements.
McKinsey is one of the representative management consulting companies that take the doctor–patient approach, collecting and analyzing organizational data without empowering the organization's members. However, when collecting and analyzing data using the 7-S model, OD practitioners should be sure to engage the organization's members as both participants and researchers who can draw meaningful conclusions from the data.
Figure 4.3. The 7-S framework.
See Dwyer and Mellor (1991) for a sample application of the 7-S model. Please keep in mind that this model should be applied differently in OD than management consulting.
Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H., Jr. (1982). In search of excellence: Lessons from America's best-run companies. Harper & Row.
Lesson Activities (6 of 6)
Lesson Activities
Lesson Activities
Lesson 4 Force Field Analysis Discussion
Overview
Kurt Lewin developed the force field analysis model in 1951 to effectively diagnose organizations in the change. This discussion requires you to conduct a force field analysis by assessing driving forces and restrain forces.
Instructions
Conduct a force field analysis on the implementation of a new technology that enables employees to be more productive (online performance tracking system, virtual office, collaborative project management system, cloud storage, etc.).
To perform the analysis, list the forces favoring and impeding this change.
To improve the efficacy of the change, either strengthen the forces favoring it or weaken the forces impeding it (which may be more advisable).
Respond to at least two postings from your peers.
Posting Timelines
Day
Task
Monday–Thursday
Post initial reply.
Friday–Sunday
Review fellow learners' posts and respond to at least two.
Additional Requirements
Limit your post to 600 words in length.
Lesson 4 Group Discussion on McKinsey's 7-S Model (Group Work)
Overview
The 7-S framework examines the elements that give a holistic understanding of an organization. These include:
strategy, a course of anticipated actions that allow an organization to achieve a competitive advantage;
structure, the way in which tasks or chains of command are distributed;
systems, which support the structure's effective functioning (for example, a performance management system allows management to ensure that outcomes are delivered in a quality manner);
skills, or the individual and institutional skills within the organization;
style (sometimes referred to as organizational culture), the way in which work is done in the organization;
staff, the employees in the organization; and
shared values, or what the organization is exerting to achieve. Shared values represent the essence of what the members in the organization believe.
Your team will work together to develop one submission. Please, engage in discussion and planning throughout the week as a group to complete this assignment.
Since this is a team assignment it is important to ensure you discuss this together in this group discussion space and that everyone's perspective is included in the deliverable.
Instructions
Ensure you reviewed all of the content for this lesson and based on your understanding of McKinsey's 7-S model for organizational diagnosis, please develop the following:
a list of information to collect in order to understand the variables in each of the seven dimensions and
a list of questions that you would like to ask to see how changes in one variable affect the others.
Deliverable
The final document should be posted by one member of your team (due Sunday).
