A Look Into the Future: The 2020 Organization. Table Of Contents

(1)

A Look Into the Future:

The 2020 Organization

by John E. Jones, Organizational Universe Systems,

and Robin Reid, Reid Moomaugh & Associates

The Need to Future

The clock is ticking on the twentieth century, and before you can figure out exactly when the next one begins, we will be there. OD practitioners need to anticipate the future in order to prepare for it. OD is not, of course, values free. As

practitioners we advocate certain values, and we "sell" certain processes. This means that as we approach the future we are actively promoting sets of beliefs and valuable conditions. In addition, we attempt to influence leaders toward certain outcomes. Facilitating organizational change is a form of strategic shaping. If we wait to see what happens," we are more vulnerable than if we adopt an active posture in determining how we want the future to affect us and our clients.

One difficulty in knowing the future is separating our needs, wants, wishes, and fears from our best guess opinions. Each of us is subject to commingling our personal psychologies with our assumptions about what will be. A way to correct this tendency is to compare our points of view with others and to be influenced in the process. This paper reports an attempt to pool the judgments of forward thinking individuals who are actively involved in facilitating organizational change, as they predict the probable characteristics of standard setting organizations in the year 2020. The methods and results have special implications for OD practitioners as we think through what it will take for us to be resourceful to leaders in creating organizational futures.

The old saying, "Hindsight is always 2020," provided the basis for establishing the target for this forecasting. We wanted to promote a kind of "2020 foresight" through the use of each other as sources of both stimulation and realism.

(2)

The Delphi Adaptation

The "classic" Delphi approach is a procedure for gathering the judgments of "experts" on a given subject, usually a large number of people who are geographically dispersed. The panel is polled in a freeform format regarding the subject of interest, and a questionnaire is developed to capture their initial opinions. The panel is then surveyed, and the results are fed back, along with the individual's original ratings. The panel is asked to use the information to rate the items a second time and to include a brief statement of rationale if they change any of their ratings. Data from this third round are compiled, and the process is repeated until there is a satisfactory degree of convergence of opinion (which is, in itself, a matter of opinion, of course). Most Delphi studies find that more than three or four rounds do not add significant value.

The Delphi technique is not, of course, without limitations. It is dependent on identifying a set of experts who are willing to participate throughout the process. It begins with highly subjective responses, and the process essentially narrows the subjectivity without eliminating it. The technique can generate pressure for individuals to conform to the "group mind." Our special application of this process was to assemble the panel in a retreat setting and to go through four rounds during one weekend. Individuals wrote descriptive statements about what they believed would be the characteristics of standard setting organizations in the year 2020. These statements were quickly compiled into a survey questionnaire, and the group responded with individual ratings, on a 10 point scale of probability (How probable is it that the trend setting organization of the year 2020 will exhibit the characteristic?). The ratings were processed and fed back to the panel, along with their original ratings. The group discussed their opinions and assumptions about individual characteristics of interest, and they completed the questionnaire a second time. The process of compiling the data, feeding back group and individual results, and

discussing the trends was repeated twice more. This adaptation of the Delphi method differed, then, from the usual approach in that people were able to influence others' thinking in face-to-face exchanges.

The panel of experts was made up of eighteen practicing change facilitators, including the authors. These people were invited to a colloquy that focused on future organizations and OD. In addition to the Delphi process, the group engaged an extensive "miniversity," in which members offered brief courses on topics of interest to the group. Individuals worked through life/career analytical materials, and there was an exchange of perceptions of each other in terms of what the panel identified as the compelling traits of change facilitators in the future. Informal exchanges among small groups were

spontaneously organized; some focused on personal situations, while others were essentially "floating seminars" on the state of the world and our place in it.

Colloquy participants were invited on the basis of having significant experience in facilitating organizational change, and being persons who, in the judgment of the authors, were "forward thinkers." Participants included both internal and external consultants, three quality improvement experts, and people with human-resource-management responsibilities. The panel composition was dominated by independent consultants, whose clients are diverse, multinational, and committed to proactive change. The group also included members from public utilities, city government, public schools, manufacturing, telecommunications, and health care.

The 2020 Organization Context

The panel debated the probable world context for the future organization and agreed to assume a setting of overall world peace, an international and highly competitive marketplace, and the continued existence of organization development as an identifiable professional level activity.

Out of a total of 82 questions, 28 items were given a probability of higher than 70% on the last iteration of the survey. They are classified below as Most Probable (80%90%), Highly Probable (73%78%), and Probable (71%72%).

The Delphi Results

Most Probable

Item Percent Probability

●

People at all levels are linked through information technology. 90%

●

The information systems of the organization are continuously updated. 88%

●

Information is valued as capital. 82%

●

Customers drive the organization. 81%

●

The organization practices continuous improvement. 80%

●

The organization works with its customers, suppliers, and employees as partners. 80%

(3)

Highly Probable

The organization has processes to integrate new technology easily. 78% Competence is a moving target. 78%

Job design is centered on multiple skills, tasks, and responsibilities. 76% The organization has both a long-term vision and short-term targets. 76% There is a spirit of inquiry that asks, "How can we improve?" 74% Performance indicators are moving targets. 74%

Information critical to individual performance is readily available to each employee. 73% There are feedback systems in place that let teams know how they are doing. 73%

The organization has multilateral communications systems that create total, mutual access among all employees. 73% The organization is able to recognize and seize opportunity rapidly. 73%

Probable

Organization design is valued as a strategic, competitive advantage. 72% The organization balances short and long-term goals. 72%

The philosophy and values of the organization are part of its decision making process. 72% The organization learns from its mistakes. 72%

The reward system focuses on the positive rather than the negative. 72%

The organization is a network of flexible entities that can proactively meet the challenges of change. 72% Job design takes into account support relationships. 71%

The orientation of the organization emphasizes networks and structures rather than functions and boundaries. 71% Learning is a core competency for individuals, teams, and the organization itself. 71%

There are feedback systems in place that tell individuals how they are doing. 71% Performance is focused more on groups and teams and less on the individual. 71%

The organization devotes resources to the development of employees on both task and relationship dimensions. 71%

The Key Indicators

Clear themes emerge in these data. The panel sees the 2020 organization as placing a premium on timely information that flows multidirectionally, using state of the art technologies. This capacity supports strong emphases on flexibility in

organizational and job design and on performance. Quality, continuous learning, competence and customer emphasis are key values.

Fourteen of the items indicate that the 2020 organization must be capable of anticipating and reacting to change; further the capacity to thrive on change will clearly be an indicator of the organization's competitive strength. The picture that emerges from these data has important features. The authors believe that the organization that sets the pace in the year 2020 will be information saturated and feedback focused. Its people will be shaping its future through team activity and learning. Change facilitators will influence its functioning by coaching its leaders to enroll people in actualizing vision through active participation in decision making, problem solving, action planning and change.

The panel of experts was not confident that leading organizations would have, what we believe to be, some desirable characteristics by the year 2020. For example, engaging in long-term planning and having enlightened reward systems had probabilities that were lower than we think is preferred.

A summary of the four questions that received less than a 50% probability on the final survey provides a strong contrast to the higher responses.

(4)

Lowest Probability

All employees have financial ownership in the organization. 48%

●

All employees are leaders. 42%

●

Hierarchies no longer exist. 39%

●

The organization sponsors spiritual growth among its people. 37%

●

These diverse "low" predictions indicate that some current approaches and attitudes about organizational life are deeply rooted and not likely to change. Despite these "lower" predictions, there are strong arguments that these four elements need to be characteristics of organizations in order to be 2020 winners. The panel was essentially pessimistic regarding the four conditions. There was pressure within the group to rate all probabilities realistically, even though each of the conditions was deemed desirable.

Change Facilitation: Compelling Traits

In a manner similar to the development of the Delphi instrument, participants in the colloquy individually wrote what they believed to be the "compelling traits" of the change facilitator who could materially assist organizations to move toward the 2020 trend setting characteristics. The initial list was narrowed to twenty-four traits and was cast into a self rating and feedback form. At the end of the third day participants selected a group of six others from within the larger group to provide feedback to them on these traits. The data were processed overnight, and confidential feedback packages were delivered as part of the final morning's design. Participants then engaged in action planning for professional improvement and developed support systems within the larger group for "back home" learning and growth.

The compelling traits were clarified by group discussion before the actual ratings took place. Here are the panel's best estimates of what it will take for OD practitioners to be good at in order to help organizations position themselves as trendsetters for the year 2020.

Compelling Traits

Ability to Work with Diversity

● Authenticity ● Communication ● Competence ● Confrontability ● Creativity ● Credibility ● Directness ● Empathy ● Flexibility ● Honesty ● Influence ● Integrity ● Intelligence ● Listening ● Openness ● Perceptiveness ● Persistence ● Resiliency ● Resourcefulness ● Risk Taking ● Self Awareness ● Sense of Humor ● Trustworthiness. ●

There is, of course, nothing new on this list, and these traits are desirable in 1993 as well. They become compelling when we anticipate taking active roles in promoting organizational change in a desirable direction. The "180 degree assessment" (self

(5)

and peer ratings) generated a clear pattern of the strengths and opportunities to improve for this panel of experts. On a 7-point scale, items receiving a 6.4 or higher included the following: integrity, intelligence, trustworthiness, honesty, competence, and resourcefulness. It is interesting to note that the top four are all character traits. In other words, this group of practitioners showed up as having these essential positive personal characteristics.

Items rated lowest by the experts and their selected peers included the following (5.9 or lower, from lowest): Confrontability, flexibility, influence, sense of humor, risk taking, and openness. These data suggest that even highly experienced practitioners need to improve on some critical personal characteristics. Most of these characteristics involve conflict and stress. In other words, we need to get better at working through our own discomfort in facilitating change. It is easy for OD practitioners to fall into a sense of complacency regarding personal and professional traits. Receiving peer feedback can jolt us into acknowledging the need for continuous improvement in ourselves as instruments of change in others.

Getting There

Organization development offers leaders a philosophy and technology for shaping the future. We presume to be able to work with and through leaders and their followers to induce changes that are seen as desirable, in an atmosphere of deliberation rather than crisis. Visioning means specifying desirable and doable futures for organizations, and we play an important part in the processes of articulating and testing vision.

For OD practitioners to make maximum contributions to transforming organizations into "selfcleaning ovens" and to creating organizations with structures and characteristics that are not now the norm, we must clearly get on top of several emerging technologies. The standard setting organizations that many of us will work in in the near future will clearly be characterized by the exploitation of communication and information technologies that many OD practitioners either do not understand or do not use with proficiency. We need to capitalize on these developments in order to point their applications to productive, humane, long-term-focused uses. OD practitioners need to become literally "wired in," networked and databased all of the time.

The so-called "total quality" movement has largely grown up outside the purview of organization development. Nowadays many OD practitioners seem to be joining as fast as they can. The results of our deliberations strongly indicate that we need to integrate this work as well. OD practitioners and quality improvement consultants need to coordinate with and support each other. We believe that the culture change needed to implement a total quality effort compels the active leadership (not followership) of OD personnel.

Finally, as OD practitioners we need to bring others in the organization along through both modeling and sponsoring learning. Being key players in shaping the trend setting organizations of the year 2020 means that we engage in continuous improvement of our personal characteristics, knowledge, skills, positions, and networks. In addition, it means pushing toward creating the conditions in which large numbers of people learn and grow together continuously.

John Jones Biography

President of Organizational Universe Systems, John probably is best known as cofounder of University Associates and coeditor of experience based training and consulting handbooks and annuals. As an experienced trainer presenter, counselor, professor, entrepreneur, and consultant, he effectively bridges the theoretical and the practical. He consults widely, with such clients as Air Canada, ARC International, AT&T Bell Laboratories, AT&T Consumer Products, Burroughs, Coca Cola, Coors, GMC, Holiday Inns, Hughes, Kaiser Permanente, Psychological Associates, Public Service Electric & Gas, Senn Delaney, Shearson Lehman Mortgage, Tonka, Turner Construction, US West, Wallace Computer Services, Xerox, and numerous not for profit organizations in education, government, and health care.

Dr. Jones taught at the University of Iowa for eight years, in Counselor Education. He has lectured on a wide range of topics in education, training, organization behavior, and leadership. His special interests in development are executive team building, intergroup problem solving, organizational survey feedback and management development. He has collaborated with Dr. William L. Bearley on state of the art organizational survey software and management training instruments.

Robin Reid Biography

Robin Reid is the Managing Partner of Reid-Moomaugh and Associates. His work focuses on facilitating large organization "culture" change efforts and training internal managers and human resource development staff as internal change agents. He also conducts team building and conflict resolution events for top level managers and teams.

Robin has over twenty-two years' experience as manager, consultant, and trainer in the field of organization and human resource change, in both the public and private sectors in North America. Prior to 1988 Robin was an Organization Effectiveness Specialist for the City of San Diego, and earlier he had served as Coordinator of Professional Services for

(6)

University Associates.

Robin is active in the Organization Development Network. He serves as a member of the national ODN Board of Trustees, and as the webmaster for several ODN related web pages, and as a co-sysop for ODNet, the list serve for OD professionals. Robin's Masters and Bachelor degrees are in History, and he is a former Associate Dean of Student Affairs for Cornell College. He has been involved in Adult and Higher education since 1965, and has taught seminars and courses in organization behavior and change, leadership, group dynamics, values, personal growth, and conflict resolution at the university and college level, and he has spoken at several international, national, and regional conferences. He is a member of the Board of Trustees of the Organizational Development Network, and was Co-Director for the 1989 International Organization Development Network Conference in San Diego.