Program Review For the Master of Science in Organization Development Central Washington University

Program Review
For the

Master of Science in Organization Development
Central Washington University

Prepared by:
Glenn H. Varney Ph.D.
12/20/06


TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROGRAM REVIEW......................................................................................................... 1
SHORT REPORT.............................................................................................................. 3
THE FOLLOWING CHART REPRESENTS A SUBJECTIVE EVALUATION OF THE
CRITICAL POINTS IN THE MSOD CWU PROGRAM REVIEW. EXPLANATION OF
EACH RATING IS CONTAINED IN THE ANALYSIS SECTION (PP. 4)......................... 3
........................................................................................................................................... 3
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE BACKGROUND............................. 4
ANALYSIS......................................................................................................................... 5
WHAT’S WORKING/WHAT’S NOT WORKING............................................................... 9
POSITIVE...........................................................................................................................9
RECOMMENDATIONS *................................................................................................. 10
APPENDIX A................................................................................................................... 11
APPENDIX B................................................................................................................... 12
ACTIONS......................................................................................................................... 16

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

2

Short Report
The following chart represents a subjective evaluation of the critical points in the MSOD CWU
program review. Explanation of each rating is contained in the analysis section (pp. 4).
Evaluation Scores
LOW

0

HIGH

1

2

3

4

MSOD Learning Outcom es
Body of ODC Knowledge (Foundation)
Body of ODC Knowledge (Core)
Faculty (Graduate Standards) - FT. Tenure
Faculty (Graduate Standards) - Adjunct
Faculty Professional Organization Afliation
Student Course Evaluation - FT. Tenure
Student Course Evaluation - Adjunct
Learning Intergration and Evaluation
Learning Model for Students
MSOD Benchmarking

Marketing MSOD
Supportive Environment - College
Supportive Environment - Department
Supportive Environment - Alumni
Vision for the Future

NO DATA
Non Weighted Average = 2.19
The results of the review suggest that the MSOD is reasonably healthy. The major problem
seems to be finding a home for the program and a person who will champion it in the future (see
pp. 9 for recommendations).
Quality of Admitted Students

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

3


Organization Development and Change Background
The term Organization Development (OD) was coined in the early 1960s. In the late 1970s, the
Academy of Management OD Division (founded in 1972) changed its name to Organization
Development & Change (ODC) to reflect what the field had become – “a profession focused on
helping organizations improve their effectiveness and competitive position through the
application of behavioral science, research, and inquiry.”
ODC was founded by a distinguished group of applied academics/scholars (i.e. Argyris, Likert,
Shepard, French, Huse, Bennis. Etc.) The founders were theory builders and applied researchers.
ODC graduate master level degrees were established in the early 70s at several universities (Case
Western Reserve University, Bowling Green State University, American University, Pepperdine,
and Benedictine). Today, there are 31 master programs plus six (6) doctorate programs
(Pepperdine, Benedictine, Saybrook, University of California, St. Thomas and Case Western

Reserve University.)
LOCATION
School of Professional Studies,
Organizational Studies, and
Human & OD
Continuing Education/ Graduate
Studies
Public Affairs/ Urban Policy
Discipline of Business
Discipline of Psychology
Discipline of Education
Discipline of Technology
Discipline of Arts & Sciences
Interdisciplinary Program
TOTAL

MASTER LEVEL

DOCTORATE LEVEL

4
1
2
10
4
5
1
3
1
31

2
1
3

6

There are three professional organizations serving ODC:
1) Academy of Management ODC Division (Academic Focus)
2) OD Network (Practitioner Focus)
3) OD Institute (Practitioner Focus)
There are three journals supporting the field of ODC:
1) Journal of Applied Behavioral Science (Research)
2) OD Practitioner (Practitioner)
3) OD Journal (Practitioner)
ODC is going through a transition from a soft/practitioner based field to a Data Based Change
Management academic discipline. The Academy of Management ODC Division is leading the
change through its conferences, research, and “Building ODC as a Academic Discipline”
initiatives.
ODC programs are likewise adjusting their program design and delivery to fit the data based
Program Review | MSOD | CWU

4


change models of the future.

Analysis
MSOD PROGRAM GOALS
1) MSOD Learning Outcomes and

Program Structure

MSOD LEARNING OUTCOMES
The field of Organization Development and Change
(ODC) is currently transitioning from a soft/practitioners
orientation to a Data Based/Change Management
“academic discipline”.
The following stated “learning outcomes” for the
Central Washington University MSOD are clearly in
line with the emerging ODC as an “academic
discipline”.
Students will be able to…
•
•
•
•

Analyze workplace behavior at the
individual, group, and organizational levels
Diagnose needs and problems that lead to
proactive interventions (Change programs)
Conduct successful interventions that achieve
desired outcomes
Evaluate actual outcomes against the desired
outcomes
PROGRAM STRUCTURE/DESIGN

There appears to be no obvious plan or model (road
map) that shows students how and when they will
acquire the knowledge and skills which will certify that

they are graduate level qualified in the four “learning
outcomes”:
1. Analyze workplace behavior
2. Diagnose needs and problems that lead to change
interventions
3. Conduct and Design interventions
4. Evaluate outcomes from interventions

2) Continuous Improvement of
MSOD Curriculum
Program Review | MSOD | CWU

There is little evidence that the MSOD curriculum has
been effectively benchmarked against other leading
programs, as well as, “competency” studies in ODC.
5


NO faculty are currently members of any of the
recognized ODC professional organizations (AOMODC, ODN, or ODI)
2 (Cont)
Continuous Improvement of MSOD
Curriculum

In general, the MSOD delivers much of the body of
knowledge defined by the Academy of Management
ODC Division study of Entry Level ODC Competencies
(graduate level).
Areas that do not appear to be included are:
Foundation (preparation for CORE ODC knowledge &

skills)
1) Organization behavior
2) Comparative cultural perspectives
3) Basic statistics
4) Basic business (Finance, Management, Supply
Chain, Etc.) [See Appendix A]
Core
1) Organizational research methods that support
data driven organizational change
2) Ethics in organizational change
3) Designing interventions that bring about desired
change
4) Evaluating and securing change
There is course content that appears to be
overemphasized or not directly related to the MSOD
“learning outcomes”:
Questionable Course Content
1) Consulting in organizations (OD 562)
2) Process control methods (OD 575) – (An
intervention)
3) OD 590 (Spring 2005) “Supervised field
experience” focuses on interpersonal skills not
application of theories and concepts as stated in
the catalog
4) OD 590 Supervised field experience titled
“whole group project” focuses on team building
and facilitation not application of theories and
concepts (questionable if this is a graduate credit
course)
5) OD 598 Special topics focus on “how to” skills

in feedback, conflict resolution, observation,
cooperation, and team leadership. This type of
course is not generally regarded as a graduate

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

6


credit course offering
3) Continuous Improvement of
Student Performance

3 (Cont)
Continuous Improvement of Student
Performance Continued

1) There does not appear to be a comprehensive,
integrative course project or thesis. Such a
course, like OD 700, should be designed to
measure the four learning outcomes – analyzing,
diagnosing, conducting interventions, and
evaluating outcomes. The one thesis submitted
with the self-study demonstrated competency in
analyzing and diagnosing, but not in conducting
interventions and evaluating outcomes.
2) The survey of alumni does not provide much
useful information on how well qualified
graduates are to manage change. Recall self
assessment against behaviorally undefined topics

tends to lack validity. Also confounding the
survey results for learning outcomes assessment
is the N=96 which includes subjects prior to
2000.
3) Student learning assessment process at the course
level (grading) seems to be sound and rigorous
except for the following courses:
a. OD 590 (Both courses)
b. OD 570
c. OD 562

4) Faculty
1) The graduate level qualifications for tenured
faculty are high, although their vitas do not
reflect their active involvement in the field of
Organization Development and Change through
their professional affiliations and publications.
(Academy of Management ODC Division,
JABS, AOM publications, etc.)
2) The adjunct faculty (N=3), by most graduate
school standards are underqualified to teach
graduate level offerings. They also appear to be
consultants with mostly “soft/practitioner
orientations.”
5) Applicant Pool and Entrance of
Students into the program

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

The self study described the potential student pool as a

mixture of experienced HR and OD practitioners/
individuals seeking “a graduate degree”, “want to be”
beginners in the field, etc. A mixed bag of students, at
best, and a difficult group to teach Organization
Development and Change.
7


The lack of clear focus on what types of students the
MSOD is designed for is and will continue to cause
problems in conducting the program.
Although there is a clear description of the admission
process, there is NO documentation of the qualifications
of the students entering the MSOD.
6) Supportive Environment

7) Vision for the MSOD

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

1) Clearly there is currently NO home for the
MSOD. The psychology department
unanimously wants the programmed transferred
or discontinued. Without a champion for the
program, it will deteriorate further resulting in its
discontinuation. There are individuals within the
university who expressed the desire to see the
program continue outside of the psychology
department.
2) Alumni as identified in the survey, have positive

and hopeful feelings about the future of the
MSOD.
There is NO clear picture from the faculty,
administration, or alumni of a “vision” for the future of
the MSOD. The field is in a state of significant
transition with all indications that ODC will emerge in
the next few years as an academically data based change
management discipline. [See Appendix B]

8


What’s Working/What’s NOT Working
POSITIVE
1) The MSOD has been staffed with competent tenured faculty
2) The program stated “learning outcomes” are “on the mark” for teaching and learning
ODC
3) The common body of knowledge is largely covered in the program
4) Alumni, in general, are supportive and satisfied with the direction of the program
5) Several CWU individuals are interested in the continuation of the program
NEGATIVE
1) Psychology department is not interested in being responsible for the program in the future
2) Adjunct faculty are underqualified to teach graduate level courses
3) There is a lack of faculty affiliation with ODC professional organizations (AOM-ODC,
ODN, & ODI)
4) There appears to be NO “champion” for the program
5) Apparently there is a small group of dissatisfied MSOD alumni groups (7 or 8 people)

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

9


Recommendations *
1) DO NOT discontinue the MSOD program.
2) Remove the program from the psychology department and attach to one of the following
in order from most to least favorable:
I.
II.
III.

IV.

College of Science (ODC is merging as a science)
College of Business Administration (Application of ODC requires a
business/management basics)
Interdisciplinary (Continuing Education, Professional and Organization
Studies because the MSOD is an applied behavioral interdisciplinary
program)
Education (Education, training, technology)

3) Find a “champion” - an academic knowledgeable in ODC and a person who will
spearhead the programs during a rebuilding period.
4) Organize a study and design group to reconstruct the MSOD. This group should be
interdisciplinary including Alumni and Psychology Faculty. They should be challenged
with building a new and viable MSOD program. Part of their task would focus on:
I.

Market – who are your potential students?

II.

Redesign the program to fit the current learning outcomes
•
•
•
•

Analyze workplace behavior at the individual, group,
and organizational levels
Diagnose needs and problems that lead to proactive
interventions (Change programs)
Conduct successful interventions that achieve desired
outcomes
Evaluate actual outcomes against the desired outcomes

III.

Recruit graduate level faculty (Interdisciplinary to CWU and Ph.D. qualified
adjuncts)

IV.

Design a delivery system to include E-learning, collaborative arrangements
with organizations for application and change research, more favorable
location, enhanced fee structure, etc.

Successful change is based on:
1) Following the discipline of change management (scientific method)
2) Continuous involvement of stakeholders (generation of ideas, ownership, and

commitment)
* Specific recommendations are available upon request
Program Review | MSOD | CWU

10


Appendix A

Dear Colleague,
Our OD work has a strong humanitarian focus. If you’re like me, you may feel some aversion to
the “hard” bottom-line focus of many organizations. In many years as an internal and external
organization development consultant, I’ve learned that my clients don’t want me to sound
“touchy-feely”. They expect me to be a business partner. As one boss once said to me, “We
expect you to learn our language and processes. We don’t want to learn what all your words and
language really mean.”
Over the years, I’ve learned how to relate OD work to my clients’ bottom line while retaining my
core values and skill sets. Now I and a group of seasoned colleagues offering you the benefit of
hundreds of years of collective experience in connecting OD work to the strategy and mission of
the organizations we serve. The OD Network Business Acumen certificate program consists of
seven web-based courses, offered in nine modules, that will give you the ability to talk to clients
in language that resonates for the executives and organizations you serve, thus enhancing your
creditability in the world of business. When you master these Business Acumen concepts, you’ll
be more effective in helping your clients, because they will see you as a true partner in their
success.
Robin Reid
OD Network Business Acumen Course Developer
Principal, Robin Reid and Associates
Source: ODN Newsletter, 11/06

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

11


Appendix B
Challenges Facing The Field
Of

Organization Development
(An Academic Perspective)
BY:
GLENN H. VARNEY PH.D.
Bowling Green State University (04/05)

For the past several years, professionals, practitioners, and academics have been abuzz with
concerns about the life expectancy of Organization Development. Typically, these concerns
involve issues like:

 What is OD?
 Where is OD going and will it be here in the future in a different form?
 Is OD just a “fad” on its way out?
 What qualifications does one need to have to do OD work?
 Why isn’t there more new research involving change?
 Why have authors stopped using OD in book titles and are now use “change” instead?

Articles and, indeed entire, issues of some practitioner publications have been devoted to this
WHO ARE WE IDENTITY CRISIS…

These concerns have been expressed by many loyal and devoted professionals in the field,

especially by academics who have a strong commitment to the foundations upon, which OD has
thrived and grown. These foundations are deeply rooted in academy, where the founders of OD
worked and lived. (Shephard, Bennis, Benne, Argyris, Schein, Blake, Mouton, French, Maslow,
McGregor, Likert, Herzberg, Zand, etc.)

Indeed, the authors of the now famous Addison Wesley “six pack” (1969) grew up in the
academic world. (Bennis, Lawrence & Lorsch, Schein, Blake & Mouton, Walton, and Galbraith)
All of the “foundation literature” listed in the 2003 edition of the Bibliography of Organization
Program Review | MSOD | CWU

12


Development and Change (p. 9-15) was authored by academics. (Argyris, Benne, Bennis,
Bradford, Boss, Lippitt, Schein, Chin, Dyer, Galbraith, Herzberg, Katz, Kahn, Lewin, Likert,
Lippitt, Watson, Westley, McGregor, Maslow, Roethlisberger, Vaill, Tannenbaum, Weschler,
Massarik, Westgaard, and etc.)

Furthermore, Richard Beckard, a highly regarded OD practitioner, “is also considered a founder
of Organization Development and was a professor of organization behavior and management at
Sloan School of Management at MIT.” (1992, Jossey Bass)

Because of the strong ties to the academic history and a concern about the health and future of
OD, a group of AOM-ODC members (30-35) have for the past 7 year been studying the
professional challenges facing the field. As an outcome of this lengthy process, a “Summit”
meeting was held on April 18, 2005 hosted by Bowling Green State University. The purpose of
this “summit” was to identify “The Challenges Facing OD&C as an Academic Discipline.” In
addition, short and long-term actions were considered designed to meet the challenges. Those in
attendance (see appendix I) represented a talented and scholarly group of academics who
examined the field from the following perspectives:

 Teaching OD&C
 Practitioners of OD&C
 OD&C Academic Program Direction
 Research in OD&C
 Scholarship in OD&C
 Authorship in OD&C
 Change Leadership
 International Practice of OD&C

The purpose, then, of this article, is to share the results of the “Summit” with all who have an
interest in Organization Development’s future.

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

13


Challenge One: Increase the volume and rigor of OD research
ACTIONS
 Build on the position of applied research
 Study the approach taken by other AOM divisions
 Increase research on what does not work
 Understand and reapply the long held traditions of going from practice to theory
and back to practice
 Introduce specially designed research courses in organizational change and
include how to write articles and scientific papers
 “Learn how to teach what we have learned in our research”
 Develop new 21st century models to replace our existing models
 Improve the quality of articles being published in the OD journals – especially

promote JABS as the leading OD journal

Challenge Two: Repair the damage resulting from the fragmentation of the
field, which has resulted in conflict between practitioners and
academics, as well as, between OD and other professional
disciplines
ACTIONS
 Define more clearly what OD is and especially the interdisciplinary character of
the field
 Build interdisciplinary alliances
 Identify and publish the contributions from other professional disciplines to the
field of OD
 Conduct interdisciplinary research and studies

Challenge Three: Talk up OD rather than constantly questioning its future.
Go beyond defining OD “competencies” and “culture” as the
only way to change organizations

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

14


ACTIONS



Build on the “greatness of the field” (More broadcasting to develop appreciation
of the roots of OD)



Develop new interventions suited to the changing environment. Reinvent Action
research process to meet continuous change in organizations



Prepare our graduates so that they have a positive view of the field



Build more doctoral programs



Lobby to include OD courses in the other disciplines such as IO Psychology,
MBA, etc.



Promote the interdisciplinary “favor of our origins”

Challenge Four: Promote the field to organizations and other professions.
Explain what we do and the value we add to all types of
organizations
ACTIONS



Tell the “world” about our global success rate in helping organizations improve



Explain what we do in a variety of media including demonstrating successes,
description of work and processes, “who’s who” in the field, etc.



Bring the founders back to rekindle the “fire” we once had in the field



Build the field with an Organization Development “brand identity” so that “OD is
where you go to move your organization forward”

Challenge Five: Improve the quality and quantity of OD educative processes
and programming
ACTIONS
 Encourage more potential teaching/research scholars to enter the field
 Develop pathways to entry and movement within the field
Program Review | MSOD | CWU

15


 Improve the quality of teaching/learning in existing graduate programs
 Increase the number of graduate programs, especially at the doctoral level
 Form a program directors group to share ideas and to encourage consistency with
program content
 Develop programs/seminars to assist practitioners in developing their theory and

knowledge base
 Study the extent of “bad practice” that is present in the field
 Encourage the development of OD skills and knowledge for all present and future
leaders/managers
 Study the impact of the “for profit” education on university OD programming
 Understand the role of “on-line and at-a-distance programming
 Increase the global perspective of OD

Challenge Six: Professionalize OD
ACTIONS
 Teach OD values and ethics in ALL programs, seminars and courses



Define what a credentialed OD practitioner is and does



Systematically build scientific inquiry back into the field



Instill professional pride and passion for the field in ALL students, faculty, and
practitioners

Challenge Seven: Understand the changing role of OD in globalization and the
potential impact OD can have on ecosystems
ACTIONS



Study and understand the role of OD in global dynamics especially in India and
China



Develop an appreciation of how OD can help the aspiration s of people in
emerging nations

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

16


These are thought provoking observations about the life expectancy of OD. They suggest a
viable, all be it, troubled profession searching for an enduring “self identity.” There is a strong
drive in the AOM-OD&C Division to address these challenges. As a matter of fact, a core group
of OD&C members have already started initiatives designed to study several of the challenges.
These initiatives include:

1. Establishment of an Endowment Fund to further research and scholarly study in OD
2. Conducting collaborative discussions with ODN officials
3. Improving the quantity and quality of research in OD
4. Examining ways to enhance OD educational programming

“Building Organization Development as an Academic Discipline” can only be achieved if the
entire global OD community is involved. Come join us as we move forward:

Peter Sorensen

Benedictine University



Larry Starr

University of Pennsylvania



Arthur Freedman

American University



Raymond Saner

C Send, Switzerland



Glenn Varney

Bowling Green State Univ.



APPENDIX I
Peter Sorensen Ph.D.

Benedictine University

Glenn Varney Ph.D.

Bowling Green State University

James McFillen Ph.D.

Bowling Green State University

Senthil Muthusamy Ph.D.

Bowling Green State University

Raymond Saner Ph.D.

C-Send (Geneva, Switzerland)

Delores Jones Ph.D.

Dana University

Terry Armstrong Ph.D.

Georgetown University

Chris Worley Ph.D.

Pepperdine University

Beryl Robison Ph.D.

Portland State University

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

17


John Adams Ph.D.

Saybrook Graduate School

Jean Neumann Ph.D.

Tavistock Institute (England)

Richard Woodman Ph.D.

Texas A&M

Don Warrick Ph.D.

University of Colorado

Wayne Boss Ph.D.

University of Colorado

Robert Golembiewski Ph.D.

University of Georgia

Gary McLean Ph.D.

University of Minnesota

Larry Starr Ph.D.

University of Pennsylvania

Program Review | MSOD | CWU

18