Organizational Development Evaluation: Tip of an Iceberg?

When attempting to understand an organization for purposes of diagnosis and prescription of an intervention, the iceberg provides the executive with a useful model. By its very nature the organization possesses tangible, observable characteristics that can be thought of as part of the formal organization and intangible, immeasurable qualities that comprise the informal organization (Gibson, Ivancevich, & Donnelly, 1994). The formal organization can be understood by examining structural qualities such as job tasks, department bases, operating policies, and personnel policies. The informal organization can be appreciated by rationalizing inter-group behavior, intra-group behavior, individual behavior, and individual group behavior. Formal targets can be better addressed because of their quantitative nature while informal targets are less easily addressed due to their qualitative nature. The formal aspects of the organization can be addressed with interventions such as job redesign, Likert’s System-4, sociotechnical system design and management by objectives (MBO) initiatives. The informal aspects of the organization can be addressed with interventions such as the managerial grid, team building, sensitivity training, and process consultation initiatives.

The corporate manager, like the seafaring ship captain faced with an iceberg, would do well to observe carefully the visible portions (i.e., formal) of the organization while estimating and paying respect to the invisible contours (i.e., informal) of the organization that are below the waterline when considering organizational development targets or groups of targets. Considering both the formal and informal aspects of an organization allows the manager to assess properly what organizational development intervention(s) is most appropriate.

Reference

Gibson, J.L., Ivancevich, J.M., & Donnelly, J.H., Jr. (1994). Organizations: Behavior, structure, processes (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Irwin.