Measuring Change and Persistence in Human Affairs: Types of Change Generated by OD Designs

There is a truism about applied research that an inadequate concept of change leads to diminished or misguided applied research. Hence this paper urges distinguishing kinds of change, distinctions which are suggested by experience and also are supported with evidence generated by exotic statistical and computational techniques in which we have been engaged. An immediate pay-off of making such distinctions is more definite reliance on existing research findings, whose interpretation is necessarily related to their underlying concept of change. More central still, the goal is to facilitate the design and evaluation of efforts to improve the human condition and the quality of life, especially in organizations. Initially, conceptual clarification of "change" will show that at least three kinds seem distinguishable. Later, data from a study of a "successful" Flexi-Time intervention will be used to test these conceptual clarifications. Detailed statistical analysis will support the broad position that a unitary concept of change is inappropriate and may be seriously misleading.

[1]  John e. Jones,et al.  Survey of Organizations , 1977 .

[2]  Richard M. Steers.  Problems in the Measurement of Organizational Effectiveness , 1975 .

[3]  Dale E. Zand,et al.  Theory of Change and the Effective Use of Management Science. , 1975 .

[4]  Robert T. Golembiewski,et al.  A Longitudinal Study of Flexi-Time Effects: Some Consequences of an OD Structural Intervention , 1974 .

[5]  S. Pepper,et al.  Sometimes frequently means seldom: Context effects in the interpretation of quantitative expressions ☆ , 1974 .

[6]  P. Watzlawick,et al.  Change. Principles of Problem Formation and Problem Resolution. New York (Norton) 1974. , 1974 .

[7]  R. E. Ward.  Culture and the Comparative Study of Politics, or the Constipated Dialectic , 1974, American Political Science Review.

[8]  A. Buss.  Multivariate Model of Quantitative, Structural, and Quantistructural Ontogenetic Change. , 1974 .

[9]  S. Iyengar.  The Problem of Response Stability: Some Correlates and Consequences , 1973 .

[10]  W. Torbert.  Some Questions on Bowers' Study of Different OD Techniques , 1973 .

[11]  D. G. Bowers.  OD Techniques and Their Results in 23 Organizations: The Michigan ICL Study , 1973 .

[12]  R. Golembiewski,et al.  Planned Change Through Laboratory Methods. , 1973 .

[13]  S. Hunka,et al.  Relating Factors Between Studies Based Upon Different Individuals. , 1971, Multivariate behavioral research.

[14]  R. Ross.  OD for Whom? , 1971 .

[15]  Edward R. Tufte,et al.  The quantitative analysis of social problems , 1971 .

[16]  L. Cronbach,et al.  How we should measure "change": Or should we? , 1970 .

[17]  Roderick P. McDonald,et al.  THE THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF PRINCIPAL FACTOR ANALYSIS, CANONICAL FACTOR ANALYSIS, AND ALPHA FACTOR ANALYSIS , 1970 .

[18]  D. Stewart,et al.  A general canonical correlation index. , 1968, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  M Hamilton.  Comparison of factors by Ahmavaara's method. , 1967, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[20]  C. Hampden-Turner.  An Existential "Learning Theory" and the Integration of T-Group Research , 1966 .

[21]  Victor E. McGee,et al.  THE MULTIDIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS OF ‘ELASTIC’ DISTANCES , 1966 .

[22]  C. Harris.  Problems in measuring change , 1965 .

[23]  Henry F. Kaiser,et al.  Alpha factor analysis , 1965, Psychometrika.

[24]  Albert Newhouse,et al.  Measures of invariance and comparability in factor analysis for fixed variables , 1964 .

[25]  H. Kaiser.  The Application of Electronic Computers to Factor Analysis , 1960 .

[26]  W. Ashby,et al.  An introduction to cybernetics. , 1956 .

[27]  W. Bennis,et al.  A Theory of Group Development , 1956 .

[28]  Calyampudi R. Rao.  Estimation and tests of significance in factor analysis , 1955 .

[29]  W. Ashby,et al.  Design for a Brain. , 1953 .

[30]  H. Muhsam.  The Factor Analysis of a Simple Object , 1951 .