One result of the current economic environment is that organization development consultants (internal and external) are using the disequilibrium in organizations as a stimulus to help change organizational cultures. Much of this is positive, as in making lemonade out of lemons, but some consultants are using metaphysical labels such as organizational transformation or organizational transmutation that devalue their efforts and turn off line managers.
I’m leery about fuzzy labels with no behavioral or operational anchors. About 30 years ago there was a buzz in OD circles concerning organizational “transformation.” This involved morphing from one state to another with some degree of facilitation by OD professionals. It kind of fizzled for lack of clarity and any real pre and post behavioral anchors or measurement criteria.
Transmutation sounds like another one of those terms. In some ways it sounds a bit like the old concept of re-engineering. The big difference is that re-engineering had a basis in hard data and involved changing measurable sub-processes and, unfortunately, triggering people reductions.
I think terms like transmutation and transformation can lead to misunderstanding and, at times, devaluing OD and we need to be careful about using them. Clear behavioral and operational criteria for even such common OD terms as “culture change” are really important. Management in today’s economic environment tend to scoff at fuzzy terms and, intriguing though they may be, we need the discipline to apply behavioral measurement criteria to what we do and need to language our profession in terms that line managers can understand.
