OD Practice : Co-optimizing & Synthesizing contrasting Paradigms. Kantharao PhD, May 202

???Over the last few years as OD practitioner, I experienced two contrasting aspects of the reality of organizations - static and other dynamic ,emerging . I am often faced with the dilemma which one to base my observation , diagnosis and intervention on. From my gross lens, I see organizational reality is still the same as object reality , but when I see from my subtle lens , most of the human processes are subtle and are in movement . I realize, as student of OD , my source of learning, teaching , books and observations are all situated in the language of objects , as if they are gross objects and static. When we actually encounter live situations , reality is unfolding, for example,?in the way members of an organization subjectively experience and narrate ( during diagnosis interviews) . And this is a challenge, as actual reality hardly seems to fit into the conceptual descriptions found in books, my inference is ,?they are written in second person - third person language , whereas lived moments are emerging in the 1 st person subjective experience. This doesn't mean, conceptualizations in books are not relevant. In fact it is widely accepted observation many student & practitioners have developed some kind allergy to refer or read books or theories , saying “theory is different from Practice “ “no point in reading theory”. I have seen some experienced people have developed very complex rationalization, how not reading make them more creative ! However, ?keen students may need to discover this nuance, it is something that needs to be experienced.?

?

Here we need to step back and see what is actually happening to us & within us .?It needs flexibility in our attention and angles of perception (frames) . As a reflective practitioner , I realized ,we need to adapt to operate from different levels of our awareness . This means we learn to move our awareness like gear in a car - at one level, certainty of tangible objects ( which have physical existence ) and other,?standing as awareness, open to the subtle dimensions which have no physical existence and third level is what is appearing in the awareness of learner herself. It's skill one can learn by being a keen student of one's self-awareness and practicing self-attentiveness’ - viz., knowledge of lenses that we use to perceive a reality ( epistemic devices ) and skill to operate, to stand at different levels of awareness, depending what we wish to focus on .

?

Those of us who are into study & Practice of OD , will be facing a dilemma in reconciling contrasting paradigms in the body of literature and actual practice, as we are trained in classical logic. This is what?we often see in mainstream practice , tilted towards one side and the other side hardly known and much less practiced.

Yes , OD consultants can & need to?use both static and emerging paradigms in understanding organizational realities. What does this imply in practice? For this we must transcend our own habits of learning, conditioned by classical logic for so many years. With in this system of logical thought, it would be impossible to accept statement like , " an individual is unique and not unique at the same time" , declared opposites cannot be true at the same time., A person is good and also bad at the same time...So , we have the task of reconciling our own self-created , logical systems . This may need an entirely new perspective of believing our nature of reality ( ontology ) - that can help us transcend from static 'Being' to assuming the stance of 'Becoming '. We need methods & tools to capture the movements and transitions as they are happening .

?

Just like a snapshot of still photograph gives us picture at a given point of time so does the video shoot gives us the moving or dynamic view . When we relate with OD consulting , one must be alive to both possibilities , means , we have the facility to perceive organizational realities from two lenses - assumption that organizational reality is pre-existing, independent, desiring to be unravelled by the practitioner from outside ( which is conventional & popular ) , and another assumption , that organization is self-organizing, hence emerging & interdependent. Just like Schr?dinger cat , it very much depends on the consultant's own implicit assumptions and lenses i.e ground of awareness ( refers to level of consciousness) of the consultant .

The danger of believing in only one view , we may inadvertently miss the other . Believing and practicing both paradigms is a challenge , amounting to holding and working with opposites.

I am reminded of James Mark Baldwin’s (1904) ( contemporary of Kurt Lewin, GH Mead ,John Dewey, William James etc ) " genetic logic" ( logic of development- investigation of real emerging phenomenon ) , asserts , if 'A ' exists , there shall be 'Non A' , always present whether we see it , acknowledge or not . A researcher or diagnostician , who acknowledges the genetic logic shall , accommodate the implicit presence of the opposite and its role in giving expression to manifested phenomenon- meaning we may perceive organizational reality as pre-existing , Independent & also reality as emerging and continuously being constructed . This calls for synthesis of the contrasting points of views ! Good news , now we have conceptual tools to understand and synthesize.

Inspired by Baldwin’s genetic logic , new advancements in ‘Developmental science’ developed a framework which helps to capture the movement of the organizational reality , viz., Micro-genetic process are those, happening very rapidly in each given moment, not stable , Meso-genetic processes are those which have over time have become somewhat stable or can be observed as some repetitions, or deviations , like the way individuals conduct meetings or individuals conduct in a given role etc , Onto-genetic, is a trajectory that seem to manifest as the pattern or path traced over a period . Typically , how various micro and meso processes precipitate into some larger organizational outcomes. Roughly speaking , the analogy that comes to my mind is , tracing the matter from gaseous state to solid state ( metamorphosis ) , or through various sublimation ( process of refinement or even maturation) . This framework provides us with a tool to place various pieces of organizational data and see if we can trace their genetic manifestations at various stages like Micro , Meso and Onto. This way, we may be able to explain how things have become what they have become and how they have become and what & how they are becoming .

?As a diagnostician , what usually?grasps our attention is, Onto level of manifestation ( gross appearances ) of reality. It is natural for the client to be worried about the gross consequences.?What we need is a new lens, to see how the genetic processes are shaping things from subtle to gross/ micro to meso - to Onto?! By developing this into our practice, we not only acknowledge the static and emerging paradigms but also learn the art & science of working with opposites, but?also gain deeper insights into the phenomenon of Transformation.???

Similarly , we can see Mahayana Buddhism' s proposition of causality, also informing us about the manifestation of an invisible opposite dimension in every phenomenon - ‘Dependent causation’. A given organizational phenomenon does not stand on its own , it has so many other forces shaping and continues to do so.??

?What is the relevance of all this in our teaching, training and practice of OD paradigms. This way of training our levels of consciousness as a practitioner, makes us a holistic practitioner and facilitator of organizational transformation, a critical competence.

?

1.????It helps us to become aware and acknowledge the implicit dimension, opposite of whatever paradigm we subscribe - static or emergent .

2.????It can dissolve the differences between practitioners of ?two contrasting camps , specially their arguments , their own view is true and right and others is wrong.

3. ?It gives us a tool & method?of?integrating & synthesizing contrasting paradigms of OD practice.

4. ?This alerts practitioners not to get into either or arguments , but hold opposites together , be open for the synthesis of new perspectives. In this sense we are open to the new possibilities.

5. This gives rise to a new framework to comprehend being and becoming, emerging ,unfolding movements ,the progressive developmental process from micro genetic , meso genetic and ontogenetic.

6. ?From this perspective we can develop new OD educational process which can equip the student practitioner, with the concepts , theory , method and tools of applying the genetic logic.

7. ?OD refers to Org Development , meaning through this, we shall develop a new perspective of understanding Development and practice of facilitating OD.

8. This genetic logic shall also be very effectively used in facilitating individual changes /transformation , including the facilitator herself. In fact systematic adherence to this underlying premise shall enhance self-awareness about our constantly evolving person ?that we are - person in Becoming. And also how we have become what we are today- Being .

#odcp,#ODconsulting,#Workingwithopposites,#Selfofconsultant,#geneticlogic

May 2023 Hyderabad

www.dhirubhai.net/in/kantharao