Agility, AI and OD with Professor Chris Worley - OrgDev Episode 73

What does it really take to build a responsive, high-performing organisation – one that learns, adapts, and endures? Today, we’re joined all the way from California by one of the world’s leading thinkers on organisation agility, Dr Chris Worley – co-author of The Agility Factor and a pioneer in the fields of organisation development, strategic change, and design. In this episode, we explore what agility really means (beyond the buzzword), how AI is reshaping organisational life, and what it takes to lead through complexity.

Wish you had a handy recap of the episode? So did we.

That’s why each week in our Next Step to Better newsletter, we’re sharing From Pod to Practice – a 2-page visual summary of each episode designed to help you take the learning from the podcast and into your work.

You’ll get:
■ Key insights from the episode
■ A reflection prompt
■ A suggested action

Sign up now to get From Pod to Practice delivered to your inbox each week: https://distinction.live/keep-in-touch/

About Us

We’re Dani and Garin – Organisation Development (OD) practitioners who help leaders and people professionals tackle the messiness of organisational life. We focus on building leadership capability, strengthening team effectiveness, and designing practical, systemic development programmes that help you deliver on your team and organisational goals. We also offer coaching to support individual growth and change.

Find out more at www.distinction.live

We'd love to connect with you on Linked In:
linkedin.com/in/danibacon478
https://www.linkedin.com/in/garinrouch

Transcript

(00:00) Hi and welcome to the org dev podcast. So what does it really take to build a responsive high-erforming organization? One that learns, adapts, and endures. Today we're joined all the way from California from one of the world's leading thinkers on organization agility, Dr. Chris Wallally, co-author of the agility factor.
(00:26) Now, we did offer to fly over to Chris, but Chris said Zoom was fine, but we're so pleased that he's accepted our invitation. In this episode, we're going to discuss how leaders can loosen their grip to create a space for adaptation, how OD practitioners can play a catalytic role, and why diversity, identity, and informal rules might matter more to agility than we think. Dr.
(00:43) Chris is a globally recognized expert in organization development, agility, and strategic change. He's authored more than a 100 articles, book chapters, and presentations on organization effectiveness, and extensive work spans academia, consulting, and executive education.
(01:00) And he's helped shaped how leaders think about change and continuous transformation. He's a research professor of management at Pepedine Business School, and he's visiting clinical professor of strategy at REN's Business School as well. And he's also affiliated senior research scientist at USC Center for Effective Organizations.
(01:17) Naturally with all this incredible experience is underpinned by professional qualifications. He has a doctorate in strategic management and a masters in OD and he's co-author of the market leading text organization development and change now in its 12th edition. And this was actually my first book that introduced me into the fascinating world of OD.
(01:35) Now they always say don't meet your heroes but this couldn't be further from the truth in this case. What we really admire about Chris is that he's provocative. He's outspoken and challenges OD professionals to do better and be better as well. So, thank you so much for joining us, Chris. [Music] We're really excited to have you with us.
(02:00) So, before we've got lots of questions about agility and all of that stuff, but before we get just give us a bit more of an overview about the work you do, what what does your work involve? I I told my wife I'm in the process of retiring. You know, I'm I think I'm in the sixth or seventh year of the four-year slowdown plan. And so, I've been, you know, trying to back away a little bit. I don't teach quite as much as I used to.
(02:20) I don't consult as much as I used to. I've still got some things I want to say. So, I'm still writing quite a bit and trying to figure stuff out. and and I enjoy like you say I I'm connected with the Pepperdine and and USC here in the States. I work with the Ren Business School over in France uh with their executive ad.
(02:42) Um I'm I'm about to start a year-long fellowship with the Singapore government and the Civil Service College to to try and talk about what agility looks like in a government setting. So I just kind of keep myself busy doing doing things that are fun. Now I suppose that's the retiring part of it. I'm trying to find stuff that's fun to do and I still stay in touch with a lot of my students and and and keep monitoring their careers and and trying to be supportive and helpful and you know do a podcast every once in a while and try and try and keep my fingers in the mix a little bit. So we're very glad that you do. So thinking about the agility factor,
(03:17) you co-wrote that and you describe in that organization agility is a deliberately cultivated capability. So what is it that's so important that it's not just a kind of it's a deliberately cultivated capability. It's quite different, isn't it? It's just something that's a kind of there. You have to intentionally build it. Yeah. You you you can't buy it.
(03:36) It's not a it's not something that exists out in the marketplace that you go buy. You have to learn it, right? And and that's it's it's it's agility is hard. Um, I think I think there's this notion that well, if I if I respond to this particular challenge, whether it's the tariffs that's happening today or or AI or if I just figure out how to adapt to the a particular challenge, then I'm being agile, right? And so people say, well, you know, let's change the let's change the meeting from Thursday to to Friday. We're being agile. No, no, no, no, no. It's it's it's much more it's
(04:13) much more of an organization design issue and an organization development issue uh than I think a lot of people give it maybe credit for. It's it's hard. And so there's this there is this notion of of committing to it, committing resources to it, understanding what it means. I think there's a lot of misunderstanding still.
(04:33) I mean uh you know I really like the little book. I I I do. Um, but it was almost 10 years ago now that it came out and I never expected Agility to have this long life. Even when we first did the first book with with Ed Lawler on Built to Change, it it it's had this life that I think is kind of interesting given the times and the technology and everything that's going on. It's hard.
(05:03) People still misunderstand it and figuring that out. Yeah. Yeah. We love a definition here. So, what is your definition of agility? you said kind of definition matters. Well, that's a that's actually a hard question because I've been changing it lately, right? And so, um I think in the book we talked about um agility being a uh a capability a capability to uh um repeat change over and over again such that it sustains performance.
(05:36) We talked about organization change when and where it matters. I I think that's that's hold held up pretty well. But lately, uh the same friend of mine, Tom Cummings, who I write the textbook with, he and I are working on a paper now and we've tried to say, okay, what have we learned in the last 10 years about agility and what's going on? And so now now we're we've modified it a little bit based on practice and research and stuff.
(06:05) So agility now is a a capac a built-in capacity and a learned capability. So that's a difference. Now it's not just a capability, it's a there's also a capacity component to it. And I hope we're not splitting academic hairs when we make a distinction between capacity and capability that we have.
(06:25) And it's kind of we think it's important uh to make timely and sufficient change. So one of the misunderstandings I think about agility is that it's about speed, about how fast you go. I don't think that's true. I think it's about can you make the change when you need to and you make the right change timely and sufficient and then the the part about sustained performance is held up really well too.
(06:52) So the capacity and capability to make timely and sufficient change when circumstances warrant such that performance stays high. So that's the little shift. It's been a little shift and the research you talk about in the book kind of made a really strong link between agility and sustained high performance, didn't it? talked about kind of Yeah.
(07:08) I I think it's interesting because the I if you're a strategist, they're always talking about um sustained competitive advantage, sustained high performance. And I'm I'm just kind of it's it's kind of funny to me. People don't Okay, what does that mean? What do you mean when you say sustained high performance? And then you go into the empirical research and they don't they don't define it or they they do cross-sectional performance. No, no, no.
(07:33) sustained over a long period of time and then what does what does superior mean? Does it mean way above average? Does it mean better than the market? And then, you know, what's the metric? Is it is it stock price? Is it profitability? And I I I do think agility factor did a good job of saying this is what it is. It's it's profitability, not stock price.
(07:52) It's above industry average for a long period of time. And that has held up pretty well, I think. Yeah. Yeah. And I guess is there a question about why broadening the definition of sustained high performance beyond profit? Is it all about profitability or is there are there other factors we need to be thinking about in a kind of wider sense? You know, one of the wrestling that you do with right is is there a single is there a single measure of performance? No.
(08:21) The debate we engaged in was is it profitability or stock price and and tried to suggest that stock price um I mean if you just look at look at what's happening in the in in the in the markets right now. We talked about the taco the or the the market's performing pretty well and then Trump announces a tariff and it goes down and then he says well I didn't mean it. We're going to go back.
(08:45) There's quite a bit of volatility there that has nothing to do with management decision. And so we said that's let's set that aside. That's as another measure of performance. Let's talk about what managers can control to some extent, right? And and work around profitability. Should we be talking about employee engagement? Should we be talking about sustainability? Should we be talking about um inclusion and community engagement? Yes. All those things I think are legit measures of performance.
(09:13) But when it comes down to a single measure, we thought profitability is at least something that organizations especially for-profit ones would really be concerned about. And I think one of the things we really sort of enjoy about it because you know if people get agility I I know I should be agile but the book sort of defines four agility routines which you can then sort of develop that discipline within the organization and that's strategizing, perceiving, testing and implementing which are central to your model. Which of these do you find organizations most
(09:42) often struggle to do and why? That's it's interesting the way you ask the question. A lot of people will ask me which one is the most important to which I say it's a system and so you need all four. The way you ask the question which I think is interesting is which one's the weakest and uh across I don't know it's it's hard to say how many one one way of studying it is by organization. We've done that before.
(10:10) We probably got 60 70 organizations that we've worked with. The other way is just to ask a lot of people, right? And just getting people from the sea suite to sort of say, "What do you think it is?" So, you know, we got four or 500 of those. Um the the by far the weakest one is the testing um routine.
(10:30) And it's not it's not that the organization doesn't encourage innovation because testing test and learn uh experimenting innovating prototyping things. It's not that they don't emphasize innovation. It's that they don't have the resource flexibility and they don't learn. They don't do afteraction reviews. They just it's we got to go too fast. We have to hurry up.
(10:54) Everything's in everything's in hurry up mode. And so they don't take the time to reflect on was that successful why was it successful? If it was a failure, why was it a failure? What do we learn from that? What would we do different next time? Organizations are seem they struggle apparently to do that. And I think that's the that's the bit by far that's the weakest one. Yeah.
(11:16) Yeah. And and it's interesting because you you talk about 3M as like a poster child of an organization that's able to launch products, but you said part of what it does is it kind of is always sort of testing. It's always making sure that it's it's ready when the new opportunities come. So it looks like it's fast. Yes. But it's not. It's just thorough. Yes. It's it's it's prepared.
(11:36) That's the what I've been trying to suggest is it's not about speed. It's about being prepared. And so in that sense the perceiving routine becomes really important because are you looking ahead? Are you looking into the future? Are you are you playing with the future trying to understand what might happen because of AI or because of globalization or whatever? Are you are you thinking ahead so that when the future comes you're sort of ready? 3M example is is a testing example and there's this built-in DNA inside of 3M that says no
(12:08) matter whether this innovation was successful or not let's do the action review and what I found so interesting about that was was not that they documented the successes is that they documented the failures and so why did something fail was it a technology was it a manufacturing process was it a materials issue was it a market was it a customer, what was the And so they go through and they say, "Well, yeah, no, it we didn't have the technology or we didn't have the materials or the market wasn't ready." And they stick that in their knowledge management system. Now
(12:43) time passes, the technology arrives, the materials sciences becomes available, the market now has matured. Ah, those two things are now fit and it looks like they're fast, but they're really just prepared. So I I thought that was a really interesting story. Yeah.
(13:06) And I guess I'm really curious as well because it's you see so much talking about it which is we fail fast and all that but you know there isn't necessarily the psychological safety in organizations where it's like you know let's draw attention to my failure. It's often like let's brush that one under the carpet and let's move on. Exactly.
(13:23) So, so is is there something specific about the organizations that are good at testing that have something in their culture DNA that makes it okay and it's just part of our sort of modus operandi? Yeah, you you talked about the psychological safety part of it, right? I think it's a great concept and if you read Amy's stuff, she talks about she she lays out why she thinks organizations create psychological safety and some of the things they have to do.
(13:49) My biggest criticism of the of of the other parts of that of that movement is everybody thinks it's a good idea and everybody says you should do it but they don't tell you how to do it. Ah that's that's kind of a missing piece. Amy does a good job in her book trying to address that, but I think organizations need to go beyond saying they should and and that requires some I'll I'll suggest that requires some interpersonal competence as opposed to an organization one where you know leaders leaders and I'm trying to think I think it was uh Lion in um in his book on teams leaders
(14:29) go first right So being able to display some vulnerability, being willing to reflect on myself and engage others in reflecting on my behaviors so that it's okay to admit that I tried this and it didn't work, but I had my I had the right intent. I think there's some some interpersonal things that we have to do.
(14:56) So even, you know, I still I still try to do, you know, a tea group every once in a while in my in my life just to keep the the instrument sharp. I I was I was exploring that idea with a group uh in the fall was a year ago almost. I think there's some interpersonal competence that comes with that and being able to say it's okay. It's okay.
(15:17) And to create that, I think the leader creates it by being vulnerable themselves and demonstrating it. Yeah. Yeah. And it's about, I guess, it's like sort of creating the environment because a lot of these, you know, senior leadership team meetings, the environment is quite intense, isn't it? You have to sort of create certain conditions for that to flourish as well.
(15:33) Yes. Exactly. No. And and it does sort of fall on the shoulders of the leaders a little bit. I don't I don't um I don't let I don't let team members off the hook. you you have you too have to take a risk. And I think there's some pretty decent research out there that says, you know, promotions and advancement in careers is partly a function of, hey, I'm trying to make things better here.
(16:01) Let's get out and and even if you do fail, okay, people look at what you did and what you were trying to do and say, here's somebody who's trying to make a difference. Let's pay attention to them. Maybe they need to be on the high potential list and get into leadership development and maybe give them a promotion or something. I think there's some decent research on that that says, you know, it's it's not always, oh, what are they doing and are they creating psychological safety? It's do I have enough sort of confidence in myself to get out there and say, here's an idea. Let's try this. Let's try let's try it. Isn't there must be a there must be a
(16:30) better way. When you think about kind of the role of organization development practitioners in kind of enabling agility, what what can OD practitioners do and how how can they support their organizations? I I I certainly think I certainly think agility should be an outcome of ongoing organization development effort.
(16:49) Right? So agility describes the design that allows an organization to make these timely and sufficient changes. Right? Um how did we get to that capability? That's where I think the organization development people should come come into play is saying okay I've got to change the organization is is thinking is under some pressure or sees an opportunity it's you know it's both opportunity based and and and problem based here's here's a change on opportunity how can I perform this change in a way that contributes to perceiving testing
(17:24) strategizing implementing right I think that's the stance I try to get OD D people to think about in terms of it's not just about this change. What's the diagnosis? What's the system? What's the intervention we're going to make? How do we change? That's all important, but is the context of all of that saying, how can I use this opportunity to build one of those one of those routines and and and create an organization that's that has more flexibility, adaptability, resilience, nimleness, whatever the what metaphor of the day is around around
(18:00) agility. So, yeah, I huge. I think it's huge. Um, if I was if I was criticizing OD, it'd be and I was I got this I have to say I got this metaphor from um a friend of mine. His name will blurt out in my head here in a second, but he what he says is or there's two kinds of organization development people.
(18:26) There's the kind that when they come into an organization, internal or external, you come in and you look down and you say, "Oh my gosh, these people are hurting. They're they're suffering. they're, you know, their engagement scores are low, whatever. I have to help them. And and we have tools that can help people. He says, "There's another kind of of OD person that when he comes in, he says, yes, those people are hurting.
(18:46) I wonder why." And they and they look up to the structures and systems and processes, right, that are that are causing the pain. And so I think organization development people need to have a nice blend of those two perspectives. right and say look the the system and the design of the organization is is suboptimal and that's one of the reasons people are suffering now people may be suffering because they need some new skills and that sort of I I I see that for sure but it's that blend now that I would I'm trying to push OD towards is
(19:22) is seeing seeing both of those as legitimate places to intervene. Yeah, but but it's a very seductive place to be, isn't it? Going down and working with the people and making them feel better and look like I finished a day. Everyone's feeling better now, aren't they? Whereas the system stuff is messy and it's it's complex and you don't see the benefits of your work straight away, do you? Political. Yeah. Power and politics.
(19:48) Um a long long long long time ago there was a chapter on on in the um annual review of psychology and Bob Quinn I think was one of the authors and he said OD often hides behind its values right uh we believe in learning and democracy and participation and all those stuff and and once we say those are our values we hide behind them and say well these are important and somebody challenges it who has power and authority authority and we say, "Well, no, we believe in these things and you're not doing them. I'm not going to work with you." Well, now now we've just
(20:24) thrown away an opportunity. So, you know, finding ways to speak truth to power, finding ways to to recognize that I think a lot of OD people just don't appreciate the complexity of a senior executive's life, right? What a CE if you're sitting in the CEO chair all the things that are happening in your world every day and all the different demands and stakeholders and things that are h it's a really hard job and a lot of I think a lot of people in OD might be a little too naive about that. So, it's about understanding these people have a
(21:04) lot of responsibility and it's a tough job making tough calls, making tradeoffs every day. And so, we have to find a way to my metaphor is I got to find a way to ride up next to them, not confront them, but be with them and and sort of understand all those things and and as appropriate, find ways to sort of nudge them and say, "Well, here's an opportunity.
(21:27) you could move and pivot a little, change direction just a little bit in the way that we've been talking about to make the organization better. But it's it's a real challenge though, is it? Because as a um uh if you've got a senior leader that's overwhelmed with complexity generally what OD sees is complexity.
(21:46) So is helping them embrace reality for what it is. So it makes their world even more complex. So, how do you the challenge is how do you present things in a way that makes things a little simpler but without dumbing it down almost isn't it? This is where I think when I call out dialogic OD as opposed to diagnostic OD I I I really don't like that. I think that's a false dichotomy.
(22:10) I think I think drawing attention to that. But I will say some of the things that the dialogic folks have done in bringing complexity thinking and and into the into our field is they begin to say yes it is complex. We do have to think in systems terms right and because it is complex because it is fastm moving because it a lot of things are emergent what's important is the conversation right and and as a as CEO are you in conversation with multiple stakeholders are you taking the time to have conversation and listen and hear and
(22:48) debate and out of that conversation out of that complexity often often, you know, sifts out um in a, you know, kind of way. It sifts out and then I now I'll pick up another little phrase from from uh the late great Ed Shine. What's the next best smallest right thing I could do, which I loved.
(23:12) I thought that was just, you know, in a system that's complex and emergent, I'm not going to pull one lever and say I'm done. I'm going to look at the complexity of the whole thing, right? and say, "Wow, okay, here's something I can do that moves me in the direction I want to go right now." And so I do think that this notion of of of of dialogue of sitting with complexity, you know, I I I I tell organizations every day, every day you're asked to perform, perform, perform, perform.
(23:45) every day or on if I can use a sports analogy the football players they you know they perform once a week and they're practicing all the time when do you get a chance to practice in organizations you don't get a chance to just step back and say I need to just think about this a little bit with some people who have different perspectives and let's have that conversation debate dialogue around all the different forces that are acting on us and and based on that what kind of emerges is the next best smallest right move we could make and you know trying to create that space. I think OD people
(24:23) are really good at creating that little space where we could have that conversation and and I guess part of it is managing the expectations because a lot of people are addicted to the lever or the silver bullet, aren't they? So it's just like and oh god that's absolutely true big biggest problem with agility with trying to get organization I want agility so what lever do I pull what is the silver bullet what do I and I no sorry you might have to go you might have to have somebody else help you I I can't do that I you know we need to understand your
(24:56) system and and all of its complexity and begin to talk about what's the next best right smallest absolutely True. Oh, I I couldn't agree more. Yeah. And just thinking back to the way you defined agility, that kind of building in capacity, you know, that can be quite uncomfortable for leaders and organizations that we're building in capacity to because it's that that I want to be efficient. We want to be productive. Yes. We want to be lean.
(25:20) We don't want capacity. And it's like, but that's exactly it's exactly what you need. That's exactly right. I could have the cap I could have the capability to change but if I don't have the slack resources I don't have a structure that is has more capacity for growth than a than another kind of structure. You you you nailed it.
(25:45) That's why we put capacity in there because if the capacity doesn't exist then the capability is worthless. I've got to have that that now that that's how it links directly to sustained above average profitability. I can't have one does can't exist without the other now. So it really becomes important to think about I'm no longer this is this is I get into trouble so much when I talk about this.
(26:12) I can no longer sort of sit idly by while they talk about maximizing shareholder wealth and maximizing profitability. I can't. I said, ' Okay, then we can't talk about agility. I'm going to I'm going to talk to you about being able to have above average profitability for a long period of time, but I'm not going to maximize the profitability because that's not sustainable. Sustained high performance.
(26:38) If you want sustained high performance, you can't maximize profitability. That thinking drives out scarce resources or slack resources. It drives out any resource that isn't directly available to value ad. So that that's well you nailed it. That's why we put capacity in there.
(26:59) It's got to be in there or else you can't sustain sustained performance just doesn't isn't possible. Yeah. You said something that we love. I think you said efficiency makes you fragile. Yes. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. That Yeah. There's something about um fragility is not agility. efficient systems are fragile. And I I go back to I remember when I was I think we were talking about about the podcast and stuff.
(27:25) I was on my way over to to France. I was halfway from LA to London. I was had a stop over in London. I was halfway over and they turned the plane around, went back to LA because of the fire outside of Heathrow. One one transformer caught on fire and wiped out all of Heathrow. That's not an agile system. That's not a robust system.
(27:45) That's a fragile system. It was probably very efficient. That's that's it. Right? If we're going to make we're going to have if efficiency is the is the altar at which we worship, right? We're going to create fragility and not agility. Just a sort of a sidebar question because um I think you sort of said you have two different types of opinion.
(28:04) Uh one is research based. You've done a lot of thinking about it. and other like opinions like yeah if you've got your values in that one of the things we're going to see a lot over the next 12 to 24 months is how companies are responding to AI and you know where announcement yesterday IBM is just gutting its HR team because opportunities to to automate h how can organizations retain agility because there's a big challenge in how you approach AI are you going for efficiency or are you looking for o opportunities here what's your thoughts in terms of how organizations can approach It's the it's the same logic. I
(28:39) I think it's really interesting. That's that's why I think this whole agility thing has been interesting and how it's how long it's lasted. It's still it's still a relevant concept in the in the age of AI. So if your if your organization adopts and most organizations are adopting some kind of responsible AI uh human- centered AI policy that says okay we're trying as we use AI we want it to be explainable um we want it to be reliable we want it to be fair not full of bias uh we want security and privacy these are all
(29:18) really crucial things with respect ect to adopting AI as an individual, you know, and do I get on and use co-pilot or chat GPT or or claude or whatever you're working with, right? Um, but as you go to use cases and we and we look at work processes and we and we disagregate the work processes and reassemble what can be automated and what can be augmented.
(29:47) And as we go through all of those things, is the H is I've kind of adopted the human- centered AI thing from Stanford. I think they're doing really cool work. Um, is the policy there? Is it active? And does it have some teeth? Right. I I I'm I see a lot of people checking the box. Yes, we have a responsible AI policy, but it comes back to what you were saying before.
(30:13) Is AI being adopted within a regime of efficiency? Because AI is goal oriented and it's learning. And if you're trying to use AI to become more efficient, you'll create a fragile system. And you know, I could get pretty dark pretty fast on this stuff, right? Because I've been I don't know. I think my Instagram algorithm is really getting good because I'll stop and listen to the different CEOs of Open AI and Anthropic and Google and I'll listen to them talk at different speech.
(30:46) They're talking pretty dark stuff about replacing jobs and and I I was, you know, my wife and I were driving down to Southern California and I asked her I said, "Can you think of a job that AI can't replace?" No. No. I don't. Have you seen these robots? the robots that they've got now that that and what they can do.
(31:05) It's it's it's amazing. So the question I think organizations have to ask is what future are you trying to build? Are you trying to build a efficient future with AI? I think you're now talking about the demise of organizations, right? Are you trying to build an organization where AI supports human purpose? Now we're talking about a jointly optimized.
(31:28) You know what's interesting? This is a long answer to your question. I apologize, but a good one. Keep going. Let's keep going. What what's really interesting to me is this this notion of um human- centered AI has has brought back a old classic in OD, which is sociotechnical work systems.
(31:54) We're now going back to some of those principles of jointly optimized human technical processes. And do you really believe that? Do you really believe in jointly optimized? I'm not going to maximize the technology, right? Because then the people go away. I want to jointly optimize both of them so that we move forward technologies and humans together moving towards human purposes, human progress and not the elimination of it.
(32:25) You can you can get into all kinds of Matrix and Skynet Terminator kinds of scenarios that nobody wants, but the the gold rush is on. So everybody's adopting AI as quickly as they can and putting it into work processes and use cases. So So there is a role for OD in this then, isn't there? Because um absolutely you can you can really approach the whole thing tactically. You know, we've got to make our year-end budget. Look, I can spot cost savings.
(32:49) is I'll be the hero of the month if I can do this. But so organizations will become what they become. Yeah. Without sort of intentional thought. So OD does that have an opportunity to take a step back here and make sure we're asking like I said the right question. You you nailed it. Right. Intentional thought.
(33:06) Are we are we are we being conscious and aware of what we're contributing to? I think in speed now sort of Peter Block had a great phrase. It was speed is a defense against depth, right? We're going so fast. We're going so fast we forgot that we should be thinking about what we're doing. And some decisions require some depth.
(33:30) This go back to our CEO our CEO conversation we're just having. Do does the CEO and the leadership team take time to think about things? And if we're just going fast, if we just got to meet the quarterly budgets or expectations of the market, will we adopt and put AI in place without thought about whether we're actually replacing humans? Just because we can doesn't mean we should. Because we can. Yeah. Yeah. Contributes to productivity and efficiency.
(33:55) I've got a teenage son and they him and his friends have been learning Japanese on Duolingo and a group because they've now replaced a lot of their staff with AI. His friend group have all opted out. They've all deleted Duolingo. they're not using it anymore because in in protest against you know the replacement of humans with AI.
(34:14) So it' be interesting to see how people respond to to organizations. It is interesting. Yeah. So many pressures. So many pressures social, technical, financial, personal. So many pressures pushing us to go faster and faster and faster. And the algorithms the algorithms are so good. I get my little dopamine rush by through my Instagram feed and am I thinking about it? Am I thinking that's that's where that perceiving routine I think comes in so important says you would see an alternative future that is AI dominated and we just don't have a role in that. Okay. Is that the future that
(34:54) I'm really trying to aim for or angle for? Or do I see do I see all the really cool parts of AI and what it could do? Bill Passmore has this great line or is you know AI is leading us to the place where everybody knows everything about anything. Okay, so AI is not going to be a competitive advantage.
(35:18) There was just a a really good article in the Sloan Management Review just recent very short little article. It said AI is not going to result in competitive advantage because everybody will have it. It'll be a commodity. The question is how we're going to use it and who who's smart enough to be think about how to use it for human progress, human human purposes. So that becomes the quick the the the little pivot point.
(35:44) And so I've been talking to organizations about what are your stakes in the ground? What are the stakes in the ground? And I think the human- centered AI policy is a potential stake in the ground, but you got to back that up with other policies and design incentives and leadership development and all that stuff that we talk about in OD, you got to back that policy up with some teeth. And going back to your original discipline, which is you got your doctorate in uh strategy, didn't you? Um so so part of it is you know do you do you get a sense that organizations are are potentially exploring the different
(36:15) scenarios that are out there? Is that a sense that you're you're getting at the moment? It's it's a really good question. I don't have a straight answer for you on that one. A lot of times when I talk to organizations and ask them are you they'll say yes we have we have an organization that does that who's worried about it and thinks about it and runs alternative scenario. Oh, that's great.
(36:41) Then I have to ask the hard question. When was the last time your leadership team had the conversation with that group about alternative futures? And that's when the room gets silent. And I say, "Okay, good on you. You got that. You're going too fast and you're not the speed is overtaking the depth and you got to you got to bring those people in more often.
(37:04) You got to have those conversations more often and and lay lay your existing set of priorities, initiatives, one to twoyear, you know, tactical strategies against that futures, against those alternative futures and saying, are we aiming for this and are we moving toward it? That's a tough one. I I don't have a straight answer.
(37:24) I wish I had some I I have some people who are doing some really cool stuff, you know, on on this on the futuring side of things, but I don't have a sense of how well it's being integrated into decisionm right now. Yeah, I think particularly if OD is going to start mixing in these areas, which it it has absolute right to do, it's about entering the language of that area, isn't it? And I remember you sort of saying an example that um you went into for example Microsoft and you were saying strategy what what's your strategy and they were like getting blank looks back and then you said then
(37:56) you heard that they used the word bet. Yes. And all of a sudden it turns out they were extremely strategic. They just didn't call it that word. They didn't call it that word. Yeah. That's right. And so I think there's two ways to go there. As OD people we have to be flexible enough and know our craft well enough not to be hung up by our own jargon, right? to enter into a system and again I don't care whether they're an internal or an external to enter into a system and listen to what they're talking about and be able to put their language into a framework and say aha
(38:29) they are talking about strategy or they are talking about systems or incentives or motivation or culture or whatever it is they are talking about it. So, how can we, you know, how can we be confident enough in our craft that we don't have to have other people talk like us to understand it? That that includes AI. I've watched some really interesting videos trying to explain to me what AI is.
(38:56) And I, you know, it's a probabilistic thing that predicts the next word and and how that minimum calculus and the curves and this thing to recognize lang. Oh, that's very interesting. I I don't I wouldn't know C++ from Python in terms of coding, but I have a better understanding now of of what people are doing and how it's working and just enough just enough to to sort of say, okay, I can I can I think I can help them think about how they're going to apply it.
(39:28) Now, I go back into my world in the in the sociotechnical world and say, are human needs being considered along with the technical economic needs? are both of those being considered and I'm trying to optimize both instead of maximizing one. Are we doing that or not? Now I I'm helping.
(39:48) Now I'm back into helping and I don't have to know the technical aspects, all the details of of of an AI algorithm. Yeah, that's a great question. We we we have to be better at understanding our craft. Hi, we're just pausing this interview for a moment. Have you ever finished an episode of the org dev podcast and wish you had a cheat sheet that summarizes all of the key points? Us too, so we made one.
(40:13) It's called from pod to practice. And each week in our newsletter will share a two-page summary of the latest org dev episode. And it includes key takeaways, a reflection prompt, and one small action you can try. And it's all in a digital format with space at the end to add your own notes and reflections. And it's designed to help you take the learning from the podcast into your day-to-day work.
(40:32) So to get your copy, just sign up to our next step to better newsletter, the links in the show notes, or you can visit our website at www.distinction.live to get the latest from pod to practice in your inbox, and let us know what you think. We'd love to get your feedback. One question we like to ask everybody who comes on the podcast is how you got into OD.
(40:50) What was your journey into the the organization development field? Okay, it's it's um Ann Farmer and I did a little study long long time ago about about this very question and I don't think I'm any different than a lot of people. I was working for the Forest Service. My I have two master's degree. The first one is is in outdoor recreation. Okay.
(41:12) And I was I was really concerned about how people my my research question at the time is why do people destroy that which they're trying to enjoy, right? Why do people go out into the mountains and the wilderness and fishing and camping and in doing that and enjoying that they're actually destroying the resource they're trying to I thought that was an interesting question.
(41:32) So, I was playing with the Forest Service and they were having a safety training one day and you know the the person got up there and started talking about safety and how you should drive and be careful and the and and rather than sort of go on for a lecture, which is what we all thought was going to happen for half a day, the the person turned out it was an OD person, sort of made some comments and made some provocative observations about things that we don't do every day with regard to safety. Then he said, "I want you to break into small groups and talk about
(42:06) the extent to which this is happening in your world." Oh, well, I thought I was going to sit here for 3 hours and listen. I didn't know I was going to have to do some work. And so, we did it and we, you know, we talked about it and all the different things.
(42:24) And afterwards, I went up to him and I said, I really didn't think, you know, I was going to do that. You know, I haven't seen anybody do that kind of a training before. ah as organization de I'm an organization development practitioner h so that kind of stuck with me you know that was an interesting way of of doing things this is a long time ago now right as I was as I was leaving the master's degree um in outdoor recreation we had the I think we went from I think it was Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan in the United States and so from Democrat to Republican and the conservative sort of
(43:01) Reagan thing, a lot of a lot of opportunities sort of dried up. I thought I might go for my doctorate at that point, but there was no money and I was broke. And I talked to a friend and he was working, he had gotten his MBA at Pepperdine and he was working for a OD firm. I've heard
(43:25) of OD. I've heard. And I said, I I'm looking for jobs if you know of anything. and he says, "Well, actually our our firm is growing and you're an interesting character because you understand systems." I was a, you know, an economist and a biologist and a you know, and you you know how to write because I wrote my dis my thesis and and articles and stuff and um you're a psychologist.
(43:47) You could be an OD practitioner. So they the firm hires me, right, as a kind of a junior little OD person running around doing policies and procedures. And this is the last part of the long story. Apologize. One of the principles in the firm was a guy named Walt Ross. Walt Ross became the associate dean uh for uh academic affairs at Pepperdine University and he was one of the key professors in the Pepperdine MSOD program and he said come after the consulting thing the consulting firm was kind of petering out. He said, "Come work for me and I'll pay for your masters in OD."
(44:28) Done deal. Done deal. So, I had I had no intention at all going into OD. I I was a I was a treehugging environmentalist. Love it. I love the stories of people's roots in it's it's always interesting. All these different people in in the history of our field came to OD from different places.
(44:47) It's what I think makes our field kind of interesting because we all bring sort of slightly different perspectives into it. And what do you enjoy most about the work these days? What what really sparks your your interest in the work that you do? It's oh that's actually kind of it's it's that's an easy one.
(45:07) It's it's it's working with a system which is made up of people and then watching those people watching the arc of their change by the end of working with them for six months or 18 months or whatever to see how to see that arc.
(45:26) And it doesn't matter whether it's a student, you know, it could be a student in in in the MSOD program and over 18 months watching their growth and development in the field or it's a client and and seeing them come to you, you know, a year and a half later and say, "Everything you asked me to do, I've never done before." And to which I always say, "Yeah, that's why we call it change." And and then the the next thing is Yeah.
(45:54) But yes, I was always I was I always you know I wasn't sure what I was doing but you made it feel safe. Ah right that's the change in this realm. Yeah. So you know I I do think there's this there's some truth to this notion that all organization change is preceded by a personal one.
(46:15) I think there's some truth to that and and certainly working with people and being able to see, oh, there's another way to look at this and and see them integrate, you know, integrate behavioral science and social science with economics and marketing and finance and and seeing how those things all fit together. That's that's gives me juice. And when you were developing as an OD practitioner, obviously one of the big things they talk about is self as instrument. It's a much talked about concept but little defined as well.
(46:40) What was your sort of process of developing that sort of self as instrument and and and what can we learn today so people that are going into the field that hear it and want to do it but how would they go about doing it? I'm very saddened by the decline in the whole sensitivity training tea groups piece of things because every time I talk to people who I admire who I think are good at what they do and I ask them about you know almost almost always there's something related to that to that process of being
(47:14) in an unstructured uh group process. Tavistock um was is a big part of that. NTL was a big part of it. Mian Chung Judge R who passed away recently, she was a big advocate of that stuff. Um, you know, getting in and and learning about yourself and and your strengths and weaknesses and and where your, you know, where your your origin story comes from and who just really having a clear sense of who you are develops develops inside of me of inside of us.
(47:52) a a an extra database that as as a process is unfolding recognizing how that process is affecting me personally and the emotions that I feel and and all that and saying wow if I'm feeling if I'm listening to this presentation and I'm bored to tears h I'll bet you other people are too and I can ask a question like I go excuse me this is some of this is really interesting but I'm really checking out because I'm not seeing what the point is or whatever. I can make an intervention. So, the whole process consultation, the
(48:29) stuff that Ed did with Humble Consulting and stuff, the TAGroup movement, um I wish I wish we could get more OD people into that and they they this is this is a fair criticism. They think they're in therapy and maybe maybe therapy is a good thing. we should be talking about having people more in therapy.
(48:53) But this is not the way they the way they conduct these when when it's done right. These these tea groups and sensitivities, it's not therapy. It's just learning learning about who you are and how you feel in situations and how other people see you and and and sort of appreciating and understanding that so that you're not walking around in some bubble thinking, I'm the best thing since, you know, sliced bread.
(49:22) Uh people see me as as having strengths and weaknesses and can I understand that and being in that and that's not therapy. That's just learning how I get in my own way. Yeah. Because those tea groups are incredibly powerful, aren't they? Because you suddenly start to understand how you respond and what your needs are. Cuz in the moment when you're in amongst as a as a as a facilitator in a group, everyone's projecting on to you their hopes, fears, anxieties, whatever. Yes.
(49:46) And you've got to unpack what is my stuff? Yes. What is it about me wanting to feel safe and comfortable in this group and what's your stuff? But it has to happen really quickly, doesn't it? Has to happen very quickly. The you know Dick Beckart was was the was the great one, right? He he didn't use the word stuff when he talked about it, but he would say your stuff, my stuff, and our stuff.
(50:08) And um that knowing knowing right that I am uncomfortable with conflict from my upbringing or whatever it was whatever I I that's what it is. I'm uncomfortable with conflict and then to have a team in conflict. Am I intervening to make myself feel better or am I intervening because I'm going to help the team work the conflict productively? Those are those are things you got to learn because otherwise you're you're working your own needs as opposed to working the needs of the client. And yes, I I think you're you're spot on. They're projecting stuff on to
(50:40) you all the time. Well, you're the expert. Help me. And they they're giving up their agency and and making you responsible for their problem. Are you aware of that? Is that or or do you like being the person who score scores all the goals? Right. Yeah. No, I think it's great. I'm glad you asked that question.
(51:04) For all the work that I do in strategy and or design, the foundation of it is is is that personal growth work. Yeah. Because again, obviously, you know, you've made a conscious choice to be both an academic and a practitioner. That's that's a really healthy combination in many ways, isn't it? Well, I I'm not an entrepreneur. One of the things I learned about myself is I'm not an entrepreneur.
(51:27) I'm I'm uncomfortable with the uncertainty of geez, I have a project today and money's coming in and the project's over and I got no money coming in anymore and I have to go run around and and beat the band. So, as an external entrepreneur, I would be pretty lousy at it. I liked having the comfort of a regular paycheck um and and being a teacher and transferring knowledge that way, but I also knew that I I I it's an uncomfortable place. I I do feel discomfort about it sometimes.
(51:58) A lot of the academics think I'm not very academic and a lot of the practitioners think I'm pretty academic and so it's a rather liinal space that I'm in, right? And I'm, you know, I've learned to live with that, right? But I I I run around I go, "God, I I really would like, you know, I I wish people thought I was a good scholar.
(52:21) you know, you haven't published in this journal or that journal or that journal. And the practitioners are like, well, he's an academic, therefore he knows some things about it. He's probably not very practical, but we'll we'll listen to what he has to say. It's a it's an odd it's an odd place to be in. It works for me. And and what what do you find most challenging about being that practitioner when you are out in the field? What what find things do you find most difficult? Uh, well, I think I'm just at a point in my life where finding work isn't that hard anymore.
(52:57) Part of it is the writing, part of it the so, you know, I get calls from people that, but it was hard for a long time, especially having started an OD on this more microoriented side. T-roups, Dick Beckart, Bob Tannenbomb, Edshine, Warner Burke, those were all the people who who taught me and it was very micro group oriented stuff.
(53:24) And as I practiced a little bit, I kept noticing the organization stuff, the the look up stuff. And so getting to that point where I could do more work at the organization level, certainly in in the my career, I just turned 70, so I'm like, I wish I knew then what I know now. So making that change was hard and I had to stick keep sticking my nose into broader and broader issues and that was hard. Oh, you're an OD person.
(53:54) You're supposed to do coaching and you know stuff. No, no, no. I'm an OD person and I want to get involved in that messy political power stuff. That was hard. That that that it didn't go as fast as I wanted it to go. Brilliant. And a question we wanted to ask as well is you you your book was my gateway drug into OD. So the OD and change book.
(54:14) Um since its fifth edition, it's now on its 12th edition. Um what are some of the standout changes that you've sort of modified about it in that time or has it sort of stayed consistent? The principles still remain the same? And I think there's a lot of it that stays the same. I think a lot of the first principles stay the same.
(54:32) I'll tell you a couple of things in this version of the book that really did change quite a bit. Maybe three. I'll say the third one first. We we got tired of the book being 700 pages. And you know, if it's a gateway drug, you want a little injection a little faster than it have, you know, if it if I'm went straight to the And so we we spent a lot of time just looking at it and saying what's the essence of it, right? And so the the the 12th edition now is is is much more concise. And that's just a process thing.
(55:09) We just thought that was important. It doesn't it doesn't look nearly as impressive on your bookshelf as the other one does, but I think there's some principles there that the same. The two things that I think were really substantive changes. one one is we had to sort of figure out in the context of the pandemic me too movement black lives matter what does that DEI chapter look like and so we really scrubbed and revised and rewrote and thought really hard about that chapter to say where what is OD's place in DEI or DEI's place in OD and one of the things I think we landed on that I hope
(55:49) people find insight ightful is that diversity diversity is not the issue. Diversity exists. There is a diverse workforce. The workforce does have different perspectives, you know, philosophically, uh, racially, sexually, there is a diverse workforce. That's not the issue. Now, organizations can make it the issue.
(56:14) Should I hire more diverse people? Do I prefer having a homogeneous group of folks in there? uh well we and we can sort of set that one aside. The real issue is inclusion and have you created an organization that is inclusive and celebrates the diversity that exists. And if you want to go beyond that and get into equity, equality, justice, you know, so be it.
(56:39) But the first question is inclusion and and acknowledging and recognizing that the the workforce is diverse. All right. So that was that that chapter I think is is a pretty big change. um from prior things. The the second sort of substantive change that I talk about is for seven editions that I've been involved with.
(57:05) Um and if you if you look about for the prior editions when Edgar Hughes started it and Tom and Ed worked together, the definition of OD didn't change that much. we would tweak a word here there and and and Tom and I actually did resist quite a bit a lot of the noise within the field about there is no agreed upon definition nobody knows what it is no there's so many definitions and well okay just let's just take a let's press pause for just one second and look across all those definitions they're pretty much the same and so I'm not sure what's what's behind what the motivation behind oh we don't know what it is oh my god. So we we
(57:41) resisted for a long time, you know, trying to fall into that black hole and then we decided to fall into the black hole this time. And what we what we thought we saw was a shift from a a a field that was primarily oriented around applied behavioral science, leaning toward the psychology and the social psychology a little bit into anthropology.
(58:12) And we start to recognize that it's more than just applied behavioral science. It's applied social science that there's sociology involved. economics are involved. And so we went from applied behavioral science to applied social science. And we think that's more than just a little word tweak, right? Because I think OD people now have to appreciate you can choose, right? I can choose to be involved in in in just applying behavioral science or psychology inside of organizations. Great.
(58:43) But I think the field now is more complex and we had to acknowledge that. And we also said it's no longer about uh it gets back to the earlier question that we had which was it's not about it's not about financial performance as effectiveness. It is now a organizations are facing a multiple objective function.
(59:06) Financial performance yes but inclusion sustainability paying attention to our environmental and carbon footprint community relationships. It is a much broader outcome that we're trying to get organizations as we develop organizations but we're trying to get them to pay attention to.
(59:29) So I think those two tweaks in the definition are are more substantive than cosmetic. you know, doesn't change the basic nature of who we are, but it acknowledges that we're trying we're trying to do something in the world now more than just self-actualize or help people actualize social personally, but to actualize the organization in society.
(59:52) So, those are two pretty big changes that we thought we made. And just pulling on two threads there and there's some really rich threads to pull on there. I guess one of them is that um OD the kind of people that are drawn to it love theory um love different things and we are a magpie profession we assimilate lots of different practices into our way of working so does that mean that the OD OD definition will always continue to evolve do you feel or I I hope so I think you know one of the best parts of OD is we have always we're always a little counterdependent right
(1:00:23) whatever whatever people say the definition is well that's not the definition, we're challenged. And so I think we've always done a good job of of of being reflective and self-critical. All right. My argument is we we can't over rotate on that and not get our butts out into the world and start ch and help help organizations change themselves in ways that they want to.
(1:00:48) So where I where I where I do get crossways with some people is if I I think we spend too much time naval gazing. Who are we? What are our values? What's our definition? We don't have one. Okay. There's there's certain healthy part of that.
(1:01:08) But if that's all we're doing and we're not out there practicing and and you know being in the world, I think that's a big mistake. I think that's a big mistake because you can be quite precious. Like in the 20 years I've been doing OD, no one has ever picked up the phone and said, "I want some OD." A lot of people don't call.
(1:01:27) I I Yeah, I wrote a little blog about category killers, right? I said, you know, nobody says they want OD. I think that's actually that's actually fair. And and so as an OD person, do I run around and call myself an OD practitioner? Okay. What So what do you do? I'm an I I work on engagement. I'm employee engagement. I'm a team building. I do large group interventions. I'm a coach. I'm a Right.
(1:01:48) And and those there's nothing wrong with that. But if you think OD is team building, we need to go talk. Right. Every all of these things, conflict resolution, engagement, strategic planning, mission, vision, values, organization, these are all part of OD, right? Each one of them is a piece of OD but together they define the field and what's underneath all of those is a process right there's a process of understanding the system and diagnosis I I get crosswise with the change management people a lot because most of
(1:02:26) the time the change management people pick up a change that has already been decided on usually by powerful people because it's in their interest that's not OD OD is understanding the system bottom up, top down, sideways in.
(1:02:47) Who are we? What are we doing? Which way are we going? Are we how are we trying to optimize on all of these objective functions? Financial, productivity, economic, marketing, all these things, right? And and saying, okay, how are we moving this system in a in a way towards better better social, environmental, economic outcomes? And just one one quick photo I want to pull on as well.
(1:03:14) Um because you do I was in the gym listening to this and I actually stopped what I was doing because you said they affect people in so many ways. I know. I was like oh god what is this? You you were talking about DEIB um and basically you said the powerful elites are happy for you to tackle unconscious bias because it lets them off the hook. I just thought there a really really wonderfully provocative like let's challenge what we're doing kind of way.
(1:03:35) Yeah. No, this it get it becomes so narrow. All we're trying to do is is is find out whether or not people have unconscious bias. Of course they do. Of course they do. The question is what do we do with that? Right? Now that I have an awareness, right, I have certain microaggressions or I have certain, you know, uh, flat sides or hidden parts of my self that that define that. Now, what do I do with it? Okay.
(1:04:06) Yeah, I can go work on myself. That's great. But I live in a system that is trying to provide employment, provide goods for and services for society. How do I use that now as an advantage? That's that's what I mean when I say diversity is already exists. It's already there. Each of us has strengths and weaknesses.
(1:04:30) Am I leveraging that in a system way to solve the problems that are affecting the world? And the there's there's some real good criticisms of the DEI movement. Let's let's let's just say that. And a lot of times we've taken DEI and and it's a bludge. It's a bludgeon and we're just going to beat people because you're you're you're unconsciously biased.
(1:04:49) I'm sorry. Okay. I need to figure out what to do with that. Just a small question for you. So, when you look back at your career care career in OD, what are a couple of the biggest lessons that you've you've learned and that you you take forward with you? Biggest lessons.
(1:05:05) Um, well, it it is the in the in the in the book, I think I we kind of had this funny little thing. You're always told to keep it simple stupid, right? kiss and in the book we said it's the system stupid its and I think that's you know I I think that has been um an important sort of learning I probably had to relearn several times right and it helps me to remember to look down and look up right because it is it is a system and we are working in a systems field and there are no simple answers there's no silver bullets there's no one lever to pull like we talked about So I I do think that's a
(1:05:43) big deal. Um I think a lot of people are often surprised at the role that the self as instrument stuff plays in in the work. Yes, I want to change the organization. Yes, I want performance to be better. Yes, I want more inclusion, whatever. But the the key to helping that happen is, you know, do you know what do you know what it means to help? and and how even even as I talk strategy I I mean for a long time there was a there was a I would say in the third quarter of my career the single most common request I got was um we're not really clear about our strategy and how
(1:06:27) we're organized could you help us with that yeah I would love to do that and oh by the way the team dynamics really suck So could you help us with that too? Right? And there it was. There it is. It just got laid out right in front. Right. So that was our strategy is not clear and we our our team dynamics are awful. Maybe those are connected.
(1:06:51) And so the that you know finding finding how to integrate that personal stuff with the organizational stuff I think was was a I I like I like pushing OD on that point, right? because I think both are important.
(1:07:11) Obviously, on top of your own books that you produce, is there a a resource that you recommend for people that sort of entering the field or just at the early stages, you know, a book that's shaped your perspective or podcast or something like that that's really inspired you? I try and read really broadly. So I'll read stuff about I'll read history a lot of you know and trying to understand how how economies and societies evolve and grow. I'll read some really odd stuff.
(1:07:37) I try to read very very broadly in terms of political philosophies. So I I try to understand populist movements right now. Um you know the left and the right. It's so funny to me that the left and the right now today are like mirror images of what they were. So I don't know if it's any particular book, but I I do try and keep do my best not to live in a bubble um on that. I try and stay a breast of technology.
(1:08:09) It's just such a big deal. I actually spend a lot of time reading about writing because we all have to write whether it's a email or a letter or an article or a blog post or and and figuring out how to be clear in in the way we communicate. I spend a lot of time trying to think about that craft because when I read something really good, it sort of pierces my the way I think.
(1:08:43) And I said, gosh, I wish I could do that. So, I don't know if I have any any specific, Danny, I if I would say anything specific that I've read or it's it's it's just I try and read pretty broadly. Yeah.
(1:09:01) Well, but it is interesting because it is a theme that's coming up and as we ask that question, is it a lot of like it's it's the breadth and the answer isn't just in the OD field. It's in so it's that curiosity, isn't it? And spotting the patterns and all that as well. Um, one of the original missions of this podcast was to inspire the next generation of OD practitioners coming through.
(1:09:20) with all the advice and all the insight that you've had over the years, what advice would you give someone who's considering a career in organization development or just at the very beginning of it? I I would certainly come back to our earlier conversation about the importance of self. I don't I don't doesn't matter whether you're in coaching and team building and and sort of the more micro kinds of parts of the field or the macro parts that what we share is a is a is a commitment to process and that process includes my own.
(1:09:47) So if you if you haven't had therapy or some find some way maybe a coach can do it right you can engage in a relationship with a coach where you say I want to do some deep personal work and find a coach that can help you do that work. I I do think that's a foundation of the field. I I think it's I think you know you I'm young and I need the money. Okay.
(1:10:11) I do think organizations pay for skills. They pay for expertise and if you like coaching or team building or process improvement or six sigma or supply chain or organization design or what I do think people pay for that. I would just and I would say you know you got to hang your shingle and and be known for something but I would say be cautious about it and don't forget that there's it's the system stupid right do keep and maintain your awareness around everything else that's going on and ask yourself ask yourself even if I'm doing micro work am I doing it in service of
(1:10:49) making the organization better and if you're doing macro work do So with your eyes wide open about the impacts that that macro work is going to have on people in the organization. So it's it's maintaining that that awareness you know we are operating in a system and and that one I love it because it doesn't matter whether you're working in nonprofits or a startup or a big corporation that that principle applies.
(1:11:19) And so thinking about that system and your role in it and how you're playing with it I think is kind of important. Well, Chris, we want to say a huge thank you. I I can't speak for Danny, but I've thoroughly enjoyed. She didn't look like she had any fun at all. I think that's the thing.
(1:11:36) I'm I'm supposed to take notes on the things that have stood out me and I've forgotten. I've been so impressed. So, on that note, Ded. Yeah, it is. Yeah. Yeah. It's hard to do it justice, but I think some of the things that have stuck with me are kind of that that thing around the importance of capacity in your organization so you can leverage the capability.
(1:11:54) um that really stuck with me. I think the importance of intention being really intentional about the future you're creating um and not sacrificing depth for speed um really struck with me. And then I think that thing about are we working on our own needs or the needs of the client and that kind of holds itself as instrument piece.
(1:12:12) if people want to um follow your work um obviously you've got some brilliant books out there and one of the things that we've really enjoyed is because we do a lot of preparation for these interviews has been the opportunity just to consume your material your perspectives and that as well um what is the best people to to follow your work or to engage in your books and that well I think the you know these days you know I I I I put a stake in the ground and I I really haven't got I I' I've pretty much left Facebook so I've got a page out there but I don't I don't do that anymore. If anything, I'm on
(1:12:42) LinkedIn. I post to LinkedIn every once in a while. I'm not a I'm not a power user by any stretch. Um, but a lot of times people can a lot of times people reach out to me through LinkedIn. And if you do and I don't respond right away, it's because I'm not a power user.
(1:13:03) But if if you DM me or, you know, want to connect, that's probably the most common way. Yeah. Well, what we'll do is we'll leave you we'll put your LinkedIn details in the show notes. Um, and we'll also leave a link to your books in the show notes as well. So, and we do recommend people to read the books because they're just great and it's an opportunity to to sit with Chris's thinking for a prolonged period of time and see the brilliant research that you've done. Um, so we want to say a huge thank you if you are watching this podcast. Um, we're always
(1:13:28) so impressed with the number of shares that we get. So, we know the people that are watching this will be seeing others that they know that would really benefit from getting Chris's insights and experiences um from his long and distinguished career as well. So, please do that. And also, we'd love it if you'd like and subscribe as well.
(1:13:45) But most importantly, Chris, um we want to say a huge thank you on behalf of the OD profession. You've inspired so many of us and played such a huge part in our development. But, but thank you. And we've loved it. It's been brilliant. What a great conversation. I I love the range.
(1:14:03) I love the range of the conversation from tea and personal stuff all the way to this agility and strategy stuff. I love the range. I think that's what the field's good at and can be good at. I think that's the place that we can play and and make a difference. Thank you so much. Thank you guys. Be well. Be well. [Music]