A Scientific Model for Grassroots O.D - Assignment Example

A Scientific Model for Grassroots O.D Affiliation Seidman W. & McCauley M. (2009) A Scientific Model for Grassroots O.D.Summer 2009, 27(2), pp. 27-37.The article talks about organizational development and the associated challenges. The article brings out the biggest challenge facing organizational development cultural change initiatives to achieve the desired change. It is difficult to embrace the desired change within an organization. A scientific methodology that leads to organizational development for cultural change is used.

The article considers some key points that generate impact on organizational development. The executives’ role in organizational development is first considered. The article points out that, executives do not play any significant role in O.D. Instead, their efforts in O.D. lead to disappointing results.Regarding the need for grassroots O.D., no one can change an organization. Each individual within an organization needs to contribute to cultural change in order to achieve positive results in O.D. Besides, mentorship programs could be very effective.

A grassroots O.D. model is again useful as it involves setting the bar, motivating change, sustaining the change, and scaling the change to enterprise. Essentially, drive to change is achieved through passionate commitment, which is characterized by good roles and actins, supporting organizational resources, and managing risks. To bring out all the points about O.D. effectively, the article is divided into various sections. An abstract is written to introduce the article and all it entails. The introduction section defined the problem and its background, including the models used.

Each model is discussed in depth with respect to the topic, but the main model addressed is the grassroots O.D. model. The article is written in a scholarly manner with all sections being addressed including the methodology, achievement of the model, and conclusion/ summary. To show that the intensive study and research has been conducted from other sources, the resources used are indicated. The article is well presented, but it lacks a clear distinction in the three key sections of a scholarly article, especially the methodology, and results.