Read the attached reading to answer the following: Of the 4 catagories of activities that the author suggest will help refine and integrate our self-knowledge, which do you think are strengths of yours and which do you wish to develop? ‘If we aspire to both the labels and the roles of helper, counsellor, adviser, and supporter, using ourselves as key instruments, we must undertake a process of life-long discovery and of owning and refining our instrumentality.’ From the ODP Archive The Self as an Instrument A Cornerstone for the Future of OD By Mee-Yan Cheung-Judge Introduction (2012) Is self a ‘structure’ or is self a ‘process?’ How would the answers to these two question fit into our phenomenological sense of an enduring ‘I’ — something that my Gestalt colleagues still debate about? I love the Gestalt work but am not academic enough to join that debate. Instead I would like to dangerously post a participant’s view to say that there are aspects of self that are quite hardwired in us (self structure). Yes, they can be modified and reshaped, but the active self needs to be provoked to a point where the self is willing to do some work to lessen the hardwiredness. However, I also believe that self is a process. In Gestalt (Perls, Hefferline, & Goodman 1951) self can be defined as ‘the system of contact at any moment…there is no self independent of the situation — it is ‘given’ in contact.’ The self emerges from the changing ground and it ‘does not exist prior to, or apart from, relationships with the environment’ (Chidiac & Denham-Vaughan, 2009). This concept is made even clearer by the Gestalt therapeutic community in which they asserted that the purpose of the self is to organize the emerging and changing experiences to make it meaningful, as the sense of self emerges from our interaction with others and the environment. As a fluid and dynamic process, the self is capable to change and adjust according to the situation within which it finds itself as well as respond to the changing needs and goals of the environment (Philippson, 2001; Chidiac & Denham-Vaughan, 2009). What does this have to do with the content of this article? Ten years on, the First published in OD Practitioner, 33(3), 2001 42 OD PRACTITIONER Vol. 44 No. 2 2012 crucial question I (and I hope other colleagues will join me) need to ask is have we modified and reshaped our sense of self as we have worked with many different client groups and colleagues? Or have we held on to the hardwired self and insisted that is our true self, and used every opportunity to justify our approach to work? Do we allow the diverse contacts we have had with diverse groups of clients and colleagues to help us realize: ‘Gosh these colleagues, clients and/or the client systems are so challenging, what type of mobilization of self needs to happen once I am made aware of what is happening? By the way, what is my emerging self from such contact tell me about me?’ It is hard to talk about the continuously effective use of self if we do not allow the changing ground or the relational contact to make us more curious about the bit of the self that is unknown to us. Without doing that, it will be difficult for us to stay curious, non-judgmental, and available to help others to discover the unknown aspect to them. If self is shaped as we make relational contact, then how we work with what comes from these contacts is crucial as we continue to strive to use ourselves in the moment to formulate our work with groups or organizations, and to help our clients. I share Chidiac and Denham-Vaughan’s view that the sense of self as a fluid process is a way of formulating our use of self as instrument when undertaking organizational work. Is our sense of self more structured or more fluid? And how may that affect our use of self as instrument in our consultancy work in the next 10 years? Table 1: Roles of OD Consultants The Self as Instrument (2001) Authors Roles of OD Consultants Burke (1982) One who provides help, counsel, advice, and support. Schroeder (1974) One who serves as a sounding board, an adviser, a confidant for the consultant who is working directly with the client (shadow consultant with other consultants as clients). Lippitt and Lippitt (1975) Outline eight roles along a continuum with Directive and NonDirective at either end of the continuum. The eight roles are advocate, technical specialist, trainer or educator, collaborator in problem solving, alternative identifier, fact finder, process specialist, and reflector. These roles are not mutually exclusive. The OD Consultant may play different roles simultaneously depending on tasks/assignments. Schein (1988) Key role defined as process consultation, i.e., a set of activities that help the client to perceive, understand and act upon process events in the client’s environment in order to improve the situation identified by the client. Tichy (1974) Outlines four change agent key roles: • OP (Outside Pressure) — advocating certain changes, planning strategies for advocacy. • AFT (Analysis for the Top) — conducting a study for a client organization and providing a report for top management. • PCT (People Change Technology) — providing a service for individuals within the organization. • OD (Organization Development) — serving as external consultant to develop systems. Beer (1980) Lists two consultant roles: (1) as Generalist with an organizational administrative perspective and (2) as a Specialist in the process of organizational diagnosis and intervention. Ferguson (1968) Lists 18 roles of OD Consultants ranging from capturing data to promoting a proper psychological climate to assisting in the management of conflict, to serving as plumber or obstetrician and in-between, etc. Nevis (1987) Outlines five basic roles / activities of a Gestalt-oriented consultant: 1. To attend to the client system, observe, and selectively share observations of what you see, hear, etc. 2. To attend to your own experience (feelings, sensations, thoughts) and selectively share these, establishing your presence in doing so. 3. To focus on energy in the client system and the emergence of or lack of issues (common figures) for which there is energy; to act to support mobilization of energy (joining) so that something happens. 4. To facilitate clear, meaningful, heightened contacts between members of the client system (including contact with you). 5. To help the group achieve heightened awareness of its process in completing units of work, and to learn how to complete units of work so as to achieve closure around problem areas and unfinished business. Warner Burke (1994) asserted that, ‘OD as a field has a bright future… The point is that OD, or whatever it may be labeled in the distant future, is here to stay.’ Such a positive assertion of OD requires its torchbearers — we, OD practitioners — to affirm our passion for OD, our commitment to developing our consulting repertoire, and our desire to continually develop our competencies. I believe among the many competencies required of us, the use of self as an instrument is at the heart of our uniqueness and effectiveness. This paper aims to demonstrate the importance for OD consultants of establishing effective relationships with clients and the use of self as an instrument, or instrumentality, in the work. The article builds upon the definitions of instrumentality developed by Warner Burke and Edwin Nevis in exploring key practices in owning and refining the use of self in our work. The premise underlying my approach is that OD consulting necessitates a high degree of self-knowledge and personal development that must engage OD practitioners throughout their professional lives. Diverse Roles of OD Consultants Although there are widely ranging definitions of OD, there is a surprisingly high level of agreement among practitionertheorists that the purpose of OD activities is to enhance organizational effectiveness. Consider the following characterizations of OD. » Planned interventions to increase organization effectiveness and health (Beckhard, 1969). » A process directed at organization improvement (Margulies, 1998). » Building and maintaining the health of the organization as a total system (Schein, 1988). » Organization revitalization achieved through synthesizing individual, group and organizational goals so as to provide effective service to the client and community while furthering quality of The Self as an Instrument: A Cornerstone for the Future of OD 43 product and work life (Lippitt & Lippitt, 1975). Within this context, the primary role of OD consultants is to establish helping relationships with and among individuals and groups within organizations. The form these relationships take depends on the nature of the task at hand and may incorporate technical advice in business processes, specialist services relating to organizational design and functioning, process consultation or variations thereof. Lippitt and Lippitt (1975) described these roles on a continuum defined by the degree of directiveness assumed by the OD consultant. An overview of how authors in the field describe the diverse consultant roles appears in Table 1 (previous page). This review of the literature illustrates the degree to which the effectiveness of the consultant necessarily depends upon the quality of his or her relationships with clients. McLagan (1989) stated this succinctly: Organization development’s primary emphasis is on relationships and processes between and among individuals and groups. Its primary intervention is influence on the relationship of individuals and groups to reflect the impact on the organization as a system. (p. 7) Having established the centrality of relationship building to the work of OD consultants, the next question is, ‘what are the key competencies and attributes essential for effectiveness?’ Self as an Instrument Table 2 (next page) summarizes competencies required for effective OD consultation, as gleaned from a review of the literature. Burke’s concept of instrumentality (1982) went beyond a collection of interpersonal skills, attributes, and technical knowledge to encompass the use of self as an instrument in conducting interventions. This notion of instrumentality is akin to the emphasis of heightened self-awareness in a gestalt approach to organization consulting. Nevis (1998) defined the qualities 44 OD PRACTITIONER Vol. 44 No. 2 2012 of ‘presence’ as the effective integration of knowledge and behavior: Presence is the living embodiment of knowledge: the theories and practices believed to be essential to bring about change in people are manifested, symbolized, or implied in the presence of the consultant. (p. 69) The concepts of instrumentality in effective OD practice and presence in gestalt practice see the use of self as our prime asset in achieving the helping relationship. It is not an option but the cornerstone of our work. The OD consultant’s ability to fill a wide range of roles depends upon this use of self. So how do we develop our instrumentality? The answer lies in two concepts: owning and refining our instrumentality. Each of these ideas and their related practices are based upon a requisite perception of our self as a key asset requiring both proper management and investment. Owning our instrumentality relates to the development of our self-knowledge and expertise as consultants in the field. Refining our instrumentality implies regular maintenance work on self. In practice, owning the self means devoting time and energy to learning about who we are, and how issues of family history, gender, race, and sexuality affect self- perception. It means also identifying and exploring the values by which we live our lives, as well as developing our intellectual, emotional, physical, and spiritual capacities. Owning instrumentality can also be understood in terms of Cooperrider’s (2000) concept of identifying the ‘positive core’ within and using it to achieve one’s dreams. ‘Putting first things first’ (Covey, 1995) in order to achieve balance between work and life can also be considered part of owning one’s instrumentality. In practice refining our instrumentality means dedicating time to the on-going maintenance of both self-knowledge and technical expertise. We could employ a shadow consultant, a mentor or even a therapeutic relationship to continually heighten our self-awareness. For others, it may mean using self-knowledge to build a package of self-care in order to ensure that instrumentality is sustainable and lasting. The following is a partial list of activities relating to owning, refining and integrating our self-knowledge. They are offered here—in four categories—as a springboard for readers in considering your own selfwork in four categories. 1. Develop Life Long Learning Habits » Continually develop and enhance competencies in order to move flexibly among the various roles required of the OD consultant. » Develop relationships with peers and professionals with whom to check perspectives, talk through challenges and strategies, and align values and practices. » Actively seek feedback from clients and colleagues. » Build a knowledge base in the field even when this seems neither urgent nor critical. » Take responsible risks that stretch your professional comfort zone and proficiency. 2. Work Through Issues of Power » Acknowledge personal issues around power and control and attune yourself to recognize their emotional triggers. » Develop strategies to manage your own and others’ power dynamics. » Develop effective habits for establishing and maintaining appropriate boundaries with colleagues and clients. » Clarify personal values and what is important in life. Practice ‘putting first things first.’ 3. Build Emotional and Intuitive Self-Awareness » Integrate your personal and family history and turn it into a source of strength. » Get to know your fears, blind spots and comfort zones. Use your emotional comfort (or discomfort) as data in making choices about the work you do and how you intervene in client systems. » Develop habits for managing anxiety Table 2: OD Consultant Competencies Authors Roles of OD Consultants Burke (1982) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The ability to tolerate ambiguity The ability to influence The ability to confront difficult issues The ability to support and nurture others The ability to listen well and empathize The ability to recognize one’s own feelings and intuitions quickly The ability to conceptualize The ability to discover and mobilize human energy The ability to teach or create learning opportunities The ability to maintain a sense of humor A sense of mission Argyris (1962) 1. 2. Self confident Interpersonally confident Beer (1980) 1. 2. 3. Be credible Be neutral Ability to stay marginal Sullivan and Sullivan (1995) McLean and Sullivan (1990) McLean and Sullivan involved over 2000 OD practitioners in defining essential competences of internal and external consultants. They listed the required 187 competences under ten categories of OD activities: 1. Marketing Phase (3 competences) 2. Initial Contactivity Phase (20 competences) 3. Start up Phase (10 competences) 4. Assessment and Feedback Phase (45 competences) 5. Action Planning Phase (16 competences) 6. Intervention Phase (12 competences) 7. Evaluation Phase 8. Adoption Phase (13 competences) 9. Separation Phase (13 competences) 10. General competences (40 competences) Nevis (1987) Outlined the skills required to be effective in using a gestalt approach based on the Cycle of Experience as an orientation for both client and self. Skills organized in terms of consultant’s major tasks: 1. Ability to stay in the present and focus on the ongoing process, with faith in natural developmental sequence. 2. Considerable sensitivity to sensory, physical functioning of self and others. 3. Frequent tuning into your emotions. 4. Ability to separate data from interpretation and to emphasize non-judgmental observations. 5. Awareness of your intentions, of what you want to do or say, together with the ability to be clear in letting others know what you want of and from them. 6. Ability to see where the client is at any time, and to respect that in working with the system. 7. Ability to face and accept emotional situations with a minimum of personal defensiveness. 8. Ability to make good contact with others. 9. Ability to present self as a highly attractive yet non-charismatic presence. 10. Capacity to be both tough and supportive during the same work session. 11. Ability to help the client system draw meaning or understanding from its experience with the consultant. 12. Appreciation of the significant contextual issues involved in System Intervention. 13. Awareness of the aesthetic, transcendent, and creative aspects of working as a consultant. The Self as an Instrument: A Cornerstone for the Future of OD 45 » » about the accuracy of your perceptions and efficacy of interventions. Acknowledge the potential power of intuition in managing decisions and risks, even in the face of clear opposition. Face your lack of effectiveness with certain projects and clients. Have the courage to stop working for clients who offer good money but at a personal price. 4. Commit to Self-Care » Organize your calendar to include time for reflection and integration, and a recharging of your intellectual and emotional energy. » Book regular time off to cater to body, mind, and soul. » Have an effective self-care package, knowing that — like a machine- we cannot keep delivering a long-haul service without maintenance work. » Use meditation or other practices to develop and maintain inner awareness and knowledge. the third, is committed to their mission as OD professionals, highly skilled in many types of OD intervention, and well respected by clients and colleagues. But they differ significantly in three ways: 1. The amount of time and energy they spend working on knowing themselves better. 2. Their commitment to take time to pursue a robust self-care package. 3. The personal cost they incur because of their high performance. The second group often performs very well for a time, and then suddenly seems to suffer from serious burn out. The symptoms can range from mild depression, loss of temper with clients and staff, lack of motivation, and continuous fatigue to physical illness, loss of focus, and serious depression. While I emphasize the differences between the three groups, in reality, most consultants slide up and down this continuum, depending on what else is happening in our lives, and how much emotional energy we have to deal with those issues that are critical to well-being and instrumentality. However, if we fail to engage in self-work activities, it is certain that high performance will entail a high personal cost, both to our clients and ourselves. Through time, this will eat into our sense of well being. Many of us have become aware of the personal cost, and have learned never again to be put in that situation unwittingly. and make a major impact in the field of OD by the effective use of self? How would things change? I believe that organizations all over the world would be well disposed to a group of effective helpers who would become likely partners with them in the pursuit of optimal health for their organizations. Through time, we would pass on the baton to managers (our clients) and coach them to play a key role in transforming the way their organizations are run. Ultimately, a healthy organization can develop itself with its managers as the primary practitioners. In this way, more managers will come to understand the necessary balance between freedom and constraint, democracy and authority, profit and ethics in organization life and health. Postscript (2012) Ten years on, have the concepts discussed in this article gone out of fashion, or do they remain relevant? There has been a lot of debate about the conditions that will lead to sustainable changes. The traditional consultancy Over the past ten years, as I have superestablishment provides very much needed vised and mentored OD consultants and services on back room work—focusing witnessed the working of instrumentality, mainly on using benchmarking data to I have concluded that they fall into three help organizations carry out continuous groups: process reengineering work while applying 1. Consultants whose effectiveness is rigorously the slim processes approach to inconsistent. ensure organizations will achieve a sustain2. Effective consultants who experience able cost base to face fierce competition. burn out because their high perforOur back room colleagues occasionally mance is costly and unsustainable. allow OD consultants to work alongside 3. Effective consultants who are in optithem, but frequently they only involve mal condition most of the time. Conclusion us after the back room process has been completed in order to do the damage limiThe first group of OD consultants often Like Burke, I believe that none of us can tation, people engagement work. Is there convey a highly professional image. They ever achieve perfect instrumentality, and any wonder why the track record on change are even likely to invest money and time that it is very difficult to be an effective is rated so poorly by all parties? updating their technical expertise. They OD consultant. We can begin the journey This raises three questions for me. can be quite effective in some projects. towards perfect instrumentality; we can First, what do OD practitioners (external However, they are much less effective when never complete it. But if we aspire to both and internal especially) need to do to gain projects require the use of self as an interthe labels and the roles of helper, counselor, enough relational traction with those vention beyond their technical expertise. adviser, and supporter, using ourselves senior decision makers so that they will Many have not accepted that an effective as key instruments, we must undertake a trust us enough to think more thoughtfully OD consultant must understand and deal process of lifelong discovery and of owning about doing the back room and front room not only with technology, but also with and refining our instrumentality. work simultaneously? Second, how do we human processes such as trust, depenFinally, what would happen if we continuously establish our unique reputadency, and ethics. collectively (without a formal licensing tion in achieving change sustainability via The second group of consultants, like procedure) agreed to create a bright future people engagement work, so that those 46 OD PRACTITIONER Vol. 44 No. 2 2012 whom we serve will not go ahead with any change work without first saying ‘I must talk to our OD or HR person?’ Third, how do we showcase and not apologize for our expertise in human dynamics, group dynamics, and system dynamics as part of business critical approaches in change? I believe the answers to these three questions all point to our effective use of self, especially in the area of how we function and behave in the relational arena, in our use of our voice; in our courage to speak the unspeakable truth within a trustworthy and compassionate frame; in using our moment by moment sensation to meet people where they are: and to create the impact that helps people make the ‘right enough’ decisions to drive economic efficiency within the ‘people matter’ framework. The key challenge is how we continue to do deeper inner work so that our groundedness and our continuous fluid but evolving integrated self manages to help us to have congruence between our outside behavior and inner self. Finally, are we able to give a sense of inspiring and establishing presence when we work with people — so that by working with us people get a glimpse of ‘ah, that is what this change is about — because I am experiencing the end game that we are meant to be heading towards (the embodiment of the end game).’ So is the use of self still critical in our field of work? I guess by now you would have made your own mind up about this — and my final question to all of us is — what are we going to do more to move closer to that end of the effective use of self continuum? Maybe it is a bit exaggerated, but the future of OD is critically dependent on all of us using ourselves effectively to bring successful and sustainable change within a humanistic framework to the world of work. Beer, M. (1980). Organization change and development: A systems view. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear. Burke, W. (1982). Organization development: Principles and practices. Boston, MA: Little, Brown. Burke, W. (1994). Organization development: A process of learning and changing (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Chidiac, M.A., & Denham-Vaughan, S. (2009). An organizational self: Applying the concept of self to groups and organizations. British Gestalt Journal, 18(1). Cooperrider, D. (2000). Positive image, positive action: The affirmative basis of organizing. In D. Cooperrider, P. Sorensen, D. Whitney, & T. Yaeger (Eds.), Appreciative Inquiry (pp. 29-53). Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing. Covey, S. (1995). First things first. New York, NY: Fireside. Egan, G. (1988a). Change agent skills A: Assessing and designing excellence. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer & Company. Ferguson, C. K. (1968). Concerning the nature of human systems and the consultant’s role. The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 4, 186-93. Lippitt, R., & Lippitt, G. (1975). Consulting process in action. Training and Development Journal. 29(5), 48-54; 29(6), 38-44. McLagan, P. (1989). Models for HRD practice. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development. McLean, G. & Sullivan, R. (1990). OD skills: An ongoing competency list. OD Practitioner, 22(2), 11-12. Margulies, N. (1978). Perspectives on the marginality of the consultant’s role. In W. W. Burke (Ed.), The cutting edge: Current theory and practice in organization development (pp. 60-69). La Jolla, CA: University Associates Nevis, E. (1998) Organizational consulting: References A Gestalt approach (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: GIC Press. Argyris, C. (1962). Interpersonal competence Perls, F., Hefferline, R., & Goodman, P. and organizational effectiveness. Belmont, (1951). Gestalt therapy: Excitement and CA: Dorsey Press. growth in human personality. New York, Beckhard, R. (1969). Organization developNY: Julian Press. ment: Strategies and models. Reading, Philippson, P. (2001). Self in relation. HighMA: Addison-Wesley. land, NY: Gestalt Journal Press. Mee-Yan Cheung-Judge, PhD, is the creator and driving force behind Quality & Equality, a UK based consulting firm. Her areas of expertise are Organization Development, Big System change, and Equality and Diversity. She works with clients from all sectors, including multinational blue chip companies, higher education, government agencies, public sector organizations, and charities. She is the author of a number of OD articles, frequently teaches at the National School of Government and other major corporate top management programs, and is a Visiting Fellow of Roffey Park Institute. In June 2008 she was voted one of the 25 most influential thinkers in HR by the UK publication HR Magazine. She can be reached at [email protected]. Schein, E. H. (1980). Organizational psychology (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. ——— (1988). Process consultation: Volume I (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. ——— (1969). Process consultation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Schroeder, M. (1974). The shadow consultant. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 10, 579-94. Sullivan, R., & Sullivan, K. (1995). Essential competencies for internal and external OD consultants. In W. Rothwell, R. Sullivan, & G. McLean (Eds.), Practicing organization development: A guide for consultants (pp. 535 — 549). San Franscisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Tichy, N. M. (1974). Agents of planned social change: Congruence of values, cognitions, and actions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 164-82 The Self as an Instrument: A Cornerstone for the Future of OD 47 Purchase answer to see full attachment Tags: activities emotional soul needs Student has agreed that all tutoring, explanations, and answers provided by the tutor will be used to help in the learning process and in accordance with Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.

MLA In-Text Citations: The Basics

Guidelines for referring to the works of others in your text using MLA style are covered throughout the MLA Handbook and in chapter 7 of the MLA Style Manual. Both books provide extensive examples, so it’s a good idea to consult them if you want to become even more familiar with MLA guidelines or if you have a particular reference question.

BASIC IN-TEXT CITATION RULES

In MLA Style, referring to the works of others in your text is done using parenthetical citations. This method involves providing relevant source information in parentheses whenever a sentence uses a quotation or paraphrase. Usually, the simplest way to do this is to put all of the source information in parentheses at the end of the sentence (i.e., just before the period). However, as the examples below will illustrate, there are situations where it makes sense to put the parenthetical elsewhere in the sentence, or even to leave information out.

General Guidelines

• The source information required in a parenthetical citation depends (1) upon the source medium (e.g. print, web, DVD) and (2) upon the source’s entry on the Works Cited page.
• Any source information that you provide in-text must correspond to the source information on the Works Cited page. More specifically, whatever signal word or phrase you provide to your readers in the text must be the first thing that appears on the left-hand margin of the corresponding entry on the Works Cited page.

IN-TEXT CITATIONS: AUTHOR-PAGE STYLE

MLA format follows the author-page method of in-text citation. This means that the author’s last name and the page number(s) from which the quotation or paraphrase is taken must appear in the text, and a complete reference should appear on your Works Cited page. The author’s name may appear either in the sentence itself or in parentheses following the quotation or paraphrase, but the page number(s) should always appear in the parentheses, not in the text of your sentence. For example:

Wordsworth stated that Romantic poetry was marked by a “spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings” (263).

Romantic poetry is characterized by the “spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings” (Wordsworth 263).

Wordsworth extensively explored the role of emotion in the creative process (263).

Both citations in the examples above, (263) and (Wordsworth 263), tell readers that the information in the sentence can be located on page 263 of a work by an author named Wordsworth. If readers want more information about this source, they can turn to the Works Cited page, where, under the name of Wordsworth, they would find the following information:

Wordsworth, William. Lyrical Ballads. Oxford UP, 1967.

IN-TEXT CITATIONS FOR PRINT SOURCES WITH KNOWN AUTHOR

For print sources like books, magazines, scholarly journal articles, and newspapers, provide a signal word or phrase (usually the author’s last name) and a page number. If you provide the signal word/phrase in the sentence, you do not need to include it in the parenthetical citation.

Human beings have been described by Kenneth Burke as “symbol-using animals” (3).

Human beings have been described as “symbol-using animals” (Burke 3).

These examples must correspond to an entry that begins with Burke, which will be the first thing that appears on the left-hand margin of an entry on the Works Cited page:

Burke, Kenneth. Language as Symbolic Action: Essays on Life, Literature, and Method. University of California Press, 1966.