30年OD顾问咨询经验之谈—创造包容性的组织英文版（下篇）

2.4 Description of the Intervention Plus Positive Deviance

We began the pilot workshop with standard climate-setting activities such as introductions and group development of norms, or behavioral guidelines for the workshop. The first disorienting dilemma occurred for some as soon as the workshop began and I spoke as the workshop leader instead of Tom. Tom and I always work to consciously model cross-gender partnership dynamics, and to counter-balance the marginalization of women by positioning me as the leader, with my branding on all our materials. The next disorienting dilemma may have come for others as we handed out the workbooks at the beginning of the session. One of the male participants looked at the title of the workshop printed on the cover of the workbook and said, with a hint of irritation, “you are trying to mess with our minds already!” The title of the workshop was, “Women and Men in the Workplace,” and the fact that the word “women” came first, instead of saying, “men and women,” was disorienting for him and others. I affirmed his observation as intentional and confirmed that one goal of the workshop was to become aware of unconscious assumptions and patterns of thought that were gender related.

The activities on the first day were focused on raising awareness of early learnings about gender, societal trends related to gender with business implications, a humorous video on gender style differences and an activity on identifying the value-added and dysfunctional stuff that each gender brings to the workplace. While individual and dialogic reflection methods were used in every activity, two of the activities on this first day on early learnings and value-added behaviors were done in same-gender groups before a whole group dialogue occurred.

Holding two same-gender group meetings on this first day was a form of positive deviance needed because we were not able to collect focus group data before the workshop. We did not have stories from women and men that could surface systemic gender-related patterns. Focus groups are set up to create safe spaces where employees meet with others who share their experiences so that information can come out that may not be known about the system.We needed the awareness-raising activities in the workshop to have this additional possible outcome of creating safe space for stories to emerge, particularly from the women, about their gender-based experiences and for gender dynamics to emerge from both groups. Because there were so few women in technical, professional and managerial roles, and they were dispersed around the company, often as the only woman in their area, we knew the women were not connected to each other. They had no opportunity to share their stories,discover commonalities and develop shared voice. Without these stories, the organization had little chance of seeing the patterns of differential impact on women of current policies and practices that probably existed. Our positive deviance was intended to create the conditions where the women could build trust and growth-fostering relationships and begin to share their stories and discover commonalities – before the second day of the workshop, where the stories would be needed.

Another purpose of the same-gender groups on the first day was to allow for gender dynamics to emerge. Tom and I knew from many previous gender workshops that when given the same task and then separated, the women would probably do the assigned task together, in a serious manner, while listening to each other and taking turns. We knew the men would probably barely do the task while joking and teasing each other, and threatening to leave each out on a limb alone if the truth came out about what they were saying about the women during their small group time. As we predicted, the usual dynamics occurred and became rich fodder for the large group dialogue about gender differences when they were revealed. Opportunities for cross-gender communication practice abounded. These differences also became a disorienting dilemma for some participants.

On the second day of the workshop, we continued the whole group dialogue about the material surfaced during the first day, while practicing cross-gender communication skills. We added a segment on insider/outsider dynamics using a simulation. Our positive deviance, or guerilla approach, came in full force at three points during the last half of this day. The first point was when we asked for stories, previously identified in the same-gender groups the day before, to be shared and documented as examples of insider/outsider dynamics. As the stories came out, from both women and men, I could see the blood draining from the faces of the three senior HR leaders in the room as the systemic issues started to become clear – definitely a disorienting moment for them. In that moment I said to myself, “Yes! They see the ways that policies and practices, unconsciously put in place in a piecemeal fashion over many years, or reflecting the unconscious bias of a gendered organizational culture that devalues feminine leadership styles, are negatively impacting women and some men.” I whispered to Tom, “Bingo! Now things can never go back to the way they were.” In some cases, the policies, especially around family leave and part-time work, were being implemented in ways that were not legal –for example, several women shared that they had been required to work full-time hours for part-time pay after maternity leaves in order to keep their jobs,which they had never shared with anyone.

As for ways in which the gendered organizational culture devalued feminine leadership styles, one example came from a female participant in the workshop who was a team leader. She shared that while her teams results for the year were excellent, she had recently been given a mediocre evaluation because her manager told her that she “coddled” her team and wasted time asking for their input. He told her she would not be promoted unless she could show she was using a directive leadership style. She was using feminine workplace values of collaboration and team focus (see Table 1), described by Dr. Joyce Fletcher (2004). In gendered organizations, feminine workplace values are not rewarded and are often discouraged, while masculine values are rewarded as “the right way” to be, as was the case for this participant.As the participants, women and men, told their stories in the context of the workshop, more disorienting moments occurred as people heard things that surprised them and the group began to engage in dialogue about what needed to change.

* Adapted from the work of Joyce Fletcher (2004), Relational Theory in the Workplace. In Jordan, J., Walker, M., Harling, L.M. (Eds.). The complexity of connection: Writings from the Stone Center’s Jean Baker Miller Training Institute. New York: Guilford Press. (p. 270-298).A second point of positive deviance came into play at the close of the second day when participants were asked to brainstorm, using an Open Space design,

all the ways that gender differences could be acknowledged and rewarded in

any of the following workplace activities at the company:

• Meetings             • Mentoring/Sponsorship   • PerformanceAppraisal

• Coaching             • Project Planning         • Conflicts/Turf Battles

• Strategic Planning      • Team Development       • Retention

• Recruiting and Hiring    • Rewards and Recognition

Many creative recommendations emerged for changes in policies, practices and reward systems. As the final activity, we asked small action groups to form and commit to working on one of the recommended changes as their action homework. Upon their return in a month for the third day of the workshop, they were expected to report on what they had accomplished. This was the third guerilla component for positive deviance initiated at the end of the workshop as these action teams did go out and start enthusiastically pushing for change.

3 Conclusion

3.1 Impacts from the Intervention

Some policies changed almost immediately after the pilot workshop, especially regarding part-time work and parental leave. Significant changes in other policies and practices did occur over the next two years because one of the outcomes of the pilot workshop was a clear recommendation from the participants for more workshops. We were able to take variations of the design to several layers of the organization to raise awareness and generate recommendations for changes in policies and practices.

Practices began to change as awareness was raised among a critical mass of employees. In addition to more workshops, employees took the initiative to create a Women’s Leadership Program within the company, a Women’s Mentoring Program, and they brought in Coaching Skills training. Accountability teams were spontaneously formed by the CEO at the end of the workshop for his top 3 layers of leadership. These accountability teams read a book entitled, Are You Clueless by my colleague, Tom Finn (2007), and held each other accountable for changing their behaviors to be more inclusive (and less clueless). The teams had to report quarterly, for a year, to the senior leadership on changes they had made during the previous quarter as individual leaders.Tom and I began to hear stories, especially from the women, about significant changes in informal practices that reflected a valuing of feminine leadership styles. In addition, the numbers of women in the management ranks, as well as in the technical and professional ranks, increased significantly over the next two or three years. We felt that we had, indeed, been catalysts for sustainable positive change.

3.2. Suggestions for Practitioners

As OD practitioners, we should always be clear about our values and do our best to live by them. I always promise only what I can deliver, and to deliver what I feel will make a difference for sustainable change for individuals and/or systems. When a client does not want to do what it takes to create sustainable change, I have to decide whether I can find a way to bring her data that will help her see what the system needs, while also delivering what I have promised, or whether I should decline the work. I do not want to waste my precious life force doing work that doesn’t make a difference, or that, in fact,might make things worse.

In the case presented here, Tom and I felt that we could promise to deliver a gender awareness workshop and, using guerilla approaches, or positive deviance, we also had a chance to create sustainable change. There are no guarantees. It might not have worked – but it did.

我们相信随着本土创业企业的蓬勃发展和传统企业的转型，以及U正在催化生发的生态经济意识下的社会场域里的深刻变革和跨界创新，绿色转型的机遇，新生态OD的春天正在到来！

IOC致力于引入国际领先的OD专业能力培养系列，包含美国OD发源的NTL流派和美国完形OSD流派，并结合本土企业实践初步形成一套中西结合的OD人才培养体系，为国内OD专业人士的发展助力！为中国企业的可持续发展助力！

翔知羽白—致力于催化新生态领导力和组织发展，共创中西创新融合的组织发展（OD)平台。

翔知羽白OD中心—致力于将国外领先的组织发展理念引入中国，在中西创新实践过程中逐步形成本土化组织发展专业人士的培养体系。

翔知羽白管理咨询—致力于提供扎根本土的组织发展咨询服务，为中国企业提供支撑其组织转型、业务创新和战略文化落地的组织发展咨询和领导力提升服务。