Ethical issues in OD involve how practitioners perform their helping role with clients. As a profession, OD always has shown a concern for the ethical conduct of its practitioners, and several ethical codes for OD practice have been developed by various professional associations. Ethical dilemmas in OD arise around misrepresentation, misuse of data, coercion, value and goal conflict, and technical ineptness.
In this case Kindred Todd who had just finished the master’s degree in organization development and had landed her first consulting position with a small consulting company. But Todd met a problem with ethics. After Todd was hired, her boss assigned her to a new client, and told her that they’re looking to them to help them address some long-range planning issues and from the way they talk, they could also use some continuous quality improvement work as well. But when Todd walked in to the president’s office of the firm, she found that her boss had sold her to the client as an “expert” in CQI, but of course she is not. And the members of the firm believed that an expert in continuous quality improvement ,such as Todd, was exactly the kind of help they needed to increase efficiency and cut costs in the core business.
Members began to ask direct questions about technical details of CQI. But to Todd, she could just suggest that all of their questions were good ones, but that they needed to be answered in the context of the long-range goals and strategies of the firm. Because to Todd, she was not an expert who can solve those big problems, she had no choice but get more information of the history about the organization. After the meeting, Todd suggested her boss that her own competencies did not fit the needs of the client and requested that another consultant-one with expertise in CQI-be assigned to the project. But her boss do not want to change the person. And the boss response to her concerns included a strong, inferred ultimatum: if you want to stay with this company, you had better take this job. Eventually, she contracted with one of her friend to be her “shadow” consultant-to work with her behind the scenes on formulating and implementing an intervention for the client.
From the course that we learned we know that OD practitioners encounter ethical dilemmas. The antecedent conditions include an OD practitioner and a client system with different goals, values, needs, skills, and abilities. As a practical matter, however, it is unreasonable to assume that all of the differences will be identified and resolved. Neither the client nor the OD practitioner is clear about respective responsibilities. The role conflict and ambiguity may produce five types of ethical dilemmas: misrepresentation, misuse of data, coercion, value and goal conflict, and technical ineptness. Misrepresentation occurs when OD practitioners claim that an intervention will produce results that are unreasonable for the change program or the situation. Misuse of data occurs when information gathered during the OD process is used punitively. Coercion occurs when organization members are forced to participate in an OD intervention. Value and goal conflict occurs when the purpose of the change effort is not clear or when the client and the practitioner disagree over how to achieve the goals.
And technical ineptness ,this final ethical dilemma that the issues of this case in our opinions. It occurs when OD practitioners try to implement interventions for which they are not skilled or when the client attempts a change for which it is not ready. Critical to the success of any OD program is the selection of an appropriate intervention, which depends, in turn, on careful diagnosis of the organization. Selecting an intervention is closely related to the practitioner’s own values, skills, and abilities. In solving organizational problems, many OD consultants emphasize a favorite intervention or technique, such as team building, total quality management, or self-managed teams. Technical ineptness dilemmas also can occur when interventions do not align with the ability of the organization to implement them. Again, careful diagnosis can reveal the extent to which the organization is ready to make a change and possesses the skills and knowledge to implement it . In this case Todd’s boss had sold her to the client as an “expert” in CQI, but of course she is not. And the members of the firm believed that an expert in continuous quality improvement ,such as Todd, was exactly the kind of help they needed to increase efficiency and cut costs in the core business. Members began to ask direct questions about technical details of CQI. But to Todd, she could just suggest that all of their questions were good ones, but that they needed to be answered in the context of the long-range goals and strategies of the firm. Because to Todd,
she was not an expert who can solve those big problems, she had no choice. And the boss response to her concerns included a strong, inferred ultimatum: if you want to stay with this company, you had better take this job. So the ethical issues is the technical ineptness which is the final ethical dilemma. Then Miss Todd just ask the customer to provide the development of the organization in the past data to evaluation, at that moment, Miss Todd just depend on the data that the customer given her for evaluation, forgot to use her professional knowledge, make it into a single thought or misuse of the information, may led damage to her own or customers of the company. Miss Todd should obtain the customer all the members in the company all the process of change, and to observe and examine the customer internal actual situation on a regular basis.
So, in our opinions we suggest that the boss need to change another consultant-one with expertise in CQI-be assigned to the project instead of Todd’s work.
