Table Of ContentClaus Jacobs
Managing Organizational
Responsiveness
Toward a Theory of Responsive Practice
With Forewords by Dr. David Coghlan
and Prof. Dr. Ekkehard Kappler
Deutscher UniversiHits-Verlag
Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek
Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie;
detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet iiber <http://dnb.ddb.de> abrufbar.
Dissertation University of Dublin, 2002
1. Auflage Oktober 2003
Aile Rechte vorbehalten
© Deutscher Universitats-Verlag/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2003
Lektorat: Ute Wrasmann / Ingrid Walther
Der Deutsche Universitats-Verlag ist ein Unternehmen der
Fachverlagsgruppe BertelsmannSpringer.
www.duv.de
Das Werk einschlieBlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschiitzt.
Jede Verwertung auBerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes
ist ohne Zustimmung des Verla.9s unzulassig und strafbar. Das gilt insbe
sondere fiir Vervielfaltigungen, Ubersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die
Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen.
Die Wiedergabe von Gebrauchsnamen, Handelsnamen, Warenbezeichnungen usw. in diesem
Werk berechtigt auch ohne besondere Kennzeichnung nicht zu der Annahme, dass solche
Namen im Sinne der Warenzeichen-und Markenschutz-Gesetzgebung als frei zu betrachten
waren und daher von jedermann benutzt werden diirften.
Umschlaggestaltung: Regine Zimmer, Dipl.-Designerin, Frankfurt/Main
Gedruckt auf saurefreiem und chlorfrei gebleichtem Papier
ISBN-13:978-3-8244-0727-9 e-ISBN-13:978-3-322-81119-6
001: 10.1007/978-3-322-81119-6
Meinen Eltern und meiner Schwester
Foreword
From the very beginning in the field of organization development and action research there
has been a central role afforded to the role conversation plays in enabling change to take place in
social systems. Kurt Lewin himself actively pursued and developed settings in which conversation was
the foundation for attitudinal and behavioral change. After his death, his colleagues and
subsequently the scholars and practitioners who took his seminal research and insights into the world
of organizations continued to explore ways in which conversation in groups could facilitate
individual, group and organizational change. From T-group to team development, from the
confrontation meeting to large group interventions, from intergroup conflict management to
dialogue conferences, the heritage of Kurt Lewin has stamped itself on the applied behavioural
science approach to change management that we know as organization development. In more recent
years the work of Bohm, Isaacs, Schein and others has contributed significantly to the development of
how conversation can be structured.
The flourishing of large group interventions -open space technology, search conferences,
future search, whole scale change -have created structures whereby whole systems can engage in
simultaneous conversation about the future of their organizations and communities. Another
distinctive characteristic of organization development is the role played by the external consultant. In
organization development, consultants work in a facilitative, process consultation mode whereby they
work at enabling members of the client system to perceive their own issues, understand them and
develop and take their own actions in their regard.
Within the philosophical tradition of action research, conversation has been equally central.
The most important root of action research is in Lewin's work and one of organization development's
distinctive characteristics is its foundation in action research. The philosophical traditions of
pragmatism, constructivism and social constructionism have influenced and are influencing how
action research is conducted. Among the expressions that action research takes, such as action
science, development action inquiry, cooperative inquiry, appreciative inquiry among others,
conversation plays a central role, not only in engaging participants with one another on issues of
value and importance to them, but also in framing individual and group assumptions and lifeworld
perspectives, which hitherto may have been tacit and unacknowledged.
VII
Claus Jacobs' research engages all these issues. The context of this research is a changing
organization, comprising multiple stakeholder groups, each with their own lifeworld and core
assumptions and each affected by the transformation of the organization and by the organization's
need to move responsively into the future.
The organization development process of visioning, taking action and reviewing was structured
around conversation. The emphasis was on creating a physical and psychologically safe space for
conversation to occur and facilitating conversation in order to help the organization move towards
strategic change.
This research is an important contribution to the application of conversation to organizational
settings in both organization development and action research terms. It shows how conversation
contributes to organization change and develops important theory about the nature of conversation
as a mechanism for organizational responsiveness.
David Coghlan
School of Business Studies
University of Dublin
Trinity College
Ireland
VIII
Foreword
Responsiveness is a crucial concept in organization and strategy research, yet it needs a more
subtle and thorough understanding if we are to develop a frame of reference for modem, progressive
models of organizations.
In their investigations on strategic change and organizational learning, Werner Kirsch, Karl
Weick, Peter Senge and Claus Otto Scharmer refer to responsiveness when they conceptualize and
reflect on an organization's necessary abilities for progress. Kirsch for example, conceives of
responsiveness as a key property in his model of modem organizations that do not exploit their
members. This consideration is even more relevant for (not-for-profit) service organizations as their
offering is built on the relational quality of service encounters. In more general terms, responsiveness
becomes necessary for organizations that need the support, participation and involvement of its
internal and external stakeholders if they are to survive. Despite these considerations, the rather
abstract use of the term does not enhance our understanding of responsiveness per se. Due to the
complicated and complex nature of the concept, to date its significance for organizational change
and to strategic thinking in organizations does not seem to be at all evident.
In this book Claus Jacobs investigates the nature of responsiveness in organizations and its
relationship to dialogue as a reflective mode of interaction. Based on his research, Jacobs identifies
three properties of responsiveness, namely perceptivity, reflectivity, and adaptivity. Rather than
proposing a single definition, he suggests a typology of responsiveness along these properties. Thus,
responsiveness has different qualities depending on how these properties differ "in their distinct
properties regarding focus, orientation, degree of complexity, speech gesture, relevance of statements,
as well as variety and equality of voices." (p. 108).
He proposes responsiveness as a social construct, a perceived quality attributed to the
organization. Furthermore, it can be conceived of as a process quality which is an inherent and
integral part ?f communicative episodes within the organization and between the organization and
its environment. As for dialogue and responsiveness in organizations, he rejects a linear and direct
relationship between the two domains. Rather, he suggests that dialogue as a reflective mode of
conversation can enhance responsiveness - in which case it is more likely.that creative answers to
stakeholders can be found in such dialogical, participatory processes of answering.
IX
Based on these propositions this work gives us a subtle understanding of the nature and
processes of responsiveness. Critically reflecting on his findings in the light of the dialogue perspective
(David Bohm, Claus Otto Scharmer, Peter Senge); the communicative action perspective (Jiirgen
Habermas) as well as Karl Weick's sensemaking perspective, Jacobs successfully enriches and extends
our understanding of these three important perspectives.
An especially remarkable and fruitful contribution is the discussion and reflection on Bernhard
Waldenfels' conceptualisation of the Other, the Unknown and the Foreign. By drawing our attention
to the very fine, subtle but nevertheless crucial distinction between response and answer,
communicative interactions within and between organizations can then be reflected upon in terms of
'answerability', i.e. the ability to give an answer. As Jacobs puts it, "responsiveness then would
translate to an organizational 'answerability', i.e. the ability to attentively listening to claims and
demands, and not simply responding." (p. 140). Such processes of answering will result in an open
answer that will itself trigger new answers from other participants in an ongoing, never-ending but
very concrete organizational process.
Claus Jacobs makes a very appreciable and original contribution to the theory and practice of
responsiveness, thereby deepening our understanding of responsiveness. In terms of organization
theory as well as communication theory , this work reformulates the concept of responsiveness and
challenges the dOminant, yet simplistic metaphors of behaviorism. This work is a considerable
contribution to theory as well as practice, and represents a substantial step toward a less ideological
approach to participation.
Ekkehard Kappler
Institute for Organisation and Learning
University of Innsbruck
Austria
x
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the following friends and colleagues who have helped me in exploring,
developing and sharpening the thoughts and ideas of this study: David Coghlan for his
knowledgeable gUidance and attentive support throughout the process of this study, as well as for his
advice on how to identify a research topic (namely "Start from your heart." and "Remember who you
are."); Britta Lenders, for her invaluable support and advice throughout this three-year journey, by
providing the vital conversational context for developing and shaping ideas; Bernd Schwefing, for his
detailed and knowledgeable scrutiny in discussing earlier drafts of this work; Tobias Scheytt, for his
preCise conclusions and knowledgeable insights that allowed me refining and substantiating the
argument; Jorg Haslbeck, for peer reviewing and discussing the case material with nearly unlimited
enthusiasm; Nicola Kriicken, a master in the art of designing contexts for conversations, for co
developing the workshop format, and for her determination in 1999 to encourage me to go back to
academia; Klaudia Werth, Daniel Berger and Ralf Stalleker, for their very thoughtful and pragmatic
critiques in the process of unfolding the argument; Joseph McDonagh, in his capacity of reader, for
his very detailed and challenging questions, which helped me in sharpening the argument; Martin
Fellenz, in his capacity of my mentor, for his crucial adVice and support - without him I simply
would not have been able to come to Trinity College Dublin in the first place; Gemma Donnelly-Cox
and Ekkehard Kappler, for encouraging me to pursue the argument further beyond the doctorate
process; Edward Kasabov and Fiona Lombard for sharing the 'roller coaster' experience of doctoral
research; Raisin Cooney, for transcribing the interviews; Fergus Dolan and Deborah Brennan for
proViding me with the necessary expertise in terms of language and culture; my colleagues Dominic
Coleman, Gwen Jaffro, Martin King, Belinda Moller, Mary Lee Rhodes; the members of the
postgraduate action research seminar Mary Casey, Phil Hanlon, Verena Keane, Phil Killeen, Pat
Nolan and Michele Ryan; as well as the executive officers of the school, Joan Reidy and Valerie
McCarthy.
I am grateful to those who have provided me in various formal and informal conversations
with useful insights that helped me in developing a 'bigger picture' of the argument: Theodora
Assimakou (Manchester Business School); Markus Becker (University of Southern Denmark);
Michael Habersam (University of Innsbruck); Loizos Heracleous (National University of Singapore);
Katrin Kaufer (Sloan School of Management Boston); Wendelin Kiipers (FernUniversitiit Hagen);
XI
Kazuma Matoba (Witten/Herdecke University); Claudia Meister-Scheytt (University of
Innsbruck); Claus Otto Scharmer (Sloan School of Management Boston); Irma Schmincke-Blau and
Martin Schnell (Witten/Herdecke University) and Bernhard Waldenfels (University of Bochum).
I gratefully acknowledge the financial sponsorship of Gottlieb-Daimler-und-Karl-Benz
Stiftung, Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD) as well as of University of Dublin, Trinity
College, that made this study and its publication possible. I am deeply grateful to all residents,
tenants, service users, staff, service managers, management committee members, volunteers, and to
the entire head office team of the Omega foundation. The encounters and conversations with you
have not only provided useful insights in terms of this research - They have made a difference to my
life.
I am particularly grateful to the following friends who have provided me with superb contexts
for reading, writing and reflecting at the different stages of this research: Esther Amegashie, Andreas
Bohler, Marie-Christin and Jochen Eisenbrand, Rainer Majcen, Jochen Marx, Silke Rooer, Marc
Schafer, Jochen Schneider, Anja Weiland, Markus Wittmann, Kerstin Wolter, Birgit Zimmer - all in
different places of the world;
Manfred Wellendorf in Cologne; Anke Dingemann, Anne Floercken and Lotte Christensen in
Witten; Barbara Backhaus, Regula Beer, Ronald Greber, Marco Beer and Jonny in Bern, as well as
Cecilie and Margaret O'Flaherty in Monkstown - my Irish family.
Manuela - Thank you for our wonderful dialogue!
Claus Jacobs
XII
Summary
This study investigates the nature of responsiveness in organizations and its relation to
dialogue as a reflective mode of conversation. Responsiveness as a theme emerged from the practical
experience of the author in an organization development project with a residential care provider for
people with physical and sensory disabilities. While strategy, stakeholder management and
organizational learning literature acknowledges the relevance of responsiveness, none of the
approaches proposes a comprehensive concept of responsiveness and its implications for
communication with stakeholders. In all three literatures a behaviorist stimulus-response metaphor
which unnecessarily puts limits to a dialogical, processual theory of responsiveness is employed.
Therefore, it is suggested to explore dialogue as an appropriate conversational mode that holds
promise to facilitate reflective conversations with and among stakeholders. Thus, two research
questions are addressed: What is the nature of responsiveness? What is its relation to dialogue?
An interpretive case study complemented by a participatory mode of inquiry allows for
juxtaposing differences in conversational modes with differences in responsive qualities. It is
suggested to conclude that responsiveness can be conceived of as an attributed perceptive, reflective
and adaptive capacity of an organization. With regard to its relation to dialogue, it is suggested to
conclude that responsiveness and dialogue are not related in a direct, linear manner. It is rather by
creating contexts for reflective conversations that might enhance responsiveness. If such reflective
conversations take place, it is more likely that productive, innovative answers to stakeholder demands
can be found in a dialogical process.
In terms of strategy, this research aims at contributing to an active notion of responsiveness in
terms of strategic thinking. With regard to stakeholder management, an active mode of
responsiveness contributes to authentic participation as a gUiding principle for stakeholder
management. As for organizational learning, active responsiveness can contribute to avoid perceptive,
reflective and adaptive myopia. Finally, a philosophically inspired outlook intends to broaden the
bandwidth of responsiveness even further. From a phenomenological viewpoint, responsiveness as a
process quality refers to encountering the foreign, which requires developing and inventing answers
in the process of answering. Based on these considerations, responsiveness then translates into the
new challenge of 'organizational answerability'.
XIII
