Professional developments
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1002/pad.4230080110 |
| Date | 01 January 1988 |
| Published date | 01 January 1988 |
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT,
Vol.
8,
115-1
18
(1988)
Professional Developments
This section of the journal carries summaries of recent
research findings and innovations
in
training and manage-
ment. The intention is to put readers in touch with new
developments which they can follow up by referring to a
contact person and to fuller accounts published elsewhere.
The hope is that this will generate a self-sustaining exchange
of
new ideas
in
the general field
of
development administra-
tion. Please send your news to the Assistant Editor (Profes-
sional Developments).
In this issue, one report describes the innovatory training
methods used at the Department of Management Studies,
University of Leeds, to help bring about change in organiza-
tions. The second report from the Centre of Development
Studies, Swansea, describes a new masters programme which
looks at the influence of world markets on national food
policy, drawing on the practical experience
of
actors in
international trade. Thirdly, there is an account
of
the options
available to the Malaysian Government in its attempt to
privatize its railway network.
MAKING ORGANIZATIONAL IMPROVEMENT RESPECTABLE
Twelve years ago I was asked by the Bureau of Public Enteprises, India, if we could run a
dedicated course for senior training managers from their public sector enterprises. The remit
was to provide a refresher programme for experienced trainers, discuss new techniques of
training, problems
of
course design, selection and evaluation
of
candidates and programmes,
visit appropriate training establishments in the UK and, where possible, arrange for
attachments in suitable organizations. The philosophy, agreed by BPE and the UK Overseas
Development Administration, was that by training trainers there would be a multiplier
effect: each trainer would return to his organization and spread his new ideas to colleagues
so
that many people would benefit from any stimulus that might have been imparted
in
the
UK.
As
training programmes are conventionally rated it is likely that we did a tolerably good
job, but
I
found it hard to justify the enormous cost (in time, effort and cash) when results
were not measured beyond the ‘interesting concepts were discussed’, ‘some
of
the visits
provided ideas we might try at home’, ‘it was nice to see the English way
of
life’, etc., type of
comments at the end-of-course review. After discussions with the BPE and the British
Council we decided to change the format
of
the course
so
that it took account
of
the power
situation within an organization. Starting from the premise that we wanted our programme
to result in beneficial change in the enterprise, as well as in the individual participant, we
decided that persons who authorize change must attend the programme. Usually when we
want to change practices, ideas, behaviour, etc., we will need to help people accomplish the
change by providing training, and
so
we decided that our programmes would take two
people from each organization: one able to authorize change in an area under his control and
the other a trainer, who would be responsible for carrying out the training necessary to
accomplish the change. We decided that the manager must accept ownership
of
the problem
and demonstrate this by writing
up
what it is that
he
wants to change, and on the basis of
these submissions teams are accepted or rejected by BPE and Leeds.
0271-2075/88/010115-04$05
.OO
0
1988
by John Wiley
&
Sons, Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial