 the general conditions in the society in general. Now, look at few situations in the organization. One cross selling is identified as the critical factor for the bankers. Not only selling the FDs or account at the saving accounts, but selling larger number of product is recognized as an important factor for the profitability of any bank. So, that is why you see banks are selling loans or different type of loans and the insurance products etcetera investment products. So, how you cross sell along with the core product is identified as a very important factor in success and profitability of a bank. Realizing this fact, a bank introduces a change program with support scripts and good profiling questions for its members and was dismayed to find that these moves had negligible impact on the sales. So, you make the checklist, you make the support script that is how you will approach the customers that is what you will ask, that is how you will make the profile and then you propose a product try to cross sell it, it did not work. What do you think? In the classroom they did not show any disagreement, they were no disagreement, they were given the script, they were given some relevant questions to be asked for profiling the customers and still the it was not translated to sales. An IT company introduces a simplified process and rating system for performance review only to find that it is team leaders are still showing the central tendency in rating their team members and avoid it delivery candidate beta. You might have seen at your workplace as well average ratings are given, team members are not comfortable telling the hard facts or the tough messages to their team members, they circumvent their message, do not give the state forward negative feedback and still follow the central tendency. In this situation do you think the performance by means system can work? It becomes a matter of adjustment ok, this year you get the good rating, then next year some other team members will get good rating and that is how team leaders are still managing their team because they have to face them regularly. So, they do not they do not want to give the negative feedback. How do how can we change this kind of behavior? When is ranking a good mechanism when ranking can work? So, ranking will work when there are when there are individual performances number one, but there is one more situation where ranking method can work, when the task is similar all of you get same question paper, all of you suffer from the similar teacher have to go through the same book all that is similar then the ranking may work, but in our workplace generally it is not the case. Someone is doing some job where he or she is specialized, someone else is specialized in something else. There might be a difference in the market value of the skills people possess in a team. So, you see a different types of assignments works being carried out. So, the ranking is difficult. We have to make people willing to give the candid feedback. How we can do that? Ranking in a critical incidence method, ok, but still if we want people to if we want people to give feedback whenever it is necessary. Isn't it a important competency for a team leader to give a candid feedback? Even if we make it very very objective everything is very objective. Still there is a competency requirement to be candid and forthright in my ability to give feedback. Can we deny that? There has to be that. How to build that? When I am when team leader is not demonstrating that. A manufacturing company purchased a state of art knowledge management technology platform for faster and effective knowledge sharing and encouraging the collaboration. Purchase it we install it still people do not use it and the no cause to change in money. How to make people use that knowledge management platform and actually demonstrating the faster and effective knowledge sharing and collaboration? Many years ago may be 15 years ago I was doing some work with the R and D firm there in a in a very big public sector company. And I entered the field with the objective of studying the knowledge management because there was a course in my PhD program knowledge management and I mentioned learning. I said that we study the knowledge management system. The similar thing was there a state of art knowledge management system not the KN system not being used very frequently. But still the collaboration was there still knowledge sharing was happening that made me realize that is not knowledge management system which can make people collaborate and share. It is the organization learning culture which makes people share and collaborate. And when I dig deeper I found that it is not only culture and this culture is is some is many times strengthened by a sudden positive emotions. The emotions of addressing a challenge, emotion of gaining respect, emotion of getting recognition. So, I entered the field to study the technology of KN system. What I came out with the insights were more related to the emotions and culture. So, the title of this paper which I wrote based on this was the special role of affectivity in the knowledge management or organization learning. Still the role of affectivity is not well documented in the organization learning game. If you look at these situations these situations are there because people operate certain basic assumptions. They hold on to certain type of belief. And until those assumptions and beliefs are not replaced with the different beliefs and assumptions behavior cannot be changed. So, for example, in the cross selling people are operating on a belief that we have to give some give what customers ask. In IT company if I am if supervisor is not giving feedback they are actually operating on a belief that criticizing is bad for relationship. If I am manufacturing company employee and the KMS having a substrate KMS system still I am not using. Most likely I am operating on a belief that knowledge gives you power not knowledge sharing, but knowledge hoarding gives you power. So, until these beliefs are not replaced with the different beliefs behavior, behavioral change is not possible. How to reach those? There are certain methods that is called process intervention. So, the process intervention is a set of activities on the part of the consultant and this can be internal or external consultant that helps group members or organizational members to understand, diagnose and improve their behavior. So, these are the interventions that are aimed at helping the group become better able to use its own resources to identify and solve interpersonal problems and devise more effective ways of working. It is called process intervention because behavior is the outcome and underneath the behavior there is a process and process starts with certain assumptions. Assumptions give birth to certain beliefs, beliefs give birth to certain morals and principles and values and these are reflected in the norms I follow and behavior I must take. So, if I have to change the behavior what I need to work upon or something which is below the in the hierarchy that is what? Values and morals and if I have to change the values and morals or I need to work upon something deeper than that what is that? That is belief. So, belief are the basic notions how this world works and values are what is valued, what is the right and wrong that is a ethics and values are what is to be valued what is preferred disposition preferred objective or preferred way of achieving objective that is values. So, we need to look at what are the operating beliefs and we need to change those operating belief with the better or more functional beliefs and that is the job of the process consultation. So, process consultation is creation of relationship that permits the client to perceive understand and act on the process events. You look at this it is not consultant who does the processing that is why here it is called facilitator because they build the relationship and in that relationship some interactions happen where client the individual is able to look at their own behavior reflect on what was the underlying values and morals and norms and beliefs of their behavior. Until a positive relationship is and trust work a trustful relationship is not built people will not be willing to reflect or even if they reflect they will not be willing to articulate and if they are if they do not articulate what they reflect upon they cannot refine their reflections. So, process consultation is an approach that helps people and groups to help themselves. So, in that way it is a empowerment the process of empowerment people get empowered in the process consultation. That is aimed at helping people by to communicate with others adopt the right attitude enhance the personal managerial effectiveness go for motivation go for innovation. One example you must have you might remember was the Johari window. Johari window help us to know something more than what I was going till now. If you remember the exercise we did there were list of the adjectives probably 60 adjectives 60 70 adjectives. I choose my I choose the 10 adjectives which I think best describe me. Then I ask my friend to choose the 10 adjectives which best describes me and then I ask someone with whom I have some level of familiarity, but not very close association or relationship or friendship. I asked this person also to look at the 10 adjectives from the same list which define me which are the major characteristics of mine. And I see that what is common in all three adjectives is something which is my self known to me and known to other that is called open window. There is some aspect which is people which people are aware of, but I am not aware of that is blind spot unknown to self, but known to other. And then there are hidden spot unknown to others, but I know about this is one way of exploring my self. And then I can connect some of the things what I do or do not do related to how do I perceive myself. So, in the using this exercise we try to expand the open window to bring more and more data in the open window which is known to me as well as known to others. And that helps in building more of intake and functional relationship with others it also helps in communication. When the window is open window is wider I am able to communicate more freely and naturally that has impact on the quality of relationship. Another way of looking at my basic assumptions and working around it is a method called ladder of inferences or laddering. What it simply says it can be compared with these two diagrams the real word may look like this, but I interpret the word like this. Can you connect just this situation with your real life? Doesn't it happen quite often that I see some situation in certain way, but others may see and the situation itself may be look like this. I am not able to communicate with someone, I am not able to appreciate someone, I become a little disturbed by what someone else says or someone else become disturbed with by hearing what I said wherein I did not meant anything wrong or ill about the person. Lot of these miscommunications happen how do we deal with that? And because of this miscommunication we are not able to appreciate each other and understand the reality. So, whenever there are conflicts or discomfort we need to look at the data. What actually happens? We experience something and we select the data. We choose to look at one some particular data. I may look at just tone, I may pick up only few those words which are more hurtful to me. In all the situation we can't collect and have all that consider all the data. So, we every time we pick up some data which is of my liking of my perception. We add meaning to it and we assume based on those meanings what this person and what this situation is doing to me is it favorable or unfavorable. All that meaning is assigned based on those assumptions and those becomes our conclusion and then we believe that this person is not friendly to me or this organization or this group is not open for new things. I give for example, I join a team fresh. I see something in my manufacturing company some process which can be changed which can be improved. I give this information in my enthusiasm to that team leader. Team leader's response is not very warm. I assume that probably this person is not open minded and there is no point in giving solution to this person. And then I conclude that best way of working in this team is do whatever is given instruction to you. Don't apply your mind. Don't think something innovative. Here things will go on as they are going on because supervisor is not very open for any change or modification and that becomes my belief about the team maybe about the department of organization. What laddering method says is that we need to have a not only one side of the loop. We need to have reflective loop as well means whenever I am acting in certain way I need to look at what is the experience which made me to behave like this. And then I reflect whether I assign the correct meaning to that situation or not. Meaning I might have gone to the supervisor with the advice and the supervisor might be dealing with a crisis situation at that moment and that is why he was not able to give sufficient attention to my advice or my idea. Whereas, I have made the conclusion that this person is not open minded. So, like that we can help people in the process consultation to look at this their experience. My relationship with my supervisor is not good. My relationship with my peer is not that great. We look at all these data and examine can there be a different meaning? Could I perceive something which I did not perceive? Could I look at the data in a different way in a way which I did not look that. So, in this in the process consultation these kind of conversations are same. And as a result of that we can shift some of our non-functional beliefs with more functional beliefs. And there is an example of the visual explorers. But these are the cards which have very different colors, very different pictures and not apparently correlated with each other. We pose a question for example, pick up a card which describes your experience in the performance appraisal conversation. Pick up a card which in some way reflects your experience of working in a team like that. And that is very open ended question. People are more frank and forthcoming when describing their experience. Sometime people are able to access their own experience by some of these artifacts. I might be feeling something it is there in my it is reflected in my energy level, but that does not come to the level of articulation. I might be feeling uncomfortable, but I am not able to sense why I am and I am not able to articulate why I am feeling uncomfortable in this situation. These kind of methods particularly in the visual explorer method help us to connect that unstated unexpressed experience to the expressed experience. And when we express our experience that expression has certain assumptions, has certain beliefs this that brings out my values as well. When these things come out in my expression, there is a chance I can critically look at those beliefs, values, norms and my assumptions. And if required we can replace those new assumptions with the old assumptions which might be more functional which may make me more effective in that situation. So, we come back to the example we started with. Bank seemingly good ultimately performance limiting mindset was why they were not able to do the cross selling probably because they were operating on a belief that my job is to give the customers what they want. I am not able to push for the cross selling. At the company I am not giving the feedback because I am operating on assumption that criticism damages relationship. And likewise in the manufacturing company example in spite of a sophisticated K and system I am not giving and sharing information because I operate on a belief that information is power and good leaders are powerful leaders. So, through the ladder of inferences, through the process concentration, through these conversations are different set of assumptions can be provoked. So, instead of thinking about my job is to give customers what they want, there is a possibility we can replace this assumption with the another one which is help customers fully understand their name rather than giving customers what they want. So, I might not be cross selling because I am trying to follow a script, but if I am develop this listening capability and sensing capability to look at what exactly what might be useful product for my customers in context of the customers need, customers responsibility, age, income etcetera. Then I can help the customers to fully understand their name, nighttime customers are not able to understand their name, they are not able to plan their finance as well, I can do that. And, but for that I need to have more empathic in being listening, but if I am not operating on this assumption and if I am operating on the assumption that I have to give what they want, then I will not indulge into the active listening and empathicism. Similarly, if I am operating on assumption that criticism damaged relationship, I will not be giving honest feedback. So, that assumption must be replaced with another assumption that honesty combined with respect does not damage the relationship. In fact, it is essential to building strong ones. So, instead of just looking at the relationship and the criticism angle, we need to look at there is another factor operating in this interaction that is called honesty and respect. So, criticism is there, but if it is given with honesty, support with the data and with respect, it may it will not damage relationship, it might in fact strengthen the relationship. Similarly, around here information is power and good leaders are powerful leaders, this assumption should be replaced with sharing information rather than voting it is the best way of magnifying power. So, initially people do not people do not feel enthusiastic about the sharing sharing information, but the good thing about sharing information authentically is that there might be other people who also might be thinking like that and this positive behavior of sharing information may provoke the goodness and authenticity in others and that will provoke more sharing of information and that may result in more collaboration. So, this is the essence of the individual level individual level intervention we looked at. So, in today's session we looked at how the psychology of the change works and the elephant rider model gives gives us few insights about how to direct the rider, how to motivate the elephants and how to clear the path for the successful change intervention. In the second half of the session we look at the individual level intervention. Individual level interventions are generally called process interventions. Process interventions aim at replacing the dysfunctional or non-functional beliefs, assumptions, attitudes and beliefs with more functional and more positive beliefs, assumptions, attitudes and values. Letter of inference, Johari window, visual explorer, general counseling and many different types of coaching methods have evolved in the current times around the process intervention area which aim at making people more functional, effective and joyful in this in their home. There is one set of OD intervention which is at the individual which operates at the individual level.