In my recent book, “Strategic Organizational Learning,” I made some controversial remarks about the continuing decline in the field of OD. Let me be blunt here: “OD is dead.”

My comments and the comments of others, such as those of Jerry Harvey, have enflamed the passions of the few remaining adherents to the faith known as OD. David Bradford and Warner Burke have published a new book, entitled “Reinventing Organization Development,” which appears to be a last stand to defend the faith. (I received a complimentary copy of the book this week. Considering my views of OD, it is quite a compliment indeed.)

For the uninitiated, let me briefly discuss what OD practitioners believe and why OD practitioners have failed to convert others to their beliefs.

Organization Development (OD) practitioners (note, if you use the word “organizational” instead of “organization” you will not be accepted as one of them), claim to represent the applied behavioral sciences approach to the fields of organizational change and change management.

While various approaches in any professional practice are welcomed and healthy, OD practitioners have never been completely forthright and honest about their beliefs. OD practitioners are staunch believers in humanistic philosophy, and they practice their faith with cult-like devotion. OD practitioners stand together against “strategic” approaches, “economic” approaches, and “capitalistic” approaches to organizational change, change management, or doing business.

While other organizational consultants, such as trainers, organizational learning consultants, HR consultants, and management consultants in general are seeking to become strategic business partners, OD practitioners still refuse to “partner” with their clients to produce business results.

Christopher Worley, one of the defenders of OD, has said OD is “concerned with learning and growth… [not] performance.” Clearly, management is, and should be, concerned with performance. Management is responsible to multiple stakeholder groups. Businesses are not founded to make employees happy; businesses are founded to serve the needs of all their stakeholders (customers, stockholders, and the community in general, not just employees).

OD practitioners look at business executives (their clients) with disdain. They see business people as bourgeois money-seekers who don’t care about the worker. They look down their noses at the “capitalists,” who incidentally happen to be their clients. Bradford and Burke complain about “OD and its marginal position.” Is there any wonder why? Why should anti-business, anti-capitalism, anti-management rhetoric be appreciated in the boardroom? OD practitioners do not want the responsibility for “performance,” but they do want the right to criticize the hard decisions management must make.

I believe there are two reasons why the OD practitioner has declined in importance and is now dead: 1) OD practitioners have not adopted a strategic partnering approach with management, and 2) many OD practices have already been adopted by mainstream corporations. Let me comment briefing about how OD has marginalized itself by not partnering with its client, and then I want to comment about the positive contributions of OD practitioners.

First, OD practitioners have marginalized themselves with cult-like vocabulary designed to separate themselves from the clients they serve. In his article, entitled “The Future of OD: Or, Why Don’t They Take the Tubes Out of Grandma?” Jerry Harvey included a list of this off-putting verbiage: “deconflicting, leadershiping, gridding, sensitizing, feedbacking, spiritualizing, T-grouping, rolfing, deep sensing, cheese chasing, renewing, life balancing, energizing, story telling, holistic knowing, mind mapping, Enneagramming,…”

So am I saying OD has been worthless? Not at all. OD practitioners have contributed many ideas that are now common practice in corporate America. Even some of OD most hated “enemies” (such as Jack Welsh) adopted many OD practices.

The second reason I believe OD is dead is the fact that the OD movement succeeded! Many OD practices, such as empowerment and participative management, are now part of organizational culture and practice in mainstream American business. Even if the initial intentions of OD were anti-business, anti-capitalism, and anti-management, the result of adopting OD practices has been higher productivity of profits. But, in addition to higher productivity and profits, I believe we also have “happier” empowered workers.

Yes, I believe OD is dead. But, I believe OD should be buried with honor. OD’s contributions were ultimately significant for all stakeholders in American business.

What’s next? OD practitioners should drop the anti-business, anti-capitalism, anti-management rhetoric and the OD practitioner banner that it represents. It’s time to become consultants who serve clients as strategic partners.