Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 180

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Process Consultation Revisited: Taking a Relational Practice Perspective

Open access
Lambrechts, Frank, Grieten, Styn, Bouwen, René, Corthouts, Felix·2009·The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science
DOI 10.1177/0021886308326563
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Process consultation as conceived and reformulated several times by Edgar Schein constitutes a seminal contribution to the process of organization development in general and to the definition of the helping role of the consultant in particular. Under the pressure of a pragmatic turn in organizational change work, the practice of process consultation was fading away during the eighties and nineties. In some particular training and organizational consulting contexts nevertheless, the foundational principles and practices of process consultation are experienced to be more relevant than ever before. A relational constructionist theoretical lens, an emphasis on joint consultant—client practices, and a proper contextual embedding constitute a relational practice perspective that embodies in a new form and language those foundational ideas.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0021886308326563

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Bass, B.M., 1965, Organizational psychology
  2. Beer, M. (2000). Research that will break the code of change. The role of useful normal science and usable action science. A commentary on Van de Ven and Argyris. In M. Beer & N. Nohria (Eds.), Breaking the code of change (pp. 429-446). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
  3. Bourdieu, P., 1980, Le sens pratique
  4. 10.1080/135943298398727 · DOI
  5. 10.1108/EUM0000000006057 · DOI
  6. 10.1080/135943200397987 · DOI
  7. 10.1002/casp.777 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Cooperrider, D., 2003, Appreciative inquiry handbook
  9. Cummings, T.G., 2005, Organization development and change
  10. French, W.L., 1998, Organization development. Behavioural science interventions for organization improvement
  11. 10.1007/978-1-4612-5706-6 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Gergen, K.J., 1994, Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction
  13. 10.1177/135050840072001 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Ghoshal, S., 1999, The individualized corporation: A fundamentally new approach to management
  15. Hosking, D.M. (2004). Change works. A critical construction. In J. J. Boonstra (Ed.), Dynamics of organizational change and learning (pp. 259-276). West Sussex , UK: Wiley & Sons. · DOI
  16. 10.4337/9781781950548.00020 · doi:10.4337/9781781950548.00020
  17. 10.1177/002188637901500309 · DOI
  18. 10.1017/CBO9780511625510.002 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Marrow, A., 1969, The practical theorist: The life and work of Kurt Lewin
  20. McNamee, S. (1998). Re-inscribing organizational wisdom and courage: The relationally engaged organization. In S. Srivastva & D. Cooperrider (Eds.), Organizational wisdom and executive courage (pp. 101-117). San Francisco: New Lexington Press.
  21. McNamee, S., 1998, Relational responsibility. Resources for sustainable dialogue
  22. Probst, G., 1997, Organizational learning. The competitive advantage of the future
  23. Schein, E.H., 1965, Organizational psychology
  24. Schein, E.H. (1969a). The mechanisms of change. In W. G. Bennis, K. D. Benne, & R. Chin (Eds.), The planning of change (pp. 98-107). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  25. Schein, E.H., 1969, Process consultation: Its role in organization development
  26. Schein, E.H., 1987, Process consultation, Vol. I: Its role in organization development
  27. Schein, E.H. (1993a). The academic as artist: Personal and professional roots. In A. Bedeian (Ed.), Management Laureates (Vol. 3, pp. 31-62). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. · doi:10.4324/9781351127202-2
  28. 10.1016/0090-2616(93)90052-3 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1108/02683949510093830 · doi:10.1108/02683949510093830
  30. Schein, E.H., 1999, Process consultation revisited: Building the helping relationship
  31. 10.1162/152417399570287 · doi:10.1162/152417399570287
  32. 10.1162/152417302762251327 · DOI
  33. 10.1162/152417303322004184 · DOI
  34. Schein, E.H., 2004, Organizational culture and leadership
  35. Schön, D.A., 1994, Frame reflection
  36. Shotter, J., 1993, Conversational realities: Constructing life through language
  37. 10.1075/cat.9.2.08sho · doi:10.1075/cat.9.2.08sho
  38. Shotter, J., 1996, Concepts and Transformations, 1, 71
  39. Weick, K.E., 1995, Sensemaking in organizations

Cited by

See all 180

Metadata

Authors
Lambrechts, F., Grieten, S., Bouwen, R., & Corthouts, F.
Venue
The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2009-03
Volume
45
Issue
1
Pages
39-58
ISSN
  • 0021-8863 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6879
DOI
10.1177/0021886308326563
OpenAlex
W2119497362
Cited by
180
References
3
FWCI
31.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Process Consultation Revisited: Taking a Relational Practice Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0021886308326563
The paper
Lambrechts, F., Grieten, S., Bouwen, R., & Corthouts, F. (2009). Process Consultation Revisited: Taking a Relational Practice Perspective. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886308326563

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.