Throughout the evolution of the concept of the organization, the definition of organizational development changed accordingly. The most widely used and recognized one is a definition by Richard Beckhard which outlined five crucial components of OD. The components include its planned nature, organization-wide scope, the vertical top-down direction of management, improvement of organizational effectiveness and health as a goal, and utilization of behavioral science for intervention facilitation (Gallos, 2006). This definition aligns well with most OD activities and can be traced to related concepts. For instance, the formulation of organizational development objectives by Block (2011) includes the improvements of interface management between different plant segments and increased cooperation between product directors and the market research group, which are consistent with the increased organizational effectiveness. Besides, the creation of a culture of strong commitment and accountability likely requires behavioral science knowledge and results in improved organizational health (Block, 2011). However, it should be noted that while this definition is robust and diverse which ensures its relative relevance, the recent changes in the understanding of the principles of successful organizational function demand an update of this definition. For example, change management is becoming recognized as an essential component of the organization’s success. On the other hand, Beckhard’s definition treats an organization as a stable, well-established, and rigid mechanism which can be definitively operated with predictable and measurable results. Besides, the experience of individuals involved in an organization’s functioning is considered vital for ensuring the success of the overall development results. Therefore, I suggest the following definition: organizational development is a planned effort of improving the efficiency and health of an organization through influencing its members by encouraging responsibility and involvement in both vertical and horizontal directions. The two questions that need to be clarified when engaging with the new clients are the initial problem they have and the expectations regarding the results of the collaboration. The former is important because on certain occasions clients can search for new opportunities rather than aim to address the existing issues. In this case, further contracting is likely to take a completely new direction and incorporate a wider scope. The latter needs to be detailed since the consultant may view the solution and the desired outcome from a different perspective, which may result in misunderstandings and dissatisfaction regarding the results. The identification of the initial need has several important details that need to be acknowledged and, on some occasions, inquired in detail. For instance, it is necessary to determine the underlying causes of the issue brought up by the client. In this way, the consultant will be able to determine the amount of work to be done as well as the level of responsibility of the firm for the encountered problem. This approach will also give the consultant an advantage of acting on par with the client, thereby assuming