The Impact of Technology Insertion on Organisations

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 November 2007 collar labour. Specifically, they conclude: ‘. . . rather than being aggregate labour-saving, increases in IT tend to be labour-using’. It seems that whilst there are many specific studies showing a loss <strong>of</strong> jobs, overall assessments such as those made by the US Congress Office <strong>of</strong> <strong>Technology</strong> Assessment [123] conclude that ‘technology was probably generating more jobs than it was destroying’. It would appear that predicting the impact <strong>of</strong> manufacturing technologies is much more straightforward. As far back as the 1950s, Woodward [124] developed a measurement scale on which firms were characterised according to the technical complexity <strong>of</strong> the manufacturing process. In this instance, high technical complexity indicated that most <strong>of</strong> the work was carried out by machines, whereas low technical complexity meant that workers play a greater part in the process. Woodward found that the number <strong>of</strong> management levels and manager to personnel level increased as technological complexity increased. In non-manufacturing industries, where the output is less tangible, the relationship between manpower levels and technology is much less predictable. 6.3 Distribution <strong>of</strong> Power and Control It has long been assumed that IT will lead to flatter organisational structures and the sharing <strong>of</strong> power. However, Zub<strong>of</strong>f [125] and Lohr [126] have found that the ‘paradise <strong>of</strong> shared knowledge and a more egalitarian working environment is just not happening. If power is not shared, it is because management does not want to share authority and power’. <strong>The</strong>y each conclude that this is a result <strong>of</strong> organisational culture, rather than technology. Studies by Fukuyama and Shulsky [127] examined the relationship between disintermediation (removing the middleman), flat organisations, and centralisation on behalf <strong>of</strong> the US Army. <strong>The</strong>y found that the conventional argument that IT will lead to flatter organisations is dependent on a single function <strong>of</strong> middle management: the aggregation, filtering, and transmission <strong>of</strong> information. In other words, if all information travels through middle management layers there will be centralisation <strong>of</strong> power. Advances in IT suggest that flattening is desirable, since IT facilitates the automation <strong>of</strong> much <strong>of</strong> this work. This research found that if the role <strong>of</strong> managers in an organisation is primarily information processing, then information-processing equipment might replace them, and organisations will become flatter. If, on the other hand, there is more to the manager’s role than information processing, then linear predictions about flattening <strong>of</strong> the organisational structure are too simple. Again it would seem that there is evidence to support both centralisation and decentralisation arguments. In fact, an international study <strong>of</strong> the effects on power distribution [128] found every possible outcome across an array <strong>of</strong> case studies: centralisation, decentralisation, lateral transfer across departments and no impact at all. 6.4 Job Enrichment vs Deskilling One common theme <strong>of</strong> new technologies in organisations is that they aim to substitute machine technology for human labour. Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs), for example, 29
HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 November 2007 have replaced thousands <strong>of</strong> human bank tellers and IBM has built a factory that can produce laptops without the help <strong>of</strong> a single worker. Besides replacing production, technologies have led to job simplification, where the variety and difficulty <strong>of</strong> tasks carried out are reduced. This can lead to boredom and reduced job satisfaction. More advanced technologies on the other hand tend to cause job enrichment, meaning that the job provides greater responsibility, recognition and opportunities for growth and development. <strong>The</strong> introduction <strong>of</strong> ATMs into banks took most <strong>of</strong> the routine tasks (deposits and withdrawals) away from bank tellers and left them with the more complex tasks that require higher level skills. <strong>The</strong>se technologies create a greater need for employee training and education because workers need higher level skills and greater competence to master their jobs. Some research has shown that the introduction <strong>of</strong> computing technologies into almost all workplaces has made the nature <strong>of</strong> work more complex [129]. <strong>The</strong> increasing complexity <strong>of</strong> modern organisations and substantial knowledge needed to get the job done has led to greater demand for a highly skilled workforce with distinct technological expertise and knowledge [130]. Even when the aim <strong>of</strong> implementing IT is not to change the organisational structures and processes it still has a knock on effect on the social system and culture. Social and technical systems are interrelated and the implementation <strong>of</strong> IT involves the introduction <strong>of</strong> a technical system into a social environment. <strong>The</strong>re are a number <strong>of</strong> issues that need to be considered when implementing technology that will impact upon job design and individual or group performance. Eason [62] identifies five categories: 1. Task Support Problems: <strong>The</strong> failure to look in detail at the work <strong>of</strong> each type <strong>of</strong> user <strong>of</strong>ten means that the system delivers an inappropriate service to the end user. 2. Job Content Issues: Implementation requires changing the user’s job. <strong>The</strong> distribution <strong>of</strong> work may be affected and the burden <strong>of</strong> work may be increased in unexpected areas as a result <strong>of</strong> the new system. For example, as salespeople are able to process more orders following the implementation <strong>of</strong> a new orders system, this may put a greater burden on the distribution and delivery <strong>of</strong> the product. 3. Formalisation: Systems require more standardised and formal procedures across all users in order to provide commonality. 4. Power and Influence: <strong>The</strong> availability and access to information will change relationships and power influences. 5. Personnel Policies: <strong>The</strong>re may be a need to retrain or employ different staff to operate the new system. Different skills may be required as the job content and workload changes to meet the needs <strong>of</strong> the new system. This will also impact on career pr<strong>of</strong>iles and future training requirements. In the 1980s researchers tried to resolve the argument about whether new technology deskilled or enriched existing jobs. Research by various authors [131], [5], [132], [133] indicates that: • new technology sometimes enriches jobs and sometimes simplifies them; • both effects can occur within the same organisation; 30
Page 1 and 2: The Impact
Page 3 and 4: HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 No
Page 33: HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 No
Page 85 and 86:
HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 No
Page 87:
HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 No
show all

The Impact of Technology Insertion on Organisations

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?