Reinforcing Values through Socio-technical Systems

Socio-technical theory & Organizational Culture

Socio-Technical Systems (STS) is “concerned with the interactions between the psychological and social factors and the needs and demands of the human part of the organization, and its structural and technological requirements.” (Szewczak, 2002, p. 107). In organizational development, STS is an approach to complex organizational work design that recognizes the interaction between people and technology in workplaces. Initially, practitioners looked at optimizing the requirements of technology with the needs of humans. However, McLoughlin (1999) asserted “The chief lesson of the research was that if management concentrated on maximizing their economic gains by improving the technological system of the organization without similar attention to the social system, then the economic benefits would be less.” (p. 136). In the pursuit of economic efficiency, an STS approach must take into account both elements as well as how they affect the organizational culture.

Organizational culture comprises the attitudes, values, beliefs, norms and customs of an organization and is considered to be intangible and difficult to measure. In describing organizational culutre, Trompenaars and Woolliams (2003) use the analogy of an onion that can be distinguished in three distinct layers (p. 25 – 27). The first layer is the outer layer and consists of what people primarily associate with culture (i. e. clothes, food, language, organizational charts, etc.) The second, and middle, layer refers to the norms and values of an organization (i.e. right and wrong or good and bad). Finally, the third layer is the deepest inner layer of the onion which is the level of implicit culture which results from human beings organizing to reconcile frequently occurring dilemmas (e.g. The daily routine of problem-solving).

The Right Technology at the Right Time

Davis (1997) observed that “The process begins with a transformation of scientific thought, with new perceptions about how the world works.”(p. 147). How often have you tried to contact customer service of your local power company, or the help desk of your Internet provider, or even ordered a pizza from pizza hut and found yourself annoyed by the awkward recording? Every organization at some point has to cope with the idea of ‘the right technology, at the right time.’ “[T]he technical aspect of needs for efficiency and economic return should be viewed as interrelated with concern for the human aspect of every organization.” (Wren, 2005, p. 292).

Understanding the Interrelationship

Each organization has its own particular cultural dynamics which vary in contexts, structures, and power relations. Any discussion of socio-technical change must also recognize an overarching set of beliefs and assumptions about technology that informs the processes of adaptation. Technology is not ‘merely’ a collection of bits and pieces, components, or design elements. McLaughlin (1999) contends “[Technology] should be regarded as an ensemble, whose component parts and their composition are held together by social relations among people, as much as by more physical ties such as screws, bolts or electrons.” (p. 2). The social and technical systems must integrate and assist one another.

Reinforcing Organizational Values

How do organizations use STS to reinforce organizational values? Organizations develop and employ technology in service of their mission, but also in service of their vision, values, and day-to-day operating requirements. Technology has the potential to liberate people and processes to greatly enhance creativity, performance, and quality, while reducing costs. Holman (2003) stated that “The reason for the change will greatly affect its nature.”(p. 333). As our society focuses on technology development, organizations are undergoing massive transformations to integrate technology into future operations. Human consideration in technological advances has a critical area in this transformation. “When any new technology is introduced, it is important that the user population have a positive attitude towards the new technology. For it to be successful, any new technology needs to be understood and valued by the users. (Szewczak, 2002, p. 108).

The users of this new technology, from an organizational context, are bound together by organizational culture which provides them with a common viewpoint, shared beliefs, or values. These values help them understand the activities of others in the organization, and it guides their own activities within and on behalf of the organization. “Because the shared beliefs include values about what is desirable and undesirable how things should and should not be, they dictate the kinds of activities that are legitimate and the kinds that are illegitimate.” (McLaughlin, 1999, p. 67). When followers participate in the embedding of technology, their values are also rooted in the resulting socio-technical organization. Embedding technology occurs in three major areas. Leaders can build commitment during the acquisition of technology. During the integration of technology into the organizational culture leaders can inspire empowerment. And through the proper management of the resulting socio-technical systems leaders can encourage teamwork and autonomy.

Commitment

Why do people complain about new technology? Technology acquisition is the process by which a company acquires the rights to use and exploit a technology for the purpose of improving work processes, products, or services. From the top-down view, managers fear the loss of control. Managers desire new technology to increase production and maintain control but during introduction they discover flaws such as poorly defined requirements and user dissatisfaction. Yates and Maanen (2001) maintained that managerial assumptions regarding control are incorrect and relationships between workers, supervisors, and top management are frequently altered by new technologies. (p. 207). Beekman and Quinn (2006) discussed how technology contributes to organizational culture by providing: “flatter” hierarchies, making it easier for workers at different levels to communicate; “increased integration” so departments can communicate openly; and “increased flexibility” allowing businesses to quickly react to changes. (p. 429-430).

From the bottom-up view the simple answer to why people complain about technology may simply be because they disapprove of the change itself. People at all levels tend to resist change when they don’t clearly understand the motivations behind the changes. Yates and Maanen (2001) discussed a “culture of complaint” which results from cynicism and negative attitudes toward organizational changes. (p. 174 – 175). The notion is that even if the current problems with technology were solved, other problems would be found to complain about.

David Haas (2003) who leads Collaborative Change Management team at the Altarum Institute, Alexandria, Virginia assisted the military in identifying the critical factors for acquisition success. Of the top ten critical factors for success, user involvement was number two second to executive support. (p. 12 – 13). One method of reducing the fear and resistance is for leaders and followers to design the socio-technical systems simultaneously and jointly. “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do not appear.” (Hebrews 11:3). Involving employees in the acquisition process provides a sense of commitment and faithfulness to the organization.

Empowerment

Another major impact for organizational management caused by the adoption of technology is integration. Although organizations have always been concerned about change management, the introduction of new technology significantly affects the breadth and depth of change. Sarmento (2005) asserted “One major impact on the organization is on how they manage and control processes, relationships and projects. The fundamental challenge to management is the need to implement the processes and infrastructure that support information management.” (p. 281). In order to be successful, organizations must undertake major changes that include changing existing work processes and transitioning workers to new roles and skills. “A major concern of corporate leaders and managers is how to effectively, efficiently, and quickly transform an organization from an older business design and model to one that is competitive and fully operational in the digital business world.” (Sarmento, 2005, p. 282). Leaders and managers must function as fully informed change agents, anticipating the need for transformation and carefully guiding the organization through implementation of all the facets of new work paradigms. Oden (1999) suggested “Other things being equal, the greater the total degree of integration or fit among the various components, the more effective the organization will be.” (p. 309).

The integration may be gradual or quick, narrowly or widely focused, involve only internal components or extensively involve customers, suppliers and other external entities. Major characteristics and processes for successfully managing the transition include vision, process reengineering, and architecture redesign knowledge and skills.

“[Socio-technical] infrastructure is complex, requires high levels of consistency and reliability, and often is globally implemented.” (Sarmento, 2005, p. 283). For example, employees must acquire new skill sets for rapid development and implementation. Managers need to understand the capabilities and limitations of new technologies and develop strategies for integration into existing administrative structures and policies.

Technological innovations by themselves introduce new challenges for leaders and followers. For example, using leader-follower integrated planning teams to develop administrative policies. Just as Jesus empowered his disciples in Mark 6:7, “he gave them power against unclean spirits” managers must empower their followers by extensively involving them in the integration process. Davis (1996) asserted, “Manage the context, and let subordinates manage the content. And let them do the same – and so on down the hierarchy, until the technology of the new economy and the values of the new society together evolve into the network that is now replacing the old order.” (p. 122).

Autonomous Teams

The third area in which socio-technical systems reinforce values is in managing the system. Socio-technical approaches include job enrichment as a design strategy and in addition emphasize worker and work group autonomy. When Jesus empowered his disciples in Mark 6:7, he also sent them out in autonomous teams “by two and two”. The purpose of going out in pairs may have been to bolster credibility by having the testimony of more than one witness, as well as to provide mutual support during their training period but he gave them, knowledge, power, and autonomy. Oden (1999) argued “Sub-units and teams should be relatively autonomous in comparison to previous organizational eras.”(p. 236).

Rather than providing traditional supervision, technology will allow managers to coach, assist with problem solving, and provide linkage to top management, to other organizational units, and to other organizations. Upper management should simply set goals, supply resources and manages the culture. “When workers were asked to suggest changes to the way in which their work was organized, the result was the setting up of autonomous work groups, individuals taking on more varied job tasks, and a flattened management hierarchy.” (Chmiel, 1998, p. 114). The effectiveness of technology depends in part on suitable ways of organizing workers to use it.

References

Chmiel, Nik. (1998). Jobs, Technology & People. Florence, KY. Routledge.

Davis, Stan (1996). Future Perfect. Reading, MA. Addison-Wesley Books.

Haas, David (2003). Government-wide Information Technology (IT) Acquisitions. Increasing Likelihood of Success Through Leadership and Integrated Planning Teams Development. Alexandria, VA. Altarum. Retrieved Electronically January 28, 2006. http://www.altarum.org/publications/pdfs/esd_ITA.pdf

Holman, David (2003). The New Workplace: A Guide to the Human Impact of Modern Working Practices. Hoboken, N.J. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.(UK), 2003.

Holy Bible (1999). King James Version. Study Bible. Grand Rapids, MI.

McLaughlin, Janice. (1999). Valuing Technology: Organizations Culture and Change.

London, GBR. Routledge.

McLoughlin, Ian. (1999). Creative Technological Change: The Shaping of Technology and Organizations. London, UK: Routledge.

Oden, Howard W. (1999). Transforming the Organization: A Socio-Technical Approach. Westport, CT. Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.

Sarmento, Anabela (2005). Issues of Human Computer Interaction. Hershey, PA. IRM Press.

Szewczak, Edward J.(Editor). (2002). Managing the Human Side of Information Technology: Challenges and Solutions. Hershey, PA. Idea Group Publishing.

Trompenaars, Fon and Woolliams, Peter (2003). Business Across Cultures. West Sussex, England, UK. Capstone Publishing.

Yates, JoAnne and Maanen, John V. (2001). Information Technology and Organizational Transformation. History, Rhetoric, and Practice. Thousands Oaks, CA. Sage Publications, Inc.