1
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
Discussion Post: Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
Anthony Soricelli
DBA: Marketing
Liberty University
2
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
Introduction
Technological structures and social boundaries are part of everyday life and are naturally
integrated into especially in modern day organizations. Technology structure is defined as the
productivity and work put into an organization. Although technology structure is the foundation
of success and the organization’s performance, social boundaries are incorporated and heavily
relied on to keep things in order. The structure of the social system plays a huge part in employee
motivation, participation, and involvement, and unites the employees with the company. An
organization can be efficient by listening to the social boundaries and employee cues to prevent
employee burnout, estrangement, as well as lowered productivity levels. Gupta (2017) makes a
great point by saying, employees that are engaged, have high involvement in the company, and
have enthusiasm for work are better performers overall. Successful organizations and their
employees must work together with the influence of the environment to be most productive and
efficient.
Technological Structures
Scott and Davis (2016) describe technology as the work collaborated on by an
organization and its employees. When one thinks of technology in an organization, they solely
think of the computers, software, or hardware, machinery the organizations uses. In reality it’s
much more than just that, it also entails the skills and knowledge of the humans that lead the
work to complete the tasks. Comparison of the different systems theories (rational, natural, and
open systems) to the technology structure does match up in a uniform manor but it varies in
3
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
structure and implementation leading to different goals instead. As leaders we need to keep in
mind there is no one correct way to structure an organization and each organization is unique in
its own way. An organization is affected by their goals, audience, tasks, environment, and
technology when operating day to day. No organization will be exactly like another when the
influence of technology structure is considered. This allows for flexibility and freedom of design
within the organization to best fit what the company needs in their specific niche market.
Scott and Davis (2016) details the three comparative elements that will influence the
organization’s structure which are: complexity or diversity, uncertainty or unpredictability, and
interdependence. Now keeping in mind that these aren’t the only sole influences of an
organizational culture, these three elements do help capture most others within them and are the
preferred outline of an organization’s technology structure.
Natural System Organizations
When it comes to natural systems organizations have to keep in mind cultural norms of
where they are located, because there are huge differences between American cultural norms
compared to other country cultural norms. Pucheta- Mart6nez & Gallego-8lvarez (2020)
interpretation of cultural norms is based off:
Hofstede’s cultural dimensions as a cultural framework for examining such a
relationship, shows mainly that the effect of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions on
environmental reporting is as expected by theory. These cultural dimensions are power
distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, masculinity, long-term orientation and
indulgence. (p.598)
4
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
Jung et al. (2019) discovered the difficulty of goals within the organization to include how
successful change is to this entity while business operations is constantly changing. These
changes allow team members within the company with the processes that conflicts when pushed
through the organization. Keeping in mind natural systems agility and flexibility, the
organizations utilizing the natural systems, as well as natural system theorists, maintain a strong
defensive stance on the benefit of the natural system in an uncertain environment. Due to the
open nature of the natural system, the individuals of the organization and their social interactions
are taken into consideration in organizational planning and structure. An organization is
influenced by the culture around it in pursuit of organizational success with adaptability through
uncertain, complex, and ambiguous environments but at the same time adhering to certain social
boundaries that keep operations in check.
Open Systems Organization
Standing et al., (2018) describes open systems as systems that utilize the external
environment around them to create and put into place changes that will benefit the organization,
people, and environment. The influences of an open system organization can come from many
sources including political, economic, and social factors that would have an impact on an
organization. In a recent study conducted by Carradus et al., (2020) they stated, the open-systems
analysis also unveiled practices that illustrate substantial involvement, distributed forms of
power, and low power distance, which are also commonly associated with stewardship. Open
system perspectives see organizations both as hierarchical systems and as broadly coupled
systems. This gives open systems the flexibility to coexist in ways with the other systems and
5
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
provide functionality throughout the systems in certain industries.
Rational Systems Organization
A rational system organization has gain advanced roles in society due to its structure of
the adaptability and flexibility to be developed and changed. An organization that uses rational
systems attempt to prevent uncertainties from the external environment from affecting their
company, they utilize four different buffering techniques (Scott and Davis, 2016). Scott and
Davis (2016) explain these techniques as:
Coding to organize the inputs for better implementation, stockpiling to ensure the inputs
and outputs are controlled to keep market exposure at a manageable level, leveling to
lower the difference in supply and demand utilizing tools such as a sale, and, finally,
forecasting to try to stay ahead of any changes in supply and demand to prevent harsh
impacts from the fluctuation. (p.128)
These techniques need to be utilized appropriately and determined by leadership which of them
would work best with organizations. Organizations must rely on teamwork to achieve goals more
than individual work because most technological structures are influenced by various factors that
make a larger impact than if they are done as a team compared to working alone. As the rational
system organization sets to obtain its goals, the focus of the organizations needs to be on how to
reach that goal with little to no risk at all. An organization has to be mindful on protecting its
6
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
technical structure from external influences and keep up with the advances its technology that
will ultimately increases the structure.
Hybrid organization structures utilize detailed technology network structures to transition
across the boundaries of the organization forming a co-op structure. Organizations like
agriculture and utility organizations are where hybrid co-op structures are typically found. This
idea of co-op structure allows for resource gathering and collaboration to meet the goals set by
the organization. In order for an organization to be successful with the hybrid co-op structure,
communication and information systems must be a well-oiled machine to ensure a strong and
successful structure.
Concerns Involving Social Boundaries
Every organization needs to be mindful of social boundaries throughout their
technological system and remember that their employees are only human. Rational, open, and
natural systems have differentiating systems and social boundaries that relate uniquely to the
system theory. The employees of varying organizations will find numerous ways to associate and
participate in the organization giving them the organizational identity. Any organization that
does not realize social boundaries and structure can fall victim to gaining a bad reputation and
could affect their ability to achieve success. Social influence plays a huge role in natural and
rational systems being combined with open systems when discussing the impact and perspectives
of social boundaries. Typically, in international labor markets are where the role differentiation
can be seen best in natural and rational open systems.
7
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
When looking at organizational boundaries, you will notice that is has advanced over the
years as early research initially notes boundaries as unquestionable lines drawn to separate the
external environment away from the organization. Current research on organizational boundaries
expands that idea to show the boundaries can be internal to the organization creating sub
divisions or even defining the differences in the human factors in the organization. Human
factors include: culture, profession, and other demographics. Boundaries can be thought of as
critical core functions for organizations if implemented correctly.
Social boundaries are typically utilized to complete two separate functions for the
organization which are divide and identify. Schotter et al., (2017) states, that these separate
functions provide the foundation and groundwork for the creation of subunits as well as in-
groups and out-groups allowing for the organization to separate itself away from the external
environment. Organizations need to keep a hold on these in-group and out-group identities
because depending on how they operate it could be damaging to organizational collaboration.
Natural Open System
As a natural system is focused on the people internally in the organization, the social
boundaries benefit from the recognition and acceptance of the cultural and social identities of the
organization’s employees. The natural system organizations embrace the added perspectives
from varying identities and the collective creativity brought to the organization through the
human social factors. When leaders are trying to hire for their organization they must take into
consideration the external factors of society for prospecting their potential candidates. Natural
systems are reliant on social expertise and collaboration when it comes to task completion to
meet goals, unlike rational systems that focus on the goals, not human participation. Scott and
8
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
Davis (2016) state, that the natural system’s reliance on skill variety promotes implicit
knowledge and growing experiences which, in turn, enhances job security. This makes a huge
selling point with potential employee candidates and will make this organization more sought out
after then other organizations.
Rational Open System
When taking a rational system approach in an organization, its main focus is on the goals
of the company as the primary matter and the internal social boundaries. When leaders of the
organization are analyzing potential candidates for a rational system organization, they plan to
ignore the external social identities of the individuals and focus on achieving the organizational
goals. Scott and Davis (2016) mention Weber’s criteria when recruiting for rational
organizations that will look at each applicant analytically taking priority to choosing a candidate
with full-time organizational commitment. This can cause some tension for the employees who
take care of household and/or caretakers as their responsibility to their families will hinder their
ability to have a full-time organizational commitment. The biggest example is when a child or
family member is sick, and the employee has to miss work to take care of their family. This
make it extremely hard for the employee to commit fully to their organizational duties and could
cause potential tension throughout the organization.
Personal Perspectives
Technology has completely shaken up organizations from the core, from day to day
operations to even some organizations completely relying on technology to run business
9
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
operations. Organizations must adapt to the changing world that we live in and have to make
changes that answer society needs. For example, the pandemic caused more organizations to
offer working from home options, you started to see a lot of husbands staying home while their
wife is working, and single parents working and holding down the household has been on the
rise of the decades. Horton (2020) states the support of positive cooperative actions through
communication and rhetoric, through the adoption of human resource management practices
related to selection and training, and through boundary-spanning processes and leadership roles
can promote better collaboration throughout all departments of an organization.
In the bible it states, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint
with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it
builds itself up in love (English Standard Version Bible, 2001, Ephesians. 4:16). As mentioned in
the previous sections, employees make the organization run and without them, the organization
would not exist. Collaboration through all departments is key to success for organizations. On
the flip side, employees need the organization as much as they need them because they provide
them the means to live and provide for themselves and their families. With rational or natural
systems, the social and technological boundaries and structures must feed off the employees and
the organization in a continual loop. Open systems on the other hand have to lean on the external
environment as an extra input and output factor.
All of these systems must consider the changes society brings on the human factor of the
equation and if organizations want to be successful they will know how to adapt accordingly. In
conclusion, while rational systems prioritize efficiency and goal attainment, natural systems
emphasize human relationships and adaptation, and open systems focus on flexibility and
10
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
responsiveness to external factors. Recognizing the working relationship between these systems
is essential for navigating the complexities of organizational technological structures and social
boundaries.
References
Carradus, A., Zozimo, R., & Cruz, A. D. (2020). Exploring a Faith-Led Open-Systems
Perspective of Stewardship in Family Businesses. Journal of Business Ethics, 163(4), 701-714.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04387-2
English Standard Version Bible. (2001). ESV Online. https://esv.literalword.com/
Gupta, M. (2017). Corporate social responsibility, employee-company identification, and
organizational commitment: Mediation by employee engagement. Current Psychology. 36(1).
101-109. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9389-8
Horton, K. E. (2020). Collaborating across workplace boundaries: Recommendations based on
identity research. International Security Management (pp. 401-413). Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42523-4_27
Jung, Y., & Vakharia, N. (2019). Open systems theory for arts and cultural organizations:
Linking structure and performance. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 49(4),
257-273.Jhttps://doi.org/10.1080/10632921.2019.1617813
11
Technology Structures and Social Boundaries
Pucheta-Mat6nez, M. C., & Gallego-8lvarez, I. (2020). Corporate environmental disclosure
practices in different national contexts: the influence of cultural dimensions. Organization &
Environment. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619860263
Scott, R. W, & Davis G. F. (2016). Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural, and Open
Systems Perspectives (1st ed.). New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Books. ISBN:
9780131958937.
Schotter, A. J., Mudambi, R., Doz, Y. L., & Gaur, A. (2017). Boundary spanning in global
organizations. Journal of Management Studies. 54(4). 403-421.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12256
Standing, C., Mingers, J., & Standing, S. (2018). The Use of Social Media in Supporting the
Development of Open Organizations for Innovation. Systems Research and Behavioral Science,
35(6), 838-855. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2521
