technology._FOR KIM WOODS ONLY

BUSM 3194

Organisational Theory Assignment

Done by Su Yan, s3474231 Date: 9/4/2015

Introduction

The present is ever-changing with new advances in technological inventions that have impacted our daily lives so greatly ever since the progression of the Internet in the early 2000s. Technology is prevalent in organizations as it makes operations much more efficient and improved work performance. Avegerou (1998) concurs by saying, ‘IT is singled out as being the most pervasive technical innovation of the post World War II era’. It is postulated that IT will continue progressing and become more unified in society (Masutti 2001). This report aims to discuss about the modernist and postmodernist perspectives towards the role of technology in organizations. Technology within orgnisations would be defined as forms of computerized systems or machinery that are used to enhance communications and information gathering and management and processing of such information, which is commonly termed as Information Technology (IT). Information Technology is the transformation of social understanding of issues and habits into automated form (Eischen 2000).

Theoretical Framework

Modernist approach

The modernist way of understanding consists of objective ontology where the discovery of reality is supported by tests and experiments which would provide figures and statistics. They believe that people are aware of their interests and these interests are not influenced by others (Calas & Smircich 1999). The modernist perspective tends to focus around rational thinking around an organized framework. (Winograd & Flores 1986). A modernist theorist would build impressions based around rationality and causality and any anomalies would be treated as unimportant instead of a symptom or a cue to other existing problems. It is concerned with finding the ultimate and fixed solution or meaning to issues. Truth is discovered through an analysis between an argument and statistically collected data. It depends upon tangible and reliable data instead of counting on unexpected phenomena (Boisot & McKelvey 2010).

Postmodernist approach

On the other hand, postmodernist theorists do not believe in an absolute truth as they embrace discovery of wide ranging ideas. Postmodernists engage in a subjective ontology where the understanding of reality is influenced by the actors of society. They think that social factors are a part of the common reality as they cannot be viewed as separate entities. There is no absolute truth as there can be many forms of reality. The postmodernist perspective is also multi-dimensional (Levine &Scolion 2004). They believe that society situations are chaotic and subjected to endless infinities and these driving forces that make up society are ambiguous and tricky to comprehend (Boisot & McKelvey 2010). The postmodernists’ perspective is concerned with the right to express opinions freely, as power can limit one’s right in expression. It is focused on breaking down the walls of superficial language and exploring motivations or ideas through discourse analysis. It is a protest against the Enlightenment by proposing a profound way of subjective analysis and the assertion of power as a form of oppression to our ideas in an objective society (Foucault, 1977). Postmodernists aim to unravel the immeasurable ideas and mindsets without the restriction that power has on them (Derrida 1978; Foucault 1977; Rorty 1989). Postmodernism opposes modernism’s singular view on science and people, breaking down the structure that forms the phenomena, disclosing the frailty of beliefs that offer this fixed structure with skepticism (Boisot & McKelvey 2010).

Modernist and Postmodernist view on technology

The modernist view of technology is that it undoubtedly exists and it is now fundamental and ubiquitous in organizations. As organizations are seen as a bureaucratic, hierarchical system, technology is used as a tool that allows organizations to operate faster, better and more efficiently in order to achieve organizational goals. The role of technology is to provide substantial intermediate support to management, communications, production and manufacturing process and to facilitate the operations of organizational flow through its departments. Technology serves as an intermediate step between processing inputs into outputs. Phahlamohlaka & Kroeze (2005) support the opinion that technology is only seen as automated equipment that each type of equipment differs from its purpose and way of using the particular technology.

However, postmodernists would beg to differ as technology is not simplistic and static. It is abstract with the consideration of societal and power conflict issues. Technology cannot be viewed objectively as its existence in the organization is related to its creators’ and provider’s goals, purpose, motives and comprehension of that technology (Orlikowski & Gash 1994).

Condella (2001) and Heidegger (1977) support this as they believe the crux of technology is not merely a system of mechanical content.

Modernists see technology as a stepping stone to provide sufficient information that can transform products or services. The use of IT can give companies a comparative edge and advantage in the market as it is used not only to improve internal operations, but also to come up with innovations that would make their products stand out or be manufactured at a lower cost (Porter 1990). Organizations use production technologies to cut down on the costs of manufacturing strategically which increases profits.

Postmodernists think that while technology may appear to be subservient to workers, as humans are the creators of technology, the pervasiveness of technology is actually inculcating in an overreliance on technology which leads to a limitation of forming new ideas or solutions. When technology becomes strongly embedded into our regular organizational processes, top management tends to disregard its strategic importance (Swanson & Ramiller 2004). By relying on technology as a routine to help us “think”, workers merely accept the ways in which technology handle work as it is, instead of having to figure out a solution to each problem faced (Berger & Luckmann 1967; Schutz 1962). People tend to be oblivious to other forms of solutions and take the only solution as innovating more efficient forms of technology to solve their problems (Condella 2001). Technology becomes an easy way out to problems that people in organizations would accept it as the normal way of getting work done and would apply it to future repeating events (Zucker 1977, 1986). People become increasingly dependent on what technology can do as they are used to instant gratification they can get from technology. With the aggressive advances in technology, organizations become more and more engrossed and fixated on the potential benefits of technology such that if technology fails, society would struggle in problem solving without technology as they revert back to manual ways of analyzing issues. It seems as though technology has the upper hand in terms of control it manipulates our behavior in ways unforeseeable. This challenges the modernist’s perspective as it is not simply a tool for us to engage in, it is becoming a tool that is driving and changing human and social behavior.

The modernist perspective also believes that technology can aid in management within organizations. IT software such as Decision Support Systems helps managerial decision making by gathering mass information and data through data mining and coding and predicting trends that will come to a best solution for managers to consider. Such uses of IT help to save time and effort by sorting out files and information and retrieving them at a fast speed. Employees can source for information quickly and work process is shortened. This helps to facilitate the operations for managers and employees and enhances the structure and hierarchy in an organization.

However, postmodernists would claim that surveillance technology and performance management technology used in organizations can be seen as a form of oppression. For example, technology that tracks the performance of employees can assert pressure on their work processes. This intrusive control over employees limits them to be flexible and “natural” as they are constantly fearful that their managers are always observing their working behavior. For example, Amazon uses harsh surveillance technology to keep track of employees’ performances to ensure that they are up to top-notch standard in their manufacturing process and they would be fired if they did not perform up to their expectations (Head 2014). Managers assert their control and power through these forms of technology which is in view of maximizing profits and gaining competitive advantage for their company. It is claimed that the advantages of IT are minimized by a system that is too standardized and restricted (Spanos et al. 2002).

In the modernist viewpoint, technology helps to improve effectiveness of communications between managers and employees in an organisation. Through communication technological innovations such as Intranet, which is an internal network meant for assisting employees’ work operations and teamwork (Martini et al. 2009), emails, and also the Internet, workers can interact effectively as it disregards the physical distance needed between people for communication. Modernists view communication as a way of exchanging viewpoints and allocation of work, and not a form of social enjoyment. It enhances work performance as employees can communicate and express ideas more fluently. These channels are used with the purpose of increasing productivity between workers and thus, bringing more success to the organisation. For example, a discussion could easily be held with the use of Skype video calls in anywhere in the world without having the people to gather physically.

On the other hand, postmodernists would deem it as an implication as people are increasingly fixated and attached to technology. While the modernist perspective believes that technology can aid interactive discussions among employees, postmodernists believe that it reduces the need of knowledge and skills of workers as machines can easily replace manual work. This is a cause for concern as it can lead to managers entrusting work to machines and systems because they are deemed as reliable and disregards employees’ suggestions and ideas. For example, manufacturing firms use machines to produce products that bring the company profits and skilled engineers are only employed to maintain and serve the machinery. Human labour and skills is easily dispensable because it is not needed most of the time. It puts people out of jobs and because there is lesser demand for human labour.

Conclusion

This paper has presented both side of the coin with perspectives of modernism and postmodernism regarding technology used within organizations. It has brought out the modernist side of focusing on the role of technology in ensuring effective organizational work processes and the postmodernist side where technology may have societal implications which may hinder organizational progresses. While it may seem that the two perspectives can be contrasting and conflicting, Boisot & McKelvey (2010) postulates that under special situations, the two perspectives can be viewed as a pair which complements each other instead of being viewed as separate outcomes. As with the perspectives on technology, it would be best to observe the two sides from an unbiased viewpoint.

Reference list

Avegerou C, 1998, ‘How can IT enable economic growth in developing countries?’, Information Technology for Development, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 15-28.

Berger P L & Luckmann T, 1967, The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, The Penguin Press, London.

Boisot E M & McKelvey B, 2010, ‘Integrating modernist and postmodernist perspectives on organizations: A complexity science bridge’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 35, no. 3, pp 415 – 433.

Calas M B & Smircich L, 1999, ‘Past postmodernism? Reflections and tentative directions’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 24, pp. 649–671.

Condella C, 2001, Overcoming the Destining of Technological Being, Fordham, viewed 20 August 2015, <www.fordham.edu/philosophy/fps/symposia/2001fall/condella.htm>.

Derrida J, 1978, Writing and difference, 1st edn, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.

Eischen K, 2000, ‘Information Technology: History, Practice and implications for Development’, CGIRS – Working Paper Series, vol. 4.

Foucault M, 1977, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Pantheon Books, New York.

Head, S 2014, Mindless: Why Smarter Machines are Making Dumber Humans, Perseus Books Group, USA.

Heidegger M, 1977, The question concerning technology and other essays, Harper Torchbooks, New York.

Levine P & Scollon R, Discourse and Technology: multimodal discourse analysis, Georgetown University Press, Washington, USA.

Masutti O, 2001, Impact of IT on society in the new century, IBM, viewed on 30th August 2015, < http://www.zurich.ibm.com/pdf/news/Masutti.pdf >.

Martini A, Corso M, Pellegrini L, 2009, ‘An Empirical Roadmap for Intranet Evolution’, International Journal of Information Management, vol. 29, pp 295-308

Orlikowski, W J & Gash, D C, 1994, ‘Technological frames: Making sense of information technology in organizations’, ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 12, no. 2, pp 174.

Phahlamohlaka L & Kroeze J, 2005, ‘Sacred space in cyberspace: an African perspective’, Journal for Semitics, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 413-440.

Porter M, 1990, The Competitive Advantage of the Nations, Free Press, New York.

Rorty R, 1980, Philosophy and the mirror of nature, Blackwell, Oxford.

Schutz A, 1962, Collected papers: the problem of social reality, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague.

Spanos Y E, Prastacos G P& Poulymenakou A, 2002, ‘The Relationship between Information and Communication Technologies Adoption and Management’, Journal of Information and Management, vol. 39, pp 659-675.

Swanson E B & Ramiller N C, 2004, ‘Innovating Mindfully with Information Technology’, MIS Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 553-583.

Winograd T & Flores F, 1986, Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design, Addison Wesley, Reading Massachusetts.

Zucker L G, 1986, ‘Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure’, Research in organizational behavior, vol. 8, pp. 53-111.