Discussion: View Thread

Robert Bacal wrote (in part)...

>I agree that blaming a tool for something is rather futile, foremost
>because the tool doesn't care, so it's hardly satisfying to berate.
>
>However, tools, technology are hardly neutral in their effects.
>Mostly they have positive and negative outcomes, some foreseen,
>many NOT foreseen.

Robert's remarks (with which I totally agree) remind me of a puzzle on
which I've been working for many years now. About 35 years ago, I read a
book in which I first encountered the statement that "sociological change
lags technological change." As I recall, the statement was made in support
of an observation that technological advances and innovations occur at a
must faster rate than sociological advances and innovations, including
sociological adaptations to technological changes. Over the years, I've
seen that same statement in various guises.

When first I read that statement so long ago, my immediate reaction was to
wonder if there was a way to use technological change as a "prybar," that
is, as a way or means of inducing sociological change. Over the years, one
point of change strategy in my own practice as a consultant has been to
ponder that issue as it might apply to the engagement at hand. Sometimes
it does, sometimes it doesn't.

A case in point with which all might be familiar is ERP, whether in the
form of SAP or PeopleSoft. The organization's processes and its employees
must all adapt to the introduction of an ERP package -- and, as Robert
observes, they adapt in ways that lead to outcomes that are foreseen and
not foreseen. It is also worth pointing out that, in at least some cases,
ERP is introduced as a deliberate way of inducing changes in processes, etc.

All this leads me to pose a few questions to the list:

1. What other examples of sociological change lagging technological
change can you point to?
2. What other examples of using technology to induce sociological change
come to mind?
3. Where in the management literature is this stratagem or ploy
described and discussed?
--

Fred Nickols
The Distance Consulting Company
"Assistance at A Distance"
http://home.att.net/~nickols/distance.htm
nickols@worldnet.att.net
(609) 490-0095

A classic example of sociological change lagging technological change is
the fax machine. The technological invention occurred in the 1940's, but
the equivalent "social invention" did not occur until the 1990's.

Steve Harper
============================================
PRAGMATEK Consulting Group, Ltd.
Steve.Harper@pragmatek.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
"The strongest human instinct is to impart information.
The second strongest is to resist it."
-- Kenneth Grahame
============================================


-----Original Message-----
From: Fred Nickols [SMTP:nickols@WORLDNET.ATT.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2000 7:24 AM
To: MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
Subject: Sociological Change Lags Technological Change

Robert Bacal wrote (in part)...

>I agree that blaming a tool for something is rather futile, foremost
>because the tool doesn't care, so it's hardly satisfying to berate.
>
>However, tools, technology are hardly neutral in their effects.
>Mostly they have positive and negative outcomes, some foreseen,
>many NOT foreseen.

Robert's remarks (with which I totally agree) remind me of a puzzle on
which I've been working for many years now. About 35 years ago, I read a
book in which I first encountered the statement that "sociological change
lags technological change." As I recall, the statement was made in support
of an observation that technological advances and innovations occur at a
must faster rate than sociological advances and innovations, including
sociological adaptations to technological changes. Over the years, I've
seen that same statement in various guises.

When first I read that statement so long ago, my immediate reaction was to
wonder if there was a way to use technological change as a "prybar," that
is, as a way or means of inducing sociological change. Over the years, one
point of change strategy in my own practice as a consultant has been to
ponder that issue as it might apply to the engagement at hand. Sometimes
it does, sometimes it doesn't.

A case in point with which all might be familiar is ERP, whether in the
form of SAP or PeopleSoft. The organization's processes and its employees
must all adapt to the introduction of an ERP package -- and, as Robert
observes, they adapt in ways that lead to outcomes that are foreseen and
not foreseen. It is also worth pointing out that, in at least some cases,
ERP is introduced as a deliberate way of inducing changes in processes,
etc.

All this leads me to pose a few questions to the list:

1. What other examples of sociological change lagging technological
change can you point to?
2. What other examples of using technology to induce sociological change
come to mind?
3. Where in the management literature is this stratagem or ploy
described and discussed?
--

Fred Nickols
The Distance Consulting Company
"Assistance at A Distance"
http://home.att.net/~nickols/distance.htm
nickols@worldnet.att.net
(609) 490-0095

On 4 Jan 00, at 7:24, Fred Nickols wrote:

> Robert Bacal wrote (in part)...
>
> >I agree that blaming a tool for something is rather futile, foremost
> >because the tool doesn't care, so it's hardly satisfying to berate.
> >

> When first I read that statement so long ago, my immediate reaction was to
> wonder if there was a way to use technological change as a "prybar," that
> is, as a way or means of inducing sociological change. Over the years,
> one point of change strategy in my own practice as a consultant has been
> to ponder that issue as it might apply to the engagement at hand.
> Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.

It's possible, I suppose, but the difficulty is in the intentionality of it.
That is, we deliberately try to create social outcome x by
introducing technology x, and our ability to predict social outcomes
is probably pretty poor.

For example, let's talk about introducing an intranet for the purpose
of improving communication, two way information flow and a
number of internal cultural objectives.

Can we predict the outcomes? Do we know enough about how
people will actually interact with this new technology to predict
outcomes? Can we anticipate unwanted ones? Do we know
enough to implement the tech. so it will bring about what we want?

I think, by and large, the answer is no. That means that using tech.
as a prybar is difficult because of the lack of ability to really predict
outcomes.

The moral. Constant monitoring and not assuming a tech. solution
will change or improve things, but working on a feedback loop to
modify and tweak the implementation (talking about internal to
companies).




Visit the work911.com supersite at http://www.work911.com
for work related articles, or to find almost anything including
book reviews and suggestions, discussion lists and more.