Evaluation and the Impact of Information Technologies on People in Organizations

Abstract

Micro-electronic-based technologies will have profound effects on the relationships between people, machines, work, and productivity. Present policies towards them, however, place an overwhelming emphasis on technological and economic considerations. An “innovation approach” to the diffusion of technology predominates, linked to a unitary concept of organization, an antagonistic view of participation and efficiency, and a short-term “cost substitution” approach to evaluation. One alternative is suggested by the emphasis in the organization theory literature that organizations are social rather than rational systems containing a plurality of interest groups. On this view, it is as unrealistic to attempt to segregate technical and economic considerations from social and psychological ones, as it is to separate short-term effects from long-term outcomes. Evaluation is seen as a central part of a complex and incremental planning process. Yet this approach is often presented as little more than a strategy to minimize possible resistance to the introduction of the technologies. There is an important need to seek to influence opinion and practice to ensure that the technologies are used to increase peoples' opportunities for self-determination at work rather than simply to seek for ways in which the new technologies can smoothly be introduced. Drawing from attempts over the past 20 years to improve the quality of working life through the promotion of job redesign theory, a general approach to the issue is outlined. It is argued that psychological and social planning is an essential part of the introduction of the new technologies, that evaluation should focus on developing goals, processual issues, and incremental change rather than on how far predetermined objectives are reached. Appropriate evaluation of the new technologies is an activity of importance, offering opportunities to help ensure that psychological and social issues are given attention comparable to that received by technical and economic concerns.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ARBROSE, J.

Is worker democracy working?

International Management, November 1979, 14-18 .

BELL, R. M. Changing technology and manpower requirements in the engineering industry. Brighton: Sussex Univeristy Press , 1972.

BLACKLER, F. H. M. Job redesign and social policies. In J. E. Kelly & C. W. Clegg (Eds.), Autonomy and control at the workplace. London: Croom Helm , 1982.

BLACKLER, F. H. M. , & BROWN, C. A. Job design and social change, The case of Volvo. In K. D. DUNCAN , M. GRUNEBERG , & D. WALLIS (Eds.), Changes in working life. London: Wiley , 1980.

BLACKLER, F. H. M. , & BROWN, C. A. The law and job design: Comments on recent Norwegian legislation . Industrial Relations Journal, 1982, 13(4), 73-83 .

BLACKLER, F. H. M. , & BROWN, C. A. Qualitative research and paradigms of practice . Journal of Management Studies, 1983, 20(3), 349-366 .

BOLWEG, J. F. Job design and industrial democracy. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff , 1976.

BRAVERMAN, H. Labor and monopoly capital. New York: Monthly Review Press , 1974.

BUCHANAN, D. , & BODDY, D. Organizations in the computer age. Aldershot: Gower , 1982.

10.

CAMPBELL, D. T. , & STANLEY, J. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally , 1966.

11.

CAPES, P. F. M. S.can mean profit but needs discipline . Networking Production, January 1984.

12.

CARNALL, C. A. The evaluation of organizational change. Farnborough: Gower , 1982.

13.

COOK, T. D. , & CAMPBELL, D. T. Quasi experimentation. Chicago: Rand McNally , 1977.

14.

CROZIER, M. Implications for the organization. In H. J. Otway & M. Peltu (Eds.), New office technology. London: Frances Pinter , 1983.

15.

DAVIS, L. E. , & CHERNS, A. B. (Eds.). The quality of working life, (Vols. I and II). New York: The Free Press , 1975.

16.

DICKSON, D. Alternative technology and the politics of technical change. London: Fontana/Collins , 1972.

17.

ELDEN, M. Three generations of work democracy experiments in Norway. C. Cooper & E. Mumford (Eds.), The quality of working life in western and eastern Europe. London: Associated Business Books , 1979.

18.

ELDEN, M. Democratization and participative research in developing local theory . Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 1983, 4, 21-23 .

19.

EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION NEWS (E.P.N.). Canberra, Australia: Department of Employment and Industrial Relations , 1984.

20.

FLETCHER, B. B. , & PAYNE, R. L. Stress and work: A review and theoretical framework . Personnel Review, 1980, 9, 19-29 .

21.

FOX, A. Industrial relations: A social critique of pluralist ideology. In J. Child (Ed.), Man and organization. London: Allen and Unwin , 1973.

22.

FROMM, E. The sane society. New York: Harper , 1955.

23.

GLASS, G. V. MCGRAW, B. , & SMITH, M. L. Meta analysis in social research. London: Sage , 1981.

24.

GOULDNER, A. W. Patterns of industrial bereaucracy. New York: Free Press , 1954.

25.

GUSTAVSEN, B. , & HUNNIUS,G. New patterns of work reform: The case of Norway. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget , 1981.

26.

HACKMAN, J. R. , & OLDHAM, G. R. Motivation through the design of work . Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 1976, 16, 250-259 .

27.

HERBST, P. G. Sociotechnical design. London: Tavistock , 1974.

28.

HERBST, P. G. Alternative to hierarchies. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff , 1976.

29.

HOPWOOD, A. G. Evaluating the real benefits. In H. J. Otway & M. Pelty (Eds.), New office technology. London: Frances Pinter , 1983.

30.

JENKINS, D. QWL-Current trends and directions. Ontario: Ministry of Labour, QWL Centre , 1981.

31.

KATZ, D. , & KAHN, R. L. The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley , 1966.

32.

KISSLER, L. , & SATTEL, V. Humanization of work and social interests . Economic and Industrial Democracy, 1982, 3, 221-261 .

33.

KLING, R. Social goals in systems planning and development. In H. J. Otway & M. Peltu (Eds.), New office technology. London: Frances Pinter , 1983.

34.

LAWLER, E. J. , NADLER, D. A. , & CAMMAN, C. Organizational assessment. London: Wiley , 1980.

35.

LEONTIEFF, W. W. The distribution of work and income . Scientific American, September, 1982, 100-112 .

36.

OTWAY, H. J. , & PELTU, M. New office technology: Human and organizational aspects. London: Frances Pinter , 1983.

37.

PETTIGREW, A. M. The politics of organizational decision making. London: Tavistock , 1973.

38.

Q.W.L. FOCUS. Ontario, Canada: Ministry of Labour , 1984.

39.

REICKEN, H. W. , & BORUCH, R. F. Social experimentation: A method for planning and evaluating social innovations. New York: Academic Press , 1974.

40.

SUCHARD, E. A. Evaluation research. New York: Russel Sage , 1967.

41.

THORSRUD, E. , & EMERY, F. Democracy at work: The report of the Norwegian industrial democracy program. The Hague: Matinus Nijhoff , 1976.

42.

TOURAINE, A. Workers' attitudes to technical change. Paris: OECD , 1965.

43.

WALTON, R. E. Social choice in the development of advanced information technology . Human Relations, 1982, 35,(12), 1073-1084 .

44.

WARNER, K. E. , & LUCE, B. R. Cost-benefit and cost effectiveness analysis on health care: Principles, practice and potential. Ann Arbor: Health Administration Press , 1982.

45.

WEISS, R. S. , & REIN, M. The evaluation of broad-aim programs: Experimental design, its difficulties and an alternative . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1970, 15, 98-109 .

46.

WILKINSON, B. The shopfloor politics of new technology. London: H.E.B. , 1983.

47.

WINNER, L. Autonomous technology. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press , 1978.

48.

WORTMAN, P. M. Evaluation research: A methodological perspective . Annual Review of Psychology, 1983, 34, 223-260 .

49.

WYNNE, B. The changing roles of managers. In H. J. Otway & M. Peltu (Eds.), New office technology. London: Frances Pinter , 1983.