An investigation of technological change revealed decreases in job commitment among employees. Decrements in commitment were found to be directly associated with several aspects of the job change and employee attitudes. The implications of these findings for organizations and individuals involved in technological change are discussed, and a model for implementing technological change is introduced.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArgoteL.GoodmanP.S.SchkadeD.“The Human Side of Robotics: How Workers react to a Robot.”Sloan Management Review, Spring, 1983, 31–41.
2.
AyresR.MillerS.Robotics: Applications and Social Implications. Cambridge, Mass: Ballinger Publishing Co., 1983.
3.
BaumgartelH.GoldsteinG.“Some Human Consequences of Technological Change.”Personnel Administrator, 24, 4, 1961, 32–40.
4.
BeckerH.S.“Personal Change in Adult Life.”The Planning of Change, 2nd ed. (ed.) BennisBenneChinNew York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 69, 255–267.
5.
BeirneJ.A.“The Nature of Automation in the Telephone Industry”. Automation and Society (ed.) Jacobson and Roucek New York: Philosophical Library, 1959, 183–194.
6.
BenneK.D.BirnbaumM.“Principles of Changing”. The Planning of Change, 2nd ed. (ed.) BennisBenneChin. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston, Inc., 1969, 328–335.
7.
BennisW.G.BenneK.D.ChinR.“Collaboration and Conflict”. The Planning of Change. 2nd ed. (ed.) BennisW.G.BenneK.D.ChinR.New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969, 147–153.
8.
BillingsR.S.KlimoskiR.J.BreaughJ.A.“The Impact of a Change in Technology on Job Characteristics: A Quasi-experiment.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 1977, 184–191.
9.
BrightJ.R.“Directions of Technological Change and Some Business Consequences.”Automation and Technological Change. Columbus, Ohio: Battelle Memorial Institute, 1963.
10.
Chadwick-JonesJ.K.Automation and Behavior. London: Wiley and Sons, Ltd., 1969.
11.
ClappN.W.“Management Resistance to Robots”. Robotics Today, Spring, 1981, 39–41.
12.
EndsleyM.R.“Technological Change and Individual Adjustment”. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, 1985.
13.
FademJ.“Fitting Computer-aided Technology to Workplace Requirements: An Example”. Proceedings of the 13th Annual Meeting and Technical Conference of the Numerical Control Society, March, 1976.
14.
GoodmanP.S.DeanJ.W.Jr.“Why Productivity Efforts Fail”. A paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, California, August, 1981.
Managemaent: The Social Perspective. (ed.) ScottE.L.BolzR.W.Athens, Georgia: Center for the Study of Automation and Society, 1970, 92–101.
17.
HeynsR.W.The Psychology of Personal Adjustment. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1958.
18.
HovlandC.I.WeissW.“The Influence of Source Credibility on Communications Effectivelness.”Experiments in Persuasion. (ed.) RosnowR.L.RobinsonE.J.New York: Academic Press, Inc., 1967, 9–24.
19.
JacksyC.E.“Overcoming Resistance Toward Computer Aided Design”. CAD in Medium Sized and Small Industries. (ed.) MermetJ.Netherlands: North-Holland Publishing Co., 1981, 117–123.
20.
KatzE.“The Social Itenerary of Technical Change: Two Studies on the Diffusion of Innovation”. The Planning of Change2nd ed. (ed.) BennisW.G.BenneK.D.ChinR.New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969, 230–255.
21.
KleinD.“Some Notes on the Dynamics of Resistance to Change: The Defender Role.”The Planning of Change, 2nd ed. (ed.) BennisW.G.BenneK.D.ChinR.New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969, 498–507.
LevinsonH.Organizational Diagnosis. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972.
24.
LewinK.“Frontiers in Group Dynamics I: Concepts, Methods and Reality in Social Science - Equilibrium and (article, truncated due to space limitations)”.
