Technological Choice and Workplace Innovation: Towards Efficient and Humanised Work

Peter Oeij, Paul T.Y. Preenen, Wouter Van der Torre, Laudry Van der Meer, Joep Van den Eerenbeemt

Abstract


Technology implementation choices in organisations require trade-offs between economic efficiency and decent work. Technology choices are often started top-down, technocratic, and from an efficiency perspective. Social and organisational aspects are seldomly sufficiently considered in this process. Negative consequences both for the people and for the chance of success of the technology implementation are the result. For overseeing and considering both social and organisational aspects in technology implementation choices, an impact choice model of (new) technologies is helpful. This article discusses such a model: TIM (Technology Impact choices Model). TIM is a method that helps organisations and policy makers assess the impact of technological choice for the production of products and services, the design of the organisation of work, and the content of separate functions and jobs.

Keywords: Technology impact, workplace innovation, sociotechnics, humanisation of work.

 

Resumen

La adopción de tecnología por parte de las organizaciones requiere generar un equilibrio entre la eficiencia económica y el trabajo digno. La incorporación de nuevas tecnologías a menudo se inician de arriba hacia abajo, de forma tecnocrática y desde una perspectiva de eficiencia. Los aspectos sociales y organizacionales rara vez son suficientemente considerados en este proceso. Como resultado de ello, las consecuencias son negativas tanto para las personas como para el éxito de la adopción de tecnología. Para supervisar y considerar tanto los aspectos sociales como organizativos en la adopción de tecnología, es útil contar con un modelo de impacto de la variable tecnológica en las organizaciones. Este artículo aborda este modelo: TIM (Technology Impact choices Model), TIM es un método que ayuda a las organizaciones y a los responsables políticos a evaluar el impacto de la variable tecnológica en la producción de productos y servicios, el diseño de la organización del trabajo y el contenido de las distintas funciones y puestos de trabajo.

Palabras clave: Impacto tecnológico, innovación en el lugar de trabajo, sociotecnología, humanización del trabajo.



Full Text:

PDF

References


Achterbergh, J. & Vriens, D. (2010). Organizations. Social systems conducting experiments. (2nd ed.; 1st ed. 2009). Berlin: Springer.

Bijker, W.E., Hughes, T.P., & Pinch, T.J. (2012). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and structure: chapters in the history of American industrial enterprises. Boston, MA: MIT Press.

Child, J. (1997). Strategic choice in the analysis of action, structure, organizations and environment: Retrospect and prospect. Organization Studies, 18 (1), 43–76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069701800104

Christis, J. H. P. (2010). Organization and job design: what is smart organizing? In H. A. M. van Lieshout, L. Polstra, J. H. P. Christis and B. J. M. Emans (Eds.), Management of labour. Societal and managerial perspectives (pp. 39-71). Groningen: Hanzehogeschool Groningen University of Applied Sciences.

De Sitter, L. U., Den Hertog, J. F., & Dankbaar, B. (1997). From complex organizations with simple jobs to simple organizations with complex jobs. Human relations, 50(5), 497-534. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679705000503

Dhondt, S., Preenen, P., Oeij, P.R.A., Putnik, K., Torre, W. van der, & Vroome, E.M.M. de. (2018). Bewältigung technologischer und personeller Herausforderungen in der niederländischen Logistikbranche: Die Bedeutung von Workplace Innovation. In R. Kopp & P. Ittermann (Red.). Konzeptionelle Perspektiven von Arbeit in der digitalisierten Logistik. Soziologisches Arbeitspapier, 55(pp. 56-75). Dortmund: Technische Universität Dortmund.

Ennals, R. (2018). Democratic dialogue and development: an intellectual obituary of Björn Gustavsen. European Journal of Workplace Innovation, 4 (1), 11-26.

Herrick ,N. Q., & Maccoby, M. (1975). Humanizing work: A Priority Goal of the 1970’s. In: L. E. Davis and A. B. Cherns (eds.), The Quality of Working Life. I (pp. 64-66). New York: Free Press.

Karanika-Murray, M., & Oeij, P.R.A. (2017). The role of work and organisational psychology for workplace innovation practice: From short-sightedness to eagle view? In European Work and Organisational Psychology in Practice. Special Issue on Workplace Innovation, 1, 19-30.

Karasek Jr, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2), 285-308. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2392498

Noble, D.F. (1984). Forces of production: A social history of industrial production. New York: Knopf.

OECD. (2016). The risk of automation for jobs in OECD countries: A comparative analysis. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 189. Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jlz9h56dvq7-en (accessed 24 April 2019).

Oeij, P. R. A., De Looze, M. P., Ten Have, K., Van Rhijn, J. W., & Kuijt-Evers, L. F. M. (2011). Developing the organization's productivity strategy in various sectors of industry. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61(1), 93-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/17410401211187525

Oeij, P.R.A., & Dhondt, S. (2017). Theoretical approaches supporting workplace innovation. In P.R.A. Oeij, D. Rus, F.D. Pot (Red.), Workplace Innovation: Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 63-78), Series 'Aligning Perspectives on Health, Safety and Well-Being’. Cham: Springer.

Oeij, P. R. A., Dhondt, S., Pot, F., & Totterdill, P. (2018). Workplace innovation as an important driver of social innovation. In J. Howaldt, C. Kaletka, A. Schröder, & M. Zirngibl (Eds.), Atlas of social innovation – new practices for a better future (pp. 55-57). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle, TU Dortmund University.

Oeij, P.R.A., Dhondt, S., Rus, D., & Van Hootegem, G. (2019). The digital transformation requires workplace innovation: an introduction. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 16(3), 199-207.

Oeij, P.R.A., Preenen, P., & Torre, W. van der. (2018). Technology Impact Assessment. Een aanpak om de impact van technologie op werk in kaart te brengen op organisatie en individueel niveau. Leiden: TNO (in Dutch).

Oeij, P.R.A., Rus, D., & Pot, F.D. (Eds.). (2017). Workplace Innovation: Theory, Research and Practice, Series 'Aligning Perspectives on Health, Safety and Well-Being’. Cham: Springer.

Oeij, P.R.A., Torre, W. van der, & Preenen, T.Y.P. (2019). Technologiekeuzen en sociale innovatie: naar efficiënte en menswaardige arbeid. In: STAD 2019: Technologische en sociale innovatie bij de overheid. Gevolgen voor beleid, bestuur en management (pp. 285-298). Staat van de Ambtelijke Dienst (STAD). Publikatiereeks Overheid & Arbeid, 2019, Nummer 50. Den Haag: CAOP.

Oeij, P. R. A., Wiezer, N. M., Elo, A. L., Nielsen, K., Vega, S., Wetzstein, A., & Żołnierczyk, D. (2006). Combating psychosocial risks in work organisations: Some European practices. In: S. McIntyre and J. Houdmont (eds.), Occupational health psychology: European perspectives on research, education and practice, 1, (pp. 233-263). Castelo da Maia, Portugal: ISMAI Publishers.

Oeij, P.R.A., Žiauberytė-Jakštienė, R., Dhondt, S., Corral, A., Totterdill, P., & Preenen, P. (2015). Workplace Innovation in European companies. Study commissioned by Eurofound, Programme ‘Third European Company Survey’. Luxemburg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Putnik, K., Oeij, P., Dhondt, S., Van der Torre, W., De Vroome, E., & Preenen, P. (2019a). Innovation adoption of employees in the logistics sector in the Netherlands: The role of workplace innovation. Submitted for publication to European Journal of Workplace Innovation.

Putnik, K., Oeij, P., van der Torre, W., de Vroome, E., & Dhondt, S. (2019b). Innovation adoption of employees in logistics: Individual and organisational factors related to the actual use of innovation. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 16(3), 251-267.

Smith, N. H. (2017). Arendt’s anti-humanism of labour. European Journal of Social Theory, 22(2), 175–190. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431017746326

Totterdill, P., Cressey, P., & Exton, R. (2012) Social innovation at work: workplace innovation as a social process. In: H-W. Franz, J. Hochgerner, & J. Howaldt (Eds.), Challenge Social Innovation. Potential for Business, Social Entrepreneurship, Welfare and Civil Society, (pp.241–259). Berlin: Springer.

Van der Torre, W. & Krause, F. (2019). The impact of goods-to-person systems on the tasks and skills of warehouse operators and engineers. Ongoing TKI Dinalog project “Human and robot: working together in the warehouse”. Available at: https://www.dinalog.nl/project/mens-en-robot-magazijn/ (in Dutch).

Van Eijndhoven, J. C. (1997). Technology assessment: Product or process? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 54(2-3), 269-286. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(96)00210-7

Walton. R. (1985). From Control to Commitment in the Workplace. Harvard Business Review, 63(4), 77-84.

World Economic Forum. (2018, September). The Future of Jobs Report 2018. Insight Report. Retrieved from WEF.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.



 

This work is licensed under Creative Commons 4.0. International. Editorial Sinnergiak