How Advances in Technology Have Changed Learning and Development in Organizations - Essay Example

How advances in technology have changed learning and development in organizations Introduction Changing economic, technological, and social conditions have resulted in intensified competition where the concern is not with producing more at a cheaper cost but continuously producing innovative products and services. The need to be continuously innovative has generated an increased emphasis on continuous life long learning to facilitate constant improvement to products, services and workers' knowledge and skills. Consequently, the creation of knowledge and the application of such knowledge in work practices has become a dominant theme in recent studies of education and training. These changes have influenced the nature of workplaces. We now talk of "learning organizations" and "learning factories" which advocate a holistic approach to training based around knowledge which is of different forms--technical, communicative, and emancipatory (Starkey, 1996). Previously workplace knowledge focused solely on technical knowledge, specific to the tasks in a job. But now skills such as communication, leadership, and individual responsibility are considered equally important to equip individuals with life long learning skills that encourage engagement with mind, body, and soul. The expectations inherent in new roles, confounded by uncertainty of the environment and the explosion of information technology, now challenge us to reconceptualise human cognition and develop education and training in a way that resonates with current knowledge and skills. One of the significant themes that is emerging from the redesigning of jobs is the contradictory yet legitimate nature of the roles and their associated values. During the transition from feudal to capitalist societies workers struggled to conceptualize self as different from labor. It was difficult for "man" to reconceptualise labor as separate from individuals and a commodity, which could be sold for a fee. We now see parallels in the emerging workplaces. There are various tensions in the contemporary world of work such as those between global and local knowledge and performance; learning and work; institution and workplace-based training; self and organizational development, competition and collaboration and these impacts the role of individuals and context in developing knowledge and skills to function in current workplaces. We have, in the past, viewed opposing positions in such tensions as only being right or wrong and hence, many are still searching for an absolute black and white solution. Giddens and Delors both have written extensively on the emerging tensions and the need to consider ways of dealing with such dualistic/contradic tory positions. For example, in considering globalization Giddens argues that we now have new trans-national systems that have heightened competition for scarce resources while at the same time creating strong regional blocks (ASEAN, EU, etc.) and a questioning of local customs and ways of life (Giddens, 1998). Such dualistic positions are no longer a question of whether individuals are part of the new global order but rather how they deal with being part of that order, while at the same time living and relating to fellow individuals in local neighborhoods. Similarly, we can see a new individualism that is linked to global mobility, individual skill development, and individual rights. At the same time, the emerging workplaces have given rise to a sophisticated system of welfare, community support, and teams in workplaces to accommodate those who find living with such dilemmas difficult or impossible. Individuals are expected to contribute to welfare, which is associated with the collective, but the contemporary world encourages individuals to take responsibility for the consequences of what they do and the lifestyle they pursue. This type of dilemma is evident in the increasing use of teams and collaborative partners in the commercial world while at the same time there is increasing pressure on individuals to take responsibility for self-development to become independent knowledge workers. Also, competition for scarce resources is becoming more significant in a global context, and we have witnessed an increasing pressure to exploit the environment for quick profit. At the same time there is increasing recognition that sustaining current levels of environmental capital is significant not only for future wealth but also for the health of the members of current society. Recognizing the pressures to both exploit and conserve in the same breath, has posed significant dilemmas and tensions for the new world order (Tishman, Jay, & Perkins, 1993). In all of these contradictions there is an expectation of individuals to cope with a retreat of tradition and custom while, at the same time, living in and with that tradition. This is part of the emerging nature of the jobs--balancing what appears to be a contradictory set of priorities is part of the dilemma of living and working in the contemporary society. Such fundamental rethinking, involving what were previously imponderable dilemmas, has meant the need for a new knowledge base--one with a capital in ideas. Previously there was an expectation of closure in every activity. This is no longer a possibility, thus we need to adopt different lenses to see the world. The difficulty is that we need to wear multiple sets of lenses at the same time or even be multiple selves. We now have to deal with conflicting situations, often where consideration of opposing ends at the same time is necessary to address an issue, even though they may have different values. We need to recognize dilemmas, resolve them to the b est of our abilities, and live with that resolution until further thought provides other insights. Thus, these dilemmas are not to be solved in a finite sense or in a finite time frame, but lived with in the best possible way. The ability to deal with this fragmented self requires a totally new focus for education, one that evokes critical insight to analyse the underlying assumptions, which is central to understanding the world of dilemmas. We cannot conceive a new education model by looking through old and mono lenses that promoted reactionary thinking (Ilamel, & Prahalad, 1994). To understand and deal with these dilemmas the traditional models of education driven by cognitive psychology alone may not be sufficient. Communicative and emancipatory knowledge are grounded in issues that are beyond psychological constructs. Thus, to achieve personal meaning in these contemporary contradictory circumstances cognitive systems, such as informal knowledge, social cultural knowledge, and other contextual knowledge, are essential but not sufficient. Technology advances and its impact Creating a future Sometimes outcomes based learning needs to be configured a different way in order to make it seem more attainable. Rapidly rising technology always creates a challenge that needs an immediate training solution. A majority of the office equipment and supplies training of late was first on the transition to digital sales and service and then the convergence of printers and copiers. As many businesses look to transit from products to service to solutions, this is where knowledge comes into play (McChristy, 2002). In the process of teaching people, those training need to be aware that people have different traits and ways of learning; some learn by seeing, some by hearing, and some by doing. Handson learning is really critical to making what is learned an everyday part of our mode of operation. It's a truism that if someone needs something bad enough to survive in the workplace, they'll do it. Real learning occurs at the point of need in the work you do. Employees who internalize effective practices in the workplace will lead the business to productivity and profit and gain personal satisfaction, Schwartz says. "They have to make it something that lives in their guts 24/7," he says. "Passion isn't conjured: it's electrified by a mystical combination of the individual's predisposition to excellence and the organization's genius in nurturing, inspiring, and challenging individuals to higher levels of performance" (McChristy, 2002). IT and organizations Computers have grown in importance within modern organizations from an obscure back-room tool to a dominating feature of the whole organization. The technology has naturally changed somewhat though, with much data now being machine-readable and remote terminals for non-DP staff to obtain on-line access to the system, both to punch in current data and read off an analysis of yesterday's data, being commonplace (Perkins, 1993). With organizations such as banks, insurance companies, the Department of Social Security, and the like, such operations may have become vital to the core functions of the organization; they still largely exist, however, in a separate organizational ghetto from the mainstream professionals who meet the public, design and market new products and make the strategic decisions for the organization (Awad, 1988). As computing became more a part of routine business operations conducted on familiar equipment, and utilizing standard techniques whose many capabilities were increasingly appreciated by ordinary managers, the role of IT departments has changed so that in many organizations the main role of the 'systems' department has been to develop new systems which are increasingly operated on a day-to-day basis by the main departments with an interactive relationship with the live data on either a section of the organizational mainframe or even a departmental 'mini' system. Technical planning, maintenance and control of the system (including acquisition of new equipment) remained a systems responsibility. Early on most new systems were written in-house by the systems department personnel in a standard 'third-generation' language such as COBOL. Such 'systems' departments tended to be largely staffed by computer specialists, but an important role was played by business or systems analysts who interpreted business needs to more technically oriented personnel. These departments could be divided into project teams or separate systems analysis and programming divisions. The rise of the personal computer, and the availability of a myriad of commercially available 'fourth-generation' applications software, has seen the emergence of a new type of IT department - the Information Technology Centre (ITC). In many cases user departments are buying in and/or developing applications for themselves. Increasingly, some technical specialists are more familiar with the latest PC-based developments in their area than are the IT personnel of the company. The role of IT personnel in such a department is predominantly advice to, and training and coordination of, end-users. Maintenance of micros may be an ITC responsibility, or this may be contracted out to the suppliers or a specialist firm. Ensuring that networked machines retain compatibility despite numerous different systems operating upon them will also be important (Orlikowski, Okamura, & Fujimoto, 1995). Increasingly firms may in fact be relying on outside contractors to develop and provide IT services so that a fourth type of IT department might be included here: the out-sourced IT department. Such a department may be on or off the premises and may be what was previously a part of the company but is now an independent firm or profit centre. Such an organization will be in a contractual relationship with the host company providing defined services at a fixed cost. Such departments are often specialist suppliers of integrated IT systems, perhaps based on their own brand of software or hardware (Burns, & Stalker, 1966). It is worth remarking that in many organizations all four styles of computing are working side by side, often with variously named IT departments also coexisting. The names used here are indicative of current commercial practice, but there is no standardization of either nomenclature or of function for IT departments. Competitive advantage and IT So far we have been considering the management of IT in organizations from the point of view of the IT function. It is, however, more important to consider the broader purposes for which IT is employed by organizations and the role of IT in achieving these. We therefore briefly turn to a consideration of the needs of organizations, followed by the role of IT in serving these. In Britain, and in most countries in the early twenty-first century, most organizations must be set in the context of a market economy. To survive, most organizations must demonstrate that they can serve customers' needs better than others. Ultimately the price of failure to compete with other organizations is stagnation and bankruptcy. If customers can obtain similar goods and services at a better price, to a better specification or more conveniently elsewhere, then the organization's supplies of cash will dry up and it will ultimately cease to exist. In a market economy success is relative and we will therefore consider first in general terms how organizations can achieve an advantage over other similar organizations and then how IT can assist with this objective. Achieving competitive advantage with IT Authors have documented how IT is becoming increasingly central to many modern organizations' strategies. IT has come to play an important role in virtually all large successful organizations in relation to computerized accounting systems, word processing, filing information in databases, modelling the future of the business through spreadsheets, maintaining stock control, and so on. But most of this would only indicate that IT was an important service function like personnel or accounts. Even so, it is worth pointing out that in order to compete on equal terms with other firms - performing with equal efficiency and economy - IT has become an essential tool of modern management. What is happening in a number of organizations is more fundamental still, however, in that either what the organization does is fundamentally dependent on information technology and/or its capacity to compete with other organizations in the field is fundamentally affected by the use made of IT. Fluency In The Workplace With the preponderance of information technology in our society and the growing importance of the Digital Divide, fluency with IT, defined as an ability to use information technology to express oneself creatively, to reformulate knowledge and to synthesize new information, has become an important concern for our society. In particular, many people who currently use information technology have only a limited understanding of the tools they use and correct belief that they are underutilizing (sic) them. Thus, research directed at how people use information technology (IT) in their work and the process by which they learn to use it is valuable for those who manage workers with jobs that require the use of IT. Reference: Awad, Elias (1988) Management Information Systems, Merlo Park, Calif., Benjamin/ Cummings. Burns, Tom and Stalker, G.M. (1966) The Management of Innovation (2nd edn), London, Tavistock. Giddens, A. (1998). The third way. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Ilamel, G., & Prahalad, C. (1994). Competing for the future. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. McChristy, Neal, 2002. Creating a learning organization: Creating a learning environment in the workplace is not only vital to keeping employees up to date on rapidly changing technology, but can also help to bring revenue to the company. Office-Solutions. Orlikowski, W. J., Yates, J., Okamura, K., & Fujimoto, M. (1995). Shaping electronic communication: The metastructuring of technology in the context of use. Organization Science, 6(4). Perkins, D.N. (1993). Person-plus: A distributed view of thinking and learning. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Starkey, K. (Ed.). (1996). How organisations learn. London: International Thompson Press. Tishman, S., Jay, E., & Perkins, D.N. (1993). Teaching thinking disposition: From transmission to enculturation. Theory Into Practice, 32(2). Read More