Applications Track
SOCIAL INTEGRATION AS A TOOL FOR
MANAGING END USER COMPUTING AND
DECENTRALIZED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
|
By:
|
Abstract |
INTRODUCTION
Information technology represents a tremendous challenge for managers. Potential payoffs are high, but so are costs and the risk of highly visible failures. Based on recent trends to outsource IT activities (Loh and Venkatraman, 1992), it appears some high-level managers feel they lack the necessary skills to effectively manage the technology.
In addition to the outsourcing trend, technical developments have encouraged dramatic increases in the amount and complexity of decentralized computing. Fourth generation languages (4GLs) and microcomputer hardware and software make it possible to satisfy many requirements, including some very sophisticated applications, through end-user-computing (EUC) (McLean and Kappelman, 1993). With local area networks (LANs) and client-server computing, traditional mainframe applications and associated IS personnel are also migrating from centralized data centers to operational groups.
Technological advances facilitate changes in the way the IT function is delivered, but do not automatically generate effective ways of managing it. Therefore it is necessary to identify specific managerial issues associated with the new environment, and then develop strategies for dealing with them.
BACKGROUND
Issues in managing information technology in a decentralized environment include:
Relevant findings are identified below under headings indicating the source discipline or concept. In the Discussion section of the paper these findings are then integrated into a comprehensive strategy for managing decentralized IT.
Diffusion of Innovation
There is a well-established body of research concerned with diffusion and adoption of technological innovations. Although originally focused on individuals, it now includes studies concerned with diffusion of information technology in organizational settings (Fichman, 1992).
One finding from classical diffusion theory is that some people are more likely than others to be innovators. They are interested in new ideas and have financial resources to experiment with innovations that may not be successful. These innovators are followed by early adopters, who are more socially integrated with peers and have the greatest influence in getting others to subsequently adopt the innovation (Rogers, 1983).
Another finding, from a more recent study, is that high knowledge requirements for using a technology may represent a barrier to adoption by individuals or organizations. This leads to a concept called absorptive capacity: the ability to recognize, assimilate and effectively use an innovation. This capacity is based on previous learning in areas related to the innovation. For organizations it is also dependent on how well new information can be communicated into the organization (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990).
Management Paradigm, Empowerment and Quality of Work Life
Management theorists in recent years have been emphasizing a new paradigm, the commitment or involvement paradigm, as opposed to the control paradigm. The commitment paradigm gives employees more autonomy in decisions on how to do their jobs, provides training and other resources, and shares information with them that is relevant to their performance. This approach is most effective in rapidly changing environments where tasks are not clearly defined and continuous learning and creativity are required. (Lawler, 1988).
In many respects, the commitment or empowerment approach is well suited to functional areas where information technology is a salient aspect of activities. However employees in such areas may find themselves more or less empowered, depending on whether they develop computer applications or use applications developed by others.
For end-user-computing personnel and information systems professionals, empowerment is virtually a sine qua non of their job. They have autonomy and flexibility because computer applications can be developed and implemented in different ways, but nontechnical managers do not have enough knowledge to narrowly define means of producing the desired results.
For operational personnel who do not develop information systems, computerization impacts may be different. Zuboff (1988) suggests two divergent possibilities. Jobs can be automated through standardization and division of labor, which reduces the range of skills required for performance. Or jobs may be informated by capturing process data and providing it to employees, who can then use their creative and analytical capabilities to expand their jobs and improve organizational performance.
In the decentralized IT environments which are the focus of this paper, the impacts on operational personnel will be largely dependent on the perspectives and skills of the local end user and information systems personnel. These perspectives may reflect personal philosophies, but probably will also be influenced by the viewpoints of their managers. If system developers have a management control perspective, activities will likely be automated.
Another point of view might be described as the programmer perspective, where the system developer focuses on programming as an end in itself rather than on user needs or other requirements. Results in this situation might vary based on the interests of the developer. If he or she likes to work with graphic user interfaces, the resulting systems might be easier to learn and use. On the other hand, a focus on programming at the expense of interaction with users could result in systems that are unresponsive to user needs.
If the developers have a user perspective, they will try to create applications that are easy to use. Documentation will be better, and help screens may be provided. Training will probably be explicitly included in the plans for the system. However a concern for user needs does not necessarily mean that the resulting systems will informate as well as being user friendly.
If the developers have an understanding of and sympathies toward the empowerment perspective, they will want to develop systems that empower the users. However they would probably have limited discretion here unless managers are also supportive of this approach.
Teams
One concept that is frequently associated with empowerment is the use of teams. This structure is based on horizontal relationships rather than the vertical ones in a typical organizational hierarchy. Teams have been found to be especially useful for problem solving and where substantial cross-functional coordination is required.
Another possible feature of teams is self-management. Team members may be given responsibility for certain management functions, in addition to functional tasks. Some teams are allowed to evaluate their own performance, both as a team and for individual members (Ostroff and Smith, 1992).
Peer Training and Assistance
In a rapidly changing environment where tasks are ambiguously defined, individuals need to be continuously learning new skills. People in the same functional area may, because of pertinent experience, be best suited to teaching the necessary skills to others. In some cases, because of the uniqueness of the work situation, peers may be the only possible source of relevant training or assistance. Peer training is frequently mentioned in the management and information systems literature in relation to the new competitive and technical environments (e.g. Bikson and Eveland, 1991; Drucker, 1991; Shayo and Olfman, 1993; Strassmann, 1985; Walton, 1989; Zuboff, 1988)
Variability in Skills and Interests
A very old study (Sackman, Erickson and Grant, 1968) suggested that the difference between the most and the least skilled programmers could be as high as 28 to one. Dickey (1981) reanalyzed the data from this widely quoted study and found that, after adjusting for methodological problems, the range of variation was substantially less but still about five to one.
Strassmann (1985) suggests that high performance individuals are necessary for successful information systems. Based on anecdotal evidence, he suggests these individuals can be identified by characteristics such as: enthusiastic about systems, personally involved with the hardware, impatient with external controls, use the network for both social and professional purposes, continuously learn from both formal sources and peers, creative, innovative, early adopters, autonomous, abstract, change agents, etc.
Summary
The literature cited above from a variety of fields is relevant to the issues in managing end-user and decentralized computing. These diverse strands are linked together into a proposed management strategy in the following section.
DISCUSSION
It appears that end-user and distributed computing are becoming the primary focus of organizational information systems activity. The explosive growth in microcomputer usage has shifted the center of gravity of aggregate computing power from centralized mainframe facilities to the desktop. End-users are becoming more sophisticated and they are increasingly being complemented by IS professionals who are being transferred out from centralized IS shops to user organizations. Previous strategies for managing end-user computing may not be adequate for the new environment. These strategies may need to be modified or extended to accommodate the new realities.
Up to this point the general strategy has been to provide resources to end-users on a relatively homogeneous basis. Classes are offered, often away from the work area, to groups of users. Students in the classes have varying levels of interest and computer aptitude, and there may also be substantial variations in skill requirements and other aspects of their work environments. Help-lines are provided, offering generalized assistance oriented toward common problems with more popular software packages.
I argue that, while this homogeneous approach to managing end-user computing is appropriate in some situations, it is not the most effective approach for managing information technology for many aspects of the new distributed environment. It does not take into account the large differences in computer skills and interests, which are becoming more pronounced with the transfer of IS professionals into distributed environments. It also does not map well onto the unique contexts of different work areas and functional activities.
A New Approach
I suggest a new approach to managing information technology, which takes into account differences in both people and working environments. This approach is based on findings from various disciplines which are summarized in the Background section of this paper. It includes the following elements:
Identifying specialists in information technology recognizes and capitalizes on the fact that skills and interests differ. However this does not imply that all these people will be in higher status jobs. A secretary who shows proficiency with word processing packages might be designated as a specialist, thereby gaining opportunities for increased status and rewards and greater autonomy.
Providing additional training and resources to IS specialists serves two functions. First it aids in assimilating new technology. These individuals are allowed to obtain new hardware and software, get the latest software upgrades, attend classes for new methods, etc. and try them out. If they discover something that could be beneficial, they can make an informed case for its adoption in their work area. Following adoption, they can use their initial experience to assist others in installing, learning and using the new technology.
Second, the additional resources become part of the reward structure. With a high interest in computers and software, the possibility of such preferential treatment should be highly motivating to IS specialists. To the extent their activities are recognized as effective from a business viewpoint and helpful to users, they will receive more new technology to play with. (It should be noted that additional training would not be limited to technical subjects. In the new environment, information technologists may also need additional training in business functions and processes.)
There are numerous benefits from making IS specialists responsible for training and support. They can help locally and individually, based on an experiential understanding of the needs and skills of individuals, locally used software and software features, etc. The more they interact with users, the greater their understanding will be of local processes, activities and human factors, which should aid in application development. Increased social integration should increase their credibility with users, which should reduce resistance to implementation of new systems. Finally these interactions with users may help replace some aspects of the peer support that IS professionals enjoyed before being transferred out from a centralized IS unit.
A key aspect of this new approach is incorporating user evaluations into the performance appraisals of these IS specialists. It provides a feedback loop between system users and developers, which should motivate the IS specialists to learn to develop more user-friendly software. It empowers users by giving them additional control over what is sometimes a very threatening aspect their work environment. (This method of evaluation would be well-suited to work groups organized as teams. However it would also provide useful additional information for evaluations in traditional hierarchical organizational units.)
Although this approach has been developed largely on inferential grounds, it is reported that Apple Computer is implementing a somewhat similar concept. Local technical experts are used as the primary source of user support, supplemented by centralized help-line assistance for problems that cannot be handled at the local level (McNurlin, 1993).
Exhibit 1 shows how elements of this approach relate to the problems of the current distributed computing environment.
EXHIBIT I
ELEMENTS OF SOCIAL INTEGRATION STRATEGY
AND PROBLEMS ADDRESSED
ELEMENT/PROBLEM ADDRESSED
Training and new hard
ware/software as part of reward structure
Motivation of IS/EUC specialists
Technology assimilation
IS specialists need to understand general business processes
IS/EUC specialists train/support
users
Individual and location-specific training needs
Social integration/peer support for IS specialists
IS specialists need to understand local business processes
Implementation difficulties due to limited understanding of
user needs
Specialization of information
technology functions
Variations in skills, interests, and aptitudes
Advancement/job enrichment opportunities for lower status personnel
IS/EUC specialists evaluated
in part by users
Limited basis for nontechnical managers to evaluate IS personnel
Lack of influence by users on software they use on their jobs
Where to Apply the New Approach
This approach would be more appropriate in some organizations than others. I posit two types of organizational environments in relation to this issue: diffused EUC and focused EUC.
In the Diffused EUC organization, there would be many employees with PCs and they would generally have strong information systems aptitudes and interests. Tasks would usually be relatively homogeneous and not too complex, so they could be handled by popular software packages, with users developing their own applications as needed. The volume of work done via PCs might be so great that everyone would need to develop their own applications--it would not be beneficial to have specialists developing for others. In this environment centralized training and help facilities, supporting very standardized software packages, would probably be cost effective.
I suspect that, in the current environment with complex applications to develop and complex LANs to manage, more organizations would fall in the Focused EUC category. IT skills and interests vary widely. Many employees have PCs and software, but the organization can not afford to provide everybody a new PC. Information technology requirements are not so extensive that every PC user needs to develop large or complex applications, so this can be handled by specialists. The organization may recognize the importance of training, but does not have the resources to take people away from their desks for days at a time for offsite training. This latter environment is where the new approach should be most appropriate.
CONCLUSION
This paper has argued, based on inferences from a variety of sources, in favor of an organizational structure that socially integrates information technology specialists into work groups. It hypothesizes that such a structure would be more effective in assimilating and using information technology.
Further research is needed to elaborate the details of how this strategy should be implemented. I suspect that some aspects are already in place in many organizations, at least informally. Identifying features of this approach that are currently being used in distributed environments would clarify benefits and problems associated with the concept, so that it could be refined.
Specific aspects that may already be available for study might be:
Given the current trend toward distributing information technology to lower levels in organizations, this approach warrants serious consideration by nontechnical managers who now have responsibility for IT in their areas.
REFERENCES
Bikson, T. K., and J. D. Eveland. 1991. “Integrating New Tools into Information Work: Technology Transfer as a Framework for Understanding Success,” pp. 229-252, in National Academy of Engineering and the,Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, People and Technology in the Workplace, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Cohen, Wesley M. and Daniel A. Levinthal. 1990. “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 1, (March): 128-152.
Couger, J. Daniel, Heimo Adelsberger and Israel Borovits. 1990. “Commonalties in Motivating Environments for Programmer/Analysts in Austria, Israel, Singapore and the USA,” Information and Management, 18, 1, (January), 41-46.
Dickey, Thomas E. 1981. “Programmer Variability,” Proceedings of the IEEE, 69, 7, (July): 844-845.
Drucker, Peter F. 199 1. “The New Productivity Challenge,” Harvard Business Review, (November-December): 69-79.
Fichman, Robert G. 1992. “Information Technology Diffusion: A Review of Empirical Research,” Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Information Systems, Dallas, TX: 195-206.
Lawler, III, Edward E. 1988. “Transformation from Control to Involvement,” pp. 46-65, in Ralph H. Kilmann, Teresa Joyce Covin, and Associates, Corporate Transformation: Revitalizing Organizations for a Competitive World, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Loh, Lawrence and N. Venkatraman. 1992. “Diffusion of Information Technology Outsourcing: Influence Sources and the Kodak Effect,” Information Science Research, 3, 4, (December): 334-358.
McLean, Ephraim R. and Leon A. Kappelman. 1993. “The Convergence of Organizational and End-User Computing,” Journal of Management Information Systems, 9, 3, (Winter): 146-155.
McNurlin, Barbara. 1993. Personal communication.
Ostroff, Frank,and Douglas Smith. 1992. “Redesigning the Corporation: The Horizontal Organization,” The McKinsey Quarterly, # 1, (n.d.), 148-168.
Rogers, Everett M. 1983. Diffusion of innovations, New York: The Free Press.
Robey, Daniel and Robert Zmud. 1992. “Research on the Organization of End-User Computing: Theoretical Perspectives from Organizational Science,” Information Technology and People, 6, 1, 11-27.
Sackman, H., W. J. Erickson and E. E. Grant. 1968. “Exploratory and Experimental Studies comparing On-line and Off-line Programming Performance," Communications of the ACM, 11, 1, (January): 38-47.
Shayo, Conrad and Lorne Olfman. 1993. “Is the Effectiveness of End-User Software Training a Mirage?” pp. 88-99 in Proceedings of the 1993 ACM SIGCPR Conference, St. Louis, MO, Mohan R. Tanniru, ed., (April 1-3).
Strassmann, Paul. 1985. Information Payoff: The Transformation of Work in the Electronic Age, New York: The Free Press.
Walton, Richard E. 1989. Up and Running: Integrating Information Technology and the Organization, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Zuboff, Shoshanna. 1988. In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power, New York: Basic Books, Inc.