“Socio-technical is basically people and technology. When you put an information system into an organization, unfortunately it’s much harder to influence people’s behavior [than to simply install computers and load software on them]. People attach emotions to their tools, and they also have cultural norms of usage that become important. Once you add people to information system usage and change efforts, you magnify the complexity—it’s an awful headache” (“Easing the information system headache where people and technology intersect”, 2008).
The theory of sociotechnical systems (STS, sociotechnical systems theory) became popular in 1970-1980th years. Its development was caused by European experiments with work democratization from the one hand, and from the other — works of American scientists in engineering and sociology. According to the theory, the organization which wants to become successful should provide harmonious unity of social and technical systems taking into account the purposes of the organization and external conditions. The technical system is not only the equipment, but also corporate principles, standard working procedures. Every method introduced by management engineer is a part of technical system. The social system includes everything connected with head-hunting and development of the people working in the organization, their characteristics and cultural interaction. The term “system” describes set of the interconnected and co-operating components forming a single entity. It is impossible to understand, how the system works, without considering its parts separately. It is understandable only after learning the interaction of people and equipment. The system is dynamic, it changes after environment changes.
Let’s browse how the STS system works for such well-known company as Toyota. What is the secret of its unprecedented success? Is it because Sakiti Toyoda borrowed some magic potion from ancient Samurais when he was founding a company for manufacturing automatic weaving looms? Or perhaps, it’s the army of super-engineers armed with expert-systems and brand-new super computers, who work for the company? No. Everything is much simpler. Toyota’s top managers responsible for product development at the American enterprises, usually answer these questions with a short phrase that their work is based upon common sense. Unfortunately, the idea of common sense in Toyota and behind its borders differs quite often. The secret of Toyota’s success cannot also be defined because there is no uniting answer of how to gather to one term all the parts: persistent work, talented engineers, culture of team work, the debugged processes, a complex of simple, but effective tools and Kai-dzen – continuous perfection of everything written above. In a word, Toyota is a real economical, sociotechnical system which constantly develops.
One of possible definition of STS can be found in its internal design – it’s the hierarchical structure of organizational divisions of different levels, each formed by cooperation of social roles personnel stuff, sending by means of modern technology specific individual (professional) activity, according to their positions, thus polarizing STS organization system to man-machine system. The organization — is a special type social object which cannot be limited by individual activities of its components. Specific features of these objects are considered within the limits of the organization and management theory which the engineering psychology in some cases can lean on. The term STS is better, than the term “organization” (which can be used as describing a process of organizing), it expresses the fact that such systems are first of all social, and that’s why they are natural-artificial formations (Berniker, 1992, p. 4).
Industrial and sociocultural factors and relations are closely interlaced in STS system. That’s why their functioning is determined not only by natural laws, but those of social reality which possesses historical and mediate features. Such systems change not so much under the influence of natural factors and conditions, as artificial – partly or totally determined by motivated activities of human and society (“Social-technical theory”, 2008).
The main process is not functioning (single or repeated for reaching the goal), but the process of development. Artificial influence on the STS system can be successful only in case when it “alters” in natural influence on the system of one of its elements. Otherwise, this impact will become not organizing, though destabilizing factor.
Each part of STS system can be replaced by another which includes the present one and determines the way of performing of many processes and interactions for initial system. Therefore consistency and limits of such system are set considering not only its inner immanent characteristics, but also considering those systems including the given one. As usually there are several systems of that kind, there exist several consistencies and several “contours” of sociotechnical system (“Principles of socio-technical design”, n. d.).
STS is usually a multileveled formation. At that, on each level possesses its own specific principles. Thus, those of them, which are responsible for individual activity, differ from principles of group activities, though groups, associations and community exist on the results of activity of many individuals. In its turn, this fact determines multidirections and often polarity of tendencies and mechanisms peculiar for each of the levels.
One of the important characteristic of STS is the fact that it cannot be fully performed in manufacture. It includes also fragments of “living activity” (individual persons, groups, communities, etc) on basis of which social life of the systems exists. At that, each of such fragments possesses its own “natural” self-movement. Their integration in the united system is similar to the process of organizing and managing.
STS is a term which belongs to theoretical level of engineering psychology and explicit as it is not empiric, but ideal objects. But peculiarities of STS pointed before do not allow considering such system as a whole on the basis of an ideal object of engineering psychology, if considering psychology its basis (Myers, 2007, p. 30).
STS is the important part of organization. As it creates a whole living organism where all parts and levels are necessary, though some of their functions can be replaced. In some kind STS reminds Russian nested dolls, where each doll consists another sub-one. It will work even if some on the chains will be lacking, though to create perfectly working system all the necessary levels should be present. STS is strongly recommended if someone wants his/hers company run like clockwork. STS motivates people to do more as having a helping machine nearby work seems to be easier. Such cooperation of humans and machines reduces time limits necessary for different activities, thus increasing productivity of each single individual, group or community. STS is a big step forward into improving organization’s life, productivity, profit and success. Principles of good organization are in good management, and STS surely adds a lot to it. And if someone wants to have his/her organization successful, he/she should take STS into account.
Reference List
Dr. Berniker, E. (1992). Some principles of sociotechnical systems analysis and design. Washington, DC: School of Business Administration Pacific Lutheran University Tacoma.
Easing the Information System Headache Where People and Technology Intersect, (2008). In Knowledge@Emory. Web.
Myers, K., & Lamb, R., (2007). For an IT manager, getting technical often means going social! n. a.
Principles of ST Design (2008). In Strategosinc. Web.
Socio-technical theory. (n.d.). In Association of Information Systems. Web.