Thinking process is a vital element in driving performance in institutions especially in the current environment where change is paramount. The process is driven by diverse factors that hold legal, social, economic and technological implications.
These elements influence individuals thinking process and contribute in the formulation of credible course of action. Indeed, individuals thinking process enable them to identify basic elements in life and potential virtues that hold pertinence in their development.
It also contributes in decision making on various issues that appertain to business operations and political issues. Ideally, thinking process leads to change on policy issues, life ideals and legal provisions. However, not all factors that drive thought process contributes directly to change initiatives.
This paper explores technological advancement as an element that facilitates though process rather than change in institutions
Response to the Question
Indeed, technological advancements enhance individuals thinking capacity. This initiates and facilitates change but does not accomplish change initiatives. It lacks legal authority that drives real change in comparison to constitutional provisions that remain in force for a long period.
As noted, it remains an intellectual incentive that provides neutral support that influence thinking capacities of persons (Marcuse 1). It is agreeable that technology enables individuals to identify the kind of change that is appropriate and the achievement process.
However, technological advances lack the legal authority of accomplishing change processes. This explains the reason why it is paramount for an individual to consider technology as an element that facilitate thinking, but not directly engaged in change processes.
Change Process in Consideration to Technological Advancement and Political Authority
Marcuse (2) noted that, the thought process in human beings is a vital aspect that defines their course of action. It provides pertinent incentives that facilitate change in diverse facets of operations. This explains why execution of the process should be under absolute diligence and accuracy.
Imperatively, change in any setting, for example, government or private sectors must be preceded with quality thinking. This is vital to facilitate individual’s capacity of acquiring essential knowledge on key issues or reasons that prompt the need for change (Postman 2).
It also equips individuals with innovative skills that hold the capacity to allow the execution of the change process in a systematic manner. Indeed, thinking process that is driven through technology, politics, and social engagement should be based on realistic ideals.
The process should also consider the future expectations of individuals in terms of performance and growth. The process allows individuals to establish and develop a clear understanding on what to change, what to change to, how to cause the change, why change and how to maintain the process (Postman 3). It is not a complete process as it is, but it provides a leading framework for achieving absolute change.
In most jurisdictions, change is eminent in various sectors of operations. However, an effective change process is a guarantee that comes with the development of systematic legal frameworks. The process normally succeeds through structured systems of operations but not mere thinking.
That is the essential elements or varied factors that drive change should have absolute legal authority or backing but not mere fallacy. Any thought on potential issues can be said to be a driver to change process, but not an element that guarantee change (Freud 23). As noted, structural systems facilitate change by providing favorable and consistent change processes with limited complications.
For instance, an institution that seeks to transform its operations by hiring new staff should first develop a structured guideline to that effect. This element should come after the thought process to facilitate change activities. It is also essential in providing a legal framework or stability that is required.
According to scholars, politicians are the custodian of change in most settings. They are the people with the obligation to craft and formulate laws that govern operations in most jurisdictions (Freud 49).
This elevates their profile as lawmakers since any decision based on the individual’s thoughts that they adopt becomes law that binds every individual. The laws that seek to regulate fiscal, political, social, and technological activities enforce change ideals in individuals.
The laws are set to provide transformative guideline to streamline operations in diverse sectors in the economy. Secondly, they are to provide a level playing field that guarantees everyone quality operations without complications.
The process is vital since it is set to provide guiding principles that enable stakeholders in any field to operate with comfort ability. It is also to eradicate execution of activities based on individuals thinking capacity (Fromm 2).
This explains why technological system is a driving force for change, but not an element that guarantee change. It only enables individuals to understand the basic areas that are in dire need for change and how the process can be under execution.
Technological Advancement as an Element that Facilitate Thinking
Technological change (TC) is a credible term that is synonymous with technological advancement in various settings. It is used to describe the process of innovation and product development in institutions (Fromm 3). Indeed, technology is an integral element in institutions since it enhances individuals thought process.
It equips individuals with new and conventional insights on various issues pertaining to social, economic, behavior and cultural activities. In particular, it achieves the provision of insights on the diverse issues using technological equipments such as TVs, modern smart phones and LCD screens.
That is, it transforms the thinking process of individuals by advancing their knowledge power on diverse issues. These issues include factors that prompt the need for change (Postman 4).
However, it only provides essential incentives that influence thinking process, but fails to.guarantee the legal authority that is binding everyone. This is evident since individuals perceptions on various issues that are learnt through technology differ.
This gives them the leeway to make decisions based on their understanding of the presented scenarios. This can lead to contention due to inconsistent operating procedures in the environment that may impede performance (Nietzsche 5).
Therefore, technological change is a process that lacks clear-cut legal backing or authority. This is because its basis is on the current changes and individual’s perception in comparison to constitutional authority.
This is evident since constitutional authority provides a clear framework that is developed under consistency principle. It provides sustainable guidelines that drive operations for long periods.
Indeed, technological advancement is an intellectual neutral element that facilitates thinking process. It enables individuals to identify what elements to change and the execution process. Technology provides incentives that instill the need for change in individuals, but does not have clear legal backing or authority.
Therefore, the element is instrumental in facilitating thinking process that drives change. It contributes indirectly in the change process.
Freud, Sigmund. Civilization and Its Discontents. London: Penguin, 2004. Print.
Fromm, Erich H. Escape from Freedom. New York: Holt, 1994. Print.
Marcuse, Herbert. One-dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. Boston: Beacon Press, 1991. Print.
Nietzsche, Friedrich W. Beyond Good and Evil. Sioux Falls, SD: NuVision Publications, 2007. Print.
Postman, Neil. Amusing Ourselves to Death: New York, N.Y. [u.a.: Penguin Books, 2005. Print.