Advertisement

Balancing Stakeholder Interests: Socio-Technical Perspectives on Smart Working Practice

  • Peter M. Bednar
  • Christine Welch
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 533)

Abstract

The advantages put forward for so-called Smart working may sound very appealing. However, it is unlikely that all stakeholder groups involved will benefit to the same extent, if at all. Many initiatives that seem to be aimed at development of Smart work systems can be seen to be flawed, since they are suggested to support empowerment but are expressed in terms of pre-defined ‘best practice’. This inherent paradox leads to consideration of ways in which innovation could occur that would lead to genuinely Smart systems, harnessing Smart technologies and empowering engaged actors to co-create meaningful practice in pursuit of professional excellence. An open, socio-technical systems approach is suggested to be the way forward.

Keywords

Open systems Socio-technical systems Smart working Human-centred design 

References

  1. 1.
    Boorsma, B., Mitchell, S.: Work-Life Innovation Smart Work—A Paradigm Shift Transforming How, Where, and When Work Gets Done. Ciscoo IBSG Point of View (2011). https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en_us/about/ac79/docs/ps/WorkLife_Innovation_Smart_Work.pdf. Accessed 21 Apr 2018
  2. 2.
    Hamel, G.: The Future of Management. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gastaldi, L., Corso, M., Raguseo, E., Neirotti, P., Paolucci, E., Martini, A.: Smart working: rethinking work practices to leverage employees’ innovation potential. In: Proceedings of 15th CINet Conference ‘Operating Innovation – Innovating Operations’, Budapest (Hungary), 7–9 September, pp. 337–347 (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    HM Government (UK): PAS 3000:2015. ICS 03.100.01 Committee ZZ/3, Smart Working. Code of Practice, 30 November 2015, BSI (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dominguez, A.: Do you know what Smart Working is? eHorus, 22 August 2017. https://ehorus.com/smart-working/. Accessed 14 Feb 2018
  6. 6.
    Civil Service Blog: Transforming the Way We Work (2018). https://civilservice.blog.gov.uk/2015/01/22/transforming-the-way-we-work/. Accessed 14 Feb 2018
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Lake, A.: Smart Working Handbook (2015). www.flexibility.co.uk. Accessed 14 Apr 2018
  9. 9.
    Millward, D.: For one day only, the saluting AA patrolman is back. The Telegraph, 11 April 2006. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1515359/For-one-day-only-the-saluting-AA-patrolman-is-back.html. Accessed 21 Feb 2018
  10. 10.
    Teather, D., Treanor, J.: Private equity: the human cost. The Guardian on-line, 23 Feb 2007. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2007/feb/23/privateequity1. Accessed 21 Feb 2018
  11. 11.
    Wachman, R.: A sorry Saga at the AA? Private equity is back in the headlight. The Guardian on-line, 1 July 2007. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2007/jul/01/privateequity.observerbusiness. Accessed 21 Feb 2018
  12. 12.
    Williams, C.: How the wheels came off at the AA. The Telegraph on-line, 5 August 2017. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/08/05/wheels-came-aa/. Accessed 21 Feb 2018
  13. 13.
    Barber, F., Campbell, D.: Layoffs: creating or destroying shareholder value? Ivy Bus. J., September/October 2001. https://iveybusinessjournal.com/publication/layoffs-creating-or-destroying-shareholder-value/. Accessed 21 Feb 2018
  14. 14.
    Elkington, J.: Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, Capstone (1997)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Willard, B.: The New Sustainability Advantage: Seven Business Case Benefits of a Triple Bottom Line. New Society Publishers (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bednar, P.M.: A contextual integration of individual and organizational learning perspectives as part of IS analysis. Inf. Sci. J. Emerg. Transdiscipline 3(3), 145–156 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bednar, P.M., Welch, C.: Learning for professional competence in an IS context. In: Lundh Snis, U. (ed.) SCIS 2016. LNBIP, vol. 259, pp. 163–175. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43597-8_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bednar, P.M., Welch, C.: Incentive and desire: covering a missing category. In: MCIS 2006, Proceedings of the Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, Università degli Studi di Trento, San Servolo, Venice, Italy, 5–9 October 2006Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bednar, P.M., Welch, C.: Inquiry into Informing Systems: critical systemic thinking in practice, Chap. 14. In: Gill, G. (ed.) Foundations of Informing Science: 1999–2008, pp. 459–501. Informing Science Press, Santa Rosa (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mohr, B.J., van Amelsvoort, P.: Co-Creating Humane and Innovative Organizations: Evolutions in the Practice of Socio-technical System Design. Global STS-D Network Press, Portland (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Davenport, L., Prusak, L.: Working Knowledge: How Organisations Manage What They Know. Harvard Business Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Za, S., Spagnoletti, P., North-Samardzic, A.: Organisational learning as an emerging process: The generative role of digital tools in informal learning practices. Br. J. Edu. Technol. 45(6), 1023–1035 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carillo, K., Scornavacca, E., Za, S.: The role of media dependency in predicting continuance intention to use ubiquitous media systems. Inf. Manag. 54(3), 317–335 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Checkland, P.: Systems Thinking, Systems Practice: A 30-year Retrospective. Wiley, Chichester (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Checkland, P.B.: OR and the systems movement: mappings and conflicts. J. Oper. Res. 34(8), 661–675 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mumford, E.: The study of socio-technical design: reflections on its successes, failures and potential. Inf. Syst. J. 16, 317–342 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bednar, P.M. (2007). Individual emergence in contextual analysis. Problems of individual emergence. In: Proceedings of Dutch Systems Society 12th Bi-Annual ‘Problems of…’ Systems Conference, Systemica, vol. 14(1-7) (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bednar, P.M.: Contextual analysis – a multiperspective inquiry into emergence of complex socio-cultural systems. In: Minati, G., Abram, M., Pessa, E. (eds.) Processes of Emergence of Systems and Systemic Properties: Towards a General Theory of Emergence. World Scientific (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schein, E., Schein, P.: Organizational Culture and Leadership, 5th edn. Jossey Bass, Thousand Oaks (2016)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kappelman, L., McLean, E., Johnson, V., Torres, R., Nguyen, Q., Maurer, C., Snyder, M.: The 2016 SIM IT issues and trends study. MIS Q. Executive 16(1), 47–80 (2017)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Henderson, J.C., Venkatraman, N.: Strategic alignment: leveraging information technology for transforming organisations. IBM Syst. J. 32(1), 472–484 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Langefors, B., Dahlbom, B. (eds.): Essays on Infology. Studentlitteratur, Lund (1995)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kahle, C., Hoffmann, D., Ahlemann, F.: Beyond business-IT alignment - digital business strategies as a paradigmatic shift: a review and research agenda. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hilton Waikoloa Village, Hawaii, 4–7 January 2017, pp. 4706–4715 (2017). https://aisel.aisnet.org/hicss-50/os/digital_innovation/2/. Accessed 21 Feb 2018
  34. 34.
    Amarilli, F., van Vliet, M., Van Den Hooff, B.: An Explanatory Study on the Co-evolutionary Mechanisms of Business IT Alignment. Proceedings of International Conference on Information Systems, Seoul, S. Korea, 10–13 December 2017Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bednar, P.M., Welch, C.: The innovation-diffusion cycle: time for a sociotechnical agenda. In: Proceedings of IFIP WG8.6 Working Conference: Re-Imagining Diffusion of Information Technology and Systems: Opportunities and Risks, University of Minho, School of Engineering, Gilmaraes, Portugal, 5 June 2017 (2017)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shin, D.: A socio-technical framework for Internet-of-Things design: a human- centered design for the Internet of Things. Telematics Inf. 31(4), 519–531 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kling, R., Lamb, R.: IT and organizational change in digital economies: a socio- technical approach. ACM SIGCAS, Comput. Soc. 29(3), 17–25 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lyytinen, K., Yoo, Y., Boland Jr., R.J.: Digital product innovation within four classes of innovation networks. Inf. Syst. J. 26(1), 47–75 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kallinikos, J., Aaltonen, A., Marton, A.: The ambivalent ontology of digital artifacts. MIS Q. 37(2), 357–370 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nissen, H.-E., Bednar, P., Welch, C.: Double helix relationships in use and design of IS: lessons to learn from phenomenology and hermeneutics. In: Nissen, H.-E., Bednar, P., Welch, C. (eds.) Use and Redesign in IS: Double Helix Relationships? Informing Science: Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, vol. 10(Monograph), pp. 1–19 (2007)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Silver, M.S., Markus, M.L.: Conceptualizing the Socio-Technical (ST) artifact. Syst. Signs Actions 7(1), 82–89 (2013)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Alvesson, M.: The Triumph of Emptiness: Consumption, Higher Education, and Work Organization. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2014)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Friis, S.: User Controlled Information Systems Development – problems and possibilities towards Local Design Shops. Dept of Information and Computer Science, Lund University Publications, Sweden (1991)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bednar, P.M., Welch, C.: Enid Mumford: the ETHICS methodology and its legacy, Chap. 15. In: Mohr, B.J., van Amelsvoort, P. (eds.) Co-Creating Humane and Innovative Organizations Evolutions in the Practice of Socio-technical System Design, pp. 274–288. Global STS-D Network Press, Portland (2016)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wenger-Trayner, E.: Learning in Landscapes of Practice. Routledge, Abingdon (2015)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bednar, P.M., Welch, C.: Paradoxical relationships in collaboration, competition and innovation: a critical systemic perspective. In: Proceedings of WOA 2009. The 10th Workshop of Italian scholars on Organization Studies, Università degli Studi di Cagliari, Cagliari, Sardinia, Italy 29–30 April 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bednar, P.M., Welch, C.: Stepping on the cracks – transcending the certainties of Big Data analytics. In: Proceedings of the 14th conference of the Italian Chapter of AIS (itAIS2017), University of Milano Bicocca, 6th–7th October 2017, Milan, Italy (2017)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Flinders, K.: Interview: how Swedish bank prepared robot for customer services. Computer Weekly, 28 October 2016 (2016). www.computerweekly.com/news/450401647. Accessed 31 May 2017
  49. 49.
    Haaramo, E.: Robotic automation takes off in the Nordics. Computer Weekly, 19 April 2017 (2017). www.computerweekly.com/news/450417014. Accessed 31 May 2017
  50. 50.
    Solon, O.: Amazon patents wristband that tracks warehouse workers’ movements, 1 February 2018. The Guardian on-line (2018). https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/31/amazon-warehouse-wristband-tracking. Accessed 20 Feb 2018
  51. 51.
    United States Patent Office: Patent No. 9,881,277 - Wrist band haptic feedback system (2018)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ciborra, C.U.: The Labyrinths of Information: Challenging the Wisdom of Systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Alvesson, M., Spicer, A.: A stupidity-based theory of organizations. J. Manage. Stud. 49(7), 1194–1220 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bednar, P.M., Welch, C.: A case for multi criteria benefit analysis. In: Spagnoletti, P. (ed.) Organizational Change and Information Systems: Working and Living Together in New Ways. LNISO, vol. 2, pp 337–344. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37228-5_33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Bednar, P.M.: The Socio-Technical Toolbox, vol. 12.3. Craneswater Press, Portsmouth (2018)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Argyris, C.: Reasons and Rationalisations. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Bednar, P., Welch, C.: A double helix metaphor for use and usefulness in Informing Systems. In: Nissen, H.-E., Bednar, P., Welch, C. (eds.) Use and Redesign in IS: Double Helix Relationships? Informing Science: Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, vol. 10(Monograph), pp. 272–295 (2007)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Bednar, P.M., Welch, C., Milner, C.: Excellence in practice through a socio-technical, open systems approach to process analysis and design. Int. J. Syst. Soc. 3(1), 110–118 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ComputingUniversity of PortsmouthPortsmouthUK
  2. 2.Department of InformaticsLund UniversityLundSweden
  3. 3.Portsmouth Business SchoolUniversity of PortsmouthPortsmouthUK

Personalised recommendations