OFFICE AUTOMATION AND ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE — THE NEED FOR A NEW KIND OF MANAGER?
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb057507 |
| Date | 01 May 1988 |
| Pages | 3-7 |
| Published date | 01 May 1988 |
| Author | Anne Williams,Christopher Rowe |
| Subject Matter | Economics,Information & knowledge management,Management science & operations |
OFFICE AUTOMATION
AND
ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE
- THE NEED FOR
A
NEW
KIND OF MANAGER?
by Anne Williams
Leeds Polytechnic, and
Christopher Rowe
Humberside Business School
Introduction
Ever since the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) first piloted a series of projects in 1982, there has
been considerable discussion of Office Automation (OA). Briefly, this refers to the application of information
technology (IT) to the different kinds of information processing found in typical office surroundings, and, when
used effectively, it can certainly increase overall efficiency. Office automation is also "holistic" in nature, in
that its effects permeate, and are felt throughout, all parts of the work organisation. While one department
may be initially responsible for its introduction, it is not restricted to particular areas and even those sections
previously unaffected by office technology will feel its impact. We might term this the "Heineken factor" —
IT's ability to reach those parts of the organisation other technologies cannot reach! We do not consider OA
as referring to the introduction of individual personal computers — for this is merely the modernisation of
discrete functions — but rather the interconnecting of separate installations in all parts of the organisation
into an integrated information network. As the DTI specified in the OA projects, each pilot "was to constitute
a complete hardware, software and communication system".
One
of the
things
the
DTI pilots highlighted, however,
is that technology
is
only half
the
story; equally,
one
has
to
consider
the
work organisation. Identical
technology can
be
installed in two work places, but with
very different results, because
of
differences
of
size,
structure, history, culture, etc. How technology affects
an organisation is, therefore,
far
less important than
how
the organisation handles technology,
and
this will
be
our primary concern. Office automation does
not
enter
an organisational vacuum;
it is
introduced into existing
work places, with established departmental structures,
work skills and political power bases. Consequently,
we
need
to
focus
on
organisational factors,
and
establish
a company's make-up
in
order
to
understand
how it is
likely
to
respond to, and be changed by,
the
introduction
of
OA. No two
companies will share identical
experiences,
but
there are certain broad trends which
do seem
to
recur regularly. Companies,
if
they
do not
go through the same problems,
do
seem
to go
through
similar ones.
In
this regard,
the
company
at the
heart
of this article
is
representative
of
many others.
Organisation and Methods
The central
aim of OA is to
eliminate waste
—
waste
of time, space, equipment,
and
money
— and the
department that most closely shares these goals
in
many organisations
—
certainly
in
large-scale
manufacturing
—
is Organisation and Methods (O&M).
O&M
can be
simply defined
as "the
systematic
application
of
common sense
to
business problems"[1],
and though
it is
more concerned with the administrative,
"office"
end of the
business,
it is not
necessarily
confined
to
that area. By analysing various operations,
O&M aims
to
remove delays and inefficiencies
in
order
to enhance overall performance and productivity Ideally,
therefore,
a
successful
O&M
person should possess
skills
in
three main areas
—
identifying problems,
providing solutions and selling proposals —
all of
which
require intelligence, persistence, persuasiveness and
an
understanding
of
business.
It
also produces what
Breadmore[1] has termed
"an
O&M attitude", which
he
sums up as follows: "Don't stand when you can sit,
and
never
sit
when you can
lie
down."
The
intention
of the
O&M analyst
is to
remove wasteful techniques
and
operations; make
the
organisation more effective
in
terms
of
overall performance; find cheaper, simpler and
easier ways
of
doing
the
same things
as
before;
and
reduce
the
dreariness, strain
and
effort
of
work.
The aims
of OA
and O&M are, therefore,
the
same
—
to reduce waste
— and
because
of
this,
in
many
companies,
it is the
O&M department that
is
seen
as
IMDS
May/June
1988
3
To continue reading
Request your trial