Re: Technology chararterization

Eddy Steenbergen (esteenbergen@peg.apc.org)
Sat, 7 Jan 1995 00:36 AEST

Steen Martiny wrote Re: Technology chararterization

>The goal for me is to identify how to characterize "the technology of a
>corporation". Should you hear long tech speeches from the engineers
>(which would be full of details and difficult to oversee) or should you ask
>the customers for what they see as the technology of the products (which
>presumably would leave out a lot of silent knowledge known to "everybody")
>or should you go to an academic institute in the relevant area to learn the
>trends of the industry (which would fill you with a lot of warm air of no
>immidiate relevance) ? The final total would be lots of details, lack of
>comprehensiveness and lack of overview.

As a professional in the field of information technology, I find this
subject fascinating. It has always been a major hurdle to speak to clients
about the technology in terms they could understand. I'd be very interested
in seeing the result of your research.

>Well, management science has touched the area. Joan Woodward of the
>Tavistock school told us that unit - mass - continuous production was
>a fundamental thing to look for. Charles Perrow classifies tech by
>the independent variables "task variability" and "problem analyzability".
>Perrow's 2 variables lead to a 4-field matrix of tech types. Mintzberg
>combined these and others (like Thompson) into the variables "regulating"
>and "sophistication". However, to me all these are quite course ways of
>characterizing technologies. I do not think this makes enough sense in
>practical situations.
>
>I have been quite attracted to Zeleny's way of looking on technology.
>Found in Human Systems Management Vol 6 109-120 (1986) and reprinted in
>Noori & Radford's "Readings and Cases in the Mngt of Technology",
>Prentice-Hall (1990). He uses the following four components of technology:
>Hardware, software, brainware and (external, societal) support net
>embedding.

It seems to me that Perrow focused on the outcomes of the use of technology
(or at least the tasks to which it is applied) while Zeleny looked at the
technology itself.

Maybe, what is needed is a matrix - rows relating to the outcomes, columns
concerned with the technology itself.

task variability problem analyzability
high low high low
hardware X X X X
software X X X X
brainware X X X X
support net X X X X

Just some brief thoughts.

Eddy

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This message comes from either Eddy or Roxanne
Steenbergen of Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Ph +61 02 726007