Confirmation
- Measures of the success of implementation of new
technology
Group/department
level
Changing to more highly integrated
and computerised systems frequently reduces the importance
of individual-level measures of productivity. Group-level
measures become more appropriate because of the inter-connected
and inter-dependent nature of many innovative, technology-oriented
work systems.
In the services sector, for example, if a group of people
are responsible for servicing a customer, individual measures of the number of customers
served are meaningless. Measures of employee and customer satisfaction, success in
cross-selling, and percentages of repeat business may be more relevant.
In a manufacturing example, a multi-skilled four-person
team operating a computer integrated manufacturing cell, are not individually responsible
for the operation of any specific machine. The number of products produced per individual
in this work cell is useless as a measure of employee performance. Factors such as speed
of tool or design change, system flexibility and up-time, the number of problems solved,
the number of process improvements made, the frequency of personnel interaction and other
group-level outcome measures become much more meaningful.
In terms of measuring the effects of the implementation
of innovation and technical change on groups or departments, there are several factors
that you may want to consider. Research conducted on thousands of individuals across
scores of organisations, has revealed several dimensions that are relevant at the
group/unit/department level of consideration (Van de Ven, A. H. & Ferry, D. L., 1980, Measuring
and assessing organisations, N.Y.: Wiley). Each of the dimensions below may be
affected when implementing innovation and technical change:
- Task difficulty. How clearly do people know how to do
their work, how easy is it for people to assess how well they are doing and what the
outcomes of their work will be.
- Task variability. The number of exceptions with which
people must normally deal, and the degree of variability of incoming work materials and
objects.
- Unit standardisation. The degree to which work rules,
policies and procedures are formalised (e.g., specified and/or written down) and followed.
- Personnel expertise. The degree of professional skills of
the group/unit members (i.e., the amount of formal university and TAFE education,
job-entry orientation and training, and on-the-job continuing education, training and
reading).
- Unit specialisation. The horizontal division of labour,
that is, the number of different tasks or jobs delegated to the group/unit (i.e., highly
specialised groups/units perform a very small number of different tasks/jobs).
- Personal specialisation/role interchangeability. The
number of people qualified to do each other's jobs/tasks, the ease with which
group/department members can take on each other's jobs/tasks.
- Employee discretion. The amount of discretion group/unit
members exercise in making work-related decisions.
- Supervisory discretion. The amount of discretion the
supervisor of the group/unit exercises in making work-related decisions about the group's
work.
- Work-flow interdependence. The degree of
dependence/independence that exists among group/unit members in order for them to perform
their individual jobs (i.e., is an individual's work independent of another's?); that is,
is work within the group/unit sequential, so that one person passes work on to the next in
a "line"?; is it reciprocal, as people pass work back-and-forth between
themselves?; or is it team-based, as people all work virtually simultaneously on the
jobs/tasks?).
- Job dependence on group/unit supervisor. The degree of
dependence/independence that exists between group/unit members and their supervisor in
order for group/unit members to perform their individual jobs (e.g., are members dependent
on the supervisor for materials, clients, information, feedback regarding results?).
- Information flows. The direction and frequency of
information flows (e.g., written memos, reports, letters; personal discussions; group
meetings) among members and among members and their supervisor.
- Frequency of conflict among group/unit members. Frequency
and severity of disagreements and disputes among group/unit personnel.
- Modes of conflict resolution. Methods by which
disagreements and disputes among group/unit personnel are handled (i.e., ignoring or
avoiding the issues, smoothing over the issues and playing down the differences, openly
dealing with the issues and working through differences to reach a mutually agreeable
solution, resorting to hierarchy and authority to resolve the matter).
Top of Page
Copyright©1999,2000
Holistic Management Pty. Ltd.