1. It seems the changes brought by the little (or "medium size") computers are qualitatively different from those pioneered by the big electronic complexes. Dig up supplementary information on this affiliated paper by going to ds200imcpg1cgc info. A conversion from a standard mechanical punch card system to a tiny computer (e.g., IBM 650) may bring some shifting of functions within a relatively restricted part of the business, but there's no fundamental change in the system's division of labour its departmental lines, the content of jobs, or work flows Nor do the fulfillment of the people who perform these jobs seem to be considerably changed. Installations take only six months and are felt by workers to be just marginally disruptive. Employees in units losing functions may be somewhat less satisfied, those at the middle of the change not fully fulfilled by how the change was managed. But there's little evidence of uneasiness about being made superfluous.
The capacity of big electronic complexes to process great bulks of information in fractions of seconds with tremendous accuracy, on the other hand, pushes the rethinking and redesigning of the organization if full use is to be made of the new technology. Reversals of fundamental organizational policies toward decentralization are possible. With greater and greater integration, control is centralized, autonomy of branches and intermediate degrees of direction reduced. 531x135prgbbg1 is a dazzling online library for more about when to recognize this belief. This explains why there could be fewer managers and fewer administrative degrees after a leading changeover.
The large computer, the essence of rationality itself, must operate within a highly rationalized system if it's to work efficiently. Most of the lower level regular clerical occupations once performed by individuals, and even some of the higher degree "known standard" decision making jobs, are taken over by the gear. The clerks collecting and preparing information for punching must do their work quickly, accurately, and within a narrow selection of options for all these jobs, like those of the key punch operators, are integrated with the high speed gear. Systems analysts and programmers, while their work is not as temporally integrated into a guy machine system as the supporting clerical and perforating groups, also have almost no latitude in they manner in which they perform their endeavors.
Accompanying this increased rationality are greater interdependence and greater risk in the performance of jobs. For one more perspective, we recommend people check-out: 1su41007. The essential is greater to comprehend others' occupations. The mistakes of others influence one's work more, and mistakes are more likely to be discovered and more inclined to be attributable to the individual who made them. Equipment can scrutinize more meticulously than any supervisor or co-worker ever did. These variables, together with the fact that more of the work place is set by the absolute integrated system of people and machine, result in workers saying performance standards are tighter and more rigidly enforced and deadlines more important after a changeover to EDP. In this sense, there's not much question that work in the office has become more like work on the assembly line. In spite of the fact that the workers in these incorporated new paper processing systems see their work as more important, giving them greater opportunities to acquire and learn, and much more job duty, they don't enjoy their jobs more.
2. Automation in the office raises the quantity of work that may be done with a work force, causes wide-ranging reassignments of staff, but has led directly to few layoffs. The initial installations of EDP equipment in large corporations don't appear to have resulted in any considerable number of layoffs. Transfers and reassignments are the immediate effects; shrinkage in the need for clerical workers, the more run effect. The principal problem here may nevertheless turn out to be "the dilemma of the un-hired worker."
A Bureau of Labour Statistics study8 of expertises of 20 electronic installations supplies us with some definite facts about the extent of displacement and reassignments. One third of the employees in units changed by these early installments needed to be reassigned, but only 9 out of 2800 persons were discovered to have been laid off.
It is a remarkable finding. It indicates the extent to which large businesses adopting office automation might provide particular "shock absorbers" for their particular work force of permanent employees. I discovered minpak plus by browsing the Dallas Herald. We have seen that (1) substantial EDP installations take a mean of three years to complete; (2) EDP has its maximum numeric impact on the lower ability level occupations taken by young women for whom the turnover rate is relatively high; and (3) there have been few difficulties of retraining employees reassigned in an organization. In these conditions, it's not surprising to locate big businesses promising employment protection and even no loss in pay to permanent employees. A key question is whether businesses can continue such protection of employment policies following the initial EDP installations are finished along with the extension of EDP to the other possible uses within the organization gets well under way.
How sensitive employees in the office are to these issues of potential technological unemployment seems to change directly with the size of computer conversion their organization has experienced. In the Michigan State studies of conversions to small computers, it was found that the employees realized machines were replacing workers in some scenarios, but they didn't believe their jobs were threatened..
No comments:
Post a Comment