Sustainability of organisational change - an AMED co-inquiry |
Do you recognise this pattern?
In the 1940s, the ‘socio-technical’ concept arose from work carried out by the Tavistock Institute for the British coal mining industry. A lot depended for postwar reconstruction on a plentiful supply of cheap coal and productivity was not keeping pace with increases in mechanisation. There was a mine, however, that was improving, contrary to the trend, where the miners “had found a way, at a higher level of mechanization, of recovering the group cohesion and self-regulation they had lost.”
The discovery led to an important breakthrough in thinking about work. “Conceptually, the new paradigm entailed a shift in the way work organizations were envisaged. Engineers, following the technical imperative, would design whatever organization the technology seemed to require. This was a rule accepted by all concerned. The ‘people cost’ of proceeding in this way was not considered.”
There was great excitement over these insights “which pointed to the existence of an alternative pattern going in the opposite direction to the prevailing mode. ... The Divisional Board, however, … feared the power change that would be consequent on allowing groups to become more autonomous at a time when they themselves were intent on intensifying managerial controls.”
The discovery led to an important breakthrough in thinking about work. “Conceptually, the new paradigm entailed a shift in the way work organizations were envisaged. Engineers, following the technical imperative, would design whatever organization the technology seemed to require. This was a rule accepted by all concerned. The ‘people cost’ of proceeding in this way was not considered.”
There was great excitement over these insights “which pointed to the existence of an alternative pattern going in the opposite direction to the prevailing mode. ... The Divisional Board, however, … feared the power change that would be consequent on allowing groups to become more autonomous at a time when they themselves were intent on intensifying managerial controls.”
Quotes are from ‘the evolution of socio-technical systems, a conceptual framework and an action research programme’, (1981, pp10-14) in which Professor Eric Trist looks back over his career.
If you recognise this picture, his paper reads like a tragic novel of breakthroughs and disappointments but Trist remained hopeful and so must we. There is an enormous investment of human creativity in the movement for change. Powerful synergy must surely be available in our diverse approaches if we can discover and understand each other.