By Ron Strand
In 1947, psychologist B.F. Skinner wrote a novel that expressed his vision of utopia. In Walden Two, Skinner described a society that employed technology to accomplish the most mundane tasks of human existence efficiently and effectively, providing free time for higher intellectual and social pursuits, such as artistic expression or scientific exploration. All necessary work was accomplished in a few hours per day. Deviant behaviour in this society did not require control because of the systematic application of behaviour modification techniques, eliminating the need for police or prisons. Children are taught to learn on their own at their own rate of development, simplifying education systems and yet making them more effective. Health care is also simplified through the systematic and universal application of prevention programs that reduce smoking and control a healthy diet and activities for each citizen.
In the decades since the publication of this book, society has implemented systems of automation, communication and information technologies that could make possible much of what Skinner envisioned in 1947. Yet the increased use of technology and the diversity of applications of technology, at least in general terms, has not had an impact on social problems. Efficiencies on the shop floor derived from automation, have not generalized to efficiencies in society in general. Many of the organizational and social problems Skinner imagined solutions for in his book persist. Systems of education and healthcare, and organizations generally have become increasingly complex and as a result of that complexity, often dysfunctional. Attempts to use technology to control human behaviour, such as increased surveillance, seem to result in counterproductive measures that contribute to organizational complexity. The present situation has developed because organizational theory has evolved to accept the prevailing view that complex organizations are more natural and organic than organizations in which participants' behaviours are controlled. Technology has had a parallel development that makes complex organizations possible. Use of technology for behaviour modification, envisioned by Skinner, is seen as limiting of human freedom and dignity. However, the paradox is that attempts to control behaviour by increased management of information are more limiting of freedom and destructive of dignity. At the same time, this practice increases organizational complexity, making organizations increasingly more inefficient. Organizational complexity could be decreased if the right use of technology to control behaviour was implemented. In doing so, human dignity and freedom could be spared from the increased oppression of constant surveillance.
The basic technology behind control is known as feedback control or closed loop systems. This concept forms the basis for simple, elegant technologies that have been applied in numerous ways, perhaps innumerable ways, to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of equally innumerable operations. Feedback control theory is very closely related to the psychological techniques of behaviour modification developed by psychologists like Skinner and others and is a very efficient and effective way to modify and control many forms of human behaviour. However, feedback control technology has been applied to human behaviour and organization quite rarely. Increased application of feedback control technology could in many circumstances improve human behaviour and at the same time simplify organizations.
Feedback control technology has been underused to control human behaviour and information technology has been overused. This situation has evolved because general systems theory has become widely accepted as a predominant organizational theory over cybernetics, the organizational theory derived from feedback control theory. Cybernetics does have its drawbacks as an organizational theory. But general systems theory has overshadowed cybernetics to the point that specific applications of feedback control technology that may be beneficial have been overlooked. This development led to a bias against control in favour of information that also created a bias against behaviour modification in favour of surveillance by information gathering and reporting systems. The result is a tendency for organizations to attempt to control as many variables as possible, through gathering and processing of information. This increases an organizations complexity. The use of information as a means of control of people, leading to a surveillance environment, can become counter-productive. Behaviour modification through the use of technology may reduce the variables of interaction in organizations and thus reduce complexity.
The prevailing theory of organization also influences how technology is implemented in an organization. The reason for the replacement of the human is not necessarily because the technology is more efficient or more productive but because it is easier to discipline and control. The communication that takes place between machine and person is scripted with a particular goal or outcome in mind. If two people interact in a system, communication takes place but not necessarily action. A system that employs only technology may ensure action but not necessarily communication. A system that uses both people and technology in interaction ensures communication and action. As an example, consider the actions of an employee that are monitored by some form of technology. The feedback in the system does not go directly to the employee to correct an error. Rather, the feedback goes to a central controller and is interpreted by a manager, who then uses the information as he or she sees fit. The employee may receive the feedback but may not. If multiple employees, say hundreds, send information to a central controller, the variables increase and the system becomes complex. This type of system could easily be modified to a closed loop feedback control system by making the feedback local, for the benefit of the employee alone. Feedback could be something simple like an audible reminder or in the form of positive enforcement. The key is that the feedback be immediate and local, with the intent of modifying behaviour.
Modifying information gathering systems into feedback control systems are an example of how subtle yet profound differences could result. Technology systems are used to manage people primarily through gathering and processing information. The same technology, if applied somewhat differently, can be used in control feedback systems that modify and control behaviour in a more effective way and in the process, simplifying the organization.
No comments:
Post a Comment