Join our mailing list!
©2007
StudentAffairs.com
All Rights Reserved
|
The Intersection of Technology and
Organizational Culture
Charmane K.
Corcoran
Michigan State
University
Implementation of new technology forces change. We adopt
new technologies to enhance our core work functions,
affecting related policies, administrative functions, and
inevitably every component of the organization. For
educational institutions, this outcome
is due in part to pressures to integrate technology for
teaching and learning, and to provide related services and
training for faculty, staff, and students. With this
all-consuming project comes the need to protect privacy and
intellectual property, ensure data integrity, and
maintain civility on the Internet and in the organization.
The transforming power of technology goes beyond the "what
we do" to the "who we are" as individuals and as an
organization.
The more fluid the culture of the organization, the
greater the potential for core work functions and policies
to generate a positive organizational synergy. Hierarchical
structure does not necessarily preclude a lack of fluidity.
The definitions of leadership under which an organization
functions determines fluidity and ultimately the ease with
which technology can be utilized to further the mission of
institution.
Implementation of new technology is perpetual, affecting
decision-making on multiple levels. Organizational culture
and the type of leadership exercised has significant impact
on how we respond to change and technology implementation
strategies. The answer to "What are we as leaders going to
attend to?" has a significant effect on organizational
culture.
When we focus only on the technology without attending to
cultural and personal elements, we fail in both arenas.
Constant flux has become the nature of technology and our
organizations. Where the decision-making processes are
attentive to the people-side and cross-functional nature of
all endeavors, our viability is enhanced. It also
facilitates compliance when initiating new technology and
the related policies.
James O'Toole (1996) said:
- . . . treating people with respect is what moral
leadership is about, and nothing could be harder. But
when there is organizational or social necessity for
change, nothing can be more practical.
Peter Block (1993) spoke of
stewardship as a central value to leadership:
- Part of the meaning of stewardship is to hold in
trust the well-being of some larger entity - our
organizations, our community, . . . placing service ahead
of control . . . There is humility in stewardship, it
evokes images of service. Service is central to the idea
of stewardship. (p. 41)
In a proposal to Educause entitled "Client
Advocacy: Client-Centric Approach to Technology and Related
Services", Corcoran and Cotter
(2000) describe an example of such stewardship in the
role of the Client
Advocacy Office (CAO) at Michigan
State University.
- Stewardship and advocacy on behalf of clients can
ensure institution-wide success. The creation of the
Client Advocacy Office demonstrates the effect of HOW
integration of client advocacy into the initiation and
delivery of services, data resource administration,
implementation of institutional policies, and procedures
can create significant synergistic results.
-
- The extent to which an institution addresses and
integrates client advocacy into technology development
and services may provide a means to measure the success
the institution as a whole will accrue in the future. To
provide a voice for our clients, we need to ensure that
advocacy is fully factored into our organization,
throughout the process of design, implementation, data
resource management, measurement, and the evaluation of
technology services. Redefining what information is
attended to and input sought is the challenge.
-
- It must be noted that advocacy is not synonymous
with consulting. Advocacy is complimentary to technology
advisory structures. Furthermore, the role of a client's
advocate must be held separate, at times, from the policy
or decision-making bodies.
Where stewardship is fostered, the institution will
wrestle with a number of critical questions. What are the
organization's needs as an entity? What are the individual
needs? How do technology services fit into that mission? How
do we engender connectedness with those we serve? What are
the technology needs of the first generation learner, the
adult learner, the distance learner, and the persons with
disabilities? Can we foster confidence in our clients as
technology users?
How do the diverse populations within our institution
relate to technology - as a tool, a toy, a necessary evil,
or an extension of self? What are the needs specific to
professors, staff, students, or administrators? How do we
best to serve the broadest spectrum of individuals in a
24/7/365 environment? How do assist our staff in capturing a
vision of stewardship in their realm of providing
services?
Though not readily apparent, answers to these questions
do have a significant impact on the culture of the
organization, on successful technology adoption, and in the
development and delivery of effective technology training.
Stewardship elementally changes how we think, speak, relate,
handle difficult situations, and learn.
Michigan State University's The
New Educator recently published "Touching
the Future", an interview with Provost
Lou Anna K.Simon. In that interview, Simon
(2000) identified some relevant issues at Michigan
State University - and I believe for other educational
institutions.
- One of the things I think about, one of the
continuing challenges, is blending knowing and being. The
land-grant university... had a characteristic that its
students would have this extraordinary competence and
knowledge... . ...I think our unique challenge in the
years ahead is not simply to chase technology as an
additional skill, but to really think about what it means
in the context of balancing the being and the knowing.
How do we think about the educated citizen for this new
world? ...It's time to look at the root value that was
here in 1855 and to think about how it translates to our
time... focusing on how the organization can be fluid
enough to be adaptive and responsive. So as I look to the
future, it isn't about being like a business, but finding
the right set of characteristics so that we can stay both
grounded in our academic values and roots and at the same
time have the ability to see those values manifested in
different programs and organizational
structures.
Without finding those "right set of characteristics" and
seeing the "values manifested in different programs and
organizational structures", we cannot provide technology
services and training or assist faculty or any other group
in a way that supports their function at the University. If
we attend to the "who", we will better be able to handle the
"do". As significant technology issues develop and new
technology services evolve, adopting a stewardship frame
contributes significantly to the success of our
institutions, allowing us to better represent and serve our
diverse populations.
References
Block,
P., (1993). Stewardship: Choosing service over self
interest. San Francisco: Berrett Koehler.
Corcoran,
C. K., & Cotter, R. D., (2000). Client advocacy:
Client-centric approach to technology and related services.
Proposed paper for conference presentation at Educause
2000. Available on line: http://www.msu.edu/~corcora1
/edprop2000.html.
O'Toole,
J., (1995). Leading change: The argument for values-based
leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Simon, L. A.
K., (2000, Spring). Touching the Future. New Educator, 6
(1).
For other related information by this author, please
see:
- http://
www.educ.msu.edu/units/dept/ead/teamlead/comptech.html
- http://www.msu.edu/user/c
orcora1/comstyles.html
- http://www.ms
u.edu/user/corcora1/educom98/ed98prop.html
Submit a
Letter to the Editor |
Printer
Friendly Version
|
