The contemporary organizational system embraces the interaction of technological structures and social systems to impact the working system of an organization. Technology structures mean the collection of systems, tools, and infrastructures that are used within the organization, and social boundaries refer to the agreed rules, connections, and interactions that create the organizational and social tissue (Knudsen, 2020). The development of these ideas, thus, becomes pivotal for organizational theorists and practitioners as they continue to contend with the complexities of the contemporary business world.
Natural Perspective
The natural management perspective in which the organic development of structures and boundaries is the core of organizational social and technological endeavours is an application of the idea of stewardship. In biblical tradition, humans are mandated to serve as the guardians of the earth, delegated with the task of overseeing responsible lordship and sustenance of God’s creation (Bayoh, 2020). It could be applied in any organizational context where participants shall oversee the organization they cover, taking care of technological innovations, relationships, and resources. Similar to the way humans are charged with developing and caring for the environment, leaders are needed within the organizations to foster the growth of the technology and social environments of the organizations in order to ensure their sustainability and alignment with the major organizational values and goals of the organization. By applying the concept of stewardship, people will have an attitude of respect, a sense of responsibility, and moral consciousness while dealing with the structures of technology and societal boundaries.
Rational Perspective
The rational point of view takes the approach that the structuring of technology first appears to be as predetermined, planned-out schemes aimed at achieving the best results in organization and functionality. Rational theorist turns one’s attention to the contribution of formal structures, procedures, and procedures for the attainment of organizational goals. Throughout this paradigm, the technological structures are carefully created and introduced based on rational analysis and strategic considerations (Rrabetyno et al., 2021). By contrast, social boundaries can be utilized as a way of determining and allocating tasks, authorities, and necessary positions at the organization. Rationalism-oriented thinkers underline the need to organize a community along a clearly defined hierarchy, identify different divisions of labor, and introduce formal regulations and procedures as necessary means for maintaining order and effective coordination.
Open Perspective
Without the consideration of viewpoint, technology within an organization can be identified as malleable and unbounded, susceptible to adaptions and updates based on the relationship of the company with surrounding stakeholders. The open system theory brings into focus the interrelatedness of organizational systems with their exterior surroundings. Thus, it stresses the necessity of resilience and flexibility in dealing with changing conditions (Brand et al. et al., 2021). In this approach, the technology framework is made up of interoperability, integration into the other system, and external innovation and collaboration. Social barriers like the trade boundary of an organization begin to wither away, and diverse ideas, resources, and information can now be communicated across the institutions.
Henceforth, the ideas of technology structures and social relations are perfect views used to understand how the firms work given those worldviews of nature, rational ones, and open perspectives. These perspectives present two different yet synergistic views of the underlying mechanism between technology and social forces in organizations. This reminds us that a fusion of the social and the technical elements should create a point of view that accurately takes into account all the aspects. When the abovementioned views are taken into account, they will contribute to the development of organizational culture, which can be successful in the changing world of modern careers.
Areas of Technology with Participants Have Issues
Workers in the organization face many technology-related problems that are likely to influence their productivity, efficiency, and working experiences. Below are some of the common issues, which include cyber security threats, digital overload, privacy concerns, and technological obsolescence.
Cyber Security Threats
Cyber security arguably is the most challenging area that organizations normally face during employee training. Since cyber threats are increasing in both frequency and sophistication, everyone is dealing with a complicated landscape when it comes to identifying potential vulnerabilities and risks. A major hindrance is a need for better knowledge about cyber security best practices among participants and how cybercriminals continue to devise new techniques (Ghelani, 2020). Employees could accidentally make risky decisions and click on a tricky link or use a simple password, which can unintentionally disclose proprietary information about the organization.
Additionally, the huge number and variety of cybersecurity threats make it a formidable task for the participants. Ranging from phishing and ransomware to insider threats and social engineering scams, the arsenal of possible attacks is exhaustive and dynamic. Participants may face challenges in coping with cybersecurity trends and technologies that change very fast. Thus, gaps may be created that hackers can exploit (Ghelani, 2022). Moreover, the growing intricacy of IT infrastructures and integrated systems within organizations make cyber security even more complicated because individuals must deal with multiple security protocols and defense measures as they seek to protect confidential data and reduce risks.
Digital Overload
Given the ever-increasing traffic of digital information and electronic communication channels in the current day fundamental ecosystem, the issue of digital overload has become a prime concern not only for individual organizations but also for society as a whole. Employees typically suffer from email deluge, message trails, inbox notifications, etc., that compete for their focus during the workday (Fan et al., 2021). Thus, the constant stream of information has an awful impact on people’s mental resources, and that may result in an inability to focus, to work effectively, and, in general, to psychological issues. Also, the fact that the digital world is full of tools that are making communication and collaboration more and more smooth and effortless usually means that there is more of the “digital clutter.” The end users may need help with handling many interfaces and applications, creating confusion and ineffective functionality. The necessity to cope with several communication avenues and stay at the beck and call of individuals constantly drains and wears out TV audiences (Fan et al., 2021). Consequently, companies should perceive the adverse impacts of digital overload and take measures that will mobilize people to have a good digital life.
Privacy Concerns
Privacy consciousness is a key problem for employees and other stakeholders in organizations as they relate to the growing phenomenon of data collection, storage, and use in digital platforms. Individuals tend to give such information to their employers, for example, personal and financial details as well as message communications history, thinking that their employers will properly and morally keep it. On the one hand, the ability to store, analyze, and share vast amounts of personal data is opening up new opportunities for businesses and individuals. However, on the other hand, privacy protection has come under jeopardy with the growing frequency of data breaches, unauthorized access, and misuse of personal information (Lee & Ahmed, 2021). Participants are concerned about the inevitable negative consequences that may come to them caused by data breaches, for example, identity theft, financial fraud, or reputational damage both for personal and organization.
The problem is that digital technology is now prevalent in remote work and digital task collaboration, which makes privacy issues among participants more serious as work and private spaces become one. People could be uneasy that some surveillance could be practiced through data collection concerning their work at home, including time on the laptop or a place of work, fearing that the latter invade their privacy. Moreover, the dependency on cloud computing and the partnership with third-party products for many of the organizational components adds a layer in terms of complexity since participants do not know exactly who is in charge of security, determination of ownership or control of access to the data and transparency (Lee & Ahmed, 2021). When formal mechanisms, including privacy policies with clear feedback from organizations, do not exist, individuals may be unable to defend themselves against the possible situations that may arise.
Technological Obsolescence
Technological obsolescence is exerting a serious strain on the participants within organizations as they need help with the sheer speed of technological advances and the resulting possibility of their knowledge and experience fading away. The technology of today does not stay static for long but rather evolves in another direction in a manner that seems unprecedented in speed, with each new move rendering the most recent and highly-touted technologies redundant (Vergara et al., 2020). The women and men involved in this process may realize that they work with such old systems and applications that do not have the utility, effectiveness, and compatibility necessary to perform well. What this entails is complaint, decline in performance, and experience of inadequacy as the employees are unable to respond effectively to technology-driven changes and ensure productivity.
In addition to technological obsolescence, this development brings other organizational-level challenges where both staff and the organization, as a whole, vie for a competitive place in the market and sustainability. Innovation can be hindered by the ineffective technologies previous to the old, ineffective technologies might be the reason for inefficient operations, and new technologies that have been limited by the outdated organizational systems of the past and are impeded by them will not be able to keep up with dynamic markets. Moreover, the costs incurred when seeking to maintain updated technology or to execute the system substitution can be a burden to the organization, which may n, reinstate diverting funds away from strategies and investment toward futurtowardnfuture-driven (Vergara et al., 2020). Participants may lose their trust in the ability of the organization to be prepared for and to keep up with the technological advancements. Their willingness to peruse their tasks may decrease accordingly. Handling technological obsolescence starts with the organization’s principle of frequently reviewing its technology and committing to technology acquisition.
Issues with Organizational Boundaries for Participants
Boundaries that organizations establish have various impacts on participants, including their communication, angles, and acknowledgment within an organization. Organizational boundaries could be affected by three issues: unidirectional thinking, lateral conflicts, and the inclusion gap.
Silo Mentality
The silo mentality pattern emerges inside a company where departments or ones work independently and unilaterally, prioritizing their objectives and interests over allied team goals and the general enterprise’s attention. Through this, information sharing, collaboration, and inter-functional innovation get a tough time as they divert into their respective silos (Bento et al., 2020). Siloing is a phenomenon that is associated with the compartmentalization of teams, which leads to the hoarding of resources, resisting change, and viewing the other teams as opponents instead of collaborators. Generally, this negatively affects the agility and effectiveness of the organization. Stakeholders might feel fed up with limited access to important information and disorganized communication within departments, which results in deficient morale and weak performance as they become the victims of merging the same operations twice.
Interdepartmental Conflicts
Likewise, organizational conflicts may stem not only from a lack of common purpose among departments but also from the divergence of priorities, interests, and perceptions to unequal resource sharing among different departments. Participants can easily get in the way of turf wars between the different teams in the organization, power struggles, and blame games as the departments try to maneuver for recognition, influence, and control (Bento et al., 2020). These conflicts could intensify tension levels, shake the foundations of trust, and cut off cooperation. Besides, it is likely that this will cause organizational cohesion to be harmed and performance damaged as well. Participants may perhaps undergo a lot of stress and anxiety as they navigate the murky interdepartmental intricacies, where they will find it difficult to reconcile the clash of both the demands and the allegiances while showing the much-required professionalism and proficiency.
Personal Perspectives
As a motivated person devoted to the ideas of a technologically enabled workplace environment where diversity and innovation thrive, my views on Technology Structures and Social Boundaries for Organizations are very interconnected to such collaboration, transparency, and empowerment. Information technology, as a means of communication, should be seen as an enabler of interconnection and productivity rather than a factor creating barriers in communication and collaboration. Moving forward with cutting-edge technologies, remembering social dynamics and their consequences is important for getting a sense of belonging and creating an atmosphere of belonging in the organization. Technologies should be a means to enable communication, sharing of knowledge, and cooperation between multidisciplinary groups and departments impenetrable by the walls, which creates a collective sense of an aim.
Thus, while I understand that social boundaries help to maintain respect, trust, and integrity in the organization amongst the participants, I also realize that the boundaries should be clear. Even though technology will increase proper work-life balance, healthy norms and rules of the game must be established. Among others, these refer to privacy protection and appropriate communication. By developing a culture based on mutual respect and understanding, the organizations allow participants to belong to the same space where they can express their ideas, say their worries openly, and take part in discussions about the decisions that impact them.
Conclusion
Conclusively, the technological structures within an organization and its social boundaries interact quite intricately, highlighting the necessity for a fine-tuned and balanced approach in organizational cultures. By recognizing the positive aspects of becoming connected and efficient, which technology holds, and at the same time, while being conscious of the negative consequences of social interactions and relationships, organizations can create undivided, innovative, and strong working environments. Creating a culture of teamwork, openness, and showing respect is the key. Team members will gain a habit of using technology just as a tool for improvement rather than as a source of dividing people. Since organizations are adapting to technological innovations while also responding to societal changes, it would be the key to realizing a harmonious mix of technical structures and social rules for continuous growth, developing strong relationships, and providing spaces where players can create a balance between personal and professional life.
References
Bayoh, A. V. (2020). Christian Leaders as Managers: Facilitating Extraordinary Outcomes Through Stewardship. Modern Metaphors of Christian Leadership: Exploring Christian Leadership in a Contemporary Organizational Context, pp. 79–94.
Bento, F., Tagliabue, M., & Lorenzo, F. (2020). Organizational silos: A scoping review informed by a behavioral perspective on systems and networks. Societies, 10(3), 56.
Brand, U., Muraca, B., Pineault, É., Sahakian, M., Schaffartzik, A., Novy, A., … & Görg, C. (2021). From planetary to societal boundaries: an argument for collectively defined self-limitation. Sustainability: Science, practice and policy, 17(1), 264-291.
Fan, M., Huang, Y., Qalati, S. A., Shah, S. M. M., Ostic, D., & Pu, Z. (2021). Effects of information overload, communication overload, and inequality on digital distrust: A cyber-violence behavior mechanism. Frontiers in Psychology, p. 12, 643981.
Ghelani, D. (2022). Cyber security, cyber threats, implications, and future perspectives: A Review. Authorea Preprints.
Knudsen, D. R. (2020). Elusive boundaries, power relations, and knowledge production: A systematic review of the literature on digitalization in accounting. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 36, 100441.
Lee, C., & Ahmed, G. (2021). Improving IoT privacy, data protection, and security concerns. International Journal of Technology, Innovation and Management (IJTIM), 1(1), 18–33.
Rabetino, R., Kohtamäki, M., & Federico, J. S. (2021). A (re) view of the philosophical foundations of strategic management. International Journal of Management Reviews, 23(2), 151–190.
Vergara, D., Extremera, J., Rubio, M. P., & Davila, L. P. (2020). The technological obsolescence of virtual reality learning environments. Applied Sciences, 10(3), 915.
write