Technological change 9781786304377, 1786304376

Citation preview

Technological Change

Technological Changes and Human Resources Set coordinated by Patrick Gilbert

Volume 1

Technological Change

Clotilde Coron Patrick Gilbert

First published 2020 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address: ISTE Ltd 27-37 St George’s Road London SW19 4EU UK

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street Hoboken, NJ 07030 USA

www.iste.co.uk

www.wiley.com

© ISTE Ltd 2020 The rights of Clotilde Coron and Patrick Gilbert to be identified as the authors of this work have been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Library of Congress Control Number: 2020930221 British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978-1-78630-437-7

Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ix

Chapter 1. The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

1.1. Approaches to technological change . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.1. Technological determinism . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.2. Social constructivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.3. Joint structuring of technical and social aspects . 1.1.4. Limitation of established distinctions . . . . . . . 1.2. A brief history of technological change . . . . . . . . 1.2.1. How can we tell the story? . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.2. At the origins of the Industrial Revolution (from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance) . . . . . . 1.2.3. The First Industrial Revolution (end of the 18th Century) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.4. The Second Industrial Revolution (late 19th Century to the 1910s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.5. The Computer Revolution (from the late 1960s to the 1990s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.6. The Digital Revolution (early 21st Century) . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

1 2 14 19 27 27 28

. . . . . . . . . . .

30

. . . . . . . . . . .

32

. . . . . . . . . . .

34

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36 38

Chapter 2. Technological Change and Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

43

2.1. Powers, institutions and technological change . . . . . 2.1.1. Fundamentals of political analysis and technology 2.1.2. The role of the State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3. Technological change in the age of globalization . 2.1.4. The dark side of technology. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

44 44 45 50 52

vi

Technological Change

2.2. Ethics in the face of technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1. Ethical evaluation of technology . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2. Three ethical issues under discussion . . . . . . . . . 2.3. Technological change and diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1. Inclusive technology/exclusive technology. . . . . . 2.3.2. Technologies that reflect their designers . . . . . . . 2.4. Technological change and ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.1. Technology, an answer to ecological challenges? . 2.4.2. Technology as a source of ecological degradation?

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

57 57 60 66 67 75 78 78 82

Chapter 3. Technological Change and Organization . . . . . . . . . . .

87

3.1. Omnipresence of the technical object in work activities . . . 3.1.1. The R&D function in the lead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.2. Marketing challenged by digital transformation . . . . . . 3.1.3. Factory 4.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.4. e-HR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2. The interaction of technological and organizational systems . 3.2.1. Technological change and organizational structure . . . . 3.2.2. Technological change, and financial and human resources for innovation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3. Technology as a liberator and control agent. . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.1. Prescriptive and assistive technologies . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.2. Technological ambivalence: the same technology for empowerment and control purposes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4. Technological change as a social process . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.1. Changes in the social entity and management methods . 3.4.2. Support for employees whose activities are threatened by technological change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.3. The actors of technological change in organizations . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

87 88 89 90 93 95 95

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100 104 104

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

111 113 114

. . . . . . . . . . . .

121 127

Chapter 4. Technological Change and the Individual . . . . . . . . . .

135

4.1. Activity and technical object. . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.1. The technical object in the activity system . 4.1.2. The technical object and its mediations . . . 4.2. The encounter between the individual and the technical object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.1. The individual in the design phase . . . . . . 4.2.2. The individual in the adoption phase . . . . 4.2.3. The individual in the use phase . . . . . . . . 4.2.4. The individual between subject and object .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

136 136 138

. . . . .

142 142 144 148 151

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

Contents

4.3. Beyond the content of activities, a transformation of working structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.1. Variable effects depending on the technological equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.2. The emergence of new work characteristics . . 4.3.3. The growth of telework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4. Technological changes and individual skills . . . . 4.4.1. Skills and their production . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.2. Digital skills as frames of reference . . . . . . . 4.4.3. No digital skills outside the activity . . . . . . .

vii

. . . . . . . . . . . .

154

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

154 155 156 158 158 161 163

Chapter 5. Experiencing Technological Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

165

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

5.1. Threats and opportunities associated with technological change in organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.1. Overview of threats and opportunities associated with technological change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.2. Threats and opportunities also concerning work organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2. Reconciling technical and social issues . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.1. Social or responsible innovations: definitions and examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.2. Responsible technological innovations within organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3. Managing responsible technological change . . . . . . . 5.3.1. Organizational change management . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.2. The specificities of technological change . . . . . . . 5.3.3. An integrative scheme for the management of responsible technological change . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

166

. . . . . . . . .

166

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

168 171

. . . . . . . . .

172

. . . .

. . . .

179 183 183 189

. . . . . . . . .

200

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

203

Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

219

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

Introduction

For a long time, technological change was considered synonymous with economic and social progress. Today, it stimulates some and worries others. To take just one example, the most emblematic, the massive arrival of new digital tools is disrupting consumption patterns, forms of employment and working conditions, and posing many challenges for organizations and individuals alike. While it is recognized that technological change is a key determinant of economic growth, it is also true that it can also amplify or even catalyze inequalities (by age, gender, level of education and skills, income, etc.). In short, technological change is also a social change with which it maintains complex interactions: technology is as much the source, ambivalent, as the consequence of social transformations. In particular, individuals are both human resources of technological transformations and receivers, more or less capable and accepting of its effects. I.1. First definitions The phenomenon we are about to discuss has a long history. However, there is still some uncertainty about the meaning of the terms used to describe it, so it is useful to start with a few definitions. I.1.1. Technical, technological and technical objects There is some confusion between the technical and technological, probably because of the respective connotations of these terms in everyday language.

x

Technological Change

Today, the term “technological” tends to be used as a superlative of “technical” for which it is sometimes substituted. More pretentiously, it has come to refer to a modern and complex technique, such as information and communication processing techniques. While the term “technical” refers to well-demarcated know-how and the traditional industrial universe, the term “technological” is spontaneously associated with modern values. Resisting the current tendency to make the terms somewhat synonyms, we will follow the tradition introduced by sociologist and anthropologist Marcel Mauss (1872–1950), and extended in the anthropology of techniques, notably by Leroi-Gourhan (1911–1986), André-Georges Haudricourt (1911–1996), and others, by designating the technical the “effective traditional act”. Let us take up the three elements of Mauss’ formula: the act, tradition and efficiency. First of all, a technology is not defined by a collection of objects, but by the concrete action it exerts on the world. It must be effective because, without sensitive effects and known as such, an act cannot be designated as such. Moreover, this act is described as traditional. For if it is not linked to a tradition, an act is neither intelligible nor reproducible, and cannot be transmitted to others. Technologies are also based on invention and innovation, but they are not themselves totally independent of the knowledge and know-how accumulated in a given culture. Specifically, technology refers to all the processes and methods used in the production activities of an object or service. It is a real need for scientists, engineers and industrialists. But, undoubtedly precisely because of the diversity of these needs, it can hardly lead to a representation that is unanimously accepted. As for technology, it is, according to the classical definition, the social science that takes a technique as its object, the study of techniques, tools, machines and materials. However, it should be recognized that clearly distinguishing the two concepts may seem difficult. Therefore, we will admit, by extension and according to a widespread use, the use of the term technology as a grouping of the techniques, procedures, methodologies, equipment and discourses associated with their implementation. In this

Introduction

xi

second sense, we will speak of digital technology, biotechnology, agro-technology, etc. In any case, we will not confuse the technical object, the product of human activity, with technology. The technical object is only one of its elements, the most concrete, the hard material of technology, “hardware”. It is a solid thing consisting of one or more tangible and intangible components (organs, information, energy and other resources), functionally arranged, designed and realized to meet a specific need or needs. Among the technical objects, we will distinguish between the technical equipment (infrastructure, machinery and tools) used to produce other objects, and the resulting products (see Figure I.1).

Figure I.1. From technology to object

These clarifications are proposed as conventions that we would like to share with the readers of this book. They will lead us, for example, to consider digital technology as the grouping of a set of technologies covering fields of application as diverse as medicine (video-endoscopy), prototype

xii

Technological Change

production (additive manufacturing or 3D printing), architecture (Building Information Models, or geometric representations of a building in 3D), and graphic creation (digital comic strips). Each of these technologies in turn brings together several objects. Thus, additive manufacturing is based on printers, producing objects as varied as functional parts, tooling components, models for metal casting, etc. Talking about technological change and not technical change is not insignificant. The term “technological change” emphasizes the need not to separate methodical processes from the principles that reflect them and from the ecosystem (economic, social, organizational, ideological) in which the technologies lead to successful practices. In this sense, technological change is not reduced to a change of processes (i.e. a technical change) and even less to a simple change of technical object. Thus, digital transformation is not just about the arrival of a few objects offered to consumers. It leads to a transformation of work structures as a new division of labor between the operator and the machine1. I.1.2. How can we address technological change? First elements Technological change can be approached from three main perspectives. The techno-centric perspective (centered on the technical object) is usually contrasted with the anthropotechnical perspective (centered on the humantechnical couple). Between the two, we will insert a “romantic” perspective, based on the joint glorification of the inventor and the object of his creation. We will define these three points of view by illustrating them and considering them both at a “macro” scale (that of the history of technologies) and at a “micro” scale (that of organizational change). I.1.2.1. Technocentrism: the primacy of the technical object The dominant representation of technological change, conceived in terms of the technology itself, corresponds to a perspective that has been described as techno-centric (Jacob and Ducharme 1995; Rabardel 1995). It is focused on the machine and its possibilities. This is the case for a history of computing in terms of generations of technical objects (see Box I.1). 1 Throughout the book we favor the use of the terms “technology” and “technological” to facilitate reading. In French, the authors’ native language, two terms can be used: “technique” and “technologique” and “techniques” and “technologies”.

Introduction

xiii

1945–1955

First generation: electronic tube machines (vacuum tubes). The first fully electronic computer, the ENIAC (Electronical Numerical Integrator And Calculator) weighs 30 tons and occupies 135 m2.

1955–1965

Second generation: transistor computers that make it possible to build more reliable and less bulky machines.

1965–1980

Third generation: integrated circuits (also called electronic chips). The Intel 4004 processor achieves the same performance as the ENIAC for a size of less than 11 mm2.

1980–2000

Fourth generation: microprocessors. Integration of thousands to billions of transistors on the same silicon chip.

2000

Fifth generation: widespread use of networks and graphical interfaces (there are disagreements between specialists about the existence of this fifth generation). Box I.1. Computer generations from a techno-centric perspective

This first perspective, concerned with the object and its materiality, does not address the human dimension of technological change. At the organizational level, it can lead to neglecting the individual who becomes the residual part of technological change, the part that is said to resist change. I.1.2.2. The romantic perspective: the inventor and his creation Here, technological change is often represented as a chronological succession of technical objects with which glorious personalities and events are associated, such as the one we have taken up, by way of illustration, in Box I.2. This tenacious tendency undoubtedly gives an attractive representation of technological change because of its simplicity, its exaltation of the idea of progress and the myth of great men. But it will not be our preference. To attribute to a single individual, at a given date, an invention when it is usually the result of a maturation, resulting from parallel research, seems to us to be from a romantic perspective.

xiv

Technological Change

1769

James Watt develops an improved condenser for the steam engine.

1821

Michael Faraday demonstrates the first electric motor.

1838

Charles Wheatstone builds the first electric telegraph.

1859

Étienne Lenoir makes the first internal combustion engine.

1876

Alexander Graham Bell files a patent on the telephone.

1879

Thomas Edison develops the carbon filament bulb.

1884

Hiram Maxim invents the first self-propelled machine gun.

1899

Guglielmo Marconi makes the first transatlantic radio transmission (which won him the Nobel Prize in 1909).

1903

Brothers Orville and Wilbur Wright make their first motorized flights.

1923

Vladimir Zworykin patent the iconoscope, a fully electronic television transmission tube.

1947

Bardeen, Brattain and Shockley (Nobel Prize winners in physics in 1956) invent a new type of transistor.

1957

The Soviets launch Sputnik 1, the first spacecraft placed in orbit around the Earth.

1969

Edward Hoff and Federico Faggin develop the very first electronic chip, the microprocessor.

1973

François Gernelle develops the first microcomputer, the Micral N.

1977

Designed by Steve Wozniak, the Apple II, a personal computer, is developed in Steve Jobs’ garage, manufactured on a large scale and marketed by Apple Computer.

1982

Microsoft, created by Bill Gates and Paul Allen, presents MS/DOS (Microsoft Disk Operating System) developed for the IBM PC, then for compatible PCs.

1994

Jeff Bezos founds the Amazon website, which becomes the world’s largest online sales company. He lists the shares on the stock exchange in 1997.

1998

Google is created by Larry Page and Sergey Brin, two students from Stanford University, who together initiate the search engine of the same name.

2005

Mark Zuckerberg founds the online social network Facebook, after testing it on his fellow students at Harvard University. Box I.2. Technological change as a succession of uses

Introduction

xv

This second perspective leaves little more room for the human being than the first, at most the latter is thought of as the progenitor of the technical object. The emphasis on the glorious origins of a tool is reflected at the organizational level when technological change is referred to exclusively in reference to the individual who was at the origin of a technological innovation and who gives it a prestigious character. I.1.2.3. The anthropotechnical perspective: towards a sociotechnical coupling The opposite of technocentrism is anthropocentrism, a vision of technologies centered on individuals and social groups. The technologies are thought of in reference to the human being and not the other way around. However, we will avoid any radicalism. In practice, we do not intend to focus solely on individuals and their needs, but rather to consider how to achieve co-adaptation between object and subject. This is what we call an anthropotechnical approach. We will present different theoretical currents in Chapter 1 in more detail. The focus on the uses of technologies, and no longer on the objects themselves, as they couple the human and technological, is a good illustration of this approach (see Box I.3). 1955–1960: from scientific computing to management computing At the beginning, computing was mainly concerned with scientific calculation and operational research. It was then the business of engineers, the only ones capable of programming the automaton in machine language that they used for their own needs. Then management applications were born, still transposed from mechanography. 1960–1970: development of management applications Scientific applications began to develop with the progress of numerical analysis and simulation (science, engineering, economics, etc.). At the same time, applications began to multiply in banking, insurance and finance. Cobol, a modern programming language dedicated to business applications, was created in 1959. The birth of the concept of an information system gave a global view of the company: processes and information flows.

xvi

Technological Change

1975–1990: computing for all With the development of computers in terms of power and reliability, computers took over all social practices of research, design, manufacturing, marketing and communication. Microcomputing has enabled the wide diffusion of microprocessorbased computer components in technical systems and the creation of microcomputers. Networks allow computers to communicate and allow machines to be decentralized as close as possible to workstations. 1990: integration into business Computing began to penetrate all sectors of the company: the business world became digital. In the mid-1990s, with the Internet and electronic mail, inter-individual and inter-organizational exchanges were organized via IT support. Information technology was no longer separable from other fields of human activity. Information and communication technologies began to be adopted by the majority of the population in their daily lives. Box I.3. A history of enterprise computing centered on usage

Without departing from the anthropotechnical posture, we will avoid as much as possible a partisan posture, striving to reflect the diversity of points of view. I.2 Technology, a social science I.2.1. Three pillars If, as we have written, technology is the social science that takes techniques as its object, on which pillars should such knowledge be based? We can see three of them in particular. I.2.1.1. First pillar: the acceptance of plural points of view The first pillar is the acceptance of plural points of view in the way the technical object and technological change as a whole are viewed. The same technical object can be approached from different points of view, each with its own value, which is not intrinsic, but depends on the identities and cultures of the actors who mobilize them. In the study of the

Introduction

xvii

object, each point of view, whether disciplinary, doctrinal or utilitarian, reveals facts and mobilizes specific methods. Let us take the example of a smartphone. It can be studied from a purely physical point of view; we are interested in its weight, the definition and size of its screen, the shock resistance of its shell, its processor and its storage capacities. From the point of view of its manufacture, it is considered as a product consisting of thousands of small components (resistors, transistors) placed between the main chips of the device that must be soldered automatically, all in a production system in which machines and operators must be integrated. From an economic point of view, as a commodity, we are concerned in particular with its price with or without an associated subscription, its value in a summation system. From the point of view of its uses, we will focus on its functions (work, play, checking emails, watching videos, using social networks), their diversity and performance, battery life, and the quality of after-sales service. From an artistic point of view, we will be curious about its more or less attractive design (plastic material, glass or metal, color), the appeal of its brand and model, etc. These plural points of view are obviously also reflected in the course of technological change and in the perception of the various actors: the designer of the technical object, the promoter of change, the pilot of the project or a simple user. In its simplified form, the consideration of this reality finds its expression in the duality of project manager/developer. When a product is being created, the project manager is the person or company (design office, architect, etc.) responsible for the design. They ensure the follow-up of the work and the co-ordination of the various tasks. The contracting authority is quite simply the user, the customer and the person for whom the product is intended. I.2.1.2. Second pillar: the contextualization of the technical object The second pillar is based on the contextualization of the technical object, i.e. the renunciation of the simplicity of isolating the envisaged object from situations in which it plays a specific role and from the time in which it evolves. For each object’s ecosystem there is a coherent set of structures dependent on each other; this is what Bertrand Gilles (1978) called a technical system. The technical object only exists because someone has designed it; others have produced it, because there are individuals who feel the need or desire to seize it. To achieve this, it is necessary to extract raw materials, process them, transport the products at different stages of

xviii

Technological Change

production, market the manufactured object, distribute it, allow its use (private or public) – and, increasingly pertinent given its ecological dimension, its destruction and/or recycling. All this requires multiple resources: materials, energy, money and human resources to mobilize other resources. I.2.1.3. Third pillar: taking into account the interaction between the human system and the technical system The third pillar of this anthropotechnical approach is to take into account the interaction of the human and technical systems. In this context, let us take the history of computer science as an illustration. It has several dimensions, technical, of course, but also economic and social. In this regard, it should be noted that the computer, like the Internet, was born of a convergence of scientific and military interests. Or, as Breton (1987) explained, the orientation of industrial groups towards large systems was in line with the centralized functioning of these groups. Breton showed that the birth and diffusion of the microcomputer in the 1980s owed as much to the social project of North American radicals, calling for the democratization of access to information, and to the willingness of the individual user to appropriate this technology, as to microprocessor technology. I.2.2. Contributions of the human and social sciences (HSS) The HSS cover a range of disciplines studying human reality, both individually and collectively. Technologies are one of the elements of this reality. Understanding technological change is based on this diversity, whose contributions are complementary. We will review the disciplines with the most important contributions by citing some of their classic authors and publications. We will come back to some of them in more detail later in the book. I.2.2.1. History History focuses on the study of technical achievements in relation to their context of appearance. More broadly, it is interested in all historical forms of conception and insertion of technologies in human societies. It is a resource for the development of reflections on the technique of other disciplines, particularly philosophy, anthropology and sociology. Among the most eminent personalities in the history of technology are Lewis Mumford, critical author of The Myth of the Machine (1966), and Bertrand Gille (1978)

Introduction

xix

who, affirming that a technology does not exist if it is not included in a system, proposed to see history as a succession of technical systems. I.2.2.2. Philosophy The philosophy of technology is the part of philosophy that is concerned with the meaning of technologies, i.e. their nature and value for humanity. Let us begin by mentioning Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who, in their Communist Manifesto (1999 (1848)), considered the determination of politics on a techno-economic basis: the hand mill corresponded to slavery; the water mill to feudal society; the steam mill to an industrial capitalist society. Considered as a whole, the philosophy of technology is shaped by two traditions. The first focused on alienation, in which technology would be the vector and symbol. The most emblematic author of this trend is certainly Martin Heidegger (1958), who is known for his denunciation of the extension of technical domination. In a similar way, Jürgen Habermas (1973) criticized techno-scientific ideology. In contrast to this pessimistic situation, we can contrast a second, optimistic orientation led by authors such as Gilbert Simondon (1969) and François Dagognet (1989, 1996), or a third orientation, inspired by the precautionary principle, such as the one led by Hans Jonas’ ethics (1903–1993). I.2.2.3. Anthropology The anthropology of technology is a branch of anthropology that is interested in the history, use and roles of technical objects in their relationship with cultures and environments. Originally focused on technologies and objects from distant, “primitive” and exotic cultures considered as “traditional”, its analyses also now focus on contemporary facts. Marcel Mauss (1923), considered the father of French anthropology, André Leroi-Gourhan (1943, 1945), author of a general classification of technologies, and André-Georges Haudricourt (1955), who was also a botanist, linguist and geographer, all already mentioned, are among the founders of the anthropology of technology. I.2.2.4. Sociology Sociology studies social facts in their entirety (general sociology) and within companies and other organizations (sociology of organizations). Sociologists have contributed to the understanding of technological change by studying individual and collective behaviors in organizations.

xx

Technological Change

Some sociologists have focused on humans’ relations with the machine, for example, Georges Friedmann (1946) or Georges Gurvitch (1968), others such as Jacques Ellul (1954, 1988), in a very targeted way, on the relations between the technical system and political power. Sociology has also made important contributions to the change in which technology is engaged. We are thinking, in particular, of Alain Touraine’s first studies (1955) on the evolution of workers’ activities in Renault factories, showing the reorganization of skills and power relations linked to the introduction of new technologies; or, further yet in other empirical fields, to the work of innovation sociologists such as Madeleine Akrich, Michel Callon and Bruno Latour (2006). I.2.2.5. Economic sciences Economics studies the functioning of the economy. It deals, from a resource allocation perspective, with all the activities of a human community relating to the production, distribution, trade and consumption of products and services. Among thinkers who have devoted part of their work to technological change and its effects, we can cite the name of Joseph Schumpeter, who developed a theory of creative destruction and innovation (1999 (1926)); Jean Fourastié, who is known for his technological optimism (1949); and Alfred Sauvy, author of the spilling theory, who noted the positive effects of technological progress on productivity and ultimately on employment (1980). I.2.2.6. Psychology Psychology seeks to explain human behavior. Since its inception at the end of the 19th Century, it has concentrated on working conditions and human–machine relations with a view to co-adaptation. But its direct contributions to the study of technological change are less long-standing. In recent years, it has contributed to enriching knowledge on phenomena such as the acceptability of technologies, the learning of their uses, and the place of technical objects in activity systems. Ergonomic psychology has focused its efforts on psychology’s contributions to the design of work systems, which are increasingly influenced by technology. A branch of social psychology, organizational psychology deals with the influence in organizations of structural factors on psychosocial relationships between individuals, such as the influence of technology on the structuring of working time and the sharing of tasks.

Introduction

xxi

I.2.2.7. Multidisciplinary authors and interdisciplinary human and social sciences Classifying authors by discipline is not always easy (Table I.1), as a common feature of many of those who have been interested in technology is that they are curious minds, whose contributions are not limited to a disciplinary field. Let us take a few examples, among the well-known personalities, without claiming to be exhaustive. First, we will see philosophers. Simondon was also a psychologist – he taught psychology for a dozen years – and Dagognet did work in the history of science. And now, we will see sociologists. Friedmann, a philosopher by training, is best known as a sociologist of work who has always sought to maintain the link between sociology and humanist philosophy, just as Gurvitch has nourished his work with a philosophy of society. Finally, where should Karl Marx, whose work covered economics, philosophy and sociology, be included? Discipline

Consideration

Subject of study

History

Technologies and their development

Genealogy of the appearance and dissemination of technical achievements

Philosophy

The meaning of technologies for humanity

Nature of the technology Value of technology for humanity

Anthropology

The uses and roles of technical objects

Material culture Technical innovation and societal transformations

Sociology

Social groups, technology and their interactions

Technical power, technical democracy Perceptions and social influences of technology Mediation and communication methods

Economic sciences

Production, trade and consumption of goods and services

Relationship between technology and economics Effects of technological progress on employment

Psychology

Individual and collective conduct at work in a technical environment

Attitudes, learning, satisfaction, adaptation, acceptance of new technical objects Productive activity and technical mediations

Table I.1. Contributions of the humanities and social sciences

xxii

Technological Change

Apart from the disciplinary contributions mentioned above, there are object-oriented sciences that involve several source disciplines, such as information and communication sciences, the purpose of which is the study of communication and for which communication is rather an object of interdisciplinary knowledge. The management sciences, which aim at the instrumental regulation of organized collective activities, have made some contributions, albeit still limited, to the question of technology. It is precisely to the task of reducing this gap that this book would like to contribute. I.3. Structure of the book The chapters that make up this book are based, each in their own way, on the foundation of the anthropogenic perspective. They can be read, in a classic way, according to the succession of their numbering, but also in different orders. However, we first invite you to read Chapter 1, which provides the essentials to understanding the whole, focusing on the contributions of the human and social sciences (HSS) to understanding technological change. The following three chapters are independent of each other and can be read according to the reader’s interests. They are built on the principle that in order to understand technological change and regulate its effects, it must be addressed at its different scales: that of society as a whole (Chapter 2), that of the organization, public or private, market or non-market (Chapter 3) and that of the individual, expert or layperson (Chapter 4). Although focusing on the level of the organization, the project of the book is to clarify the subject at different levels, by convening the disciplines of the HSS applied to it. The fifth and final chapter looks at how technological change is experienced, depending on where you are. It functions to summarize and discuss the various elements presented in the previous chapters. At the end of the book, the reader will find an extensive bibliography that will allow for in-depth study of one or more of the topics covered, as well as an index that will organize thematic entries for the text.

1 The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

Discourses on technological change are numerous and do not owe everything to social scientists. Engineers as well as merchants, philanthropists as well as intellectuals, have a point of view on the subject. Crossed by multiple conceptions, these discourses sometimes intersect and merge. In order to disentangle this and to reflect the diversity of approaches, this chapter focuses firstly (section 1.1) on their summative presentation, concluding with the presentation of the anthropotechnical perspective, which shows the interdependence between technical and social factors. Inspired by this perspective, the second section examines the long history of technological change and its most recent developments (section 1.2). 1.1. Approaches to technological change We will approach our subject according to the postulated relationship between technology and society. Technical historians have wondered whether inventions are inevitable, whether the machine makes history. But economists, on the other hand, have wondered whether it was not rather social demand that led to innovation. Sociologists have also questioned the relationship between technical innovation and social transformations. Philosophers have often been critical, but sometimes also adopted the cause of technophiles.

Technological Change, First Edition. Clotilde Coron and Patrick Gilbert. © ISTE Ltd 2020. Published by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

2

Technological Change

Following Vinck (1995), it should be noted that technology and society have generally been thought of as two distinct spheres, one of which influences the other. In relation to this conception, in a first approach, technology is seen as exerting its influence on the social sphere, which is what is referred to as technological determinism (section 1.1.1). The opposite approach assumes that the influence of society is exerted on the technology, what Vinck calls “social constructivism” (section 1.1.2). A third approach, with which we will agree, postulates the mutual influence of technical and social aspects, or even the fusion of technical and social ingredients (section 1.1.3). We ask that the reader forgives the deliberately extreme presentation of these approaches, given that few authors claim to be clear-cut about all the hypotheses that we will highlight and that characterize each approach. 1.1.1. Technological determinism Technological determinism takes many forms, which will justify the place we will give it, first for a general presentation and then for that of its two antagonistic orientations. This is how the debate on technology is too often concluded: a dispute between those who link the fate of the social matter to the development of technology (technophiles) and those who, on the contrary, oppose them (technophobes). Beyond these oppositions, both sides come together in the idea that technology determines social matter. 1.1.1.1. Technology as an element in determining social behavior The founding assumptions of this approach, considered in its most absolute form, are as follows: – daughter of science, technology is an autonomous variable; – a society is determined by the technologies in use; – the technical evolution is linear, due to the irreversibility of the technologies; – for better or for worse, the technological imperative is imposed on everyone: it is inevitable and universal.

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

3

For example, Canadian historian Harold Innis (1894–1952), a pioneer in the formulation of communication theories (Innis, 1950), associates the spread of the papyrus with the development of the Roman Empire and bureaucratic power. He then states that the invention of the parchment led to a shift from places of knowledge to monasteries and a strengthening of religious power. The latter is, in turn, reduced by the invention of paper, which encouraged the development of trade in Italy and northern Europe. Another classic author case, among the most characteristic of this trend, is that of the American sociologist William Ogburn (1886–1959) who explained that technology changes society by changing the environment to which individuals, in turn, must adapt. This change, he believed, is common in the material environment, and the adaptation we make to it often changes social mores and institutions. He deduced that inventions influence society, first by being produced in large quantities and then by being used by a large number of consumers. Ogburn devoted several studies to the specific social effects of inventions. One of his most famous analyses concerns the invention of radio, for which he listed no less than 150 effects. We provide some extracts, with the numbering assigned by this author, in Box 1.1. I. On uniformity and diffusion 5. Distinctions between social classes and economic groups lessened. 9. Favoring of the widely spread languages. II. On recreation and entertainment 14. The enjoyment of music popularized greatly. 20. Revival of old song, at least for a time. III. On transportation 27. Radio beams, enabling aviators to remain on course. 34. Receipt of communications en route by air passengers. IV. On education 38. Broadcasting has aided adult education.

4

Technological Change

48. Discussion of books aids selection and stimulates readers. V. On the dissemination of information 56. Prevention of loss in crops by broadcasting weather reports. 64. Quicker detection of crime and criminals, through police automobile patrols equipped with radio. VI. On religion 65. Discouragement, it is said, of preachers of lesser abilities. 68. Invalids and others unable to attend church enabled to hear religious service. VII. On industry and business 79. A new form of advertising has been created. 84. An increase in the consumption of electricity. 85. Provision of employment for 200,000 persons. VIII. On occupations 89. Music sales and possibly song writing have declined. Studies indicate that broadcasting is a factor. 92. New occupations: announcer, engineer, advertising salesman. IX. On government and politics 98. New problem of copyright has arisen. 100. Executive pressure on legislatures, through radio appeals. X. On other inventions 120. The vacuum tube, a radio invention, is used in many fields […] A new science is being developed on the vacuum tube. 125. Geophysical prospecting aided by the radio.

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

5

XI. Miscellaneous 132. The noise problem of loud speakers has caused some regulation. 135. Late hours have been ruled against in dormitories and homes. Box 1.1. The effects of the invention of radio (source: Ogburn, 1933)

While determinism is no longer popular in academic circles – we will see its limits later on (see section 1.1.1.4) – this approach remains surprisingly prominent in public discourse, despite (because of?) its reductionism. Judging by the questions encountered in the press and in widely circulated books, at random: “what is the impact of ICT on business performance?”, “what are the effects of digital technologies on employment?”, “what is the influence of the Internet on doctor-patient relationships?”, etc. Basically, this approach does not, in itself, make any value judgments about the effects of technology. This is not the case for some of its orientations, which we will now discuss. Some are very enthusiastic about the latest technologies (“promising technology”). Others are resolutely critical of one or all technologies (“technology that causes much harm”). 1.1.1.2. Technology, which holds promise This “techno-enthusiastic” approach nurtures a glorifying vision of technology and praises new technical objects. For its supporters, the source of social progress must be sought in innovations and mainly in material inventions and discoveries, which would occur more quickly and cumulatively than intangible innovations – it should be noted that no evidence has been produced in this regard. The engineer’s desire to register his/her invention in the world by sharing his/her passion with as many people as possible and the merchant’s desire to disseminate the new technical objects as widely as possible are united in the same fervor. So a technophile euphoria is expressed when announcing all the new features. We recall the communicative utopia celebrated in the late 1960s by media theorist Marshall McLuhan (1911–1980), famous for his notion of the “global village” and his famous formula “the medium is the message” (McLuhan, 1967).

6

Technological Change

In the 1990s, a new utopia of communication emerged around the notion of cyberspace, exalting collective intelligence and the potentialities of virtual worlds. A representative figure of this trend is that of the philosopher Pierre Lévy (Lévy, 1994). In a report submitted to the Council of Europe entitled “Cyberculture”, it is written: “[…] I claim that cyberculture can be considered as a worthy (though distant) heir to the progressive project of 18th Century philosophers. Indeed, it values the participation in communities of debate and argumentation” (Lévy, 1997, p. 302). Each new feature feeds the techno-enthusiasts. In the 1980s, pioneering authors in the cognitive sciences, such as Douglas Hofstadter (2000) and Marvin Minsky (1990), with widely published books, praised the possibilities of simulating, and stimulating, the brain through computers. These authors have, at least indirectly, fueled the vision of a spiritual fusion between man and machine, preceding the transhumanist wave (see an illustration in Box 1.2). Liao and his fellow philosophers, specialists in bio-ethics, raise the problem of climate change today, which can seriously affect life on our planet. Diagnosing the limits of ordinary remedies (hybrid cars, carbon pricing, etc.), they propose new, more radical solutions that consist of manipulating beings to make them more energy efficient. Their recommendations are based on human engineering, which they define as a biomedical modification of individuals in order to make them better able to mitigate climate change. Suggested interventions range from pharmacology, making humans intolerant to meat consumption (18% of global greenhouse gas emissions come from livestock), making humans smaller, by reducing the size of newborns, through drugs, to changing children’s growth rates (the ecological footprint is partly correlated with size). Another set of measures, designed to make ecological issues more sensitive, also concerns the use of drugs and genetic modifications. The overall logic is that humans must be manipulated to save the climate. Box 1.2. Transhumanism to help the environment (source: Liao et al., 2012)

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

7

The prestige of technological modernity attached to a particular technical object is shifting as the corresponding market develops and its purchase price and operating cost fall. This was the case in the change from horse-drawn carriages to cars, from fixed phones to mobile phones, from phones to the Internet, etc. All these “novelties” were, at their release, the prerogative of a few privileged people. Today, 3D printing, “augmented reality”, artificial intelligence and biotechnologies, in turn, convey new promises: a world in which any object can be manufactured quickly and anywhere, for 3D printing; the disappearance of screens and omniscience in real time, with augmented reality; personal assistants helping us in daily life, interacting with us, whatever our language, with artificial intelligence; completely restoring or even improving the human body, with biotechnologies. 1.1.1.3. Technology, the cause of many harmful effects Faced with the praiseworthy vision of techno-enthusiasts, a critique of technical thinking has developed, carried by those who are generally referred to as technophobes. Far from being marginal, mistrust of technology is widespread among HSS authors. As the philosopher Jean-Yves Goffi rightly points out: “The list of authors who have emerged from the long list of contemporary technophobes is almost infinite”. (Goffi, 1988, p. 11). Contrary to technological consumerism, “technocritics” (Jarrige, 2016) share most of the deterministic assumptions, but strongly contest the idea that technology is the mother of the social progress it would bring forward. This current of thought is far from being reducible to the posture of a few conservative intellectuals. Long before the development of philosophical criticism of technology, it is necessary to note the social conflicts that marked the beginning of the 19th Century in the context of the industrialization of most European countries, particularly in the textile industry. In France, there were the successive revolts of the Canuts lyonnais, rebelling against their working conditions, as well as against the machines that competed with them and deprived them of their livelihood by taking work from their very arms. In England, at the same time, it was the Luddites that came to the fore. To those for whom the triumph of mechanization was inevitable, the struggle of these textile workers, “machine breakers” (the Luddites owe their name to the young Ned Ludd, an apprentice who broke a loom), may have seemed to express an unhealthy and retrograde rage.

8

Technological Change

But, as the British historian Edward P. Thompson (1963) wrote: “The character of Luddism was not that of a blind protest, or of a food riot (as took place in many other districts). Nor will it do to describe Luddism as a form of ‘primitive’ trade unionism. […] the men who organized, sheltered, or condoned Luddism were far from primitive. They were shrewd and humorous; next to the London artisans, some of them were amongst the most articulate of the ‘industrious classes’.” Today, some people claiming the ravages of technological progress and the unemployment induced by automation do not hesitate to accept an identity as neo-Luddites. For example, Chellis Glendinning (1990), a psychologist from New Mexico, published a neo-Luddite manifesto in an alternative press magazine, where she wrote: “The technologies created and disseminated by modern Western societies are out of control and desecrating the fragile fabric of life on Earth.” This point of view is far from being isolated (see section 1.3). In North America, the anti-technology movement is at the root of militant activism that can take extreme forms, sometimes simply spectacular, sometimes very violent. The American essayist Kirkpatrick Sale, author of a vigorous anti-industrial critique (Sale, 1995), made his name with a stunt to smash a computer during the public presentation of his book on the Luddites. From 1978 to 1995, mathematician Theodore John Kaczynski, nicknamed “unabomber”, after a promising early career as a professor at Berkeley, committed a series of bomb attacks against the technological society. In France too, there are many examples of neo-Luddite actors. Some of them have been in the news in recent decades. A mysterious group, CLODO (Comité Liquidant ou Détournant les Ordinateurs – Committee for Liquidation or Subversion of Computers), committed arson against computer companies, in the Toulouse region, between 1980 and 1983. In 2005, three young people, including a philosopher known for her translations of critical works on modern technology, destroyed two biometric terminals in a high school cafeteria with a hammer. Similarly, we can consider as inspired by the neo-Luddite spirit the movement based around the ZAD (zone à défendre – Zone to Defend), the most famous expression of which was the one erected on the site of Notre-Dame-des-Landes against an airport project. Box 1.3. Neo-Luddism today

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

9

1.1.1.3.1. Fear of job destruction Among workers, fear of job loss mainly fuels the rejection of technical innovations. Herbert Simon, 1978 Nobel Prize winner in economics, reports that, long before the artificial intelligence of which he was a pioneer, the argument against mechanization has always been that it was a cause of unemployment. He illustrates his point by referring to the almost total disappearance of the horse on farms at the beginning of the 20th Century in the United States. So, he wonders: can the same thing happen to the human worker? (See Box 1.4.) “In 1915, the horse population in the United States reached a peak of about twenty-one million head. By 1960, it had fallen to two million and almost no horse was a draught horse. Facing the tractor, the horse was simply not able to produce enough to pay for its maintenance […]. A man, a horse and a plough could still plough several acres a day, as in the past. But the tractor had increased the costs of the driver whose productivity was higher when ploughing with a tractor. At the new real salary that man could demand thanks to the invention of a mechanical substitute, the horse could no longer cover the cost of his services.” Box 1.4. The horse, the human and the tractor (source: Simon, 1980)

For Simon (1980), as for the other economists we quote in our general introduction, technological progress is entirely compatible with full employment. However, the theory of job-destroying technology continues to be supported. As early as the 1950s and 1960s, some argued that in a high-tech economy, only the most educated would get a job. When, in the late 1980s, word processing machines and then the first microcomputers, known as “new office technologies”, invaded companies, some alarmist studies believed that secretaries had disappeared, given the performance of equipment and the productivity gains announced. This was not the case. In the mid-2000s, it was the progress of robotics in the industry that was generally singled out and renewed the fears of the past (we will return to this in Chapter 3). Many of the effects attributed to technological change are due to a combination of factors and not technology alone, and in any case, not to a single technical object. To continue the illustration given in Box 1.4, Cépède et al. (1951) note that in the United States, the number of agricultural workers declined by about one-fifth between the end of World War I and

10

Technological Change

1944. However, according to American agronomists, only 14% of this result is attributable to tractors, while, during this period, the number of tractors increased from 200,000 to 2,200,000. The 48% reduction in employment was certainly achieved through the use of machines (trucks, cars, milking machines, electric fences, etc.) but not only the tractor. The remaining 52% was due to the implementation of a streamlined organization that resulted in higher yields per hectare and reduced useful working time, as well as an increase in the size of agricultural holdings. What about today, with the emergence of new technologies such as artificial intelligence, robots and chatbots, software programmed to simulate a natural language conversation with a consumer or other individual? The most common answer is that if these technologies kill jobs – the least skilled because they are most likely to be automated – they create new ones. With regard to the introduction of robots into industry, a sector in which there is some visibility as opposed to services, a report by the International Federation of Robotics (IFR) (2018), an association of industrial and service robot manufacturers, underlines that the world industry spent $16.2 billion on robots in 2017, a 21% increase over 2016. And, according to the same sources, during 2018 at least 421,000 new robots were installed. And in 2021, this may be 630,000 robots, almost double the record set in 2017. There is therefore a legitimate concern that the automation of production lines could put workers on the sidelines. However, according to IFR, industrial robots can have a positive impact on employment, although job profiles and skill requirements will be modified (see Chapter 3). 1.1.1.3.2. Criticism of technicist ideology Another criticism, an intellectual one, is directed at the technicist ideology. Jacques Ellul (1912–1994), a thinker of technological society and modernity, inspired by Marx’s thinking, was the leading figure in the critical analyses of technicist ideology, underlining both the inexorable nature of technology and the damage of technical euphoria. In La technique ou l’enjeu du siècle (Ellul, 1954), it is considered that technology now includes civilization because, as the author argues, we are no longer with technology, but in technology. Later, Ellul took this conception further, stating that technology had ceased to be an addition of techniques and became a “technician system” (Ellul, 1977). This system has developed to such an extent that the human being has lost all contact with

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

11

his/her natural environment and has no more relations than with this mediator. For the philosopher, it is now an autonomous system of techniques, because it has become a primary factor that imposes its laws on all humanity: “Beyond a certain degree of technicization, we move from a society determined by natural factors to a society determined by technical factors” (1977, p. 77). About 10 years later, Ellul (1988) radicalized his remarks with the shock formula of “technological bluff”. In the book that bears this title, he argued against the fact that the technocratic discourse invests in technologies with many uses, considerably exaggerating their actual possibilities, while radically obscuring the negative aspects (costs and dangers). Technology, he believes, is now presented to us both as the only solution to all our collective or individual problems, and as the only opportunity for progress. The “technological bluff” theory has become topical again in recent years during the debates on nuclear energy following the Fukushima disaster (see Box 1.5). A physicist, Bernard Laponche, involved in the development of the first French power plants and now an activist for the development of renewable energies, recently protested against the idea of nuclear power as a highly sophisticated technology. Interviewed by a journalist, he said: “A nuclear reactor is only a boiler: it produces heat. But instead of heat, as in thermal power plants, coming from the combustion of coal or gas, it is the result of the fission of uranium […]. Nuclear energy is therefore not this miraculous thing that would see electricity ‘coming out’ of the reactor, as if there were an almost spontaneous production…” Box 1.5. The technological bluff theory (source: comments collected by Vincent Remy - Télérama no. 3205)

Politician Lucien Sfez (2002) also notes the increase of the discourse on technology and questions its sources of legitimacy, concluding that his positions owe nothing to the knowledge of experts. According to Sfez, ideological issues are hidden behind technical objects, supposedly carriers of rationality and progress. To illustrate technological myths, he gives the example of the role played by technology in the reform of French telecommunications, in which decision-making processes have become

12

Technological Change

communication processes. Thus, he explains that technology is first national and egalitarian, impregnated with “public service”, embodied by a large body of technical civil servants (telecom engineers); then, the marks of the technology are erased to be able to sell it in response to expectations of happiness and comfort. Finally, an advertising sign system is set up to promote a future, open to innovation. The debate on structural reform and the change in status is being replaced by a corporate image promotion carried out through an advertising campaign (“un avenir d’avance” (a future in advance) was France Telecom’s slogan at the end of the 1980s). 1.1.1.3.3. The rejection of technical domination and the risk of dehumanization Michel Foucault (1926–1984) and his concept of a “surveillance society” (Foucault, 1975) have been a source of inspiration for all those who postulate technical domination. To characterize disciplinary power, Foucault cites the penitentiary project of Jeremy Bentham, an 18th Century English reformer: the panopticon. This prison structure is a control system that ensures continuous surveillance of individuals without them knowing when they are observed. Surveillance is omnipresent, yet hidden, so that prisoners in the prison exercise self-discipline and incorporate the behavioral standards expected of them. For some, the surveillance society is, in a way, the dark side of the information society, which is expressed through the proliferation of a security apparatus that is constantly being improved: video surveillance, geolocation, biometrics, etc. Building on this work, Sewell (1998) examined the coupling of the informatization of production processes and new organizations of work in autonomous teams. He states that these two devices increase vertical (by information systems) and horizontal (by partners) monitoring. Everything encourages the development of self-discipline, the development of which follows the same mechanisms as the panopticon. In addition to political criticism, some add a psychological critique, that of the risk of dehumanization. For Sherry Turkle (2015), new technologies are redefining our emotional lives and intimacy. From a wide range of observed situations, Turkle describes the general conditions under which digital communications can have a resolutely negative influence on interpersonal relationships. They undermine self-reflection and ultimately

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

13

degrade well-being. She argues that communication technology, always changing, distracts us from important social experiences here and now. For example, mobile phones can divert attention from face-to-face conversations by highlighting concerns about maintaining broader social networks. In another order of criticism, Francis Pavé (1989) develops the theory that computer science, although not determining social organization, conveys a particular way of thinking, “hyperfunctionalism”, which refers to a logical-mathematical model of a reality. The purified, coherent and rationalized reality that results from automated data processing gives the illusion of being the bearer of an organizational project that is imposed on everyone. Hyperfunctionalism postulates the primacy of logical reason, an ideology of total transparency that makes an actors’ behavior predictable, and which can therefore be manipulated. This transparency has a market value, but it also has a social cost. For Zuboff (2015), it is the mark of a surveillance capitalism based on the giants of the Web who are the main providers of practices that endanger our private lives. They monitor individuals, particularly users of digital services, and make their behavior predictable and therefore controllable. 1.1.1.4. Contributions and limitations of technological determinism The posture of techno-enthusiasts has brought about the idea of progress and directed the attention of individuals towards a promising future. But the exaltation of which it is the source is not without unfortunate consequences. Moreover, as the American historian Jeffrey Herf (1986) has shown with regard to Nazi Germany, material modernity can very well be accommodated by a reactionary ideology, far removed from the idea of progress; at the very least, adherence to technological modernity is not a guarantee of emancipation. Technocritics are also to blame, in the excesses of their radical contestation of technosciences. Nevertheless, unlike technophile proselytism, which tends to mask the harmful effects of technology in the name of progress and its requirements, criticism of technology has the advantage that it questions the technological phenomenon, revealing its hidden face, and “denaturalizes” it. However, it does not provide instructions for its use and, in its exaggerations, it can slow down the progress of a society.

14

Technological Change

The rejection of technological determinism is not only fueled by the excesses of its two opposite sides. More substantially, it is the irremediability of the technology that is in question and, in particular, its supposed dependence on science. In fact, technologies, which have their own rationality, are not reduced to scientific applications. Technical gestures are underpinned by representations that are not necessarily part of scholarly knowledge. Moreover, technology develops independently of science; the proof is the architect’s empirical know-how. In this field there is indeed knowledge, but this knowledge is not the knowledge that is derived from a particular science. Moreover, if we can go from science to technology, it is quite possible to do the opposite. Science is indebted to technology whenever practice advances theory, for example the case of the steam engine, which owes its birth to the tricks of mechanics whose practice contributed to the development of thermodynamics, which prior to that did not exist (Daumas, 1963). 1.1.2. Social constructivism In contrast to technological determinism, social constructivism takes many forms. For our limited purpose, we want to refer simply to approaches that, rejecting technological determinism, question the way in which technical objects are socially constructed. Consequently, this approach examines why and how social functioning influences technological change. 1.1.2.1. Technology, always subordinated to society The idea of technological determinism, which could be thought to be inspired by the metaphor of contagion in medicine (evolutionary model) or the ballistics of artillerymen (ballistic model), has always been a controversial issue. As a counterpoint, there is a social constructivism based on the following assumptions, more or less asserted according to the currents of thought: – social structures determine technological change; – there are technical alternatives, depending on social expectations; – technology does not determine anything by itself; it always gives the actors room for maneuver;

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

15

– the notion of impact is to be rejected, because everything depends on the way in which technical objects (uses) are used. This point of view does not deny that technology entails choices and orientations. Some authors have come to argue that it is the social relationships embedded in the technology that are imposed on the users of it. This conception deeply questions the autonomy of technology, since it considers it only as a transmission medium for the representations of those who promote it. The media coverage of economic, political or other projects via a technology that serves as a relay is not without implementation difficulties, such as those raised by integrated management systems (see Box 1.6). Despite their adaptability and customization, enterprise resource planning software packages (SAP, Oracle, Baan, PeopleSoft, etc.) are based on specific organizational models. SAP R/3, released in 1993, comes from the Material Requirement Planning (MRP) systems for calculating component part requirements in the German mechanical industry. It is the structure of this industry, its organizational modes in force in the 1970s and its production modes that have been included in the software, making it much less suitable for flow industries or those where the number of elements to be supplied is lower, or even for service companies for which it introduces complexities which are of no use. The efforts of integrators to transform the organizational reality they are confronted with, in order to move towards an ideal model that promotes the “best practices” formalized in the software package, face important limitations. Box 1.6. A controversy over integrated management systems (source: Gilbert and Leclair, 2004)

In the end, it is the organizational actors who interpret the elements applied to them and who, through their interaction and according to various strategies, reach a certain state resulting from technological change. When the weight of the technical factor is reduced to the extreme (radical version), this approach takes the form of a kind of social determinism, or at least the determination of technological change by the social factor.

16

Technological Change

1.1.2.2. A moderate version: in the face of technicism, the interplay of social actors Developed by Michel Crozier (Crozier, 1964; Crozier and Friedberg, 1977), the strategic actor theory is one of the foundations of a moderate approach. For them, behavior in a situation of technological change does not result from technological determinisms but from the strategic intentions of social actors who aim to achieve certain goals. In other words, technology is always subject to the verdict of its users and the logic of negotiation always prevails over instrumental rationality. The formulation of this theory is largely based on a critique of contingency theory and specifically technological determinism (Crozier and Friedberg, 1977, Chapter 4, Section 1). This relativization of the influence of technology is a sociological tradition that can be found markedly in work specifically related to information science (e.g. Pavé, 1989, or more recently, Segrestin et al., 2004). Concerning the computerization of companies, the work of sociologists, often working in teams with economists, has been particularly visible in France. They generally conclude that while technologies are a variable that influence the organization and conditions of work, they are by no means the only and determining factor (Bernoux, 2004). Among the surveys carried out, we describe in Box 1.7 some conclusions from a report supported by a statistical survey on the link between ICT (information and communication technologies) and working conditions. This theme has particularly fueled the social debate around the increase in suffering at work. The study takes into account ICT, emblematic of the knowledge economy, whether in terms of hardware equipment or specific software: network technologies, integrated management systems, process modeling tools, collaborative work, traceability or automatic distribution of telephone calls. In addition to equipment, it examines employees’ uses of these technical objects, distinguishing between the uses of highly connected employees and those of employees who are not or only slightly connected. The statistical study analyzes the working conditions of employees according to these practices and the context of their company’s equipment. The statistical analysis reveals two main labor mobilization regimes related to ICT. Connected technologies, used by a “trusted employee”, managerial status or intermediate profession in large companies, are associated with a perception of

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

17

intensification at work (with spillover into the private sphere), as well as with autonomy and a certain well-being, due to the feeling that work is recognized at its true value. On the other hand, users of technologies that are not or only poorly connected and employees of companies equipped with transversal software tools (ERP, process modeling, traceability tools) and those working in a call center not only have an intense working experience but also little room for maneuver to respond to it, because the prescription can go as far as operating modes (script models to be respected). Their work is controlled, even under supervision (in call centers), even though they have to deal with unclear or contradictory injunctions. Paradoxically, employees who do not use these technologies are subject to the digital divide. Their work is probably less intense, but it is impoverished and finally employees consider it unsatisfactory. In short, the report shows that the risks allegedly generated by ICT are closely linked to the organizational context in which they are embedded and to the decisions of company management on how IT supports management activity. Therefore, rather than attributing a deterministic role to ICT, the authors of the report conclude that it would be appropriate to reason in terms of risks associated with configurations of contexts and uses. Box 1.7. The differential effects of ICT on the organization (source: Greenan et al., 2012)

In practice, the “mechanical” logic inevitably comes into confrontation with another one, that of the social. This results in the “computer conflict” because, as Pichault (1990) points out, the acceptance of a technology, however sophisticated it may be, is always subject to the verdict of its users. This “externalistic” vision of technology – in that it does not concern itself with the way in which technical objects are manufactured – does not go as far as social determinism, because it rejects any simple determinism. 1.1.2.3. A radical version: the metaphor of ventriloquism More radically, social constructivism can be transformed into social determinism. This approach essentially refers to the idea that it is the interactions (debates, negotiations, exchanges, consultations and confrontations) between the actors that ensure that a technology develops and exists through uses. For social determinism, any technological project brings together actors who come together to define the technology, to

18

Technological Change

specify its uses and its effectiveness (Bijker, Hughes and Pinch, 1987). It is therefore society that determines technology. Technical objects provide a range of implicit functions that help to control and promote the acceptance of a change that is not fundamentally technical. It is not uncommon for technical objects, although not designed in this spirit, to serve as lightning rods, channeling the strong emotions (bitterness, anger, etc.) that inevitably manifest themselves during radical organizational changes. Their implementation is then an opportunity to liquidate problems that could not be addressed head-on, without going through the open conflict and the negative consequences that would result. Let us return to the typical example of integrated management systems (discussed in Box 1.6). They have been highly criticized for their effects on work and the balance of responsibilities. However, should they be considered as an expression of a new form of difficulty at work and a factor of exclusion? In large companies, at the heart of the tensions that affect business management, the software package sometimes appears as a mediator designed to manage the tensions resulting from the call for the development of autonomy, by more decentralized organizations, associated with the strengthening of control, through the control of information and its processing processes. Integrated management systems have been introduced in companies facing contradictions in strategy, political discourse and effective practices. One of their roles has been to somehow absorb these tensions and contradictions. As in the case of the integrated management systems just mentioned, it could be said that humans delegate a negotiating role to technical objects. François Cooren (2010) goes further, stating that silent objects speak through their interlocutors. He proposes the metaphor of ventriloquism to express the idea that humans make objects speak, while letting objects speak through them: “The advantage of such a metaphor is that it makes it possible not only to identify the beings that the interlocutors animate in their conversations, but also to show that, in doing so, these same interlocutors position themselves as animated by the beings they animate. In other words, the ventriloquist is not necessarily who you think they are…” (Cooren, 2010, p. 41, authors’ translation).

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

19

This analysis “unmasks” technological determinism by replacing it with social determinism. Thus, today, any major organizational change is argued on the basis of technological imperatives. To say that digital technology imposes a particular restructuring, or that it is the computer application that obliges a particular measure: is this not a way of making the weight of transformation bear on technology, by letting it speak for those who want change and whose intentions no longer need to be debated? “It’s the technology that wants that.” 1.1.2.4. Contributions and limitations of social constructivism Among the approaches dealing with confrontation, happy or gloomy, with technology and social issues, social constructivism brings with it a notable difference. It has the merit of drawing attention to factors other than those that are strictly technical and yet contribute to technological change (see the example we give above of the motorization on agriculture). But this approach is open to criticism when it leads to absolute social relativism, affirming the total neutrality of the technology and denying that it can produce effects by itself. The conclusion we could draw from this is that technology is devoid of any structuring action, which would obviously be suspicious. If we admit that the phenomena traditionally called “impacts” are not really impacts, we must also recognize that the tendency to see in the implementation of a technical object only a pretext or an “opportunity” is just as erroneous. The introduction of new technologies has consequences for both organizations and social functioning. In other words, while technology does not determine much, it is not without effect. It is in this in-between that the following approach takes place. 1.1.3. Joint structuring of technical and social aspects In addition to the approaches that represent technology and society in unidirectional confrontational relationships, there are others that, on the contrary, see them as linked, or even confused, the existence of two separate spheres (technical vs. social) being contested.

20

Technological Change

1.1.3.1. The anthropotechnical1 perspective: moving beyond the two determinisms Emancipating itself from the archetypal opposition between the social construction of technology and the technical construction of society, the theory of the co-structuring of technology and society postulates that there are no simple relations between the two domains, but ambiguous and complex relations. This view can be found in the work of classical philosophers or ethnologists such as Gilbert Simondon, Bertrand Gille or André Leroy-Gourhan. This approach jointly refutes both determinisms and postulates a double movement. Its main assumptions are as follows: – technologies only occur in a social context that favors it; – technology is a cultural fact; each technology conveys a conception of social relations, a culture. Thus, Dagognet (1989, p. 41), inspired by Mauss (1926), argues that the technical object is precisely a “total social fact” that we must learn to read and decipher in order to discover “the cultural that is part of it”; – technologies are not neutral; they have social effects; – but not all of them are powerful and their effects are ambivalent. There are several currents of research here, including the sociology of translation, structuring theory and activity theory. 1.1.3.2. Sociology of translation and model of seamless fabric The sociology of translation (Akrich et al., 2006), also known as actor–network theory or ANT, has become a leading reference for the social sciences. In the “seamless fabric” model – weaving between technological environments and systems on the one hand, and social environments and systems on the other – technology and society “[…] emerge together from innovation processes and technology appears only as a particular modality of sustainable association of humans with each other and with non-human entities” (Akrich, 1994, p. 107, authors’ translation).

1 We use “anthropotechnical” rather than “socio-technical” to distinguish from “socio-technical” history, born in the 1950s, marked by the industrial universe and the postulate of a separation between the technical system and the social system.

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

21

This emergence is achieved in line with “translations”, a metaphor for the way in which certain actors set themselves up as “spokespersons” for other actors whom they seek to mobilize and interest, in order to associate them within a socio-technical network. If the incentive is successful, there is “enrolment”. Instead of a principled opposition between technical and social, human and non-human (called “actants”), translation chains refer to the work by which actants modify, displace and translate their varied and contradictory interests. ANT invokes a similar treatment of human and non-human actors, refusing to distinguish between what is social and what is technical (“principle of symmetry”). More broadly, proponents of this current of thought reject the distinctions between science, technology and society. Originally, ANT researchers were interested in the conditions for the production of science and the diffusion of technological innovations and wanted to put an end to the extreme positions that considered either that science and technology were external to society, political passions, cultural prejudices, personal feelings, or that the scientific fact was merely the result of power games. Rejecting this dual vision, they consider that society and technology, human and non-human, do not constitute two distinct worlds; they are closely intertwined and interact with each other. Non-human entities (objects, machines, tools, equipment) and the devices set up to represent them have their own way of life: they produce effects on the course of action, in the same way as humans do. In order to avoid the pitfalls of “naturalization” (scientific rationality) and “socialization” (social constructivism), ANT seeks to offer a balanced vision of the social construction of our artifacts (products of human activity) and the technical construction of our social ties. While common sense generally recognizes that traditional technologies are the result of social construction, as ethnologists have shown, modern equipment and high technology are often assumed to have a less social, more self-determined way of life. ANT shows that this is not the case. By considering the subject–object relationship as a process of co-incorporation of the object in the social and the social in the object, it proposes an original way of approaching socio-technical networks. It shows that it is not the intrinsic quality of innovation that imposes it, but the process on which it is based and, in particular, the consolidation and

22

Technological Change

expansion of the network that drives it. In this way, ANT provides useful benchmarks for understanding technological change. Because of the principle of symmetry, the researcher must give equal importance to both failures and successes: “If we say of a successful project that it existed from the beginning because it was well designed and the failed project broke down because it was poorly designed, we say nothing. We are simply repeating the words ‘success’ and ‘failure’ by placing the cause of both at the beginning of the project, at its conception” (Latour, 1992, pp. 71–72, authors’ translation). On the basis of this reasoning, one of Latour’s research works focuses on the analysis of a failure: that of Aramis, a revolutionary automatic metro that existed until it became a prototype and was abandoned in 1987 by its three sponsors, the State, RATP and the Matra company (Latour, 1992). This case study summarizes the research carried out over many years on the dynamics of innovation and the way it involves technology (see Box 1.8). Aramis was the development of a public transport project aimed to individualize use (reduction in the size of trains and autonomy of mini-trains in terms of stopping and restarting them). A series of difficult technical problems were gradually solved, but the growing network faced the difficulty of including a group of key players: frail people, elderly people, etc. How could they avoid the accelerations and decelerations that such a means of locomotion would imply? This technical difficulty was a real and lasting problem. However, the inclusion of elderly people was a sine qua non condition for the development of the network supporting this technical project. One of the project’s engineers proposed a translation: he/she made the analogy between this problem and that of the displacement of explosives sensitive to the same constraints. The translation operation was successful when the resolution tracks that became available in the context of the armaments industry were properly adapted to the context of passenger transport. Any translation is an effective approximation: the different contexts do not, by definition, allow the expression of the same statement (process). Contexts and statements, scientific facts and networks, actors and systems, actions and situations are redefined. In the end, the Aramis projected failed. Latour shows that human actors must fight, negotiate and discuss in order to make a technical project exist, as that type of

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

23

project is not similar to a scientific fact whose evidence would be binding. On the contrary, it is made up of doubts, uncertainties and bets on the future and without a total commitment from the actors, it risks dying of weakness. As humans withdraw their support, their vitality, the technique loses what it possessed of humanity and ceases to exist. Box 1.8. An analysis in terms of a socio-technical network (source: Latour, 1992)

The most common criticism of this approach is that it is an anthropomorphism of technology. The notion of the actant, equating “human” and “non-human” and assigning strategic capacity to technical devices, has sometimes been perceived as a real provocation and has been the subject of numerous attacks. These are particularly nourished by sociologists of a critical orientation who criticize it for reducing the sphere of politics to the sole adaptation to the requirements of technological change (Metzger, 2011). 1.1.3.3. Activity theory: no technical objects outside the activity system “Activity theory” was developed by Vygotsky (1896–1934), a pioneer of the Soviet historical and cultural school of psychology (Vygotsky, 1997). Vygotsky took from Marx the principle of transformation of the self and the species through the material tools that he considered to be a major psychological fact. In this theory, the genesis of the psyche is achieved through collective activities and the technical mediation of these activities. Leontiev (1978) took Vygotsky’s theory further and sought the elements that make it possible to define the activity for which he proposed a three-level hierarchical structure (activity, action and operations). The activity is driven by a motive and develops gradually, wanting to satisfy this motive, through actions in the real world; the distinction between “activity” and “actions” is therefore fundamental. Actions, which are the product of the transposition into reality of the will to achieve the “motive” of the activity, refer to conscious goals, designed to achieve them. But they are part of the broader context of an activity and the “reason” for it. In addition, Leontiev proposed to break down the actions into “operations” that concretely carry out the actions in the situation. In continuity with Marx, who maintained that the means of work modify humanity’s “natural nature”, Vygotsky postulated that their appropriation restructures the development of the psyche.

24

Technological Change

Technical objects are therefore not mere auxiliaries that prolong the human psyche by leaving its mental functions unchanged. On the contrary, they transform its development. Their role is therefore central. But they are nothing outside the system of activity. They only produce effects through internal reconstruction by the subject through social cooperation practices.

Figure 1.1. Basic structure of an activity (source: adapted from Engeström, 1987, p. 78)

This theory is used in a wide variety of fields (educational psychology, occupational psychology, ergonomics, didactics, computer science, etc.). It has developed particularly in Northern Europe. Finnish native Engeström (Engeström, 1987, 1999) applied Vygotsky’s ideas to the study of interactions and communication at work, focusing on collective activity and the way it is structured. For Engeström, analyzing an activity means analyzing a system that includes the individual, the tools, the materials or concepts they use, their relationships with the community around them and the product they propose to produce, the interactions that occur there and the transformations that take place there while maintaining a global vision of the system. The individual is not an isolated subject but is part of a community that represents all the subjects who share the same object (task to be performed, objective to be achieved) targeted by the activity. Their own activity cannot be described outside this context. When new members arrive in a community, they must appropriate distributed knowledge. Relationships between individuals and

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

25

the community are governed by rules (norms, conventions, shared work practices, etc.), implicit or explicit, that maintain and regulate actions and interactions within the system. The activity is carried out by means of instruments, material or not, according to a division of labor (distribution of actions between subjects) and according to production, concrete or abstract. Starting from the hierarchical structure of the activity and the components of the activity system, Kuutti (1996) applied this model to the analysis of ways to support activities through information technology (see Table 1.1). Level of activity Supporting transformative and instrumental actions Tool/instrument Making tools and procedures visible and understandable Making sure that an object becomes a common good

Object

Level of action

Level of operations

Enabling the automation of a new routine or the construction of a new tool

Automating routines

Making an object manipulable

Providing data on an object

Supporting learning Supporting the and reflection in creation of meaning in relation to the whole an activity mission and the object

Subject

Initiating pre-established responses

Enabling the negotiation of new rules

Ensuring that all rules are visible and understandable

Integrating and imposing a certain number of rules

Community

Fostering training of a new community

Promoting communication actions Making the network of actors visible

Creating a virtual community by linking the different work tasks of several people together

Division of labor

Facilitating the redefinition of a division of labor

Making the organization of work visible and understandable

Integrating and imposing a certain division of labor

Rules

Table 1.1. Means of supporting activities via information technology (source: adapted from Kuutti, 1996, pp. 38–39)

26

Technological Change

1.1.3.4. Structuration theory and duality of the structural Structuration theory (Giddens, 1987) seeks to shed light on individuals’ actions by linking them to the characteristics of the structure of the social system. The term “structural” is used to make reference to an approach to structure that involves dynamic processes. It models the processes by which social systems are produced and reproduced. The notion of the “duality of the structural”, central to this theory, underlines that while structures constrain social action, they are also created, modified and renewed by competent actors. Giddens does not specifically address the link between structuring and technology. But structuring theory is increasingly being used to study the relationships between information systems, human action and social structure. Through this perspective, information systems are conceptualized as human artifacts, produced and reproduced by human actions, and which simultaneously constrain and enable such actions. This approach shares with ANT and activity theory a vision of the contextual and negotiated nature of the links between technical and organizational phenomena. Like the two previous theories, it has made it possible to move away from both technological determinism and an exclusive focus on the behavior of actors by focusing on interactions around technology (Bia Figueiredo and Morley, 2015, p. 48). As such, it constitutes a stimulating entry into the discussion on the impact of new technologies on organizational change. Stephen Barley and Wanda Orlikowski were pioneers in the application of this theory to the specific field of technology, showing how human actors and organizational structure interact in a structured and structuring process where technology is considered a social construct, both a medium and result of these interactions. In a seminal article, Barley (1986) analyzes the evolution of interactions within two different radiology units following the introduction of new medical imaging devices, CT scanners. These devices have changed the distribution of roles and skills between radiologists and radiology technicians, thus contributing to the transformation of logical radio work and, beyond that, of organizations. But it also shows how identical scanners that have led to similar structuring processes in two radiology departments have led to divergent forms of organization.

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

27

Orlikowski (1992), following on from structuration theory, advanced the notion of duality of technology. In this approach, organizations are not only shaped by information technologies but also strongly influenced by social processes. Technologies are therefore both the product and the medium of human activity. Once implemented, the technology ceases to belong to its designers or promoters and is part of the structural properties of the organization. The ways in which technology is used as a support for action become structural routines that become institutionalized in the organization. Symmetrically, through their reflexive control, actors are also led to change their relationship with technology, intentionally or unintentionally. 1.1.4. Limitation of established distinctions To close this section, we can note that most of the authors, including those we have cited, do not fit fully into the categories we have established, which are quite simplistic. For example, Ogburn, who we cited as illustrating a form of technological determinism, also noted that many inventions had been made in parallel by several inventors who ignored each other and thus defended the theory of cultural determinism: culture will largely determine the possible inventions. Yet Pavé, although supporting the theory of hyper-functionalism in computing (technological determinism), shows that technology does not lead directly to a predefined social organization (social constructivism) because, as he explains, actors have the ability to reshape the devices imposed on them at their convenience. 1.2. A brief history of technological change While technological change is synonymous with topicality and modernity, it has a history. To ignore it would be to condemn oneself to understanding nothing of what is happening with an ongoing change. Nevertheless, the exercise is not self-evident. A summary that would deal with the history of technology in its entirety would be insipid and in any case out of step with the project of the book. The adventure would be perilous: the theories are eclectic; David Edgerton (1998) distinguishes no less than 10, each giving a particular image of technology.

28

Technological Change

Our intention is, more modestly, to focus on periods of change, rather than those that are traditional and appear more immobile. For a broader and more scholarly coverage of the history of technology, we refer the reader to specialized works, for example, the five volumes of the general history of technology published by Daumas between 1962 and 1979, or the work of Bertrand Gille (1978). It should be noted that syntheses also exist (e.g. Baudet, 2016). 1.2.1. How can we tell the story? The above being said, the remaining task is to define a method to talk about technological change and to divide history into significant periods. As we warned the reader in the introduction, we intend to discuss technologies and their evolution without reducing them to a succession of isolated objects and without separating them from the environment in which they occurred. This because, in a technological change, technology is not the only cause. Its transformation is accompanied by various changes such as those in production and exchange structures, as well as mentalities. A starting point is offered to us by the concept of a technical system, advanced by Gille, for which the technologies should not be studied in isolation but in a set whose elements form a system. Starting from this idea, Lemonnier proposes a definition of technology as: “a set always involving four elements: a material on which it acts; objects (‘tools’, ‘means of work’, ‘artifacts’); gestures or energy sources (running water, wind, animal power, etc.) that set these objects in motion; particular representations that underlie technical gestures” (Lemonnier, 1991, p. 697). To say that this set concerns a system is to say that the technologies depend on each other with reciprocal actions. For example, the invention of the jet engine in the 1930s required, in addition to the gas turbine (designed in the previous century), the ability to produce metals resistant to very high temperatures and high precision casting of parts. Technical systems are also dependent on political, economic and social environments; so, it would be more accurate to talk about socio-technical systems. Thus, to return to our example of jet aircraft, it was originally a military project which, after having established itself in this field in the 1950s, revolutionized long- and mediumhaul civil air transports to meet the growing needs of passenger transport.

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

29

We will use Lemonnier’s definition, which seems to us to go beyond technology, in that it connects the physical domain (matter, energy) and the human domain (representations), the object being located at the intersection of these two domains, without forgetting that, as Lemonnier (1991, p. 698) reminds us: “Despite its material dimension, any technology is never anything but objectified thought.” To link the technological revolutions to their economic and social environments, we will rely on the notion of an industrial revolution. Referring to the notion of revolution, we are well aware that we are using a debatable term. This notion refers, in fact, to the idea of a sudden change, a radical disruption, a generalized disruption over a short period of time, moving from one state of technology to another, in an irreversible way. This is far from being so obvious. But let us consider this approach as a convenience of presentation. There remains the question of periodization. We have selected five stages: 1) the origins of the industrial revolution (from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance); 2) the First Industrial Revolution (from the end of the 18th Century to the beginning of the 19th Century); 3) the Second Industrial Revolution (end of the 19th Century to World War I); 4) the computer revolution (late 1960s); 5) the fifth stage announces the digital revolution (beginning of the 21st Century). The first period is a starting point, showing that the periods preceding the Enlightenment were not without remarkable technological innovations. The next four (periods 2–5) correspond to the revolutions identified by Klauss Schwab (2017), the founder and president of the World Economic Forum. The question of whether there have been three or four industrial revolutions is a matter of debate. Among various renowned personalities, the futurist Jeremy Rifkin includes our periods 4 and 5 in a Third Industrial Revolution that began at the end of the 20th Century (Rifkin, 2012). The advantage of Schwab’s periodization is that it focuses on the most recent transformations. That is why we will keep it.

30

Technological Change

For each period, to describe technological developments, we will mainly consider four descriptive dimensions, from the most material to the most immaterial: materials, energy sources, technical objects and underlying representations (production methods, key disciplines). Each revolution, which we will illustrate with a figure, is characterized by a simultaneous change of these four closely related dimensions. We will place technical objects in the center, because they are the most visible and most related to uses. But it is obviously by relocating the windmill, the steam engine, the car, the computer or the digital networks in their respective environments that we can see a coherent socio-technical system emerge. We will therefore develop our discussion by taking into account the environmental transformations. 1.2.2. At the origins of the Industrial Revolution (from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance) It is customary to consider that the industrial revolution dates back to the 19th Century, but historians (White, 1969; Gille, 1978; Gimpel, 1975) now widely admit that the medieval West experienced unprecedented economic development. The medievalist Jean Gimpel (1975) even claims that the industrial revolution originated in the Middle Ages. Indeed, contrary to the widespread idea of a dark and lethargic age, it was a fertile period of inventions and technological advances. This era revolutionized the world of work through the renewal of energy sources and technological innovation. According to Gimpel, a first “industrial” revolution occurred in the 11th, 12th and 13th Centuries, the emergence of which was specially based on the ability to develop the efficiency of technologies: water mills, camshafts, rigid harnesses and horseshoes, navigation tools, clocks, etc. The adaptation of all these technologies led, at the time, to a spectacular increase in the energy available to economically replace human strength. According to the medievalist, it was on these discoveries, much more than on those of the Renaissance, that the industrial revolution of the 18th Century took off. It is also in the second half of the 12th Century that, according to Crosby (2003), quantification and measurement developed significantly, as deliberate and organized activities that contributed to the constitution of Western rationality, applying measurement to all things, especially chronometry (clocks). The interest in quantification gave rise, from the end of the 13th

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

31

Century, to double-entry bookkeeping, which had such an influence on trade and business life, first in large Italian cities and then elsewhere, and which the German sociologist Werner Sombart (1843–1941) said was one of the conditions for the emergence of capitalism.

Figure 1.2. Transformation of the socio-technical system in the Middle Ages

During the 14th and 15th Centuries, there were no major technical developments and, according to Gimpel, Renaissance engineers themselves would only exploit inventions that already existed. However, we cannot overlook the contributions of the Renaissance, particularly with the Italian school and personalities such as Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519), who made contributions in a wide variety of fields, such as weaponry – a development that went hand in hand with the incessant wars fought by the nations at that time – architecture, metallurgy, textile machinery, watchmaking, hydraulics, etc. (Gilles, 1964). This period was also the time of a new scientific and technological spirit, in which the method of observation spread to all fields

32

Technological Change

such as astronomy (Galileo, 1564–1642), anatomy, botany and zoology. The discoveries were not limited to Italian engineers. For example, Queen Elizabeth I’s doctor William Gilbert (1544–1603) is considered the first electrician because of his work on magnetism. Finally, the Renaissance saw the emergence in Europe of a literary and artistic movement which, by drawing on the source of Greek–Latin antiquity, placed the human being at the heart of its concerns. 1.2.3. The First Industrial Revolution (end of the 18th Century) In its early days, the First Industrial Revolution was mainly located in the United Kingdom. It extended to other countries much later, in the middle of the 19th Century. It was mainly driven by the development of coal mining and the development of the steam engine by the Scot James Watt in 1769. After 1800, other engineers improved the system even further. The steam engine then arrived and came to be used more and more in industry. These developments made it possible to mechanize production, particularly in the textile sector, for which Edmund Cartwright developed the very first mechanical loom in 1789. In the steel industry, the use of coke became widespread and enabled the construction of blast furnaces. Metallurgy progressed, with coke cast iron, then steel containing less carbon than cast iron, and therefore more resistant, which gradually tended to replace it. The first machine tools, mechanical equipment that transforms iron (drilling, boring, cutting, etc.), also date from this period. They enabled the manufacture of all kinds of mechanical parts: screws, gear wheels, rods and cylinders. In 1751, Frenchman Vaucanson designed the first turning machine with a mechanical frame, which allowed the precise machining of parts up to 1 m long. Gradually, machines, grouped in vast buildings (ancestors of factories), replaced the work of craftsmen. At the same time, infrastructures such as waterways, steam transport by sea, and railways came to be developed. However, land transport was still largely dependent on animal power. It was not until 1804 that a steam train ran in Pen-y-Darren, a mining region of Wales known as the Black Country, due to the profusion of coal mines and air pollution. The first railway line was built near Newcastle in 1825. During this period, international trade intensified, supported by the gradual elimination of piracy that had begun,

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

33

first in Europe at the beginning of the 18th Century and then around Africa and the Indian Ocean. Mechanical energy also led to the industrialization of printing and, with it, of the written press on a large scale, as well as the dissemination of knowledge. This led to a real inflation in print production (newspapers, administrative printed matter and books) in response to the growing need for information among a readership that was constantly expanding with the progress of literacy.

Figure 1.3. Transformation of the socio-technical system during the First Industrial Revolution

This technical approach should not lead us to forget other changes of magnitude. Particularly noteworthy is the “demographic revolution” and the considerable reduction in the number of illiterate adults, two phenomena highlighted by Rioux (1971). Rioux notes that between 1750 and 1850, the

34

Technological Change

European population increased from 140 million to 266 million and, in North America, from about 3 million to 40 million. European population growth, mainly due to the fall in mortality rates – boosted by an increase in agricultural productivity that allowed food shortages to disappear – continued in the following period, with the progress of medicine and the end of the major waves of epidemics. Population growth and rising knowledge levels significantly contributed to the development of industry. 1.2.4. The Second Industrial Revolution (late 19th Century to the 1910s) The Second Revolution used new energy sources: oil and electricity. Electrical energy enabled the industry to engage in mass production. Oil replaced whale oil as a fuel for lighting and contributed to the development of the automobile that appeared at the end of the 19th Century. The first American oil well was drilled in 1859 by Edwin Drake. This event led to the black gold rush. In 1870, John D. Rockefeller founded Standard Oil, which would hold 80% of the refining and 90% of the transport of “black gold”. Means of transport started to boom. Railroads extended with the opening of a transcontinental link in the United States, from California to Nebraska (in 1869) and the Trans-Siberian Railway (in 1904). Railways provided important opportunities for industry: from 38,000 km of railways worldwide in 1850, to 300,000 km in 1870, to 1 million km in 1914. It also facilitated the circulation of people and ideas. Trade relations and more distant exchanges intensified with maritime shipping. The opening of the Suez Canal (1869) linking the Mediterranean to the Red Sea and the Panama Canal (1914), which directly runs from the Atlantic to the Pacific, created new shipping routes that shortened distances. The emerging automotive industry developed at high speed. There were 4,000 motor vehicles in 1900. The commercial launch of the first Ford T took place in 1908, and it heralded the era of mass production with assembly lines. There were nearly two million cars on the road in 1914. In addition, new means of communication such as the telegraph and telephone were developed. Samuel Morse filed the patent for the electric

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

35

telegraph in 1840. The first transatlantic link dates back to 1866 and, in 1870, the European telegraph network covered 500,000 km. In 1876, the telephone, attributed sometimes to the Italian Antonio Meucci, sometimes to the American Graham Bell, who filed the patent, also helped to facilitate remote exchanges. This period was marked by a relative balance in terms of the economy and international politics (no major wars). It also saw the decline of the agricultural population. Between 1850 and 1910, the numbers of farmers fell from 22% of the active population to 6% in Great Britain, from 64% to 42% in France, from 65% to 18% in Germany and from 65% to 33% in the United States.

Figure 1.4. Transformation of the socio-technical system during the Second Industrial Revolution

36

Technological Change

Utopian rationality also asserted itself at the end of this period when the principles of the scientific organization of work (Taylor, 1911) emerged, which, going beyond the factory, extended its application to domestic work with the American “domestic science” movement at the end of the 19th Century (Frederick, 1912). The American brothers Wilbur and Orville Wright made the first successful airplane in 1903. But the beginnings of civil aviation concerned only adventurous sportsmen and women, and it was not until the late 1930s that transatlantic commercial flights began. In conjunction with these flowering inventions, it is necessary to note the emergence of new forms of professional activity. Employers were different from 18th Century traders and manufacturers and more closely linked to finance, but they were less politically powerful since the introduction of universal suffrage (established during the 1848 Revolution). Above all, a numerically important working class emerged that became a social force with which political power needed to deal with. 1.2.5. The Computer Revolution (from the late 1960s to the 1990s) At the end of the 20th Century, a third industrial revolution took place, based on electronics, telecommunications and information technology. It was the advent of ICTs. The first foundations of the IT revolution were laid at the very end of the 1960s and early 1970s. In 1972, Intel launched its 8008 microprocessor on the market. The Apple II, ancestor of the desktop computer, the first to be sold on a large scale, was launched in 1977. IBM’s PC (Personal Computer) was launched in 1981. In 1985, IBM employed 10,000 people in its PC division. ARPANET (Advanced Research Projects Agency Network) was created in 1969. It prefigured the Internet computer network and the most famous aspect of the Internet today, the Web (abbreviation of World Wide Web), created in the early 1990s. After a focus on hardware, companies in the IT sector gradually focused on application software. In industrial sectors, applications were often specific, but the same cannot be said for management areas where

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

37

automation needs were similar from one company to another, especially when activities were standardized. In fact, accounting software was first developed, an area where the workload was considerable and many retail tasks were relatively simple. ICT played a major role during this period, accompanying the development of organizational structures. They helped to initiate a profound reconfiguration of production processes and work organizations. The large centralized organizations of the 1960s with information systems driven by mainframe computers were replaced by more decentralized structures with microcomputers. The widespread dissemination of electronic messaging in the late 1980s helped to foster lateral relationships and reduce hierarchical burdens. Since the end of the 19th Century, the main source of energy has been electricity, produced in power plants. On December 20, 1951, the United States used nuclear energy to generate electricity for the first time. Since the first connection of a nuclear power plant to the electricity grid, the world’s nuclear capacity has steadily increased. This was also the time of the space conquest that inspired a whole generation and illustrated the competition between the United States and the Soviet Union for several decades. On April 12, 1961, the Soviets launched a man into space for the first time. On July 20, 1969, the American Apollo XI mission landed two men on the moon: Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin. Humanity was entering the space age in a spectacular way. On April 12, 1981, the world witnessed the very first flight of the American space shuttle, Columbia. Finally, this period can also be described as revolutionary from a social point of view. The year 1968 was the year of protest almost everywhere in the world with a social and societal movement of an exceptional magnitude: the Prague Spring in Czechoslovakia, May 1968 in France, American students protesting against the Vietnam War, etc. This year marked the beginning of the decline of traditional institutions and announced the years of reform that would follow and the liberalization of morals.

38

Technological Change

Figure 1.5. Transformation of the socio-technical system during the IT revolution

1.2.6. The Digital Revolution (early 21st Century) We will now look at the current period and its possibilities. The way we look at it differs since we are no longer following a historical analysis, but using prospective studies. Moreover, as we have previously written, not all authors agree that this should be a new era. For Schwab (2017), on whom we will rely, there is no doubt that the many innovations that have emerged since the beginning of the century constitute a new industrial revolution. This author puts forward three arguments to support his point of view: the speed of the phenomenon, its scale and its impact, which together herald the complete transformation of production, distribution and management systems. In his book, he highlights 23 “profound changes” expected by 2025, highlighting their positive impacts, but without overlooking the difficulties (see a selection of 10 in Table 1.2).

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

Changes

Implantable technologies

Features and characteristics

Some positive impacts

Devices increasingly connected to the Decrease in missing human body, children performing various Better health outcomes roles: communication, Increased autonomy geolocation, health monitoring

39

Some negative impacts Surveillance risk Decreased data security Addiction

Digital identity

Increased transparency More frequent identity theft Digital presence on a Faster interconnection Online harassment multitude of networks between individuals and other online and groups Fake news media Faster dissemination Confidentiality of information threatened

Increased vision

Various objects allow individuals to connect to other objects or the Internet

Improves the ability to perform tasks (including for people with disabilities) Immediate access to information

Deconcentration Addiction Negative immersive experiences

Connected clothing

Clothing and other accessories (watches, bracelets, etc.) with chips connected to the Internet and to the person

Increased autonomy Self-management of health Personalized clothing

Surveillance risk Security of threatened data

The connected home

Remote control of lighting, air conditioning, security, household appliances, etc.

Efficiency in the use of resources Access control Increased comfort

Confidentiality and monitoring Exposure to cybercrime

Big Data

Accumulation of a huge amount of data and increasing possibilities to process it

Increased decision speed Reduction of data processing costs

Confidentiality Problem of trust in the data collected Loss of jobs in data processing

Cars running without driver intervention

More free time Reduced driving stress (fewer accidents) Improving mobility (especially for the disabled)

Loss of driver jobs Legal structures (traffic, liability, insurance systems)

Driverless car

40

Technological Change

Sharing economy

3D printing

Robotics

Sharing of goods and services made possible by mobile applications, geolocation services and digital platforms

Easy access to resources Job instability Feedback on public More opportunities for and direct information breach of trust Increase in human services

Accelerated product development Increase in the volume of waste Democratization of Creation of a material creative and Piracy object from a 3D plan production capacities Quality of the Reduction of transport products needs Substitution of robots for humans in an increasing number of domestic and manufacturing activities

Rationalization of supply chains Relocation of production activities

Job losses Accountability and responsibility issues

Table 1.2. Ten profound changes in the Fourth Industrial Revolution (source: excerpts from Schwab, 2017)

Schwab places great emphasis on digital technologies, hence the title we give to this Fourth Industrial Revolution. But we must also note the importance of engaging in an energy transition (renewable energies, energyproducing buildings and increasing energy storage capacity). Also, without this being a certainty, the prospect of the end of fossil fuel exploitation (coal, oil, etc.) and the advent of “clean energies” (wind, solar, geothermal, tidal energy, etc.) are opening up. In terms of behavior, both at work and in society, we can also see that in the West, individuals emphasize the values of freedom and autonomy, wishing to free themselves from collective rules and traditional supervision to satisfy their aspirations. In the previous period, the automobile, after having been a symbol of social success, conveyed these values. But today, it appears more like a constraint and a growing number of individuals would like the car to be autonomous, to free ourselves from it. In addition to Google, which has embarked on clean development (Google Car), most car manufacturers have announced that they plan to market the first autonomous car models by 2020.

The Human and Social Sciences in the Face of Technological Change

41

The digital revolution derives its originality mainly from the fusion of technologies and their interaction in the physical, digital and biological fields, which allows an unprecedented increase in production capacities. A striking illustration of this is the “factory of the future” (or industry 4.0), which corresponds to a new way of organizing the means of production where, thanks to digitization, everything is done in interaction between the customer’s needs, the machines connected to each other and the manufacture of products.

Figure 1.6. Transformation of the socio-technical system to the digital revolution

To address the contributions of HSS to the understanding of technological change, we proceeded in two steps. The first step allowed us to understand the variety of points of view on the link between technology and social issues. We have focused on the anthropotechnical perspective that we favor because of its ability to overcome all determinism and open up to action. In a second step, we proposed a brief history of technological change to illustrate the intertwining of technical and social factors, recognizing with Robert Cresswell (1996) that it is impossible to separate technical facts from social facts. We will continue by highlighting some of the most significant societal, organizational and individual elements.

2 Technological Change and Society

Technology and society are mutually dependent: technology is shaped by the society it shapes in turn. Let us take just one example, which is emblematic, that of the automobile. Its development was in response to a society aspiring to achieve mobility, with a desire to escape and visit wide open spaces. At the same time, the organization of society was linked to the automobile, which had a great influence on metropolization (cities expanded with the development of the automobile). Without it, hypermarkets, leisure centers and motels would have only limited interest. It is therefore around the idea of a joint structuring of technology and society, in tune with the chosen anthropotechnical perspective, that this chapter is structured. We will approach technological change from the perspective of a set of societal dimensions: – the political and institutional dimension, that of the organization of collective structures and the constituted economic and social forms that govern technology (section 2.1); – the ethical dimension, that of the good and the just, and more broadly the values that guide the design, dissemination and use of technologies (section 2.2); – the diversity dimension (gender, age, culture, disability, etc.) corresponding to the challenges that technology raises in terms of combating discrimination and respecting and valuing inter-individual differences (section 2.3);

Technological Change, First Edition. Clotilde Coron and Patrick Gilbert. © ISTE Ltd 2020. Published by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

44

Technological Change

– the ecological dimension, which requires taking into account the exchanges that exist between human beings and their increasingly technological environment (section 2.4). 2.1. Powers, institutions and technological change To say that technological change is as much a political issue as it is a technical one is not new. Critical authors have already highlighted this aspect. Unlike them, our point of view will be more analytical. After laying the foundations for a political analysis of technology, we will focus on a series of more focused questions: the role of the State in the production and diffusion of technology, the relationship between market globalization and technological change and, finally, the “dark side” of technological change (technostress, war and crime). 2.1.1. Fundamentals of political analysis and technology The political object is defined in various ways. If we return to its Greek etymology, everything that affects the life of the city, the life of a community and its government, is political. We will move away from the traditional oppositions, particularly the opposition between technical decision and political decision which leads to the idea of a neutrality of technology, which we reject. The supposed neutrality of technology only feeds a form of fatalism towards the power of experts and those who use it. The scientific expertise on which technology is based is itself a power technology (Bonneuil and Joly, 2013). We will follow Max Weber in defining power: “‘Power’ (Macht) is the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability rests” (Weber, 1978, p. 53). According to Weberian understanding, technology is a means of ensuring legal-rational domination based on the conformity of actions undertaken with impersonal laws and rules. This is manifested in the state apparatus. But there are a multiplicity of other sources of power (such as large companies, standardization bodies or multinational board members) and counter-powers (non-governmental

Technological Change and Society

45

organizations, consumer associations, etc.) that respond to precedents in a form of conflicting complementarity. Without restricting ourselves to the State, we will first discuss its role, before addressing the issue of power-sharing in a technological democracy. 2.1.2. The role of the State Our interest will focus on the role of the State before and after technological change. Upstream, government action can consist of guiding or promoting innovation. Downstream, we will focus on the use of new technologies by the State in its relationship with its citizens. 2.1.2.1. The role of the State upstream of technological change The role of the state significantly differs depending on the origin of the innovation. Two modes can be distinguished (Gilbert et al., 2018). In the “technology push” mode, innovations begin from the technological invention and go to the market. In the “market pull” mode, innovations are based on needs identified in the market. The push mode is more suitable for disruptive (or radical) innovations, insofar as they involve the production of new knowledge, and the pull mode for incremental innovations, which generally reflect an improvement of what already exists on the basis of the already constituted fundamental knowledge. The technology push model was the main reference until the 1960s. It remains present in the research and development (R&D) policies of firms, but especially in those of States, through major research organizations such as the Centre national de recherche scientifique (CNRS) in France, the Max Planck Society for the Development of Science (MPG) in Germany, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council in the United Kingdom and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the United States. In this model, technological innovation is first and foremost dependent on industrial and scientific policies, companies or States, in a top-down vision. It is the result of a scientific and technological progress that drives innovation. In many States, this approach has had a major influence on the development of fields such as telecommunications, aerospace, nuclear or robotics.

46

Technological Change

Market pull design emerged in the late 1960s. It is based on the consumer who expresses an expectation or formulates a need to which R&D structures will endeavor to respond by adapting existing technologies if necessary. The R&D function is then in the position of an internal service provider, vis-à-vis the marketing function, which studies the fine needs of the market, to provide technical answers to the needs expressed in functional terms. This distinction, which is entirely theoretical, must not obscure the fact that technological innovations can result from multiple sources (pressure from legislators, customers and partners, environmental constraints, etc.). Moreover, although States are less present today, it should be noted that in some areas, the State remains a major player. Thus, a major part of energy research in Europe is carried out by public authorities (direct research subsidies, regulatory incentives, targeted support, etc.). 2.1.2.2. Technological democracy 2.1.2.2.1. Citizen participation in major debates on technological change As De Bresson (1993) notes, in liberal democracies the right to choose a technology is not a source of power that is exclusive to the state, or any other investors. Its ownership is shared among multiple actors and, ultimately, results from an explicit or implicit social consensus. In the West, with the rise in the population’s education level, citizens are increasingly asking to be involved in the debate. Included in government systems, as well as in individual and visual interactions, technologies have become essential mediators of social relations. From this observation emerged the notion of “technological democracy” in an approach that could be described as anti-expertise, or rather counter-expertise. Indeed, it takes the technology out of a closed field in which discussions are only a matter for specialists and arguments of technical authority and transposes it into the field of social analysis. Thus, recognizing the importance of the technology does not imply submitting to its diktat. To analyze technologies, it is not a question of opposing laypeople and specialists, but of striving, as Callon et al. (2001) put it, for a “dialogical democracy” that puts an end to the monopoly of experts and promotes

Technological Change and Society

47

exchanges between them. This approach, which would have been considered incongruous only a few years ago, is gaining ground, even in highly complex areas such as nuclear energy (see Box 2.1). “Until the mid-1970s, nuclear expertise in France was reserved for a small circle of state experts. The mobilization, in 1975, of thousands of researchers against the nuclear power program led to the emergence in the world of research of the first massive challenge to civil nuclear power and its management. This was at the center of two major shifts in mobilizations in the face of nuclear risk from the 1950s to the 1990s. First, there was a shift from the engagement of ‘scientists’ against the bomb in the post-war period to the engagement of ‘critical scientists’ in the post-May 1968 period. We then note the rise, after the Chernobyl accident, of associative mobilizations of counter-expertise in nuclear risk management.” Box 2.1. The debate on nuclear energy: from scientists’ expertise to community mobilization (source: Topçu, 2006, p. 249)

2.1.2.2.2. E-democracy in action? The Internet was originally seen as a tool that could revive democratic debate, which has been the subject of numerous controversies since the early 1990s (Flichy, 2008). The emergence of an online public space is attractive. Undoubtedly, the various tools of electronic democracy (e-access, e-consultation, e-forums, e-voting) can strengthen citizen participation and act as catalysts of legitimacy on the governance of States. But they also raise their share of questions, such as what happened in France with the great national debate (see Box 2.2), which was criticized for its excessive focus on speech, a lack of transparency in the processing of responses (use of proprietary software with opaque algorithms and scripts for organizing and processing information) and the absence of information on consultation participants, which prevented appropriate data analysis. In France, at the initiative of the President of the Republic, the government launched a great national debate from January 15 to March 15, 2019, proposing that everyone should express their views on four themes: ecological transition, taxation and public expenditure, democracy and citizenship, and the organization of the state and public services. This debate took place in different ways. In addition to local

48

Technological Change

initiative meetings and regional and national conferences, every citizen was invited to contribute online on a dedicated digital platform. For each of the four themes, the aim was to answer about 10 questions. According to the French government, more than 500,000 contributions were made to this platform. The Government has undertaken to take into account all the opinions and proposals expressed in accordance with the method and rules of the debate, in accordance with the principles of transparency, pluralism and inclusion, neutrality, equality and respect for each individual’s words. The entire process was placed under the control of a panel of five “guarantors”: a former CEO of public companies, a leading figure from the associative sector, a political scientist, a senior magistrate and a digital specialist were responsible for ensuring that the great national debate took place properly. This association was composed of personalities who were supposed to ensure the regularity of the analytical work method, guaranteeing the impartiality and transparency of the process. Box 2.2. The great national debate in France: an experience of e-democracy1

The most basic observation shows that typically online forums are more often the scene of “insult wars”, in which everyone ardently defends welldefined opinions, than spaces for debate. Let us suppose that, with time and the evolution of morals, we can move away from “interactive monologues”, which are weakly argued. But for democracy to benefit from the contributions of new technologies, this also implies that the principle of equality applies to access for all to these media. However, situations can vary according to a combination of factors. Table 2.1 shows that the level of Internet access is not homogeneous across the EU. However, the gaps are narrowing. Households in Northern and Western European countries are more likely to have Internet access at home, particularly in the Netherlands (98%), Sweden (92%) and Denmark (93%). Member States in Southern and Eastern Europe have a lower rate of home Internet access. However, these countries largely caught up with the leading group of countries in terms of household Internet access in 2002.

1 Source: https://granddebat.fr/, accessed March 20, 2019.

Technological Change and Society

49

Population in 2016

Access rate in 2002

Access rate in 2007

Access rate in 2018

Germany

82,162,000

46

71

94

France

66,661,621

23

55

89

United Kingdom

65,341,183

50

67

95

Italy

60,665,551

34

43

84

Spain

46,438,422

17

43

86

Poland

37,967,209

11

41

84

Romania

19,760,314

4

22

81

Netherlands

16,979,120

58

83

98

Belgium

11,289,853

43

60

87

Greece

10,793,526

12

25

71 (2017)

Czech Republic

10,553,853

13

35

86

Portugal

10,341,330

15

40

79

Sweden

9,851,017

66

79

92

Hungary

9,830,485

8

38

83

Austria

8,700,471

33

60

89

Bulgaria

7,153,784

3

19

72

Denmark

5,659,715

56

78

93

Finland

5,707,251

44

69

94

Slovakia

5,426,252

13

46

81

Ireland

4,658,530

35

57

89

Table 2.1. Change in the percentage of households with Internet access in the top 20 European countries (source: Eurostat and statistical institutes of the member countries)

While household access to the Internet is becoming more widespread, the fact remains that the fraction of a nation left out cannot be considered insignificant. In addition, differences in access, which are correlated with age, diploma, employment status and income, should not be overlooked. For example, in France, according to a survey (Credoc, 2016), in 2016, the Internet connection rate was 92% for 12–17 year-olds, compared to 56% for those aged 70 and over; 96% for higher education graduates compared to 57% for those without diplomas; and 96% for high earners, compared to 75% for those with low incomes. The people with the least access to the

50

Technological Change

Internet are also the least equipped with fixed and mobile phones and computers. In addition, the same survey highlighted the difficulties of dematerialization and showed that the encounter between public services and users via digital technology was far from self-evident. Generally speaking, there is still a challenge of inclusion for the most vulnerable people (Alberola et al., 2016). We will return to this in section 2.3 of this chapter. 2.1.3. Technological change in the age of globalization The acceleration of technological change, market pressures and the evolution of large companies’ R&D strategies lead to tension between the need for innovation and the need to control costs in a globalized world (Gilbert et al., 2018). In addition, the geostrategic logics of influence in research, marked by the traditional domination of the West, are being reversed. Laperche et al. (2011) analyzed the internationalization (or globalization) strategies of R&D in four partially overlapping phases. For a long time, the globalization of corporate strategies did not include research laboratories, in order to reduce the risks of dissemination of strategic information and the loss of know-how. By the early 1980s, the paradigm of “open innovation” began to break through, meaning that companies believed that valuable ideas could come from both outside and inside and be brought to market. The first phase of internationalization began. In the 1980s and 1990s, a second phase began, in which the internationalization of R&D was essentially located in the three centers that dominated the world economy in 1985, the so-called “triad”, namely, Japan, the EEC (composed of 10 members) and the United States. In a third phase, starting in the 1990s, the internationalization of R&D led to investments and establishments in emerging countries, such as Brazil, China and India. Finally, since the end of the first decade of the 21st Century, there has been a fourth phase in which a process of reverse innovation has emerged, mainly in emerging countries. Unlike the classic traditions of innovation, which required Western firms to innovate at the top end of the

Technological Change and Society

51

market, i.e. through product sophistication, drawing on the technical design capabilities of the country of origin and then projecting it to the rest of the world, the example of the design of the Kwid, Renault-Nissan’s Indian vehicle, provides a good illustration of reverse innovation (Box 2.3). The approach implemented at the end of 2011 was a departure from the company’s usual vehicle design practice: to initially offer the vehicle on the Indian market, it had to be designed according to the most stringent specifications: drastically reduce costs, adopt an original small SUV concept, introduce integrated navigation tools and provide more space than that offered by competing models. The project design involved a strong independence from the parent company’s engineering, which led the project team, for example, to no longer take any technical standards for granted: questioning the number of wheel fixing points, reducing the weight of wiring, reducing the thickness of seat runners, factory without walls or doors, etc. The project was then managed by a cost target according to principles, methods and tools (design to cost), which aimed to take into account as much as possible the design choices of the value objectives for the customer, as well as the costs for the company in consultation with suppliers who, for the most part, were local. They provided original solutions, including technological solutions, in collaboration with suppliers starting at a very early stage. In addition, the project set up a creative development process where innovation was no longer concentrated only in the upstream design phase, but also in the development and even commercial deployment phases. Thus, a new innovation method was developed that did not exist at either Renault or Nissan; it was a global project based on a reverse innovation approach via the search for frugality in industrial investment. The result was convincing: the investment has been reduced by a factor of three compared to a conventional vehicle design, and the cost price has been reduced by half compared to a vehicle like the Dacia Sandero in the Entry range. Today, the Kwid has found its market in India (120,000 vehicles sold by 2015–2016). It has since been exported from India to South Africa, Sri Lanka and Brazil. Box 2.3. Renault-Nissan Kwid, a reverse innovation (source: Midler, Julien and Lung, 2017)

52

Technological Change

The globalization of markets has therefore resulted in polycentric structures in which technological innovation capacity is no longer concentrated in a few countries. It is in line with the policy of advanced liberal democracies. This is not without giving rise to growing mistrust on the part of citizens who are worried about the capacity of States to manage economic and social relations over such vast areas and dissatisfied with agreements between States and supranational organizations such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) or the European Union. 2.1.4. The dark side of technology It is common to associate beneficial effects with technological change. We have seen that critical authors are far from sharing this idea. There is now a wave of publications on the dark side of technology. A political analysis of technology cannot avoid the place of conflicts, open or frozen, whether intrapsychic (technostress), inter-State (war) or between the State, holder of legitimate power, and those who violate its prohibitions (crime). Referring to the dark side of technology, much of the literature on the harmful and undesirable effects of technological change focuses on the individual component. We will broaden the scope by referring to the other two components. 2.1.4.1. Technological stress Technological stress is a psychosomatic disease induced by the use of information and communication technologies that is excessive in relation to an individual’s ability to adapt. This modern disease is not new. The term “technostress” was coined by clinical psychologist Craig Brod (1984) who, as early as the 1980s, noted that the computer revolution had a human cost. Since then, research on the influence of digital technologies on employee stress (during their deployment or use) has multiplied. The specialized literature considers that technostress results from a set of reinforcing factors: overwork, the need to control technology, the dissolution of the boundary between professional and private life, the complexity of technology, the fear of not being able to adapt to technological change and of losing one’s job and the concern related to the acceleration of technological change and uncertainty about its organizational consequences. In direct relation to the possibilities offered by information processing, authors such as Brillhart (2004) and Bawden

Technological Change and Society

53

and Robinson (2009) have highlighted information pathologies related to information overload and multitasking entailed by computers. It is tempting to link technostress to demographic characteristics. There is no shortage of studies in this regard. But their results are far from convergent (see Table 2.2). Demographic characteristics and effects on technostress

Research studies Gender

Age

Education

Çoklar and Şahin (2011)

More common in women

More frequent among the elderly

–

Ragu-Nathan et al. (2008)

More common in men

More frequent among young people

–

Tarafdar et al. (2011)

More common in men

More frequent among young people

More frequent among the less qualified

Jena and Mahanti (2014)

More common in men

More frequent among the elderly

–

Şahin and Çoklar (2009)

–

More frequent among young people

–

Wang et al. (2008)

No effects

No effects

No effects

Maier et al. (2015)

No effects

No effects

–

Hsiao et al. (2017b)

No effects

–

–

Hsiao (2017a)

No effects

More frequent among young people

More frequent among the less qualified

Krishnan (2017)

No effects

No effects

More frequent among the less qualified

Table 2.2. Research on the relationship between technostress and demographic characteristics (source: Marchiori et al., 2018, p. 5)

Marchiori et al. (2018) provide some answers to the apparent contradiction in the results obtained by the previous research. These authors show that individual characteristics do influence the manifestation of

54

Technological Change

psychological stress, but in a complex way, because the stress caused by the use of information technologies takes many forms and its effects cannot be reduced to stress intensity. 2.1.4.2. Technology and war A sensitive subject, the relationship between technology and war is often overlooked in debates. While Leonardo da Vinci is admired for the extent of his culture and the richness of his artistic production, we forget that he was also a military engineer, like many other scientists before him, such as the Roman architect Vitruvius or the Greek mathematician and physicist Archimedes, who were interested in the design of war machines. While funding was required, there was a need to focus on what mobilized the prince: the (armed) exercise of power. In modern times, major inventions have also been made possible or developed by the “war effort”. Let us take a few examples. We know that World War II played a key role in the development of nuclear energy research. The Manhattan project, led by the United States with the participation of the United Kingdom and Canada, mobilized thousands of scientists, engineers and technicians and resulted in the 1945 Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings that ended World War II. Civilian applications followed. By 2016, the nuclear share of global electricity production was nearly 10.5%, although it is steadily decreasing. The conquest of space, which is the source of many technological innovations (development of printed circuits, mobile telephony and satellite TV, GPS, composite materials, contributions to medical imaging, etc.), first represented a competition between the United States and the USSR in a space race in the context of the Cold War. The Internet, with which social networks and online games are spontaneously associated, owes its birth to the design of the ARPANET network system, funded by the US Department of Defense, which was set up in the middle of the Cold War to provide the United States with a reliable communication system. Thus, without being the engines of war, technological innovations are often put at its service and regularly integrated into the armies to increase their effectiveness in combat. We spontaneously think of the air force. But in future armed conflicts, the infantryman’s equipment is also considerably

Technological Change and Society

55

evolving to take advantage of information technologies, with infantry fighting being approached from the perspective of “information superiority” (see Box 2.4). The operational requirements and available technologies lead to the development of new equipment corresponding to the following trends: – thermal imaging, allowing detection and laser designation for all combatants; – the integration of the individual combatant into C4I networks (acronym for a set of military functions: command, control, computer and intelligence capabilities); – GPS positioning and a representation of the shared operational situation; – the ability to generate “infralethal” effects, i.e. to carry out neutralizing shots, while increasing the probability of reaching the target and reducing the risk of collateral damage; – in the longer term, the robotization of the operational function (generalization of ground reconnaissance, transport or combat robots to support infantry action). Box 2.4. The “infantryman system” of the future (source: Chareyron, 2011)

In a different way, the war is moving onto the digital front. Indeed, Winnefeld et al. (2016) note that the Pentagon, the US Department of Defense, is reported to record 41 million attacks per month. For these authors, more than the inadequacy of security technologies, this would result from errors made by computer network administrators and users. They invite business leaders to rely on the measures taken by the American army, which has become a master in the art of detecting and blocking intrusions into its networks. This point is therefore directly related to the next one. 2.1.4.3. Technology and crime While technological changes offer new opportunities to fight crime (biometric identification, video surveillance, etc.), crime is also evolving with technology. In particular, the development of information technology, in connection with the Internet, has led to cybercrime, which poses a threat to both democracy and the economy.

56

Technological Change

Cybercrime takes many forms that do not have any standardized classification (Gordon and Ford, 2006). The use of this term is sometimes limited to illegal activities committed on the Internet. But a computer, or another digital device (tablet, smartphone, etc.), can also be the vehicle for a crime (dissemination of illegal content of a racist, anti-Semitic or child pornography nature, scams on online sales sites, blackmail operations, etc.), as well as its target (virus attacks, intrusion aimed at data theft, extortion, control or destruction of computer systems, etc.). Cybercriminals’ methods are varied. They include, for example, forcing access to a remote computer (hacking), modifying data and files, and implementing malware on servers (cracking). Cybercrime has gained the attention of public actors and government departments that have organized responses, both nationally and internationally, with legislative and police resources. In 2013, the European Cybercrime Centre (EC3) was set up to protect citizens from online crime. In response to the increase in cybercrime, the United Nations has taken up the subject (see Box 2.5): “Twenty years ago […], despite the steady march of progress, the Internet was just starting to impact homes and offices. Crime was mainly low-tech. […] Fast forward 20 years, and criminals are the unintended beneficiaries of technology and globalisation. We have prospered from our high-speed, high-tech world, but the criminals have been gifted a digital platform on which to develop their illicit businesses. Technology and globalization enable criminals to work across regions; increasing their reach, their crimes and their profits. Just as the Internet has transformed every aspect of our lives, it has also become a cornerstone of criminality. What happens in the bright sunshine of the Internet echoes in the far murkier depths of the dark web. The Internet helps companies sell their legitimate goods, but it allows criminals to sell drugs, firearms, and endangered wildlife. Social media websites give millions the ability to share their joyful experiences, while the dark web protects the privacy of criminals who are also networking and building relationships. Accepted by the financial world, the explosion of Crypto-currencies is helping criminals launder money and lower the detection risk.” Box 2.5. The global fight against cybercrime, from the statement by Yury Fedotov, Executive Director of UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime), October 23, 2017

Technological Change and Society

57

The dark side of new technologies and some of their uses leads to the introduction of the theme of ethics into the reflection on technological change in order not to give in to the ease and fascination of offering new tools. 2.2. Ethics in the face of technology For a long time, technology was considered to be an ethically neutral field. The emergence of technologies that modify the conditions of human action in the relationship with oneself and with others raises ethical questions that cannot be neglected in the name of modernism: technological change is not synonymous with social progress and can easily make do with a reactionary ideology (Herf, 1986). We will start by addressing the problem as a whole before focusing on issues related to specific technologies. 2.2.1. Ethical evaluation of technology 2.2.1.1. Towards an ethics of technology We will not feed the recurrent debate on the relationship between ethics and morality, because as the philosopher Paul Ricœur reminds us: “If we take the etymology, they are two perfect synonyms; one is Greek and the other Latin. And in both languages, they evoke the same thing: morals. But there is now a certain discredit of the word ‘moral’, and it happens that, in society, the word ‘ethical’ has better press. It is not clear how we could talk about a National Moral Committee!” (Ricœur, 1989, p. 53). However, for most authors, ethics is associated with the notion of principles. It strives to nourish a reasoned reflection that justifies rules of conduct that should guide our actions in the direction of “doing the right thing”. More precisely, what does this notion cover? Ethically speaking, for Ricœur: “it is based on the conviction that there is a better way of acting and living […] a way of living well and for the other […] within the framework of just institutions […]. The response to

58

Technological Change

ethical requests involves these three references: self-care, caring for others, caring for the institution” (Ricœur, 1989, p. 53). However, for Gilbert Hottois (1984, 1987), technology is monstrous, in that it is totally indifferent to the ethical imperative, whatever it may be, and even to any ethical sensitivity. By the same token, humanity cannot be the measure of technology. This is not identifiable in the philosophical field, due to the trend towards technological autonomy: “Techno-scientific development tends towards ever greater empowerment (and automation)” (Hottois, 1987, p. 280). Consequently, it would be absurd to reduce the technological universe to the human kingdom: “Just as humanity is not reduced to the animal kingdom and this one is not reduced to the vegetable kingdom which supposes the mineral kingdom, so the technological kingdom is not reduced to the human kingdom. This analogy invites us to be aware of the fact that the relationship between humanity and technoscience is changing profoundly. People are less the subject of technoscience than its vector” (Hottois, 1987, p. 281). The point of view of sociologist Claude Javeau (1990) is different. For him, the relationship between ethics and technology is an old debate that remains, however, open. Technocritics have condemned modern technology as dehumanizing. Yet, says Javeau: “Both the users of technologies and the servants of the technological world itself engage in transactions of values, either in the resistance behaviors of the former or in the ethical concerns of the latter. These transactions correct the theory of dehumanization and remind us of the relevance of an approach based on social activities and not on the substantiation of concepts such as technology” (Javeau, 1990, p. 173). The ethical questioning of modern technology cannot therefore be reduced to highlighting a dehumanizing perversity. This is because both the design of technological objects and their use are the subject of permanent transactions of values, paving the way to ethical reflection.

Technological Change and Society

59

2.2.1.2. Technicizing the human versus humanizing the technology In view of the importance of technology in society, moral analyses of it are still rare. However, past philosophical and sociological contributions are far from negligible and their production is intensifying. Gilbert Simondon is one of the pioneers of technological humanism, and his criticism of the tendency of cyberneticians2 of his time to exaggerate the analogy between machines and living beings remains highly topical in the age of humanoid robots and artificial intelligence: “The machine does not feed itself, nor perceive, nor rest, cybernetic literature exploits a false appearance of analogy” (Simondon, 1958, p. 138). But if the technical object cannot be assimilated to the human, it is nevertheless one of its dimensions. In this context, the Danish philosopher Peter Kemp, far from reducing technology to a tool, makes it an internal dimension of the person and his social and political environment. For him, the novelty lies in the emergence of technologies that modify the conditions of human action. Nevertheless, the philosopher argues, humans, unlike technologies, are irreplaceable and can never be treated as mere commodities, because each is an end in itself; hence, the title of his essay, The Irreplaceable (Kemp, 1997), in which, after proposals aimed at clarifying fundamental ethical concepts, he focuses on the study of some concrete problems of applied ethics (technical expertise, bioethics, robotics, etc.). Conversely, technology itself includes a part of humanity, linked, first of all, to the human intelligence that gave rise to its invention. In its use, Simondon tells us, the technical object frees itself from its designer and thus “approaches the mode of existence of natural objects” (Simondon, 1958, p. 46). Simondon does not ask humans to dominate the machine, but to maintain a cooperative relationship with it, because machines, especially when they are self-regulated, need humans as partners: “Technological life does not consist of managing machines, but in existing at the same level as them” (Simondon, 1958, p. 125).

2 Created after World War II as a transverse discipline, cybernetics, the science of system control, brought together automation, electronics and the mathematical theory of information. Mathematician Norbert Wiener is considered to be the founder.

60

Technological Change

2.2.2. Three ethical issues under discussion There are various ethical issues raised by the development of new technologies. For illustrative purposes, we will focus on three emblematic technologies: nanotechnology, digital technology and biotechnology. 2.2.2.1. Nanotechnology Nanotechnologies are concerned with objects (inert or living) at the molecular or even atomic scale (from the nanometer, a trillionth of a meter, to a few hundred nanometers) in order to understand and manipulate the structure and behavior of these objects, using high-performance microscopes called “scanning tunneling microscopes”. They do not therefore designate a specific sector, but are promoted as technologies likely to renew all sectors of activity, from medicine to agriculture, via the automobile, and therefore have an interdisciplinary character for many disciplines (chemistry, physics, biology). These technologies are seen by some as a revolution comparable to the computer revolution. According to David Guston, professor at Arizona State University, a specialist in the ethics of nanotechnologies and editor of a two-volume encyclopedia on the subject (Guston, 2010, p. 136): “Nanotechnology has become a model and an intellectual focus in addressing societal implications and governance methods of emerging new technologies.” The possibility of accessing this scale carries its share of promises and the possibility of acting on our daily lives by making the world safer and more comfortable. As has been said of other technologies before them, their development is inevitable and makes it possible to solve the many difficulties faced by post-industrial societies: climate, aging, pollution, energy, sustainable development, etc. This is why public authorities devote a lot of resources to them. But these potentialities also pose some threats. For example, in the field of international security, Schwab (2017, p. 107) refers to their possibilities in the context of “automated warfare” in which they would make it possible to produce weapons capable of assembly and reproduction. Should we really be happy about this?

Technological Change and Society

61

Moreover, the idyllic vision of the potentialities of nanotechnologies is far from unanimous: since nanoparticles escape, because of their size, from the usual means of detection, some consider it very unwise to introduce them into the environment and, a fortiori, into the human body. This fear fuels activist movements, as evidenced, for example, by the wave of attacks in Mexico against researchers in the field (see Box 2.6). On August 8, 2011, Armando Herrera Corral received a parcel the size of a shoebox, covered with official looking stamps. Armando works as a researcher in computer science at a research center in Mexico City, the Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education. The package announced that he was the lucky winner of a scientific award. Intrigued, Armando shook the box several times, trying to guess its content, and decided to bring it to his colleague, Alejandro Aceves López, a robotics researcher. The package contained an improvised explosive device, which fortunately exploded much less than expected, but caused significant physical damage to Alejandro who was standing nearby when the bomb exploded. The day after this tragic event, a group of “eco-anarchists” calling themselves “ITS” (Individuals Tending Towards Savagery) claimed responsibility for the attack. In a diatribe published online, the group announced that it wanted to take action against the threat posed by nanotechnologies. The same text, charred, was found at the site of the explosion. Box 2.6. Armed resistance against nanotechnologies (source: Phillips, 2012)

While nanotechnologies give rise to both amazing promises and nightmarish visions, we must face the facts: the huge investments that have been made in the United States, Japan and Europe have so far produced rather slim results (self-cleaning glasses, improved cosmetics, new medical diagnostic technologies, food packaging). This does not mean that we should delay ethical reflection and be caught short. The manipulation of biological nanostructures is still at an experimental stage. But nanotechnology applications in the medical field are developing, and the idea of transporting active ingredients to a specific biological target (tissues, organs or cells) is no longer science fiction.

62

Technological Change

2.2.2.2. Bioethics Bioethics covers a range of fields in biology, medicine and more generally public health. It deals, in particular, with issues relating to human cloning, medically assisted procreation, organ donation, embryo manipulation, gene therapy and euthanasia. Today, genetic engineering offers the possibility of modifying an individual’s genetic heritage, for example, by transferring a gene from one embryo to another. Since animal experiments – starting in 1996 with the birth of Dolly, an exact copy of another sheep – human cloning has been under study, introducing a complete break with the natural way of transmitting life. Nick Bostrom, a Swedish philosopher, founder of the World Transhumanist Association and a strong advocate of the augmented human, proposes to improve human functioning with the help of biotechnology. The human being as we know today would only be a transitional form of evolution. He defines transhumanism as follows: “Transhumanism is a way of thinking about the future that is based on the premise that the human species in its current form does not represent the end of our development but rather a comparatively early phase” (Bostrom, 2003). These biotechnologies raise hopes, but at the same time raise legitimate and serious questions: how can they be used? What rules should be established to avoid risks? Should we set some limits? On this last question, Gabor’s law – named after Dennis Gabor, a Hungarian physicist and 1971 Nobel Prize winner who proclaimed it – states that “everything that can technically be done will be achieved, whatever the moral cost”. For Séris: “[This law] is not a pessimistic or apocalyptic observation, as one might think, but it takes note above all of what technologies are: a set where everything communicates with everything, the pooling, sooner or later, of the apparently most dispersed resources” (Séris, 2013, p. 57).

Technological Change and Society

63

2.2.2.3. Ethical reflection on digital technology and its problems 2.2.2.3.1. Beginning of the reflection Ethical reflection on the consequences of digital technology is not new. As early as the early 1990s, some noted that digital technology amplified certain information and communication problems (data protection, embezzlement, harassment, etc.) and a profusion of codes and charters were produced. “La Nétiquette”, a French charter relating to the rules of good manners on the Internet, is one of its expressions. The word “Netiquette” comes from the fusion of the words “network” from English and “etiquette”, which, in both English and French, refers to all the good manners concerning notably online debates, forums and blogs (see Box 2.7). I. Thou shalt not use a computer to harm other people. II. Thou shalt not interfere with other people’s computer work. III. Thou shalt not snoop around in other people’s computer files. IV. Thou shalt not use a computer to steal. V. Thou shalt not use a computer to bear false witness. VI. Thou shalt not copy or use proprietary software for which you have not paid. VII. Thou shalt not use other people’s computer resources without authorization or proper compensation. VIII. Thou shalt not appropriate other people’s intellectual output. IX. Thou shalt think about the social consequences of the program you are writing or the system you are designing. X. Thou shalt always use a computer in ways that ensure consideration and respect for your fellow humans. Box 2.7. The 10 commandments of computer ethics (source: Rinaldi, 1996)

64

Technological Change

There are many ethical issues related to digital technology. We will limit ourselves to mentioning only some among those that raise the most heated debates. 2.2.2.3.2. Personal data protection Personal data alone feeds a whole section of the digital economy and, caught between ethics and business, arouses the obvious desire of e-commerce and digital marketing players. With the development of new data processing capacities (Big Data: data diversity, increased analytical capacity, very large amounts of data), national and international provisions for the protection of personal data have been strengthened, as the risk is real and abuses exist (see Box 2.8). The Facebook scandal is a good example of the importance of surveillance in the area of personal data protection. On March 17, 2018, the New York Times revealed that Cambridge Analytica, a London-based consulting firm, had collected personal data from the Facebook profiles of several tens of millions of users without their consent, in violation of the rules established by the social network. These data were used to create psychological profiles to help with advertising during the Brexit referendum campaigns and the American presidential election. Box 2.8. The Cambridge Analytica scandal (source: Granville, 2018)

In Europe, the recording of personal data (identification, name, address, telephone number, photo, IP address, etc.) is governed by a European regulation (Regulation 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of April 27, 2016). According to this Regulation, everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him/her and such data must be processed fairly, for specified purposes and on the basis of the consent of the data subject or on another legitimate basis laid down by law. In addition, every person has the right to access the data collected concerning them and to obtain, if necessary, rectification. In addition, compliance with these rules is subject to control by an independent authority. The national protection authorities (in France, the regulatory authority is the Commission nationale informatique et liberté) are brought together in a European Data Protection Committee. There are provisions in Canada and the United States that are partially consistent with these regulations. Elsewhere, situations vary from state to state.

Technological Change and Society

65

2.2.2.3.3. The uses of biometrics Biometric devices allow people to be identified according to morphological, biological or behavioral characteristics, such as fingerprints, facial features, retinal image, voice or DNA. In the police field, the use of these multiple mechanisms is justified by the fight against fraud, the security of financial and commercial exchanges, as well as legitimate access to government services to combat crime. While the usefulness for police services is not questionable, the fact remains that their use can raise delicate ethical issues, in particular, in line with the previous point, regarding the protection of personal data collected. Biometric technologies are not only used for civil and police identification and control purposes. Facial recognition has also become a trendy tool for marketing. By placing cameras at points of sale, it is possible to analyze visitor behavior and improve the “customer experience”. These technologies provide a commercial company with information about its customers from their social profiles in order to design precisely targeted offers and, it is said, make consumers’ lives easier. Adhering to biometrics because it is seen as a step forward and provides an easy solution is not without danger. It also potentially constitutes a risk of intrusion into individuals’ private lives, all the more dangerous because it is very easily usable without their consent. 2.2.2.3.4. Social robots and android robotics In industry, for some time now, the emergence and development of robots has been orchestrating a vast substitution movement from capital to labor. They perform a wide variety of functions, such as painting, welding and measuring, but they are closely specialized and have no specific cognitive components. It is this component that today differentiates industrial automation from recent robotics applications. Domestic robot or assistance projects (physical rehabilitation, functional substitution, support for the elderly) are developing significantly. They aim to imagine robots with good motor skills (moving around in a known domestic environment, recognizing and grabbing an object, helping a person to move around), as well as cognitive skills (adapting their behavior to the behavior of a human interlocutor). These projects raise the question of the

66

Technological Change

need for robots to help people with loss of autonomy. One part of the answer comes from Japan, where there is a large population of the elderly. As the number of dependent people increases while the proportion of working people in the population decreases, robots are seen as a solution to overcome this demographic phenomenon. There are many reasons to justify the interest of such a technology. However, as Dowek et al.: “We may wonder if there is not a risk that the social bond introduced through the robot may be more an equivalent of chemical antidepressants than a real tool to strengthen the effective social bond between humans. In the medium term, there is therefore a potential risk that the use of such robots may actually contribute to increasing social isolation” (Dowek et al., 2009, p. 16). The human appearance of some robots, those called androids, also raises questions. Androids are robots whose general appearance (skin-like material, hair substitute, movement, voice) reminds us of the human body and behavior. Many science fiction films use androids to reinforce the futuristic side of their production, even giving their actors an android look (like in the Terminator movie series). Today, some researchers are developing highly realistic looking androids that may or may not be built on the model of an existing human. These achievements raise the ethical question of the extent to which people can be confronted with such robots. The widespread use of robots also raises the question of criminal liability in the event of offences: who is responsible for them (the manufacturer, the user, the seller)? More generally, we may wonder whether the emergence of “social robots”, and particularly assistance robots, is really beneficial to society. 2.3. Technological change and diversity The ethical question leads us to mention another societal component related to technological change: the question of diversity. Technology is regularly presented as an asset for a more inclusive society, for example, for people with disabilities, to whom it can provide greater comfort in life. But at

Technological Change and Society

67

the same time, the technology can also be exclusive and discriminatory. In fact, technology designers often mark them with their own biases and stereotypes, which becomes an issue given the low diversity of these designers’ profiles. 2.3.1. Inclusive technology/exclusive technology In several areas, technological change can be put at the service of a more inclusive society. Thus, in the field of disability, certain technological innovations have facilitated the integration of people with visual or hearing impairments, making services or places more accessible, for example. In the field of gender equality, some technological changes have been presented as equality factors, for example, those that have contributed to reducing the burden of household chores. However, these discourses must not hide the fact that technologies can also be exclusionary or even discriminatory. Thus, stereotypes that combine the mastery of technology with demographic characteristics (Western male graduates) contribute to certain forms of exclusion or inequality. In addition, technologies that require certain skills to be mastered (such as digital technology today) can lead to social divides (in this case, the digital divide). Finally, the technology can also become a tool of discrimination, as some authors denounce it with regard to the use of algorithms in decision-making (in the legal, banking and policing fields for example). 2.3.1.1. Technology at the service of a more egalitarian society? 2.3.1.1.1. Technology and health Societal management of disability has experienced different waves and trends in different countries. But in most European countries, it was characterized by a strong change during the 20th Century, under the combined effect of the two World Wars, which contributed to a sharp increase in the number of people with disabilities, and demographic changes, which contributed to a generalized aging of the population. In several countries, disability management has thus moved from an obligation to provide assistance and compensation following wars to an obligation to integrate and include. For example, in Germany, legislative framework

68

Technological Change

places a strong emphasis on professional reintegration, which is explained, in part, by the context of demographic aging (Hege and Dufour, 2010). In France, disability management has two structuring dimensions: guaranteeing a minimum income for people with disabilities and promoting their professional integration (Maggi-Germain, 2010). One of the objectives of the legal and societal obligation to integrate and include is to facilitate access to all services, places or jobs, regardless of the disabilities involved. For example, in France, the 2005 Accessibility Act provides that all establishments open to the public must be accessible to all, which requires accommodation, for example, for people in wheelchairs or people with visual impairment. Similarly, digital services must also be accessible, which is reflected in graphic visibility rules and the implementation of audio description tools. Technology can be used to achieve these accessibility objectives, for example, by contributing to the necessary facilities in public spaces: elevators, electric stairlifts, GPS guidance systems in public places, etc. At the same time, the development of character recognition, synthesis and speech recognition software greatly facilitates the accessibility of information and digital services. Technology can also compensate for certain physical deficiencies, temporary or not. Disabled sports tournaments (sports played by people with physical or sensory disabilities) thus reflect certain technological achievements, particularly in the fields of prostheses or orthoses or wheelchairs. For example, sprinter Oscar Pistorius, whose legs were amputated at the age of 11 months below the knees, was able to compete against able-bodied athletes in 2011; archer Neroli Fairhall, paralyzed in the lower limbs and in a wheelchair, was able to compete against able-bodied athletes in 1982. These material technological contributions, complemented by software technological contributions, have also led to significant progress in the two main sensory disabilities: deafness and blindness. As a result, hearing aids are becoming more efficient, and the latest generations of retinal prostheses under development offer significant potential for blind people with intact optic nerves. Technological change can therefore be used to improve accessibility (see Box 2.9).

Technological Change and Society

69

In the case of motor disability, two main types of technologies can facilitate accessibility: technologies used by the disabled person (orthoses, prostheses, wheelchairs), or technologies used to design environments or services to make them more accessible (e.g. remote control systems). Some technological changes, although not initially thought of as allowing more accessibility, may have helped to facilitate this. For example, advances in home automation help to make space and the environment remotely controllable, which can make everyday life easier for people with reduced mobility. Even if research in the field remains active, several fears can be expressed. First of all, some disabilities represent “niche” markets, which can lead to a lack of interest on the part of manufacturers or laboratories in these issues, as well as to a prohibitive price level, due to the lack of a market large enough to create economies of scale and make costs profitable. Thus, these technological innovations could create inequalities within populations with disabilities, depending on the social level. Secondly, the possibility for people with disabilities to acquire technologies at an individual level must not lead to a transfer of responsibility for accessibility from companies or public services to people with disabilities. Box 2.9. Technology and accessibility (source: Thoumie, 2004)

Technology can also facilitate the management of certain long-term or chronic diseases. For example, diabetics who need to inject insulin regularly could benefit from the marketing of a “smart patch” that can control blood sugar levels and deliver insulin doses directly when needed. More generally, individuals’ management of their chronic disease requires, among other things, efforts to comply with their treatment and medical instructions, which can sometimes be complex and restrictive. In this area, advances in telemedicine (medical examinations and interactions with the medical profession at a distance) or patient-managed telehomecare systems with clinical sign monitoring tools can facilitate these compliance efforts (Celler, Lovell and Basilakis, 2003). Finally, technology contributes to the prevention and treatment of certain disabilities or long-term diseases. Progress in diagnosis, for example, makes it possible to detect diseases earlier and potentially limit their development.

70

Technological Change

Progress in immunization, medical imaging or surgery also contributes to reducing the number of people with severe disabilities (see Box 2.10). Medicine regularly benefits from technological change, and the field of disability and chronic disease is no exception. Thus, advances in the storage and analysis of Big Data are helping to improve the accuracy and speed of diagnosis at increasingly early stages of the disease. Advances in genetics and immunotherapy are raising new hopes for the treatment of serious and chronic diseases such as cancer: immunotherapy or genetically targeted treatments, for example. On the other hand, these advances may be accompanied by eugenicist temptations, since they could make it technically possible to select and improve human beings. Recently, for example, a Chinese scientist claimed to have contributed to the birth of genetically modified twins (to make them resistant to HIV). Box 2.10. Some examples of how technological change has contributed to medicine (sources: Mayer-Schönberger and Cukier, 2014; Harari, 2018)

These different examples show that technology can be used to reduce differences and inequalities between able-bodied people and those with disabilities. In this way, it contributes to a more inclusive and accessible society. 2.3.1.1.2. Technology and gender equality Another more controversial discourse links technology and the reduction of inequalities. This discourse mentions the technological changes that have made it possible to reduce the burden of domestic and household tasks, and argues that they have contributed to reducing professional gender inequalities. The unequal sharing of domestic tasks (including household tasks, child management, cooking, etc.) is a barrier to reducing inequalities. Indeed, this unpaid but time-consuming work can, among other things, reduce women’s availability for their professional lives and therefore for their careers. The unequal distribution of domestic tasks decreased during the 20th Century, while remaining significant. Thus, at the European Union level, in 2015, 37.5% of women were involved in the daily care of others (children, the elderly, people with disabilities), compared to 24.7% of men, and 78.7%

Technological Change and Society

71

of women cooked or cleaned daily, compared to 33.7% of men (European Institute for Gender Equality, 20153). In fact, part of this reduction can be seen as a consequence of technological change. For example, in France, the reduction in women’s domestic activity (a decrease of 10 hours per week on average), linked to the decrease in the proportion of women at home, as well as to technological advances that have made it possible to automate or mechanize certain tasks, in turn, contributed to a convergence of male and female schedules (Brousse, 2015; see Box 2.11). The reduction of women’s time spent on domestic activities has been made possible by, among other things: – the virtual disappearance of activities such as sewing or knitting, due to the production and distribution of very low cost clothing; – the reduction in the time spent washing clothes thanks to the diffusion of washing machines (the household equipment rate rose from 68% in 1974 to 90% in 2010); – the reduction of ironing time through the development and distribution of synthetic fabrics that do not require it; – the reduction in the time spent washing dishes thanks to the diffusion of dishwashers (the household equipment rate rose from 5% in 1974 to 45% in 2010); – the reduction in the time spent cooking, thanks to the increase in the number of meals taken outdoors, as well as to the spread of microwave ovens (the household equipment rate has risen from less than 5% in 1987 to more than 80% in 2010), freezing systems and industrial dishes already prepared. Box 2.11. Technology to reduce the time women spend on domestic tasks in France (source: Brousse, 2015)

However, this discourse remains criticized, particularly by feminist research, because historically, many of these technological innovations have given rise to a particularly gendered, even sexist, marketing discourse. Thus, the dissemination of methods for rationalizing household work has been addressed almost exclusively to women (Martin, 1980). In addition, during the second half of the 20th Century, advertising for household products 3 Figures to be found here: http://eige.europa.eu/gender-equality-index/2015/domain/time, accessed December 2019.

72

Technological Change

massively mobilized two types of arguments: the idea of women’s liberation, which was nevertheless confined to their role as housewives, and the idea of meeting men’s needs, for example by providing food processors that guarantee good cooking quality (see Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1. Two examples of sexist advertising for household products (source: www.methodshop.com licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0)

The examples of disability management and gender equality therefore illustrate the ambivalence of technological change, which, in some cases, may have fostered a form of liberation and inclusion while contributing to the persistence of certain stereotypes. In addition, technology can also be exclusive and discriminatory. 2.3.1.2. An exclusive and discriminating technology At least three factors can make technology a tool of exclusion and discrimination. These factors have been highlighted by research in different fields, but particularly in experimental psychology and sociology. The first factor comes from the stereotypes usually associated with technology. Thus, some populations, particularly women and seniors, are perceived as less skilled in the field of technology (Shapiro and Williams, 2012; Lagacé et al., 2015). Changes in the typing profession (Gardey, 1995, 2018) provide an example of stereotypes that dissociate women and technology. The typewriter was a technical object that, at the end of the 19th Century, contributed to the emergence of the shorthand typist profession.

Technological Change and Society

73

At the end of the 19th Century, shorthand typists were mainly men with a good level of education and a valued social status. The skills considered necessary for this work were language proficiency and business acumen, but some technical skills were also required, such as the mastery of progressively formalized techniques for faster keyboard typing (Gardey, 1995). This profession was then gradually feminized until the 1920s and the emergence of the typist. However, this feminization was accompanied by a naturalization of these skills. Thus, advertisements emphasized the proximity between the typewriter and the piano (middle-class girls generally knew how to play the piano), and the technical dimension of speed was no longer attributed to the typist and her skills, but to the machine and its characteristics. At the same time, the profession was gradually losing its qualifications as a result of the rationalization of work and the disappearance of stenography linked to the commercialization of the phonograph (dictation device). This example clearly shows the existence of a stereotype that dissociates women and technology. However, these stereotypes can have significant effects. Firstly, stereotypes associated with a suspicion of incompetence may lead to undervaluing oneself in the field concerned. Then, they can also become self-fulfilling prophecies. For example, research in experimental psychology has shown that young female students exposed to negative stereotypes about women’s relationships to a given skill (e.g. mathematics) tend to underestimate their own competence in the field (Correll, 2004). Other experiments have shown that, when facing a mathematics test, women to whom the experimenter begins by saying that the test generally reveals gender differences perform less well than those to whom the experimenter says that the test generally does not reveal a gender difference (Spencer et al., 1999). This second phenomenon, referred to as a “stereotype threat”, is generally explained by the fact that the pressure felt by people who think they are likely to be judged on the basis of a stereotype has a negative impact on their performance. The second factor refers to the case of technologies whose mastery requires the acquisition of certain skills or tools that, in turn, require a certain socio-economic level. Indeed, within the same society, some populations may find it more difficult to acquire these skills, and thus to master the technology, and other populations (sometimes the same) do not have access to the possession of technological tools. The notion of the “digital divide”, for example, reflects this phenomenon for technologies associated with digital technology (Granjon, 2011). Digital technology is becoming omnipresent in

74

Technological Change

Western societies, to the point that the lack of mastery or possession of IT tools makes it almost impossible to access certain services: increasingly, job searches are carried out via the Internet, as well as access to various administrative services, or the purchase of train or plane tickets. This digital divide threatens both the most socio-economically challenged populations, as they can have greater difficulty in acquiring computer tools, and the populations most in difficulty in acquiring new skills (isolated, low education level, for example). Finally, the third factor comes from the fact that technology can also contribute to discrimination. O’Neil’s (2016) work on Big Data illustrates this factor. O’Neil describes the omnipresence of algorithms in our daily lives and the growing importance they have taken, especially in decisionmaking processes. She then highlights the fact that, very often, these algorithms contribute to discriminating against populations that are already the most vulnerable socio-economically or already discriminated against, which tends to reinforce social inequalities (see Box 2.12). Algorithms have become almost indispensable technological tools in a large number of fields: insurance, health, justice and policing, for example. In particular, they are used to inform or support decision-making, offering the possibility of processing very large volumes of data. However, most of these algorithms use “proxies”, i.e. variables that allow us to approach what is not directly observable. For example, an insurer would need to know how their client will behave in a car in order to be able to offer them an appropriate insurance package. As this behavior cannot be directly observed, the insurer will look for variables that allow this information to be approximated: past behavior or lifestyle habits, for example. However, O’Neil shows that, in the United States, the “credit score”, which corresponds to an individual’s ability to manage their budget and repay their loans, is commonly used as a proxy for other types of behaviors (including driving behavior), which contributes to reinforcing socio-economic inequalities. Similarly, in the legal field, people who have a repeat offender in their family will be more often classified by the algorithm as being at risk of recidivism, and will therefore remain in prison for a longer period of time, which will reduce their chances of reintegrating and finding a job upon their release. Box 2.12. Algorithms and discrimination (source: O’Neil, 2016)

Technological Change and Society

75

Finally, technologies can be used to serve societies that are more inclusive and egalitarian, and more exclusive and discriminating. This ambiguity stems, among other things, from the fact that the technologies reflect their designers and the stereotypes and biases of the latter. 2.3.2. Technologies that reflect their designers Quite often, a technology does not only reflect technological choices but also worldviews and principles. Consequently, the educational segregation, which leads, for example, to the under-representation of women among technology developers, and in any case to a lack of diversity among these developers, results in the unsuitability of certain technologies for certain populations. 2.3.2.1. From the gender segregation of training courses to the lower presence of women in technical occupations Training courses leading to scientific and technical occupations suffer from a lack of diversity. In this section, we explore the example of the under-representation of women in these sectors, while not forgetting that other populations are under-represented (e.g. non-white people, people with disabilities, people from disadvantaged social backgrounds). Once again, the work on the subject comes from different disciplines: psychology, management, sociology, etc. The gender educational segregation is a widespread international phenomenon. Girls are thus generally under-represented in scientific and technical training courses, and over-represented in humanities training courses (Shapiro and Williams, 2012). Several mechanisms contribute to this gendered segregation. Firstly, the gender stereotypes presented in the previous section influence all actors involved in school counselling. Thus, for an equivalent academic record, guidance counsellors or families do not necessarily give the same orientation guidance to a young girl and a young boy (Vouillot, 2010). In addition, students themselves are subject to these stereotypes, which influence their choices, either through an undervaluation of their own skills,

76

Technological Change

as we have seen (Correll, 2004), or through the anticipation of discrimination (Shapiro and Williams, 2012). Guidance actors often mobilize the notion of individual choice and student freedom to justify their failure to correct or compensate for students’ gendered choices (Duru-Bellat, 2004). Secondly, the phenomena of direct discrimination (not recruiting a person on the basis of gender) or indirect discrimination (using selection tools that are apparently neutral but which, in fact, lead to excluding individuals on the basis of gender) during the selection process at the entrance to training courses can also partly explain the gender segregation of courses. Finally, these training courses suffer from a lack of diversity which is reflected later in the lack of diversity of technological designers. Thus, in recent years, voices have been raised to denounce the lack of diversity of the population of Silicon Valley, a major center for the design and production of new technologies. In particular, Blacks, Hispanics and women are significantly under-represented. The Blendoor start-up, which promotes recruitment tools to promote greater diversity, has thus set up a database on American companies in the technology sector and assigns an index to each of these companies, based on the diversity (ethnic and gender) of their management committee, executive committee and employees, and their diversity policy. For example, in 2019, Facebook’s executive committee included a woman (20%) and no non-white individuals, as in its board of directors (a woman (13%) and no non-white individuals). Facebook’s membership is 33% female, 2% black, 4% Latin American, 4% other non-white (Asian, for example). 2.3.2.2. Technologies poorly adapted to certain populations? This lack of diversity among technology developers is sometimes reflected in the inadequacy of technologies for certain populations. Thus, recently, voices have been raised to denounce the “racism” and “sexism” of facial recognition technologies. Indeed, tests conducted by an MIT researcher4 have shown that these technologies work better with white male faces. The faces of women and non-white people are less well recognized. These biases are, in fact, due to the fact that the recognition technology has been trained on a set of images composed mainly of white male faces. By 2015, Google’s visual recognition system had also been

4 See http://gendershades.org/, accessed December 2019.

Technological Change and Society

77

criticized for classifying black people as “gorillas”, an error that may also have been due to the lack of diversity of training image sets5. More generally, some authors, researchers and journalists denounce the fact that the world of objects is generally more thought out for men than for women, and for men of average stature, which also represents a potential discrimination against people who are very overweight, for example. Thus, the reference individual used to define car seat sizes, toxic chemical exposure thresholds or indoor building temperature recommendations is a man weighing between 70 and 80 kg. Poor consideration of women or people of different sizes in product or health tests can have important consequences: for example, the inadequacy of car seats to women’s average stature results in women being less protected in the event of an accident (Bose, Segui-Gomez and Crandall, 2011)6. In another field, medical research and the associated technological changes are sometimes criticized for failing to take into account the specificities of women’s metabolism, as highlighted in a report by the Académie française nationale de médecine in 2016. Thus, some diseases cause different symptoms in women and men, and generally it is the male symptoms that are best known and detected. Similarly, the side effects of drugs may differ between women and men. However, for a long time, tests have been carried out in a privileged way on male animals or male human beings, to avoid hormonal fluctuations among others, which has led to neglecting some of the side effects encountered mainly in females or women. This probably explains why women have almost twice as many drug-related secondary accidents as men (National Academy of Medicine, 2016). Finally, this section highlights that it is not the technologies themselves that are or are not discriminatory. It is their designers who introduce their own biases and prejudices, often without being aware of them, and their

5 An Internet user had contacted Google on Twitter following a photo representing him and his girlfriend being tagged and representative of “gorillas”. Google’s executives apologized and linked the problem to the lack of diversity of their engineers. See, for example, http://eu.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/07/01/google-apologizes-after-photos-identify-blackpeople-as-gorillas/29567465/, accessed December 2019. 6 Journalist Caroline Criado Perez conducted an investigation and wrote a book on the subject.

78

Technological Change

users who mobilize them for discriminatory or non-discriminatory purposes. This phenomenon therefore illustrates once again the fact that a technology cannot be dissociated from the actors who design and use it, and from the uses that are made of it. 2.4. Technological change and ecology Finally, it seems important to address the ecological issues related to technology. Basically, technology promises a new and different relationship to nature. In the Discourse on the Method (1637), Descartes thus establishes a very clear link between the mastery of technologies and the domination of nature, explaining that, alongside “speculative” philosophy, there is a more “practical” science, allowing knowledge of the various elements (water, fire, air, stars, etc.) and thus enabling humans to become “masters and owners of nature”. This expression illustrates particularly well the relationship of domination between technology and nature. However, this positioning has gradually been nuanced and today, two discourses are in conflict. On the one hand, technology is sometimes presented as a response to ecological challenges; on the other hand, other voices denounce the fact that the technology significantly contributes to ecological degradation. 2.4.1. Technology, an answer to ecological challenges? Environmental issues have multiplied since the second half of the 20th Century and, above all, have given rise to increasingly committed, sometimes alarmist, rhetoric. Climate change, the disappearance of animal species, water pollution and the overexploitation of current natural resources (e.g. freshwater, forests) are among the issues regularly mentioned in this field. However, technological change is sometimes presented as a possible solution to these challenges. For example, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has been publishing regular reports on climate change since 1990, and the report published in 2014 focuses, in particular, on technological solutions that could reduce this disruption. These solutions are aimed at several areas: producing more with fewer resources, or correcting problems caused by previous technologies by replacing them with less polluting ones.

Technological Change and Society

79

2.4.1.1. Producing more with fewer resources or renewable resources, a major challenge of the 21st Century The first problem is the fact that the number of human beings is growing exponentially: the world population has increased from 1.8 billion in 1900 to more than 7.5 billion today. Climate change is therefore partly due to this exponential growth and the theory that the simple objective of feeding all human beings exceeds the planet’s capacities (even beyond the question of lifestyles and diets that consume too many non-renewable resources). As a result, some scientists are seeking to propose technical solutions aimed at producing more (food especially) with fewer resources. This is the whole purpose of biotechnology, which aims to modify or improve the production of plant or animal elements from components of living organisms (molecules, cells, etc.). Thus, Harari (2018) points out that the meat industry is one of the main causes of global warming, and one of the main polluters of air, land and water. However, technologies have been developed to produce “clean”, i.e. non-polluting meat: they actually allow meat to be produced from cells. The first “clean hamburger” was produced and consumed in 2013. At the time, its cost was prohibitive ($330,000). But subsequent technological advances have significantly reduced this cost, and it is likely that in a few years’ time, clean meat produced from cells will become cheaper than meat from animal slaughter (Harari, 2018). Biotechnology therefore offers hope for a solution to stem climate change (see Box 2.13). Plant and animal genomic selection and the control of biotechnologies are ways of reducing the energy needs associated with food production. This involves solutions such as selecting species for better disease resistance and thus reduced pesticide use, or better tolerance to drought and heat. Genome editing techniques (targeted genome modification) aim to directly modify species to make them more compatible with the needs of sustainable agriculture (species that consume less energy resources and are more resistant to climate change). Today, however, these avenues remain confronted with essential scientific, ethical and political discussions. The field of genetic manipulation, for example, requires a strong and joint regulation at the international level. Box 2.13. Biotechnologies, a hope for ecology? (source: Bournigal et al., 2015)

80

Technological Change

Beyond biotechnologies, other fields are part of the objective of proposing technological solutions to climate change. Material science, for example, has made considerable progress in insulating homes and thus reducing heating needs. Other scientific fields are trying to consider solutions for energy production from renewable sources: wind turbines, solar panels, etc. Unlike conventional energy production, which is based on limited stocks (e.g. oil, coal, gas), the consumption of renewable energy, which is based on flows, does not limit its future use because it is rapidly replenished directly from natural phenomena. In 2012, the share of final energy consumption from renewable sources was 19% worldwide, compared to 78% for fossil fuels and 2.6% for nuclear energy (Collard, 2015). However, of these 19%, 9% were related to the combustion of wood or organic waste, leaving only 10% for totally and unquestionably renewable energy flows. This figure changed little in the following years, rising to 10.4% in 2016 (Hales, 2018). There are many obstacles to the development of renewable energies. Firstly, they are intermittent energy sources (e.g. the sun does not shine all the time, the wind does not blow continuously), which raises the question of their storage and integration into the existing grid. Secondly, the cost of installations remains high, which leads to an economic trade-off between oil, nuclear and renewable energies to the detriment of the latter, at least in the short and medium terms (Collard, 2015). Thus, technological change is sometimes put at the service of the ecological challenge, whether by trying to produce more with fewer resources or by trying to promote the mobilization of renewable resources. 2.4.1.2. Technological innovations to correct the effects of older technologies At the same time, scientists are also seeking to propose new technical solutions to compensate or correct the polluting or deregulatory effects of older technologies. The history of the automotive industry illustrates this movement well (see Box 2.14). The automotive industry is a significant source of climate change. First of all, vehicle production requires significant amounts of water and energy and produces a lot of waste. Secondly, the use of cars by private individuals contributes, in particular, to greenhouse gas emissions.

Technological Change and Society

81

However, manufacturers have already made efforts to reduce, for example, greenhouse gas emissions from engines. Thus, catalytic converters made mandatory in many countries since the end of the 20th Century destroy part of the polluting gases by catalysis and thus prevent their emission into the air. The creation and diffusion of the diesel engine have also made it possible to reduce CO2 emissions through higher efficiency than the gasoline engine. The introduction of particulate filters since the early 2000s has been a further step forward in reducing the emission of fine particles. Today, the electric car promises a further reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. However, this promise is already controversial, on the one hand because the production of these cars and, in particular, their batteries requires the extraction of rare metals, and, on the other hand, because the recharging of these cars requires the production of national electricity. For example, in the United States, where a large proportion of electricity comes from coal, the carbon footprint of electric cars is questionable. Box 2.14. The automotive industry and the ecological issue (sources: Harari, 2018; Demoli, 2015)

Beyond the automotive sector, other technological innovations now promise to correct the harmful effects of other technologies. Thus, the production of synthetic plastic, which spread throughout the 20th Century, contributed to the production of large quantities of non-recyclable waste and indirectly to the pollution of the seas and oceans. Today, some technical actors (companies, researchers) propose solutions to recover and treat this waste: filter barriers, boats equipped with waste recovery systems, floating bins, etc. Similarly, geo-engineering is a discipline that aims to develop techniques to limit the effect of human activity on the planet. Carbon capture and storage, for example, is one of them. Finally, the field of waste recycling has given rise to several technological innovations, such as the recycling of plastic, as well as glass or rare metals such as those contained in computer equipment (GIEC-IPCC, 2014). Finally, technological change is sometimes put at the service of sustainability and ecology, whether to improve the profitability of existing resources or to compensate for the negative effects of other technologies. However, these technological solutions must not overshadow the fact that technology is also one of the major sources of ecological degradation.

82

Technological Change

2.4.2. Technology as a source of ecological degradation? Several authors from different backgrounds have shown that technological progress has often been accompanied by ecological degradation. Thus, Ellul (1988) has already mentioned the negative externalities of technology, firstly pollution, the destruction of agricultural areas in favor of industrial areas, the depletion of natural resources and waste linked, for example, to the rapid obsolescence of products. Moreover, Ellul strives to show that modern human beings tend to segment the harmful effect of technology on the environment into fragments (on the one hand, the depletion of resources, on the other hand, water pollution, for example). This decomposition tendency is striking in the movement described in the previous section to invent and propose new technologies to solve problems posed by older ones. However, Ellul questions this decomposition, stressing that, on the contrary, it is necessary to grasp the ecological dimension linked to the technology as a whole and with all its implications. According to him, this posture shows that the ecological problem cannot be solved entirely by technology. Similarly, Harari (2018) explains that solutions to climate change must be global, transnational, and based on, among other things, significant changes in lifestyles and consumption patterns. These two positions tend to be corroborated by statistical studies on the subject. Thus, greenhouse gas emissions are massively linked to industry (GIEC-IPCC, 2014) and the industrial revolution marked the beginning of an exponential growth in these emissions. In fact, technological change almost mechanically leads to a shift towards more resource-intensive lifestyles and consumption patterns. 2.4.2.1. Technological change and development towards more resource-intensive lifestyles Indeed, a significant proportion of technological developments leads to changes in people’s daily lives, characterized by an increased consumption of energy resources. Several authors, historians or philosophers, provide illustrations of this phenomenon. Caron (2010) shows the changes in lifestyles and consumption that have resulted from technological innovations such as railways, aircraft and household appliances. In both cases, the innovation meets a user need (being able to move faster, for example) but initially spreads only within the wealthiest environments. Secondly, the drop in prices linked to the gradual

Technological Change and Society

83

industrialization of innovation makes it possible to democratize access to it. As a result, it is the lifestyles of all individuals that are changed (Ellul, 1954). The distribution of the refrigerator, washing machine and television thus generally followed this pattern (even if the television set spread so quickly that the gap between social classes was not very visible). In France, the diffusion of these three objects took place mainly between 1970 and 1990. In 1968, half of French households had neither hot water nor a washing machine. In 1988, 96% of households had a refrigerator, 95% a television and 84% a washing machine (Caron, 2010). Over the same period, the rate of car ownership increased from half to three-quarters of French households. This equipment development corresponded to a change in lifestyles. Thus, the car created a system of rapid individual mobility and enabled families, for example, to access new places – contributing to a rise in tourism. More recently, the rise of the Internet, micro-computing and mobile telephony has led to major changes, comparable, according to some historians, to the changes associated with the invention of the alphabet (Caron, 2010). These changes in lifestyles and operations have first of all affected companies, encouraging them to adopt more networked structures and develop remote collaboration. But they have also affected individuals (see Box 2.15). From 1960 to 2008, the consumption of “communicating objects” (telephones, computers, televisions, radios) increased faster than the overall consumption in France. This change took place in three phases. In the 1960s, the driving force behind this growth was fixed telephones and televisions (black and white, then color). In the 1990s, it was computers and then mobile phones that drove this growth. Finally, since the late 1990s, smartphones and the Internet have become increasingly indispensable products, boosting the consumption of “communicating objects”. However, the advent of microcomputers, the Internet and cell phones has brought about many changes in people’s daily lives. These tools have led to the accumulation and immediate availability of content and information. They have also helped to facilitate distance exchanges, whether non-commercial or commercial: the Internet is now, among other things, a vast hypermarket that meets a very wide range of needs. Box 2.15. “Communicating objects” and changing lifestyles (source: Caron, 2010)

84

Technological Change

Moreover, in the 20th Century, in most Western countries, technological change seemed inseparable from the advent of a consumer society, as Ellul (1988) points out. However, the consumer society is characterized by the appearance of behavior harmful to ecology. First, as we have seen, in developed countries, the democratization of access to technology has led to a sharp increase in the rate of household equipment in the form of household appliances and cars. These two categories of products are highly energy consuming. Then, it was necessary to respond to this increase in demand with an increase in production, which led to the displacement of some industrial production to developing countries, knowing that this production itself is a source of ecological disruption (extraction of rare materials, greenhouse gas emissions, use of harmful substances). In addition, technological change has led to an overall increase in living standards in developed countries, with the first consequence being an increase in health and life expectancy, in particular. For example, life expectancy for French women increased from 69.2 years in 1950 to 85.1 years in 2015 (for French men: from 63.4 years to 79.0 years (INSEE, 2016)). However, the longer an individual lives, the higher their overall consumption of resources is, which raises the problem of overconsumption of resources in relation to what the planet can provide. The second consequence of the rising standard of living is the increase in dietary requirements. Thus, meat consumption significantly increased in the second half of the 20th Century. In the United States, for example, the annual meat consumption per person has increased from about 100 pounds in 1910 to about 170 pounds in 20107. However, meat production requires a high consumption of natural resources (freshwater, in particular) and contributes to the emission of greenhouse gases. Finally, consumer society is also characterized by a more short-term relationship with objects, what Ellul (1988) calls “waste”. This waste takes many forms. First of all, the rapid obsolescence of objects requires their frequent renewal. This obsolescence is partly due to rapid technological change, which can make a device that is only a few years old obsolete or even unusable. This phenomenon is particularly observable in the field of mobile telephony. Indeed, changes in telecommunication standards (3G, 4G, 5G, etc.) are particularly rapid. The new standards are much more efficient 7 Figures provided by the Earth Policy Institute.

Technological Change and Society

85

than the old ones: they are faster and therefore enable the user to worry less about the amount of data he or she wants to access. But this can make smartphones without the technology to connect to the latest standards unusable. In addition, older operating systems may no longer be updated, rendering devices that do not have the latest systems unusable. Secondly, obsolescence is also linked to fashion effects. Still in the field of mobile telephony, major manufacturers such as Apple or Samsung have managed to make annual launches of their new products real marketing events, and thus ensure that users very regularly renew products that are still functional. Finally, the phenomenon of “waste” is also reflected in the acquisition of products that are not entirely necessary, which corresponds to a “gadget world” (Ellul, 1988). According to Ellul, a gadget is an object of a certain technical complexity, having therefore required strong development investments, but not necessarily responding to an actual need. The world of gadgets is therefore characterized by the diffusion of products that are costly in terms of resources (and therefore environmentally harmful) and not really necessary. Technological change is therefore inseparable from the changes in lifestyles and consumption that it generates and supports (Ellul, 1954). In many cases, these developments are leading to an increase in resource consumption and an increase in energy needs. 2.4.2.2. Technological change and nature control Moreover, as has been pointed out, technology makes a fundamental contribution to positioning the human being in a relationship of mastering nature. Initially, the first technologies were aimed at controlling the natural elements: control of water or air with mills, soil with agriculture, etc. Subsequently, technologies also helped to structure the relationship between human beings and nature, in particular, by reducing human physical limits. Thus, contemporary modes of transport make it possible to travel thousands of kilometers in a day (Ellul, 1954); new modes of communication make it possible to interact with a person who is in a completely different place, giving human beings a kind of gift of ubiquity; the conquest of space has freed human beings, in part, from the laws of universal gravitation; etc.

86

Technological Change

However, this mastery of nature risks transforming human beings into “sorcerer’s apprentices” who totally disregard nature, and their relationship with it, for lack of knowing how to resist the temptation to have total control over their environment. These drifts may concern different dimensions. For example, eugenicist temptations, which correspond to a desire to control natural selection, were already denounced in the 20th Century and are regularly revived by racist or imperialist discourse. Large-scale destruction of forests or ecosystems (e.g. modification of river courses during the construction of hydroelectric dams) corresponds to another type of drift. However, the most recent climatic phenomena (fires in the United States, typhoons in China or the Philippines, floods in India, etc.) show that nature is far from being totally controlled or domesticated by human beings. On the contrary, climate change, partly caused by technology, seems to be embodied in a loss of human control, overtaken by unpredictable and potentially devastating natural phenomena. Finally, technological change maintains ambiguous links with ecology, creating both the conditions for climate change and sometimes providing solutions to it. As we have seen, several authors from different disciplines have been interested in the links between technology and ecology. Among them, the philosopher H. Jonas particularly has explored this question and developed the notion of the “principle of responsibility”. Jonas (2008) shows that technological changes, particularly those that occurred during the 20th Century, can potentially have dramatic consequences (nuclear and climate change, in particular) and have also given human beings unprecedented power and responsibility as a result of the expansion of their field of action. Jonas then proposes what he calls “heuristics of fear”: anticipating all threats and paying attention to extreme risks, even when their probability of occurrence seems very low. Finally, he formulates his principle of responsibility on the model of Kantian imperatives: act in such a way that the effects of your actions are compatible with the permanence of genuine human life.

3 Technological Change and Organization

The organizational level (meso-level) is important for understanding the dynamics of technological change, especially as technology plays an increasingly important role in organizations (section 3.1). In addition, there are many interdependencies between organizations and technologies, as shown by the work of some historians (section 3.2). On the one hand, organizations can participate in technological change, for example, by contributing to the R&D effort through private research laboratories or through partnerships with public laboratories. In some areas, such as chemistry or, more recently, mobile telephony or artificial intelligence, companies have proven to be the driving force behind technological change. On the other hand, technology can also influence companies, for example, by introducing tools that promote new organizational forms. Therefore, within the organization, a major question, raised by history, sociology and philosophy, concerns the link between technology and workers’ autonomy (or conversely their control) (section 3.3). Many technologies carry a form of ambivalence and can become instruments of empowerment or, on the contrary, control of workers, depending on how they are used. Finally, this implies that any technological change also implies a process of social change (section 3.4): support for employees when jobs change or even disappear, change management, in particular. 3.1. Omnipresence of the technical object in work activities While for a time, the technical object was confined to the functions that were precisely designated “technical” (in industry: research and development (R&D), production preparation and control, manufacturing), it

Technological Change, First Edition. Clotilde Coron and Patrick Gilbert. © ISTE Ltd 2020. Published by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

88

Technological Change

now has, with digital technologies, a central place in all the company’s functions. Without claiming to be exhaustive, we propose to report on this phenomenon in an illustrative way. 3.1.1. The R&D function in the lead1 The R&D function has always maintained a close link with digital technologies, compared to the company’s other tasks. Not only are these technologies designed quite extensively by R&D, but they have sometimes been designed first for R&D and then extended to a wider audience. The world of R&D therefore has a more daily, and in a way “natural”, relationship with these technologies. For years now, R&D has been experiencing the use of a wide range of digital tools. This is the case for those that enable a very fast and low-cost flow of information: messaging, the Internet, electronic databases, online scientific journals and specialized social networks. Scientific monitoring, literature reviews and cooperation between researchers are greatly facilitated. By accelerating computation and reducing the resources required to perform a test, digital tools increase the efficiency of R&D. They also make it possible to make the results more reliable, because the experiments have been replicated over a larger number of tests and computer-aided design (CAD) tools leave less room for error than hand-operated drawings, etc. But these tools also transform the way of working and support the development of new skills and innovations. Collaborative tools make it easier to work with others and remotely. In internationally fragmented R&D networks, in multi-organizational R&D partnerships, these tools are valuable. The development of online virtual communities, specialized social networks, wikis, Internet forums, etc., provides new spaces for the exchange of ideas, inspiration and learning. Digital equipment is also changing the way we work, because of the new possibilities it opens up in terms of prototyping. This is particularly the case in software development. Tools such as 3D printers make it possible to materialize ideas at a fairly early stage and very easily. It is now possible to test the ergonomic character of an object, check its compatibility with another, 1 This section is very directly inspired by Gastaldi’s work (2018).

Technological Change and Organization

89

etc. Other technologies such as virtual reality and augmented reality make it possible to project a user into experiences of using a product at intermediate states of realization, facilitating very rapid feedback from customers. Finally, digital technologies offer many possibilities to involve customers in design processes: crowdsourcing platforms, remote data collection and use, physical or virtual prototype testing, etc. 3.1.2. Marketing challenged by digital transformation In the marketing function, which is essentially open to new ideas, “digital marketing” has become very important. It consists of promoting products and services and interacting with the consumer through the available digital technologies. It has become an essential component of a marketing strategy. Digital marketing concerns both operational sales activities (prospecting by emailing and other means of electronic promotion, online sales) and strategic brand policy activities (use of social media, brand blogs, etc.), as well as customer loyalty (community animation using chat tools, mobile applications, “in-store” interactions by digitizing the point of sale). Even more profoundly, the development of digital technology is changing interaction with consumers and potentially creating a new paradigm (Quinton, 2013). The digital world makes more data available to consumers who can easily compare product performance and prices. With one click, they can switch from one sales site to another and have the product delivered to their home as soon as possible. The development of social networks disrupts consumer relations with brands, from a simple conversation between the service provider and consumers to a multitude of exchanges between customers themselves on forums, through co-creation, brand communities, communication via mobile phones or online games, etc. (Iglesias and Bonet, 2012). Shared dissatisfaction with a product or service can affect a hard-won brand image. This phenomenon requires new skills that the actors in the marketing department do not always possess. From a more global perspective, the market can be seen as a carrier of symbolic resources that allow consumers to tell their stories by building their identity. However, digital technology affects the relationships that individuals maintain, through the products they use, with others and with themselves.

90

Technological Change

Belk (2013), a North American marketing professor, is at the origin of an extended self theory which postulates that beyond a core self, other elements (objects, people, places, ideas, experiences) gravitate towards the person’s history and define it. In this context, a smartphone, a computer or any other digital object can fall within this status and constitute an extension of oneself. Belk questioned the relevance of the notion of the self in a digital world. He identified five major changes that also have an impact on marketing: – the dematerialization that the digital age has extended to the entire sectors of the economy, particularly cultural goods (music, films, books, etc.); – reincorporation, which allows an individual to appear in various forms, with the use of avatars in video games, as well as in blogs or social networks; – sharing with a circle of acquaintances whose scope has considerably expanded with social networks that allow individuals to be in contact with others who are geographically very distant; – co-construction of the self, linked to the intensification of sharing (especially with photos of an object that you would like to acquire) that allows an individual to obtain rapid feedback and thus to reassure her/himself about his/her choices or perceptions; – distributed memory, because everyone’s life is now delivered by Google in small pieces that fit together more or less successfully. 3.1.3. Factory 4.0 Obviously, “factory” does not spontaneously rhyme with digital technologies. However, industrial activities, although considered more traditional, are not to be outdone. The notions of the factory of the future, industry 4.0 or even the connected factory, became very popular at the end of the 2010s. They constitute one of the European Union’s strategic axes, together with the “Horizon 2020” and “Factories of the Future” programs. In general, the idea of stopping the deindustrialization of developed countries is nowadays a necessity, and digital technologies are called for as a reinforcement. Without being the only ones concerned, the manufacturing industries will be profoundly affected. According to the Fédération des industries de la mécanique (2015, p. 21–22), ICTs (Information and Communication

Technological Change and Organization

91

Technologies), which pave the way for the connected and digital factory, should make it possible to deliver: “– continuous, instant and integrated communication of information relating to production processes (design, manufacturing, logistics and maintenance) and manufactured products; – the simulation of the product, process, workstation and even the factory, logistics and supplier chain; – self-diagnosis and self-adaptation of production processes and equipment and continuous product monitoring” (authors’ translation). To meet these needs, the Boston Consulting Group, an international strategy consulting firm, has identified nine technologies that are transforming industrial production (Gerbert et al., 2015): – Big Data and analytics: the presence of sensors on machines and products facilitates the collection of large datasets from many different sources. With appropriate processing and analysis tools, this data makes it possible to optimize the production chain by identifying in a very detailed way the problems that arise in relation to an increased knowledge of customers’ habits and preferences; – autonomous robots: manufacturers in many industries have long used robots to tackle complex tasks, but robots are evolving to be even more useful. Advanced robotics now makes it possible to create robots that are cheaper, more autonomous, more flexible and capable of greater cooperation with humans; – simulation: 3D simulation of products, materials or processes extends to the entire production chain. Real-time data acquisition offers the possibility of refining models to better reflect reality and allow operators to optimize machine settings; – horizontal and vertical integration systems: information systems facilitate integration and communication within and between companies, functions and services, and between companies in order to automate value chains; – Industrial Internet of Things: with the multiplication of sensors on machines and products, even unfinished ones, machines can know the production history of the object, the corresponding final demand in order to

92

Technological Change

respond in a fully automated way or through global control of the manufacturing process; – the cloud: cloud storage is already widely used for software and data management. As its performance improves, data and machine functionality will be increasingly deployed in cloud storage, making it easier to share large amounts of data; – additive manufacturing: beyond the production of prototypes, 3D printing already enables the production of complex parts, spare parts and even customized tools in small series. The speed and accuracy of printing should increase and allow, in some cases, large-scale production. In addition, efficient and decentralized additive manufacturing systems will reduce transport distances and available stock; – augmented reality: this technology, which is still in its infancy, will be able to support a wide range of services, from sending instructions to repair a damaged part on a mobile device to providing real-time information to operators on the operation of an installation or even training; – Cybersecurity: with the increase in connectivity (presence of sensors generating data, communications within and outside the company), the need to protect critical industrial systems and manufacturing chains against threats is increasing and cybersecurity is becoming a major challenge for industrial companies. Factories are therefore also deeply concerned by digital technology, whether it concerns, to use a few illustrations, prototyping (rapid prototyping and printing of unit products via 3D printing), manufacturing (simulation before starting production, collaborative robotics, Internet of Things, etc.) or maintenance (preventive maintenance by anticipating the replacement of parts or systems through Big Data, remote maintenance of industrial machines, etc.). On the periphery of production, traditional activities such as logistics are at the forefront of modernity with voice recognition, which is used in order preparation or automatic goods movement systems (automatic conveyors, guided carts, etc.). But to meet their industrial challenges, companies are not relying solely on digital technology, as in the case of the Fonderies de Sougland, an SMI based in northern France for nearly 500 years that combines digital technology, reorganization and employee empowerment (see Figure 3.1). This case – it is

Technological Change and Organization

93

far from being isolated – also shows that digital transformation is not only for large high-tech companies.

Figure 3.1. The factory of the future (source: 2 adapted from Alliance Industrie du Futur )

3.1.4. e-HR No activity escapes the “digital revolution”, including those areas that were seen by non-specialists as less technical and less likely to receive significant contributions from digital technology. This is the case for the human resources role. Indeed, in human resources departments, the challenge is twofold. On the one hand, as with other support roles, it is a question of taking advantage of the facilities offered by new technologies and the cost reductions they allow. Thus, many start-ups now offer digital services to automate some of the tasks assigned to the HR function (e.g. CV pre-selection, administrative management of employees). The progress made in the field of HRIS (Human Resources Information Systems) therefore makes it a cost reduction lever today. But, on the other hand, it is also a question of modernizing the company’s image and thus attracting and retaining young talents, 2 Available at: www.industrie-dufutur.org/content/uploads/2018/03/BrochureVitrine_fev19-1.pdf, accessed December 2019.

94

Technological Change

accustomed to using digital tools. These two issues (reducing HR role costs and at the same time attracting candidates and retaining employees) may seem contradictory. We illustrate them by referring to the effects of digital technology on some key recruitment and training activities (see Table 3.1). Field of activity Make the company known to candidates Publish job advertisements

Receive applications

Search for candidates Structure the data on the candidates Select candidates Automate some of the administrative tasks involved in recruitment Manage employees’ training requests

Offer massive training courses at a lower cost Promote training and the transfer of skills between peers

Developments related to digital technologies 1. Recruitment Social networks are nowadays platforms for raising the visibility of a company’s “employer brand”. Tools are available to publish a job advertisement on several job boards at the same time. It is now possible to receive applications in different forms and through different channels (on an internal website, through LinkedIn, through an application form, etc.) and to store them in a single space (application management software). Digital professional social networks allow companies to search for candidates based on criteria and keywords (linked to skills or professional experience, for example). Algorithms are used to extract structured data from CVs (unstructured data, text). Pre-selection algorithms can help recruiters in selecting applications, for example, by assigning a relevance score to each CV based on a comparison of the keywords contained in the CVs and in the offers. Some information systems offer solutions to automate the production of employment contracts or the transmission of information to administrative services. 2. Training Some online training management tools allow employees to register independently for certain training courses (with the agreement of the line manager, if necessary). COOCs (Corporate Online Open Courses) make it possible to train all employees at a low cost (cost mainly related to the production of training materials). Corporate social networks facilitate the exchange and transfer of skills and knowledge between employees of the same company.

Table 3.1. How digital technologies have changed the HR processes (non-exhaustive examples)

Technological Change and Organization

95

3.2. The interaction of technological and organizational systems Beyond the fact that technology occupies an important place in work organizations, companies are also essential stakeholders in technological change (Chandler, 1992). In particular, they have a privileged role in the transformation of scientific and technical knowledge into consumable products by individuals (Caron, 2010). Many innovations have thus emerged in private laboratories, or following partnerships between several companies, or between companies and public laboratories. However, a company’s ability to innovate depends largely on two factors: its organizational structure, and the financial and human resources it devotes to innovation. 3.2.1. Technological change and organizational structure The study of the succession of technological changes in the 19th and 20th Centuries in the Western world identifies two phenomena that highlight the profound links between technological change and organizational structure. First, the structure of an organization affects its organizational capacity; but, as a result, the need for innovation also encourages organizations to focus on certain organizational structures. Caron (2010) identifies several stages in the history of technology between the 16th and 20th Centuries in the Western world. He shows, in particular, that between the years 1830 and 1960, four main categories of actors emerged and had to coordinate themselves around technological research: companies, trades, engineers and universities. In particular, since the 1880s, the emergence of large companies has profoundly changed the technological landscape. Indeed, these companies have developed planned research strategies, and policies to appropriate the knowledge produced, by the patent filing system. In the United States, Edison is the embodiment of this movement (see Box 3.1). The French automotive industry is a second example: the brothers André and Édouard Michelin, Armand Peugeot and Louis Renault, created great industrial empires based on innovation (the dismountable tire for Michelin, for example) and greatly contributed to the development and dissemination of innovations to the general public. These two examples show the important role that companies have played in technological change.

96

Technological Change

Having founded an industrial company of 60 researchers in 1874 based on an innovation (an automatic multiplexed telegraph), Edison quickly expanded his company to more than 5,000 employees by the late 1880s and more than 35,000 by the late 1920s, a large proportion of these employees being researchers. His company’s project aimed to produce new scientific knowledge, but, above all, to make it usable and accessible to the general public. He thus made a significant contribution to reducing the cost and price of electricity. This industrial project was accompanied by a qualitative and quantitative patent filing strategy. During Edison’s lifetime, his company filed more than a thousand patents in total. His most notable inventions include the phonograph, the incandescent lamp, the kinetograph (cinematographic camera), the fluorescent lamp, a film projection device, etc. Box 3.1. Edison and the industrial strategy for research development (source: Hughes, 1989)

The success of large companies in the field of technological innovation depends largely on their ability to limit the risks inherent in R&D activity, as well as to monetize the knowledge produced. The process of national and then international concentrations of companies in certain fields, such as synthetic chemistry, is an illustration of this. Caron (2010) explains that, from the end of the 19th Century until World War I, companies in the technological sectors tended to group themselves into national and then international oligopolies, in order to pool research efforts and the knowledge and innovations produced. These large groups or companies, such as Bayer in Germany, opted to create integrated research laboratories alongside the establishment of partnerships with public laboratories. This internalization of research allowed them to have groups of employees dedicated to producing knowledge and to controlling the dissemination of this knowledge. Thus, this strategy was accompanied by massive patent filings to protect the knowledge produced, or by scientific publication strategies aimed at disseminating knowledge on behalf of the company. Caron (2010) and Chandler (1992) give the example of General Electric’s laboratory (see Box 3.2). The example of General Electric, or more generally the fact that many companies set up internal research laboratories dedicated both to fundamental and applied research at the beginning of the 20th Century,

Technological Change and Organization

97

clearly shows the role of the company as an actor of technological change and the importance of the organizational structure in this role. General Electric established a research laboratory in the United States in 1900. The underlying argument was to apply a form of rationalization to research methods: instead of proceeding solely by experimental approach and therefore by trial and error, the creation of the laboratory aimed to discover fundamental principles through scientific research. Thus, this laboratory has made it possible to combine fundamental and applied research. This gave General Electric both new innovation capabilities to strengthen its commercial capacity and the ability to produce knowledge to enrich basic science. Thus, the scientist Irving Langmuir, recruited in 1909 by General Electric, won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1932, thanks, in part, to the invention of the tungsten lamp, which was a major source of profit for the company between the two world wars. By the late 1920s, General Electric dominated the global electrical equipment market. Box 3.2. The importance of the creation of internal laboratories in technological change (sources: Chandler, 1992; Caron, 2010)

Beyond the internal laboratories at the beginning of the 20th Century, companies have also gradually adopted other organizational structures more favorable to innovation, of which we give two examples here: the network structure and the extended enterprise. The network structure dates back to the 1980s. This type of organization is based on the decentralization of tasks and institutionalizes the operation in business units, to the detriment of hierarchical functioning. These business units benefit from the proximity of the field (market, for example), as well as from the ease with which knowledge and innovations can be disseminated between units. Several studies have shown the usefulness of this type of organization in the field of innovation (Tsai, 2001). However, this represents a reversal of the pyramidal hierarchical organization common in the 20th Century and therefore requires an adaptation of human resource management practices, with, for example, the mobility of researchers between units (Gilbert et al., 2018). The extended enterprise goes even further than the networked enterprise by setting up inter-company cooperation systems: co-design, co-development and co-production. In these systems, companies pool

98

Technological Change

resources (material, human, financial, for example) and coordinate to produce together. The advantage of this model lies in the fact that companies focus on their area of excellence, and join up with external partners on elements of the value chain that are not part of this area (Defélix and Picq, 2013). It is highly developed in sectors that require multiple skills or that are involved in several fields of activity (interdisciplinary): the automotive industry or aeronautics, for example. The extended enterprise can also refer to the involvement customers in a product’s design before it is launched on the market: this is the case today with many start-ups that, using crowdfunding, offer individuals the opportunity to receive a test version of the product and to give their opinion on it. Finally, this extended enterprise system is similar to the notion of open innovation, in which companies rely on an entire ecosystem of both internal and external R&D (Gilbert et al., 2018). Like the network structure, the extended enterprise requires an adaptation of management practices, for example, in terms of skills and knowledge management or legal matters. These new and more cooperative ways of working towards innovation require significant coordination and cooperation capacities. The different groups of actors involved in the development of the project (engineers, researchers in companies, researchers in laboratories, customers, etc.) will have to coordinate themselves around a project of which they do not necessarily have the same vision or knowledge. The work of the sociology of translation, and, in particular that of Star and Griesemer (1989), has focused on this very issue of coordination around scientific research work. They stress the importance of having “boundary objects”, objects in the broad sense of the term (standards, reference systems, work programs, concepts, physical objects), which will enable agreement, coordination and work sharing around an innovation. In particular, these boundary objects must be sufficiently flexible so that each group of actors can maintain its own vision of the project, and sufficiently robust to allow for delegation and work sharing. This notion underlines the importance of adopting less streamlined working methods, leaving room for flexibility and uncertainty in the production of scientific innovations. Finally, companies have also adopted new ways of working, as more conducive to innovation. These new ways of working may also have led in some cases to the adoption of new types of organization. We give here the example of CAD, developed, in particular, in the book edited by Cadix and Pointet (2002) (see Box 3.3).

Technological Change and Organization

99

CAD consists of digital geometric modeling technologies for designing, testing and planning the production of manufactured products. There are software programs for modeling the behavior of materials (metals, plastics, composite materials) and processes. Therefore, instead of building a physical prototype to test, for example, its resistance properties in operating conditions, it is possible to develop a digital prototype for the same purpose. CAD applications are very numerous, including in industry. CAD has been widely used since the end of the 20th Century in the aeronautics and automotive sectors. Indeed, these sectors combine both a cost competition and a time competition: you have to be the cheapest and the fastest to propose new models. In this context, the rise of CAD is quite understandable because it makes it possible to detect the best technological solution at the best cost, while optimizing resources (materials, equipment, processes, duration, etc.). Finally, this type of software aims to optimize all stages: manufacturing process, cost, time to market, etc. For example, the use of CAD has reduced the manufacturing time between two Renault models by 11 months (Cadix and Pointet, 2002). The growth in the use of CAD has been accompanied by significant computer advances to improve the accuracy of simulations, such as the transition from 2D to 3D. However, the adoption of this new way of working is accompanied by organizational changes. Indeed, the software can also integrate the degree of interdependence between different production departments. Thus, when a user schedules a product change, the computer can not only anticipate how this change affects other downstream services but also warn them of future changes. As a result, the coordination of work no longer involves a single, centralizing manager or verbal or written exchanges between the various teams, but a machine. Box 3.3. Computer-aided design (source: Cadix and Pointet, 2002)

These various examples therefore highlight the role of the company in technological change, as well as the profound interdependence between technological change and organizational structure. The school of structural contingency (Lawrence and Lorsch, 1967), among others, provides a clear understanding of this interdependence. According to this school, the environment (competitive, strategic, economic, etc.) is a decisive factor in the structure and performance of an organization. Thus, a particularly competitive environment requiring strong innovation capacities may encourage organizations to adopt the structures and processes mentioned

100

Technological Change

above: creation of internal laboratories, network structure, extended enterprise, digital design tools, etc. From then on, it becomes easier to understand the mimicry and ultimately the homogenization of the structures of so-called innovative companies. 3.2.2. Technological change, and financial and human resources for innovation Beyond the organizational structure, the question of the financial and human resources that organizations allocate to innovation should not be neglected. In fact, these expenses can be considerable. Thus, in 2012, OECD companies spent US$752 billion on R&D, which corresponded to more than two-thirds of the total R&D expenditure (OECD, 2014). In the same year, Chinese companies spent $224 billion on R&D, one-fifth of OECD spending. These expenses were mainly allocated to experimental research and to a lesser extent to fundamental research. The OECD has carried out numerous studies on the link between R&D spending, technological change and growth. According to this organization, investment in R&D and employee training is a necessary condition for global growth. Moreover, the most developed economies tend to be more R&D intensive, due to their proximity to the “technological frontier” (the most advanced level of technological research), which requires their industries to innovate to make further progress. However, investments in R&D and training have rather long-term effects, which can weaken them in times of crisis. For example, during the Great Depression of the 1930s in the United States, patenting declined (OECD, 2015). Similarly, R&D spending decreased during the 2008 crisis, except for the companies that invest the most in R&D globally, which maintained their efforts during the crisis. In this context, the OECD is particularly interested in public policies aimed at supporting companies’ innovation efforts. These policies acknowledge that the costs and uncertainty associated with R&D, as well as the payback period and the non-rivalled and non-exclusive nature of R&D, can be a barrier to business investment in this area. They also acknowledge that companies’ R&D efforts can benefit a country as a whole, by contributing to the dissemination of knowledge and innovations, and because

Technological Change and Organization

101

of their potential economic benefits. In France, for example, which is one of the most generous countries in terms of indirect support for R&D3, this includes the Crédit d’impôt recherché (a research tax credit) (see Box 3.4), and PhD contracts in companies (CIFRE; see Gilbert et al., 2018). On average, in the OECD, direct and indirect government funding of R&D represent between 10% and 20% of business R&D expenditure. Business expenditure on R&D can take a wide variety of forms, from providing premises for researchers to purchasing machines, the hiring of research staff, financial support for public research, etc. Whatever their form, they give a good idea of the role of companies in technological innovation and the importance they attach to the subject. In France, the research tax credit is a generic measure to support companies’ R&D activities. Thus, companies that incur R&D expenses, whether for fundamental or applied research, can benefit from a tax credit. Many categories of expenditure can be included in the calculation of the tax credit: depreciation of research assets and buildings, expenditure on research and technological staff, additional remuneration of employees who are the authors of an innovation, outsourced research expenditure (e.g. partnerships with external research laboratories), patent costs, etc. This measure is therefore intended to support companies’ R&D spending. It is widely used, particularly in pharmacy and computer science. About €5.5 billion is spent on it every year. Box 3.4. The operation of the research tax credit in France (sources: departmental websites)

A particular form of means allocated by the company to innovation can also be identified: human resources. Again, this support can take many forms. The creation of internal laboratories, already mentioned and now well established in large companies, is of course one of them. More innovatively, some companies seek to take into account the fact that employees themselves can innovate, sometimes outside any established circuit, any institutionalized structure. They will then seek to stimulate and encourage this creativity, which can take various forms. At Google, for example, since 2004, employees have had working time (one day a week) dedicated to developing their personal ideas and projects related to Google’s overall 3 Government support for business R&D exceeds 0.35% of GDP (OECD, 2014).

102

Technological Change

business. This system was linked to an internal collaborative platform, Google Labs, allowing exchanges on projects and ideas. Two of Google’s most profitable projects were born from this device: Gmail and Adwords. Even if the reality of this 20% rule is subject to debate, the fact that Google communicates on the subject and that this device has such a media success clearly shows the need for companies to record and make visible the innovation potential of employees. At Orange, an international system allows employees in each country to submit their innovation ideas (service, product or organizational) on a platform for expert evaluation. This system was then extended, as in other companies, by an internal incubator system (see Box 3.5). Orange is an international telecommunications group with approximately 150,000 employees worldwide. As the telecommunications sector is highly competitive and innovations have multiplied since the 2000s (3G, 4G, 5G, mobile phones, connected objects, social networks, etc.), Orange has developed a particularly proactive innovation policy. Thus, the group has an internal laboratory in France, as well as develops partnerships with external partners, contributing to more than 70 cooperative projects, and to more than 100 research partnerships with universities and public laboratories around the world. More than 6,000 patents have been filed. In 2017, Orange decided to launch an international program (called “OZ”) to stimulate innovation among its employees internally. This program has four dimensions: continuous improvement, a mechanism for sharing and disseminating ideas, innovation challenges and an internal incubator. Thus, employees can propose ideas or projects for the development of new products or services. Employees selected by Orange on the basis of the quality of their idea or project are then taken away for a certain period of time from their usual activities, in order to devote themselves to the development of their project. They can also be supported for 6–18 months to develop their project, independently, while benefiting from resources made available by Orange (assistance with the formalization of the business plan, access to software or machines, access to premises designed to promote teamwork around an innovation, etc.). The objective is that the products or services developed in this way will eventually be marketed by Orange. This system therefore represents a potential gain for the company, which hopes to benefit in the long term from new services or products, as well as for employees, who have had the opportunity to develop their project and product in a safe environment with many resources. Box 3.5. Orange and employee innovation (source: Orange corporate website)

Technological Change and Organization

103

Intrapreneurship schemes are increasingly developing in all areas where companies need to innovate. Intrapreneurship refers to schemes that allow employees of a company to carry out an innovative project while maintaining their salary status. These measures have two complementary objectives: to capitalize on a potential for innovation (employees) and to retain employees with innovative ideas who may be tempted to develop them in a less restrictive framework than that of large companies. They must therefore have several characteristics: selection of the most promising ideas, creation of a space and ecosystem conducive to new ways of working, more agility and proximity with regard to small businesses and provisioning of means and resources specific to large companies. They therefore represent costs for the company. However, the success and dissemination of such schemes illustrate the importance for companies of encouraging innovation among their employees. The example of Crédit Agricole, a major French bank, supports this point (see Box 3.6). Crédit Agricole is a French network of cooperative and mutual banks employing more than 130,000 people. Facing increasing competition in this sector and, in particular, the rapid development of online banks that compete with traditional banking, Crédit Agricole has defined a proactive innovation strategy. In 2014, Crédit Agricole created the “Village by CA”, bringing together several elements: a 4,600 m2 space in Paris with a start-up ecosystem (154 start-ups were incubated in this location). More recently, the Village has launched an intrapreneurship offer for large companies wishing to see their employees develop new products or services internally. The Village offers them support in the implementation stages of this type of system: project selection phase, formalization phase of selected projects and deployment phase. The program lasts about a year. For example, a project by an employee of a Crédit Agricole subsidiary, consisting of a portal for retrieving and selecting the most recent and relevant information on a given customer, benefited from this system. At the end of 2017, this solution was deployed on a test basis for all users of the internal customer relationship management tool. Box 3.6. Intrapreneurship at Crédit Agricole (source: Village by CA website)

Finally, this section highlighted the major role played by companies and organizations in technological change. Two elements were particularly highlighted: the organizational system, and financial and human resources.

104

Technological Change

We also stressed that the search for technological change has an impact on organizations, particularly on organizational structures. 3.3. Technology as a liberator and control agent This raises another question, which has given rise to important debates in the academic literature in the humanities and social sciences: what is the effect of technology on employees? This question can be clarified: if a new technology is introduced in a company (CAD, as we have seen, or email, for example), what could the effects be on employees? The literature gives contradictory results on this issue. Indeed, while some authors or currents see the mobilization of technology in organizations as an instrument of worker alienation, others perceive it as an opportunity for empowerment. Authors such as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (1999 (1848)) and Simone Weil (1951) have worked extensively on the link between technology or technological change and worker alienation within organizations, but Weil also suggests that greater mechanization or automation could contribute to the empowerment of these same workers, by having the most repetitive tasks performed by machines. This apparent contradiction can be explained, in part, by the distinction between prescriptive technologies and supporting technologies, which can be used jointly in organizations. 3.3.1. Prescriptive and assistive technologies More specifically, the same technology can be used as a prescriptive tool or as an aid tool, and the effects on employees can therefore differ significantly. Thus, the same technology can become a control or empowerment agent. 3.3.1.1. Prescriptive technologies The main characteristic of a prescriptive technology is to constrain users. For example, software that requires the user to fill in a certain number of fields generates a form of constraint, by forcing the user to comply with the software’s functioning. Sociological studies on the introduction of ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), or integrated management software packages, clearly illustrate the importance of prescriptive technologies for employees. These software

Technological Change and Organization

105

packages, already mentioned in Chapter 1, are information systems that completed the computerization of companies in the late 1990s. Market leaders include SAP and Oracle, for example. The introduction of these software packages has several objectives: to facilitate the feedback and aggregation of information, and to streamline work (Segrestin, 2003). Indeed, these software packages contribute to a high standardization of tasks and the way they are performed, in particular by standardizing the information to be retrieved at the end of each task. In addition, the distribution of software packages that can cover all the fields of an organization (marketing, finance, HR, etc.) aims at a form of integration of these different functions. In this case, the standardization effort is all the more important as the software aims to transfer and share data between functions, which requires a major harmonization effort upstream. The financial gains associated with the introduction of an ERP can be significant: the reduction of inventory costs by 25–30%, raw material costs by 15%, production costs by 11% (Ragowsky and Somers, 2002), etc. They thus offset the significant financial costs associated with the implementation of an ERP (often more than several million dollars for large companies). However, as discussed in Chapter 1, much work, particularly in sociology or management sciences, highlights the organizational and managerial effects of these software packages. Thus, Segrestin (2003) points out that the design and implementation of ERPs are based on three major myths, describing in a nutshell the consequences of these tools on employees: a panoptic myth referring to Foucault’s work on the supervisory society (see Chapter 1), an integration myth and a standardization myth. Other studies (e.g. Gilbert and Leclair, 2004; see Chapter 1, Box 1.6) highlight the indissoluble link between organizational structure and software operation. Pillon (2015) underlines the fact that an ERP, although intangible, largely prescribes the work of individuals (in this case, Pôle emploi4 agents). The introduction of ERP is often accompanied by an inflation of dashboards and reports, as instruments to better monitor and control the work of individuals (Pillon, 2015). These instruments can generally be

4 Pôle emploi is a French governmental agency that helps unemployed people find jobs and provides them with financial aid.

106

Technological Change

produced continuously, instantly, by the software, emphasizing the impression of permanent control for employees. This implies an increased possibility of control and supervision of the employee’s work. Indeed, the computerization involved by ERP is accompanied by the recovery of all kinds of data on the activity. For example, for a call center agent, an ERP will automatically retrieve certain data (number of calls received in one hour, processed in one hour, average call duration, among others), and the call center agent will contribute to this information feedback, for example, by entering the subject of the call himself/herself into the machine, or by sending the most complex requests to be processed to the software so that they can be transmitted to the specialized services. This has two effects for the employee: the work is more easily controlled via this information, and the call center agent has a new task of producing additional data. Then, coordinating the different services between them may have to evolve under the effect of the software. This coordination can be directly achieved by the most advanced software. We have already mentioned the example of advanced CAD software, which can modify a team’s work instructions based on changes in design made by another team upstream. The case of ERP systems differs slightly: they coordinate the activity by aggregating the different functions of the company around a common database and software. Finally, the generic dimension and standardization involved in the software contributes to the strong formalization of processes, by breaking them down into identical steps for all companies or departments. This decomposition results in a redefinition of the tasks and activities previously performed, in order to bring them into the “logic” of the software. It is in this sense that the technology becomes prescriptive. Even more than ERP, warehouse management at Amazon gives us an insight into how a technology can prescribe almost all the work (see Box 3.7). Amazon, an online business founded in 1994, initially specializing in book sales, has gradually diversified, first into cultural products and then into all types of products. The company employs more than 500,000 people worldwide. The management of storage warehouses is a crucial issue for e-commerce companies. Amazon has been the subject of several reports about working conditions in its warehouses, which are considered degrading for employees. The

Technological Change and Organization

107

work is highly robotized. For example, to limit employee movement within the warehouse, and knowing that products are not organized by theme but by size, employees are equipped with scanners that tell them where to pick up the products constituting an order or group of orders. Each product is geolocated. Products are scanned very regularly by employees to validate and control the content of orders: when they are received in the warehouse, when the product is picked up on the shelf, when it is packaged, among other things. Finally, the work of Amazon warehouse employees is largely regulated by machines (scanners that tell them where to go to get the next product, for example). This robotization process, which aims for greater productivity and a reduction in lead time as well as delivery errors, therefore results in a high level of technological work prescription. Box 3.7. Amazon and prescriptive technology 5 (sources: reports and various websites )

This example illustrates well the implications as well as the excesses of the introduction of prescriptive technologies in the world of work. In particular, it shows to what extent these technologies can constrain employees and prescribe tasks, or even all of their work. 3.3.1.2. Technologies to assist in decision-making or implementation On the other hand, a decision-making or implementation technology does not compel the user: it supports them in their tasks. For example, software that, by aggregating certain information, facilitates decision-making on a given subject supports and does not prescribe the work. As early as the second half of the 20th Century, researchers conceptualized the notion of artificial intelligence in relation to the question of decision-making. The term artificial intelligence was coined in 1956 at a summer conference in Dartmouth that brought together researchers from different disciplines. Herbert Simon, for example, known for his work on rationality and decision-making, has been involved in this conceptualization and in the development of computer-based decision-making programs. The most recent technological developments in the use of data provide many examples where technology can help human decision-making. Indeed, 5 For example: www.bbc.com/news/business-25034598, accessed December 2019.

108

Technological Change

some devices using Big Data or artificial intelligence are presented as decision aids. This point is even stressed emphatically, probably because of the potential rejection by users of these devices if they are found to replace humans. For example, the development and use of algorithms in recruitment is becoming increasingly common in companies that have to manage a large number of recruitments. These algorithms aim to produce a ranking of CVs according to their degree of proximity to the job offer. However, today, the majority of companies that use this type of system insist that the purpose is to help recruitment managers in their decision-making, not to make the final decision for them. Mayer-Schönberger and Cukier (2014) and O’Neil (2016) provide many examples of such data use: Google’s influenza epidemic prediction algorithm to help health authorities anticipate the treatment of the epidemic, or crime prediction algorithms that allow police to anticipate crime, for example. IBM has also developed many tools in the field of databased decision support (see Box 3.8). IBM, an American multinational company in the IT sector created at the beginning of the 20th Century, distinguished itself at the end of this century by the development of a computer program designed to be able to process and answer questions in natural language, called Watson. Anecdotally, Watson made itself known to the general public by winning an American question-and-answer game show in 2011 (Jeopardy!). Natural language processing is, in fact, the first step towards many applications. Watson could thus be used as an aid to medical diagnosis: for example, the program diagnosed a case of rare leukemia in a few minutes in 2016, where a human team would probably have spent several days on the diagnosis. Similarly, IBM believes that Watson could assist employees in businesses that require rapid processing of massive amounts of data. Financial advisors who have to process a lot of financial data per day, or legal assistants, who have to process considerable amounts of case law and data provided by opposing parties in the most complex cases, could similarly benefit from Watson’s assistance, according to IBM. Box 3.8. IBM and decision support technology 6 (sources: Watson official website, official documents )

6 Notably: http://developer.ibm.com/watson/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2013/11/The-Eraof-Cognitive-Systems-An-Inside-Look-at-IBM-Watson-and-How-it-Works1.pdf, accessed December 2019.

Technological Change and Organization

109

Without going as far as predictive algorithms or the understanding of natural language by machines, data processing technologies can support the decision. In the field of management, this type of approach is called EBM (Evidence-Based Management). EBM is about making decisions based on evidence, including quantified evidence, rather than intuition (Rousseau, 2006). As Lawler, Levenson and Boudreau (2010) point out, “evidence” can be simple metrics (performance indicators or indicators that describe a given phenomenon), or results from more sophisticated statistical methods (reasoning “all other things being equal”, for example). A Google project, Oxygen, provides a good illustration of this EBM approach (see Box 3.9). Google, an American company founded in 1998 in the United States, is now known worldwide for its search engine, as well as its Google Maps services and the Android mobile phone operating service. In 2002, the founders of Google were convinced that management was not so useful and eliminated management positions. The experiment lasted only a few months: the founders quickly found themselves helpless in the face of the wave of requests, such as expense reports and interpersonal conflicts, that were reaching them. Gradually, as the company grew, managers began to play increasingly strategic roles: facilitating collaboration, ensuring policy implementation, disseminating the company’s strategy, etc. In 2009, the department dedicated to HR data research launched a study on the question: what is the role of managers? The first step consisted of examining the reasons for the departure of employees (in exit interviews) in order to identify whether the manager held an important place in them, which was not verified in a sufficiently robust way in the data given the very low overall turnover. The second step consisted of evaluating the link between team performance and manager satisfaction. Thus, based on a satisfaction survey and half-yearly reports, statisticians were able to identify that managers who obtained a high satisfaction rate had lower staff turnover in their team and a higher well-being index. The third step consisted of identifying the practices that distinguished the managers with the lowest and highest ratings. Interviews on managerial practices were conducted with managers who were very poorly and highly rated. At the same time, qualitative comments from the satisfaction survey and evaluation interviews were also collected. Finally, these textual data were recoded and made it possible to identify eight managerial practices associated with a high score. The fourth step consisted of putting these results into practice by asking employees to rate their manager on these

110

Technological Change

eight behaviors. Managers who received a poor score on one or more behaviors then received targeted training on these particular behaviors. This project illustrates the fact that even relatively simple data processing technologies can become decision-making aids in organizations. Here, they made it possible to answer the question of the manager’s usefulness and to identify the managerial practices most appreciated by employees, and finally to define a more appropriate training policy. Box 3.9. Google and data processing technologies as a decision-making tool (source: Garvin, 2014)

In addition to decision-support technologies, technologies to assist implementation can also be cited as non-prescriptive ones. This includes software for modeling or 3D reproduction of buildings or objects. This software, initially used by architectural professionals, has recently been released to the general public. Today, for example, private individuals can plan the layout of a kitchen using this type of software. The success of 3D printers with both professionals and individuals is also part of this trend, where software or tools help to model an object or layout at a lower cost. In the case of both decision-support and execution-support technologies, the technology is not intended to prescribe the user’s behavior. It can certainly influence it, for example by influencing decision-making, but it does not a priori diminish human freedom of choice. These various examples and references make it possible to better understand the extent of the distinction between prescriptive and decision- or implementation-support technologies. In practice, this distinction may blur the boundaries for many technologies. In the first section, we gave the example of CAD. This technology can be seen as an aid to realization, since it facilitates design or production. But it also forces the user to a certain extent, compelling them to enter into the logic of the machine. Thus, the long transition to numerical simulation delays the physical prototyping stage, which can certainly represent an economic gain and lead to time saving, but can be difficult for employees used to making design or material choices based on the physical prototype (Cadix and Pointet, 2002). Similarly, a recruitment algorithm or IBM’s Watson program can certainly be used to

Technological Change and Organization

111

support decision-making, but could also replace human decision-making, and even impose their own decision on humans. They would then become prescriptive technologies in the same way as the programs that manage work at Amazon. 3.3.2. Technological ambivalence: the same technology for empowerment and control purposes This blurring of the distinction between prescriptive and assistive technology may explain why the same technology may be used by organizations for empowerment or control purposes. More precisely, it also illustrates the fact that, as indicated in the introduction, a technology refers to all the techniques, procedures, methodologies, equipment and discourse enabling implementations. This means that a technology can carry several possibilities of implementation. This phenomenon, described as technological ambivalence, has been studied, in particular, by Ellul (1988), as discussed in Chapter 1. Technological ambivalence also exists within organizations. In this case, the “negative effects” will refer to the prescriptive dimension of the technology and the notion of control, and the “positive effects” to its dimension of decision support and the notion of empowerment. Thus, the same technology may be used for prescription purposes or as a decisionmaking aid, which will have very different effects on the social entity. Several authors have taken an interest in technology as an instrument of workers’ alienation, in a sometimes Marxist approach linking mechanization, capitalism and the appearance of the proletariat. Marx thus made a distinction between craftsmanship, production and manufacturing. Machines are used in production and manufacturing. In the factory, this mechanization is accompanied by a dispossession of the worker: the worker has his/her labor power, but not the means of production (which therefore refers to the notion of capitalism). Marx then denounced the fact that, in capitalist labor, the worker loses both individual freedom and know-how, in favor of a fragmentation of tasks allowed and accentuated by the machine. Weil (1951) repeated this analysis but introduced a form of ambivalence. Having had experience working in a factory, she established a link between mechanization, Taylorization and worker alienation. The machine is indeed a

112

Technological Change

cornerstone of the rationalization of work, by taking on certain categories of tasks faster than humans, or even by participating in the organization of human work, as in the case of chain work. Besides, mechanization is accompanied by a fragmentation of work, which is segmented into small tasks, each worker being deprived of the vision of the finished product in favor of a much more fragmented vision. This fragmentation constitutes a form of alienation; the worker can only be aware of the physical difficulty of their work, and no longer of his/her meaning. However, this Marxist-style analysis is sometimes mixed with much more optimistic statements about technology. Indeed, the philosopher sometimes proposes as a horizon and as a solution a more complete mechanization of tasks, allowing the worker to be free from all the chain work and the most physically demanding tasks. This apparent contradiction is a good illustration of technological ambivalence: the machine can be considered as a tool of human alienation, but progress in mechanization could, to some extent, contribute to the worker’s empowerment, avoiding the most fragmented and painful tasks. More recently, the digitalization of companies offers us many examples of such ambivalence. For example, the use of electronic messaging, which has spread very rapidly and is now widely used in companies, can have several effects. Electronic messaging facilitates exchanges by shortening the time it takes to receive information. It has thus enabled telework to develop, whether in the form of cooperation between geographically remote sites or in the form of telework. Telework can be seen as an instrument for liberating workers, allowing them to work from a place of their choice, without being subject to the constant presence of their colleagues and superiors. But on the other hand, both sending and receiving emails can be tracked relatively easily, which then gives a particularly controlling manager the opportunity to check at what times the members of his/her teams work and process their emails. In France, for example, case law thus gives the employer the right to control and monitor employees’ activity on the Internet or via email, insofar as employees are informed of this. Similarly, many corporate computers today are equipped with remote communication software that indicates whether employees are “online” or not. From then on, it becomes easy for a manager to remotely check that members of their telework team have their computer turned on and are connected to the Internet at the times they are supposed to work. Geolocation gives other examples of technological ambivalence: used to manage a company’s fleet of vehicles, it can also be used to monitor where employees are located at a particular time of day. Finally, the rise of internal and external social networks is a good

Technological Change and Organization

113

example of technological ambivalence, between empowerment and control (see Box 3.10). Corporate social networks have considerably grown in recent years, following the development of social networks used for private or professional use such as Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn. In addition, companies are also increasingly present on social networks, notably as employers. The advantage of social networks over electronic messaging is that they replace a two-way communication with a much more open communication. This makes it an asset, particularly for cooperation approaches and practices. Internal social networks are regularly presented by companies as a means of facilitating and encouraging employees to speak out. Thus, employees are encouraged to mobilize social networks as tools for work, as well as for exchanges. However, control practices are also very present. Thus, some companies have community managers who check that the messages posted comply with the company’s charter (e.g. on hate messages, racist messages, etc.). Employees’ discourse is even more controlled on external social networks. Employees can be fired for criticizing their company on social networks. Social networks are therefore an example of technological ambivalence: as instruments of employee discourse empowerment, they contain in themselves the possibilities of controlling that discourse, making it much more visible. Box 3.10. Corporate social networks, between empowerment and control (sources: Hauptmann and Steger, 2013; Dudezert, 2018)

This section has therefore illustrated the notion of technological ambivalence, and clarified it by applying it to the question of organization. We thus have examples of technologies that can be used for empowerment, as well as for control purposes, thereby completing the distinction between prescriptive and assistive technologies presented above. 3.4. Technological change as a social process These elements highlight the fact that a technological change in an organization is never just a change in technology. It is also still a social change, as highlighted by the work from the socio-technical perspective

114

Technological Change

discussed in Chapter 1 (Trist, 1978). Three elements deserve to be distinguished. First of all, a technological change may require a development of the social entity and management methods. Secondly, some activities may be threatened by technological change, for example, due to possible automation, which requires organizations to support the employees concerned. This raises the question of the role of the different actors of this sociotechnical change within organizations. 3.4.1. Changes in the social entity and management methods We have already highlighted in the first section of this chapter the profound interaction between the technological and organizational systems. Thus, we explained that certain structural forms, or forms of work organization, could more easily bring about technological innovation. However, beyond this phenomenon of concordance between the objective of the organization and its structure, the interaction between the technological and organizational systems also stems from the fact that the organization constitutes above all a social system, which can be modified by the introduction of a new technology. This is why this introduction is never selfevident: employees must take it on board, sometimes contributing to forms of diversion. The perspective used here to analyze the meeting of technical objects and employees is rather sociological. We will take up the subject from a more psychological perspective in Chapter 4. 3.4.1.1. The organization, a social system and not only technological The sociology of organizations emphasizes the social dimension of the organization, which can be defined as a set of organized human activities. Mintzberg (1979) thus identifies five types of human activities within the organization, corresponding to five social bodies: the strategic summit, the technostructure, the logistical support functions, the hierarchical line and the operational center. Consequently, several questions are addressed by the sociology of organizations: what are the coordination mechanisms between these different functions? How can we ensure that individuals cooperate for a common purpose, which is that of the organization and does not necessarily coincide with their own goals? What are the obstacles and resistance to this

Technological Change and Organization

115

cooperation? What are the relationships between individuals and services? How is the work controlled, evaluated? Etc. The variety of these issues must not obscure their commonality, which lies in the concern for the human factor: relations between individuals, cooperation, control of individuals, and other aspects. This underlines the fact that the tools, techniques and rules for using these technologies are not the only factor structuring individual and collective activities within an organization. More precisely, the Taylorian vision of work, which postulated that there is an ideal way to organize work, through a continuous rationalization of the mechanical and human resources used, has since been challenged by many currents. Thus, the school of human relations, in line with Hawthorne’s experiences in valuing individuals, emphasizes the existence of the need to belong to a group, the search for esteem and good relationships, and the importance of a sense of utility. Other currents or movements have since completed or complicated this vision, but have in common that they question the idea of technological determinism, forgetting the free will of individuals. 3.4.1.2. The introduction of a new technology into a social system If we draw the consequences from this definition of organization, it means that introducing a new technology into an organization will, in most cases, require a reflection on the social changes that must accompany it. The example of the implementation of an internal social network is another example of what we are talking about. As we have seen, one of the aims of an internal social network is to encourage cooperation and employee participation. Some companies even see it as a way to develop creativity, innovation, sharing, exchange, etc. However, the introduction of the social network alone is not enough. It must be accompanied by an evolution of the explicit and implicit rules governing the internal speaking by each employee and perhaps also by an enhancement of this social network by management, a modification of coordination methods aimed at leaving more space for the social network, etc. Without these changes in the social system, which protect employees who use the social network and even guarantee some form of interest in using it, it is likely that employees will not use this new tool (see Box 3.11).

116

Technological Change

The implementation of corporate social networks often faces low employee engagement, who prefer to continue to use external platforms or applications that are often considered more intuitive and practical (Facebook, WhatsApp, etc.). To support this implementation, companies are trying to set up actions to encourage employees to use the company’s internal network. For example, in France, the Bel group has created a participatory innovation program using a collaborative web platform. To encourage employees to participate, major communication efforts have been made, using various media (posters, videos, emails, etc.). A gamification approach (employees earn points when they post an idea, for example) was also used. Finally, a project sponsor was appointed at the executive committee level, in order to convince the management line of the interest of the approach. Also in France, at SNCF, managers who use the internal social network to manage their teams have had to accept that not everyone participates in it and that the uses of the internal social network that have been imagined upstream do not correspond to what is wanted or expected by their teams. This therefore corresponds to a change in managerial culture. Finally, SNCF deduced from this experience that, to get the most out of digitalization, it was necessary to change tools, skills and managerial culture. In Germany, the comparison between the case of a computer company using the Yammer tool to communicate, and the case of a university research group using a similar tool called Communote, makes it possible to identify that the needs in support of the use of the new tools can vary according to the organization, its sector, its culture and its social entity. However, in both cases, the introduction of the tool was the result of a decision taken not by the hierarchy, but by a team or even an employee. This is due to the fact that both structures have a very flat hierarchy and a high degree of employee autonomy. Box 3.11. Support for the implementation of social networks (sources: Hauptmann and Steger, 2013; Dudezert, 2018)

These examples are particularly rich because they highlight the many changes in the social system that technological change may require: changes in the explicit and implicit rules of the organization, changes in assessment methods, changes in working methods, etc.

Technological Change and Organization

117

The modification of the organization’s explicit rules refers to the formal processes and rules that govern the daily lives of individuals within the organization. In the example of the social network, it is, for example, the explicit rules of speaking: who has the right to speak about a particular subject, who has the right to express a critical opinion on a particular subject, for example. Changing the implicit rules is probably more difficult to achieve because it cannot be decreed from above. Rather, it corresponds to a change in representations and values. In the example of employee discourse and the introduction of a new social network, it should be recalled that most large companies are organized in a fairly hierarchical way, where expression is reserved for managers or experts. As a result, if the organization wishes to encourage employees to speak out on the internal social network, these implicit or explicit rules must be modified so that everyone feels free to express themselves. This will involve, for example, a few forward-thinking employees who will see in the social network a way to put their knowledge and expertise in the spotlight, as well as by the company valuing them in order to give them an exemplary status. Changing the way work is assessed is also central. It involves thinking about the interrelationships between a technology and a type of evaluation. It acknowledges that the introduction of a technology can change the activities and content of the work. For example, while a doctor’s performance today is closely linked to his or her ability to make the right diagnoses, it is likely that the introduction of new diagnostic technologies will change the way doctors’ skills are assessed, for example, by directing them towards the relational dimension, which machines cannot replace at present. Changing assessment methods has many effects on human resources management practices, including recruitment, compensation and career management for example. Finally, the modification of working methods has two dimensions: the modification of coordination and the modification of management methods. Coordination mechanisms are key dimensions of an organization (Mintzberg, 1979). Therefore, modifying them requires considerable reflection and effort on the part of the organization. If we take the example of the introduction of electronic messaging, this has had many effects upon organizations, promoting remote coordination as we have seen. This has made it possible to envisage cooperation between geographically distant sites, including international ones, even on complex projects requiring regular exchanges. But it also meant reviewing the coordination

118

Technological Change

mechanisms, for example, by assigning immediate written and digital exchanges (electronic messaging) a key role in this coordination. The change in management methods results from both the change in evaluation rules and the change in coordination methods. Indeed, ensuring coordination and evaluating employees are two central dimensions of the manager’s role and direct supervision (Mintzberg, 1979). In the example already mentioned of teleworking made possible by the introduction of remote means of communication, this introduction implies a change in managerial posture, based more on trust and less on control, since working remotely implies partly escaping the visual and physical control of the manager. Finally, the introduction of a new technology requires significant adaptation efforts on the part of an organization: technological change cannot occur without a change in the social system. This point is underlined by the notion of a “socio-technical project”, which recalls the strong interrelationships between technology and society. 3.4.1.3. The appropriation of technological change by employees However, the organization’s adaptation efforts are not enough: in many cases, the introduction of a new technology within an organization also requires an effort of appropriation by internal actors (employees). However, this appropriation7 may ultimately lead to a form of misuse of the technology: new uses may appear, instead of the uses initially planned by the designers of the technologies. 3.4.1.3.1. Three “perspectives” on appropriation A large amount of research, both in sociology and management, focuses on the appropriation of tools by users. A book coordinated by De Vaujany (2005), in particular, sheds light on this question, highlighting several points. Among other things, he insists that any tool has a form of flexibility, which leaves users room for maneuver in the use they will make of it. It is this flexibility, referring to the elements described above of the ambivalence of the technology, that explains the possible occurrence of diversion phenomena. For example, the implementation of a new information system in an organization can result in a wide variety of practices and uses. It may even

7 To account for human confrontation with technical objects, the appropriation paradigm competes with others such as those of acceptance and symbiosis that are presented in Chapter 4.

Technological Change and Organization

119

encounter resistance that could lead to the abandonment of the new system, or a significant part of its functionalities, as Pichault (1990) shows. De Vaujany (2005) then identifies three types of “views” that can be applied to appropriation (see Box 3.12). This analytical grid seems particularly rich for understanding the phenomenon of the appropriation of a technology by the actors of an organization and its different phases. De Vaujany (2005) proposes to mobilize three perspectives on the appropriation of tools. The first (rational) perspective corresponds to the point of view of tool designers: what have they planned as use, as purpose, for the tool? The second (psychocognitive) refers to the learning dynamics necessary to use the tool. Finally, the third (socio-political) perspective refers to the sociological processes that will accompany the appropriation of the tool: possible recomposition of relationships, power relations, etc. In the same book, Carton, De Vaujany, Perez and Romeyer give the example of the implementation of an information system in a university hospital center. This system aims to enable the exchange of information between the various actors (human resources, purchasing, procurement, etc.). Rational perspective. The system has several objectives: to promote greater efficiency in the production of care, improve the quality and safety of services, reduce hospitalization times, and better understand and evaluate production as part of activity-based pricing. The authors then mobilize socio-political and psychocognitive perspectives to identify factors that facilitate users’ appropriation of the software. Sociopolitical perspective. Appropriation depends on the social and political representativeness of the people who have participated in the choice of the future information system: it is important that these people represent all users and are recognized and listened to. Appropriation is also promoted by the fact that the use of the software is a factor allowing integration or strengthening professional roles. The use of an information system can indeed allow different actors from different departments to cooperate more closely together, to better understand organizational functioning, etc. Finally, appropriation can also be promoted by taking into account the demands of the various users when defining the information system implementation project. Psychocognitive perspective. User appropriation depends, in part, on an understanding of the added value of the new system and the objectives of the project, and the management method chosen for the project. But it also depends

120

Technological Change

on the room for maneuver left to users in the way they use the new tool. An adaptation phase can therefore be planned (combining, for example, the old and new systems). Box 3.12. The appropriation of a new information system by users (source: De Vaujany, 2005)

3.4.1.3.2. Technological polyphony The variety of forms appropriation takes can be explained and illustrated by the concept of polyphony (Belova, King and Sliwa, 2008), which refers to the fact that an organization brings together a great diversity of rationalities and interests. As a result, the same tool may be used differently by different actors. Pichault (1990) thus gives three examples of computerization that have led to misuse. These examples, although relatively old, illustrate the variety of forms of appropriation of the same tool within the same organization (see Box 3.13). It should be stressed that, according to Pichault (1990), these misappropriations are, in fact, essential conditions for employees to appropriate a new technology. Moreover, according to this author, the desire for rationalization embodied in the fact of limiting employees’ room for maneuver in their use of a tool as much as possible can undoubtedly lead to a failure of the technological–organizational change, i.e. to a refusal of the tool by employees and even to conflicts. This last point seems essential and illustrates once again the profound intertwining between technological change and social change. Example 1 concerns an administrative department that employs two types of employees, agents who welcome users and must provide them with the requested documents (certificate of address, birth, etc.) and operators who must record the data in the machine. Computerization means to increasingly use a machine to carry out information retrieval and document production. In fact, agents show a variable appropriation of the machine: some continue to carry out retrievals and produce documents manually, while others use the machine for the most part. On the other hand, operators, who are expected to simply enter the information indicated on the manual sheets and must return the sheets to the relevant department in the event of rejection by the machine, also have a variety of attitudes. Some do not hesitate to take initiatives not foreseen in their role, such as correcting inconsistent information

Technological Change and Organization

121

in a form themselves so that it is accepted by the machine instead of sending it back to the department concerned, which would imply an increase in the processing time. Example 2 involves a hospital that has installed computers at registration counters to automate the recording of patient data. However, the computerization of other services encountered strong resistance, which led to the abandonment of part of the project. Thus, all invoicing and accounting work remain done by hand in many departments. Example 3 concerns a bank that wanted to computerize part of its processes to improve productivity. However, some agents continue to use paper, which they find more convenient. This leads them to duplicate their tasks: looking for a transaction on the screen, then copying it onto paper, instead of doing everything on the screen. In addition, computer tools are regularly used for personal purposes. In fact, some managers even encourage this trend, believing that it allows employees to familiarize themselves with IT. Box 3.13. Examples of misuse of computer tools (source: Pichault, 1990)

3.4.2. Support for employees whose activities are threatened by technological change Beyond this appropriation dimension, technological change is linked to social or societal change when it has an effect on activities and jobs, which has been relatively common during major industrial revolutions, as discussed in Chapter 1. More recently, computerization and digitalization have also contributed to new replacements of human by machine, leading to a question, now very present in the public debate, about the potential end of work. Indeed, computerization and digitalization offer many opportunities for business automation. Advances in artificial intelligence, for example, which refers to the construction of machines that reproduce or imitate human reasoning and capabilities, make it possible to develop programs that can perform increasingly complex tasks, not just simple and repetitive tasks, such as the machines described by Marx. One of the particularities of current technological progress then lies in the fact that machines can nowadays

122

Technological Change

supplant humans in their intellectual activities, and not only physical ones (Harari, 2018). Thus, artificial intelligence has many applications today, from visual recognition to automatic natural language processing. Some jobs are strongly affected by these technological changes, and two cases in particular arise: jobs that are likely to evolve and jobs that are likely to disappear. In both cases, the organization’s support of employees is necessary. 3.4.2.1. Changing professions 3.4.2.1.1. Job transformation The case of secretaries or executive assistants seems to be particularly emblematic of professions that change under the influence of technological change, because this profession continued to evolve during the 20th and the current 21st Centuries, but has not disappeared (see Box 3.14). At the beginning of the 20th Century, the role of executive assistant included shorthand typing as one of it’s essential aspects. Shorthand is about taking notes very quickly by hand and typing text on a keyboard. The typewriter was widely introduced into offices at the beginning of the 20th Century and disrupted office work by allowing texts to be duplicated and documents to be standardized. The use of the typewriter and especially shorthand requires skills that make it a profession in its own right, a shorthand typist. In the 1920s, the invention of the phonograph as a dictation device reduced the importance of shorthand in favor of typing, which was associated with a decline in the profession. Finally, in the 1990–2000s, with the introduction of microcomputing and software that made document formatting and computer input much easier, the proportion of the profession devoted to typing tended to decline. Indeed, it is probably faster today for a manager to enter a written document himself/herself on the computer than to dictate it to an assistant who will then enter it. While this typing dimension remains even smaller, it can be assumed that it will completely disappear with the technological progress made in the field of automatic voice transcription software. However, the job of executive assistant has not disappeared. It should be stressed that this profession has a strong relational and even political dimension, which is sometimes overshadowed by the focus on technological tasks: managing dissatisfied interlocutors when an appointment has to be postponed or prioritizing certain requests to the detriment of others, for example. This dimension of the profession seems difficult to automate.

Technological Change and Organization

123

Some start-ups now offer a virtual management assistant system, capable of making appointments and managing an agenda. However, this virtual assistant does not integrate the political and relational dimension at all, which undoubtedly limits its establishment in the company. Box 3.14. The job of secretary or executive assistant, constantly evolving under the effect of technological changes (sources: Gardey, 1995, 2008)

In fact, most professions are likely to evolve as soon as a technology makes it possible to work differently. We have already seen, for example, the case of CAD in the automotive sector, which changes both design and production work. In the medical sector, the emergence of new tools or technologies has also changed the way people do their jobs. For example, the rise of local anesthesia now allows dentists to perform operations with minimal suffering for patients, when most dental operations are actually painful. Similarly, discoveries and advances in radiography have significantly changed the methods of diagnosis and care of diseases: diagnosis can be made well before the external signs and symptoms of disease, and much more accurately. 3.4.2.1.2. Support for the employees concerned The potential importance of these changes gives the organization a key role in supporting the employees concerned. This support may require training and change management approaches. The aim of the training is to provide employees with the new skills they need to continue performing their tasks: using new software, understanding a new technology, etc. Change management approaches aim first and foremost to better identify the effects of change on employees, and not only in terms of skills. Thus, a change in activity or tasks can also affect the professional identity of employees and provoke resistance. These steps are then aimed at limiting these resistances. They can be started well before the change takes place: they then aim to prepare employees for a possible change or even to make them actors of this change. This is the case, for example, for learning expeditions, which are increasing considerably in companies (see Box 3.15).

124

Technological Change

A learning expedition consists of taking employees out of the company’s premises to meet other professionals, other environments and other sectors. These “expeditions” can be of variable duration (a few days, one or even several weeks). The important thing is to open the employees’ minds so that they can see new things. Many learning expeditions take the form of discovery trips abroad; others aim to change the professional environment (e.g. taking the executives of a large company to a start-up). One of the preferred places for a learning expedition for European company executives is obviously Silicon Valley in California, as an emblematic place of innovation. Regardless of the location, the format remains relatively identical: participants visit companies or associations and thus see new ways of working and new work tools. Some companies go a little further by offering longer periods of change of scenery: executives of large companies may thus be seconded to start-ups for a few months. The objective is to give them new work experiences, to show them other realities, which may represent a new horizon for the world of big business in the hope that they will contribute to these changes in their initial business when the time comes. Box 3.15. Supporting employees in anticipating change: learning expedition approaches (source: Chaintreuil, 2015)

3.4.2.2. Declining professions However, technological change can also have a more dramatic impact, leading to the elimination of some occupations. 3.4.2.2.1. The disappearance of certain jobs Contrary to common belief, it is not always the least qualified jobs that present the highest level of automation risk. Indeed, some very complex tasks for a human being, which are found in the most qualified professions, can be relatively simple for a machine. This paradox, known as the “Moravec paradox”, has its source in the distinction between sensorimotor tasks and reasoning tasks. Thus, some sensorimotor tasks are, in fact, difficult to program electronically (throwing and capturing a ball, for example, or recognizing faces), while some reasoning skills are easy to program (logical reasoning, or mental calculation, for example). Even if this paradox, which dates back to the 1980s, tends to lose its relevance in view of

Technological Change and Organization

125

the progress made by robotics in the fields of motor tasks, we can still give examples of it today. For example, information processing tasks, which are more common in skilled jobs, can be relatively easy to automate. For example, while a significant part of good lawyers’/traders’ work lies in their ability to process a large amount of information and make a quick decision based on that information, machines can probably do better than human beings in this type of activity. For example, they can perform complex calculations (in the case of financial trading algorithms) or scan case law texts (in the case of legal professions) more quickly. On the other hand, some physical tasks such as catching an object while flying, or cutting hair, are more difficult to perform for machines, while they require few qualifications for human beings. However, the scope of tasks that can be controlled by machines is constantly expanding. Thus, facial recognition tasks are now practically acquired for machines. But they have required computer development efforts and still represent higher costs than the very sophisticated calculation programs available in most college or high school calculators. In addition, tasks involving relational skills require even greater programming efforts, since they require the ability not only to analyze the environment but also to adapt to it. As a result, the trading profession has a higher risk of automation than that of a gardener or hairdresser. In short, the most easily automated jobs combine a low relational dimension with tasks that can be easily performed by machines such as those related to massive information processing or repetitive tasks. Some jobs may also be delegated to a certain extent to the user or customer as a result of the development of new technologies. More and more supermarkets are using automatic cash register systems, where the customer scans his/her items himself/herself. A single employee is then required to supervise islands of four to six tills, which reduces the number of employees required to maintain them. Similarly, many websites require the user to enter a certain amount of data, which is therefore work done by the user and not by actors on the website. Another example is “captcha”, which aims to distinguish between humans and robots on the Internet. These tests, based on optical character recognition, can also potentially be used to facilitate the digitization of books. In this case, the user faces two words, the first of which is known, and the second unknown because it is poorly scanned, or a poor quality image. The user enters the two words successively: the first one verifies that he/she is a human, and by entering the second word, he/she

126

Technological Change

allows the content aggregator to record the meaning of the word. These cases of disguised labor and consumer work are regularly highlighted in connection with the Internet. The issue of business automation is becoming increasingly important in the public debate. For example, the BBC offers an online simulator to predict the risk of automation for a large number of jobs, based on a study conducted at Oxford University8. While risk estimates are not stabilized and are regularly called into question, there is a consensus among the various points of view that digitalization is potentially destructive of certain jobs. An important and unresolved question to date is the extent of these job losses, and whether they can be offset by an equivalent number of job creations. A World Economic Forum report (Weff, 2016), for example, predicts that 7 million jobs will be destroyed internationally between 2015 and 2020 in connection with digitalization, with little compensation in the creation of 2 million jobs. It should also be noted that some jobs or sectors combine job losses with changes in them. This is the case, for example, for agriculture. As a result of mechanization and the search for productivity gains, agricultural work considerably changed during the 20th and 21st Centuries. Thus, between the two world wars, plant breeding and fertilizers began to appear, allowing for better soil productivity. After the war, research in the field of plant and animal breeding intensified: in France, the creation of INRA (Institut national de la recherche agronomique) in 1946 testified to the importance attached by the public authorities to this type of research. More recently, the rise of agricultural machinery has further changed agricultural work and reduced labor requirements. For example, the recent rise of agricultural drones makes it possible both to improve the accuracy of weather forecasts and to facilitate the surveillance of large farms, or, in some countries where this is not prohibited, the spraying of plant protection products. 3.4.2.2.2. The employability of the employees concerned For the organizations, this means supporting the employees concerned. This aims, in particular, to contribute to the development of employability, for example through training, or by organizing career paths offering a variety of experiences and thus the acquisition of a certain number of skills. More specifically, developing employability requires promoting the 8 www.bbc.com/news/technology-34066941, accessed December 2019.

Technological Change and Organization

127

acquisition of transferable skills, rather than specific ones. This represents a real challenge and a real disruption for companies, which are accustomed to reaching targets of employees gaining specific skills that generate less risk of loss of human capital. Companies have few incentives to support employees whom technological change may make redundant. It may then be up to the public authorities to create these incentives or take over by offering training programs on jobs of the future. The role of public authorities seems unavoidable, since a large number of jobs are threatened, which could constitute a factor of mass unemployment. Finally, technological change has a significant effect on people’s daily activities and actual work. Several degrees of change have been identified, from jobs that are evolving under the pressure of technological change to jobs that are at risk of disappearing. In both cases, this requires the organization to play a role in supporting the employees concerned. While the support of employees whose profession is changing seems to be well taken into account by organizations today, the support of employees whose profession is disappearing, which aims to develop their employability, especially externally, is undoubtedly more uncertain: organizations are not used to contributing willingly to the development of the external employability of their employees. This may require a paradigm shift for organizations and an incentive stance on the part of public authorities. 3.4.3. The actors of technological change in organizations We highlighted the intertwining of technological and social change, the role of organizations, organizational polyphony, the need to support employees, etc. These different elements highlight the key role of certain actors inside and outside the organization: – the technological actors, first of all, who will design the technological change; – the decision-making actors, who will take the decision to introduce this change in the organization; – trade union actors, who will influence this decision; – employees and users, who will contribute to redefining the scope of this change through their appropriation;

128

Technological Change

– finally, technological change is embedded, as we have seen in the organization, in a more global ecosystem, including, for example, consultants and start-ups. Finally, this section summarizes the contributions of this chapter by specifying the outlines of technological change in organizations. 3.4.3.1. Technological actors Technological actors design technologies and, in this way, contribute to defining aspect of technological change. As we have seen, many technological actors are located outside the organization: researchers, engineers belonging to companies proposing technologies, etc. However, in some cases, technological actors are located within the organization itself. This is the case, for example, for IT services, which can develop new software or new internal technological solutions. For example, some companies have taken the gamble of developing their own payroll or training management software. However, internal technological actors may suffer from their lack of specialization and time to devote to research and innovation. This is why, as we have seen, some companies are trying to create conditions that encourage employee participation in innovation, such as intrapreneurship programs. 3.4.3.2. Decision-making actors Decision-makers decide on the introduction of a new technology into the organization. This decision can be based on several types of rationality. The search for productivity gains is regularly put forward as an argument justifying the introduction of a new technology. Thus, the massive computerization of companies and, in particular, of administrative work since the 1980s is largely in line with this logic (Pichault, 1990). Similarly, all automation technologies contribute to productivity gains. However, other rationalities may also be at work. Thus, the fear of missing a technological milestone can contribute, as well as the desire to imitate competitors. Currently, some areas produce innovations very regularly, thus contributing to constant technological change. This is the case, for example, in the field of mobile telephony, which has seen a succession of touch screens, 3G, 4G, 5G, color screens, fingerprint reading or facial recognition, and soon flexible or foldable screens or personal

Technological Change and Organization

129

assistant applications. This sector is just one example of the rapid pace of technological change. This speed and probably also the difficulty of anticipating change can lead organizations to fear that they will be overwhelmed by technological change that they would not have seen coming. This can then encourage decision-makers to introduce the vast majority of new technologies into their organization, without always questioning their meaning and contribution. Moreover, in a context of uncertainty, organizations have a strong interest in developing a form of mimicry, i.e. in aligning themselves with the behaviors of other organizations. As a result, if a large company decides to introduce a change, competing companies may tend to make the same decision. This is what neo-institutional theorists call mimetic isomorphism: DiMaggio and Powell (1983) explain that most forms of technological–organizational changes at the end of the 20th Century came not from a search for efficiency and rationalization, but from a process of homogenization of organizations. They point out that, in uncertain environments, when organizations’ objectives are ambiguous or the environment creates uncertainty (competition, technological change, etc.), doing the same as competitors in the sector seems the best strategy to adopt to limit the risks of failure. The disadvantage of this strategy is that the transferability of some changes is limited. As we have seen, the success of the introduction of a new technology depends largely on its adoption by users and therefore on the company’s context. Implementing a new technology for the sole reason that a competing organization has done so may result in a failed adoption. Finally, the decision to introduce a new technology into an organization can meet several types of rationality and thus pursue different objectives. 3.4.3.3. Trade union actors Once the introductory decision has been taken by the decision-making actors, the trade union actors can help to define the outlines and modalities of this introduction. In some countries, such as France, trade unions are required to be consulted when a new technology is introduced that could change working conditions. However, the different unions in a company may have different strategies for technological change. This is a phenomenon described by Pichault (1990) for Belgium: some unions favor a negotiation strategy, others reformism, others opposition. However, whatever their strategy, unions

130

Technological Change

generally agree on several types of demands: maintaining membership, avoiding deterioration in working conditions, protecting individual freedoms. Several difficulties may arise for trade unions and decision-makers when discussing the introduction of a new technology. Firstly, it is often difficult to anticipate the effects of this technology on the volume of long-term employment and working conditions. Indeed, as we have seen, the same technology can finally be used in a very different way by different line managers, and thus lead to variable situations for employees. Secondly, the social entity may present very different demands regarding technological change: some employees will demand more efficient equipment, more modern software, more efficient machines, while others will be suspicious of the introduction of these new features. Therefore, taking into account the variety of these points of view is a major difficulty. Negotiating with trade unions on these issues can then provide some assurance that different points of view are taken into account (see Box 3.16). In France, since the 2016 law, companies have had an obligation to negotiate with trade unions on the issue of the right to disconnect. Some companies have taken advantage of this obligation as an opportunity to negotiate with trade unions on digitalization more broadly. Company agreements on the subject can cover different dimensions: the right to disconnection, of course, as well as employee training, job retention commitments and supervision of experiments with new technologies in the working environment, for example. Box 3.16. Agreements on the right to disconnect and digital technology in France

3.4.3.4. Employees As we have seen, the employees, agents and, more generally, the users who will use the technology will also contribute to redefining its outlines. Through their use of the new technology, they will strongly define the outlines and limits of the technological change initially planned by designers and decision-makers. We have thus given examples of companies that, having implemented software, finally found that employees kept on working without the software. Conversely, in other cases, employees may themselves be drivers of technological change, introducing new ways of working into the company through new technologies, software or

Technological Change and Organization

131

applications. For example, today, many employees whose organizations do not offer mobile instant messaging or file sharing services use external applications such as WhatsApp to coordinate, or Dropbox to exchange files. In this way, they contribute to introducing technological change into the organization. 3.4.3.5. External actors Finally, technological change places the organization in a broader ecosystem, including, for example, research laboratories, as well as consulting firms and start-ups. Consulting firms promote the diffusion of technologies within companies, through their role as interfaces that give them access to different organizations and companies. They thus directly contribute to the phenomenon of mimetic isomorphism, by disseminating, for example, what they consider to be “good practices”, of which the adoption of new technologies can be a part. In addition to this dissemination role, they often also play a supporting role and, in this way, contribute even more to mimetic isomorphism, if they offer similar support services to the various client organizations. As for start-ups, they now play a considerable role in the creation and dissemination of technologies, particularly in the IT world. Indeed, in this sector, technologies can sometimes represent a level of expertise that most organizations do not have: semantic analysis algorithms, for example, or machine learning algorithms, are certainly significant innovations, but do not, in themselves, carry out the instructions for use to disseminate their operations in the organization. As a result, it is mainly start-ups that position themselves at the interface between these technologies and the organization, by offering the latter new products or uses that incorporate the algorithms themselves. Thus, in most developed countries, start-ups are now multiplying in the field of Big Data applied to marketing, accounting, human resources, etc. 3.4.3.6. A multiplicity of actors The list of these different actors clearly shows that technological change does not depend solely on the technological actors. A conclusive diagram summarizes the role of each actor and thus highlights that technological

132

Technological Change

change in organizations does not stop with the design of a new tool by technological actors (see Figure 3.2).

Figure 3.2. The different actors of technological change in organizations

Thus, the technological actors design a new technology, possibly in conjunction with external actors such as consulting firms or start-ups. But this new technology must then be the subject of a decision to introduce it into the organization, which is done by the decision-making (management) and trade union actors. In addition, these two categories of actors can participate in defining the rules for the use of the technology, for example, by refusing certain uses. Thus, as we have seen, a human resources department may wish to adopt a CV pre-selection algorithm, while refusing to allow this algorithm to replace human decision entirely. Finally, the new technology is then appropriated by the employees. However, this appropriation can, in turn, redefine the outlines of the new technology, as illustrated by the many examples given in the chapter. Finally, the technology as initially thought by the designers may be considerably modified during this process. This plurality of actors already highlights the difficulty of driving technological change in organizations, whose different strategies will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 5.

Technological Change and Organization

133

The variety of actors corresponds to the notion of “technological democracy”, already mentioned in Chapter 2 (Callon, 2003). Sociologist Michel Callon thus deplores the fact that technology remains today mainly in the hands of researchers and engineers. This monopoly is accentuated by a distinction in the debates between the content of technologies, which remains the preserve of researchers and engineers, on the one hand, and the values, ethics and purpose of these technologies, which can be discussed by citizens and elected officials, on the other hand. However, the growing awareness of the secondary effects of the use of technology on the environment or democracy is gradually blurring this distinction, or at least calling for it to disappear. Callon thus gives the example of GMOs or nuclear waste, which have given rise to important debates within civil and non-technological society. The more recent emergence of algorithms that partly govern relationships to culture or consumption through their suggestions is also becoming a subject of debate, even for non-specialists (Cardon, 2015). Thus, citizens are increasingly convinced that technologies can have an impact on their daily lives, and as such judge it to be legitimate to ask for information and debate the very content of technologies. For their part, some scientists call for the production of scientific and technological knowledge to be more guided by moral and ethical imperatives. The graph above illustrates well that, when a new technology is implemented in an organization, this distinction no longer makes sense. Indeed, non-technological actors (decision-making actors, trade unions, employees, etc.) participate to a significant extent in the definition of the technology, its uses and outlines. It therefore seems illusory to think that the content of the technologies exclusively remains in the hands of engineers and researchers. This then calls for another perspective, the socio-technical perspective. Trist (1978) points out that separate approaches to social and technological systems cannot be sufficient to reflect reality, given the profound interactions between these two systems. Therefore, from this perspective, the two systems must be viewed together. This perspective is relevant for understanding different levels (macro, meso, micro). Thus, the organization (meso-level) actually forms a system that combines a social and a technical subsystem: a socio-technical system (Trist, 1978). The optimization of this system then involves a joint optimization of the two dimensions, which cannot evolve one without the other. This is also illustrated in Figure 3.2.

4 Technological Change and the Individual

The previous chapters called for the mobilization of disciplines concerned with technological change at the level of society as a whole or of productive organizations. At the individual level, a more psychological interpretation is useful. However, the association of individuals with technologies cannot be understood solely through their own characteristics (attitudes, motivations, personality traits, etc.). From the perspective of occupational psychology and activity-oriented1 ergonomics, we will focus on them essentially as they are associated with technical objects in an activity system. Moreover, without forgetting the specificity of each technology, which can have its own effects, we will focus on digital technology, specifically information and communication technologies (ICTs), to reflect the most significant transformations of the current era, those of the “digital revolution”. In a first section (section 4.1), we will first locate the technical object (called “digital technologies”) in the system of human activities. We will then focus (section 4.2) on the encounter between the individual and the technical object, which will be captured at three levels: object design, adoption and use. We will conclude this section by focusing on the notion of the “technological individual”. We will continue by focusing on the effects of technological change on work structures (section 4.3). 1 The specialized literature contrasts the ergonomics of the human factor, centered on the intrinsic properties of the human being at work, an older theory and predominantly seen in the English-speaking world, with ergonomics centered on the activity, more recent and especially seen in Francophone world.

Technological Change, First Edition. Clotilde Coron and Patrick Gilbert. © ISTE Ltd 2020. Published by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

136

Technological Change

Finally, we will examine the consequences of the digital transformation of activities on workers’ skills (section 4.4). 4.1. Activity and technical object We recall here that the technical object is the most concrete element of technology. Composed of one or more tangible and intangible components (organs, information, energy and other resources), arranged in a functional way, it has been designed and built to meet one or more specific needs. We will define its place in the different fields of human activity, before addressing the mediations by which technical objects operate in each activity. In doing so, we will support the individual through their activities taken as a whole and then through their own activity as a worker. 4.1.1. The technical object in the activity system We start from the theory presented in Chapter 1 (section 1.1.3.3), according to which the technical object is nothing outside the activity system. It can only be understood in relation to the human environment associated with it. It makes sense, through the use that is made of it, in all human activities. As indicated in our general introduction, the book focuses on the level of the organization. But it would be very simplistic and outdated to consider work activities as a completely separate field. This is because no human conduct escapes the instrumentation process through the mediation of technological artifacts. While for a long time and for most workers, there was a clear distinction between the private and professional spheres, this is no longer the case today. The concept of “activity system” developed by occupational and organizational psychology reflects the reciprocal influence of working and non-working life. The idea, developed by Curie et al. (1990), is that each activity using limited means (time, energy) constitutes both a constraint and a resource for those activities that are relevant to other contexts. To capture this system of activities, these researchers designed an inventory of the activity system which aims to describe the structure of each subsystem (or activity area) and the relationships that unite or oppose the activity areas. We have used them

Technological Change and the Individual

137

as a basis for providing an overview of the multiple contributions that digital technology has made to human activity (see Table 4.1). Field of activity

Contribution 1. Family life

Managing the family budget well

Online comparisons of various articles

Improving the comfort of my home or making repairs

Online decoration tutorials

Creating or recreating a family, a home

Dating websites

Making myself available to help my parents, visiting them

Communication tools to call and chat for free

Renewing or acquiring household equipment (freezers, dishwashers, vacuum cleaners)

Online sales websites

2. Professional life Doing part of my professional work at home

Laptops, the Internet, printers, scanners, professional applications

Looking for ways to increase my income (overtime, undeclared work, getting an allowance, etc.)

Sites for doing small paid tasks (paid surveys, product tests, etc.)

Resuming studies

Free MOOCs (massive open online courses) or other online courses Distance learning at all levels (up to long term higher education diplomas)

Making business trips outside the region

Online mapping

3. Personal and social life Having free time to read

Digital reading on smartphones and other devices

Resting or relaxing

Streaming movies, online music

Doing some DIY work

Online shops, DIY tutorials

Improving or maintaining my intellectual level

Online encyclopedias, free courses, free e-books

Buying books or magazines

Online sales sites, e-books

Having free time to listen to music

MP3, MP4 players

Going out to restaurants, theaters, cinemas, etc.

Booking sites, carpooling

Going on vacation (or going more often)

Booking sites, comparison websites

Making friends

Social networks

Maintaining relationships with people in good positions

Professional social networks

Table 4.1. Some contributions of digital technology to the system of activity

138

Technological Change

The effects of digital technology are not limited to cumulative contributions to a structure of activity that would remain unchanged. In particular, the permeability of the boundaries between personal and professional life is increased by the use of ICT. For example, in a survey of 247 employees, El Wafi et al. (2016) showed that a large majority of respondents (70.9%) use the Internet at home to meet business needs and, similarly, use it at work to meet personal needs (63.5%). These authors also highlight that strategies differ from one individual to another, with some trying to minimize interference between the professional and private domains, while others, on the contrary, mix the two domains. Some technical objects, some of the most everyday and seemingly harmless ones, very actively organize porosity between fields of activity. This is the case for cell phones, whose contribution goes beyond breaking down the boundaries between private and professional life. As Bardin (2002) noted, cell phones encourage social practices that are largely based on cultural norms from the professional sphere: they must be fast, functional and brief, and access networks of numerous and compartmentalized contacts.

4.1.2. The technical object and its mediations 4.1.2.1. From the tool to the instrument While technologies “do something” to humans when they are confronted with them, it would obviously be reductive to see the person only as a passive receiver of the changes administered to them. In Rabardel’s work (1995), the tool is constituted by use. It only becomes an instrument at the end of a process of instrumental genesis, when it is accompanied by cognitive patterns of use, which refers to the process of appropriation by users that we will examine later (see section 4.2). In terms of activity theory, the instrument is a mixed entity that is both a subject and an object. In an organizational context, technical objects can, in fact, be assimilated to intermediaries between an individual subject, an object (the purpose of the activity) and other individuals. As materials for organized action, most of them fulfill, to varying degrees and in an

Technological Change and the Individual

139

increasingly obvious way given the increasing importance of information processing, the role of management tools. Thus, inspired by Chiapello and Gilbert (2016), we can identify three distinct mediations: “pragmatic” (decide and act), “epistemic” (learn) and “political”2 (influence, control and arbitrate). 4.1.2.2. A triple mediation 4.1.2.2.1. Pragmatic mediation Pragmatic mediation is the most obvious mediation, the one that corresponds to the usual definition of a tool: what makes it possible to act on the object and thus to carry out work. In pragmatic mediation, technical objects are the means of a transformative action directed towards a management object (often an operational objective) on which the emphasis is placed. Most often, the justifications for the introduction of a technological innovation are explicitly based on this pragmatic mediation. For example, an electronic calendar might be introduced to manage the user’s time, to organize meetings without wasting time (possibility of consulting the free time slots of their employees at any time), to delegate the management of their schedule to an employee without risk of error and to manage resources shared by teams. 4.1.2.2.2. Epistemic mediation In epistemic mediation, the technical objects equipping the action are cognitive tools that convey and produce mental representations. They allow the subject to access knowledge about the object. Knowledge may have been previously deposited in the instrument, in the form of processing rules, or may accumulate there, in the form of data collected within the context. For example, an organization may introduce an enterprise resource planning system to improve the quality of the data at its disposal in order to base its decision-making on reliable information or to have a single reference source shared by all its units. But the software package itself, before it is

2 Rabardel (1995) speaks of collaborative mediation, which we wanted to broaden, collaboration being only one of the possible expressions of politics, as an influential mechanism governing social relations.

140

Technological Change

activated, is not empty of intentions. It conveys a vision of reality that denies the variety of specific interpretation grids, especially when its various modules are built on the basis of best practices. 4.1.2.2.3. Political mediation Engaged in control and arbitration actions, the technical objects equipping the action are agents of influence. As such, they perform a political function, even when they are not designed or mobilized for this purpose. They act on the relationships of influence, reproducing them by legitimizing and reifying them. In political mediation, technical objects are a means of regulating the behavior of social actors. Certain technologies are explicitly covered by this register, as is the case with cyber surveillance in its application at work. In the critique of transparency, two simple images are contrasted: that of the supervisor (the dominant one) and that of the supervised (the employee that the supervisor wants to be docile). But political mediation is expressed through many other technologies and in a more subtle way: groupware structures the rules of information sharing, electronic process management consolidates and tags pre-established decision-making paths, electronic messaging encourages interdisciplinary communication, etc. This type of mediation is especially highlighted by critical studies. In the most recent literature, the emphasis has been on transparency. This notion is one of those that spontaneously meets with almost unanimous approval. It is difficult to be against it (what does one have to hide?). Investigative journalism, as well as the rise of regulatory bodies, certainly have a lot to do with it. Transparency, being assimilated to giving all available information, obviously has a direct link with information and communication technologies. For Gallot and Verlaet (2016), two researchers in the information and communication sciences, transparency could well be the utopia of digital technology, for which everyone can build a virtual reality by preserving opacity and secrecy. In any case, transparency does not automatically translate into information democracy, as shown in the example developed in Box 4.1.

Technological Change and the Individual

141

In a study on social dialogue on corporate strategy, which concerned 13 companies in various sectors, the authors show that the difficulties of appropriation of information are reinforced by digitization: “The format of the digital medium (Excel, SharePoint, or other) is not mastered by everyone, hence a long period of appropriation and adaptation. This digital format and the lack of training widen the digital divide between categories of personnel: to access the BDES (economic and social database) externally, it is necessary to be able to connect to its professional messaging system, a right reserved for managers at Sporclerc (a sports equipment distribution company). This barrier is particularly sensitive in low-skilled labor sectors because not everyone has access to a computer or the Internet” (authors’ translation). Box 4.1. Ideology of transparency and internal communication (source: Fleury et al., 2018, p. 129)

4.1.2.2.4. Sources of tension These three mediations are totally incompatible with the linear vision of the deterministic perspective. They are therefore a source of tension, due to the interactions within the management system, which does not obey this linear vision. Pragmatic mediation is opposed to social organization, which sometimes resists it. Pragmatic mediation is thwarted by the actors’ play and their quest for autonomy. Epistemic mediation confronts the subject and its own structures of knowledge. This vision in terms of mediation makes it possible to understand in a new light what is usually called “resistance to change” and which is nothing more than the effect of interactions in an instrumented management system. To want to annihilate these “resistances” is to pretend to introduce an instrument into an environment that we would like to be inert. By obsessing over the reasoning on pragmatic mediation, we assume a direct action of the instrument on reality, a transformation. This conception is part of the relationship between a supposedly omnipotent subject and an obedient object. In this vision, technical objects are operators intended to facilitate the various actions necessary for the exercise of management. It is not a question of denying this character, but of recognizing that there is, on the contrary, an uncooperative action of the object towards the subject.

142

Technological Change

Indeed, the use of the instrument does not immediately lead to a transformation of the context, of the object on which it must act. Initially, the latter produces revealing effects, highlighting both small pre-existing dysfunctions and large inconsistencies. More subtly, it provokes reactions due to differences between the representations incorporated in the instrument and those included in the organization’s usual operations. ICTs therefore have very different effects depending on the type of organization in which they are developed. They are challenged when the context is not appropriate. 4.2. The encounter between the individual and the technical object In order to better understand how the individual and the technical object meet, we will distinguish three levels of analysis corresponding to successive phases: design, adoption and use. These divisions, which correspond to a convenience of presentation, could of course be discussed. The fact is that the connection is considered too wide and the phases will, in turn, be subdivided; thus, Silverstone and Hirsch (1994) analyze the adoption of ICTs in everyday life in four stages: appropriation, objectification, incorporation and conversion. But we can also question the linearity of the reasoning. In particular, as we will see, some approaches do not dissociate adoption and use. 4.2.1. The individual in the design phase 4.2.1.1. From creator to innovator Innovation is not reduced to a creation, an invention. It is the result of a design activity that has been adopted by a market. At the end of the day, the aim is to bring profitable products to market. As a result, product design is much more use-oriented. With regard to product innovation, for most of the 20th Century, it was the technology push model (technological progress conquering the market) that dominated (see Chapter 2). This was particularly the case in the telecommunications, aerospace, nuclear and robotics industries, under the influence of public policies and associated funding. In this model, innovation is the result of scientific and technological progress. Based on technological determinism, innovation is designed and then delivered to society or markets in a linear and mechanical manner with a top-down vision.

Technological Change and the Individual

143

At the end of the 20th Century, this vision was followed by that of market pull (products marketed were inspired by the consumer), based on taking the customer into account as a key player in defining needs. This started from market expectations and aimed to adapt or promote technologies. Marketing was at the heart of the system. In companies, R&D designers were in the position to act as internal service providers at the service of marketing to provide technical solutions to needs expressed in functional terms. Although there may still be technological innovations born from the technology push model (Apple’s iPad is a good example), most innovations are nowadays born from a market pull vision. The 1990s saw the arrival of a radically new concept. The expertise present in a company gave it a sustainable competitive advantage in its market in the name of its ability to generate innovation in its products or services. Companies witnessed the rapid wear and tear and obsolescence of the knowledge of its businesses and technologies. The rapid commercialization of products required the acceleration of innovation processes and cost pressure to streamline design activities. The designer’s romantic vision, seen as a hero rewarded for their autonomous and independent work, is flawed, even in areas that seemed a priori the most creative. In the video game sector, for example, rationalization and customer orientation impose their law and work is segmented into a multitude of skilled trades. This sector of activity is maturing and includes large companies whose operations are far from the start-up model that dominated at the beginning. We are now speaking of organizations such as those found in the industrial world (see Box 4.2). Within the artistic field of video game production, there are concept artists, 3D animators who bring characters to life, level artists and level designers who create the environment, and among the programmers, engineers who code, menu specialists, game designers who set the rules of the game, etc. The conductor is the producer who manages time, budget and quality. The game is evaluated by the specialized press, but increasingly upstream, both by external play testers who rate the games and internal devtesters who test everything. A live team is in constant interaction with the players, because it is a question of taking into account the customer’s reactions. Ultimately, the game is a co-construction. Box 4.2. The design of a video game: an industrial activity? (source: interview with the HRD of a video game studio)

144

Technological Change

4.2.1.2. A design shared between humans and machines? While the technical innovations in the digital field result from a design activity, this activity is, in turn, increasingly structured by digital technology such that it is not an exaggeration to talk today about a sharing of design between humans and machines. In industry, the future of engineering and R&D professions is strongly linked to the development of PLM (Product Lifecycle Management) digital platforms that introduce new ways of working. These tools facilitate the organizational and geographical fragmentation of value chains and, while they can provide valuable assistance in terms of knowledge capitalization, they also tend towards a certain automatism. They result in a greater formalization of activities, with new tool intelligence obligations, for example, and questions are raised as to whether they are a form of support or an obstacle to creativity and innovation (Paraponaris et al., 2018). However, when faced with complex work situations, design engineers take different perspectives and do not converge on describing a single situation. While some mentioned the difficulty of achieving cohesion in their work incurred by the use of these design tools, others noted a harmony facilitated by these same tools and a more fluid collaboration. Digital R&D is now seen as having very high stakes, which places it at the forefront of the concerns of company management (scientific and information systems departments), and as one of the prominent sources of questioning (if not concern) for R&D professionals. It is certain that digital technology will change R&D work and the professionalism of researchers and engineers, with uncertainty about the nature and depth of these transformations. For R&D managers, this calls for vigilance and consideration of ways to support these changes in work by promoting the necessary learning dynamics. For researchers, this invites them to take the initial work on these issues further. 4.2.2. The individual in the adoption phase3 4.2.2.1. The diffusionist point of view Supporters of the diffusionist movement do not pay attention to the technical object’s design phase, of what is related to its genesis. They focus, 3 Unlike Chapter 3, which used the notion of appropriation, we focus here on readings that focus on the notions of adoption and acceptance.

Technological Change and the Individual

145

on the one hand, on how innovations are disseminated and who their users are (the adopters) by developing behavioral models, and, on the other hand, on measuring the impact of their adoption through changes in practices. This point of view is particularly embodied by Everett Rogers (1983), author of the diffusion of innovations theory developed from the summary of the results of various studies. According to Rogers, it is the characteristics of innovation, as perceived by individuals, that determine its adoption rate. He identifies five characteristic attributes of an innovation: its relative advantage, its compatibility with the pre-existing system, its complexity, its trialability and its observed effects. This typology has been well received by marketing. The research resulting from it generally has a prescriptive purpose, seeking to explain disparities in an innovation’s adoption level by correlating them, through questionnaire surveys, with traditional socio-demographic variables: age, sex, occupation, income, housing, family size, etc. The groups that result from it are interpreted as customer segments. In addition, product marketing can involve opinion leaders who are the most supportive of innovation. This theory classifies individuals, users of innovation, according to five standard profiles: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards. We provide a brief definition, inspired by Rogers (1983) and expressed from a marketing perspective: – innovators are the most sensitive to innovation. They are the first consumers of a new product as soon as it is released. They make their purchases without having to consult the opinions of other users. They are more motivated than others by the status conferred by a new product. These customers like to share their experience with others on something new; – the early adopters quickly buy an innovative product. They are people who like new things, they try them out and give their opinion. They show more active social participation and have a denser and more diversified interpersonal network than the late majority. They also show a higher degree of opinion leadership. They contribute using these characteristics to the triggering of the critical mass formed by the early majority; – those of the early majority are thoughtful customers. They await feedback from the first experiences before buying a new product;

146

Technological Change

– the late majority expects the product to be used by a significant part of the population. The individuals who constitute it want proof of performance. They are very influenced by the opinions of other users and want to know to what extent a new object is better than others that are already on the market; – the laggards are the last to accept an innovation. They are the most rational customers. They only buy new products when they have been tested and become commonplace or even when they are part of a tradition. The originality of this approach is that it integrates the classification of adopters into different categories by considering the reception of an innovation on a time scale: the profile of adopters moves from a small and marginal group to a larger group, and then to a pool covering the entire population. This view, which praises innovators, suffers from a bias in favor of innovation. As such, it has been the subject of much criticism, particularly from the sociology of innovation (Akrich et al., 2006). Moreover, by equating diffusion with an inevitable and irreversible phenomenon, it does not take into account the possible rejection of innovation by the adopter at any time (“abandoners”), and not only during the initial decision-making process. Finally, in line with our reflections on determinism (see Chapter 1), it is clear that diffusionism expresses a certain economic determinism. Indeed, we can highlight a static vision of innovation, an idea that is part of an instrumental conception of innovation: transformed into a marketable product, responding to a need that it is able to satisfy, it would no longer be transformed. 4.2.2.2. The acceptance model Unlike diffusionism, which, by focusing on studying the process of technology diffusion through the evolution of an adoption rate, embraces the innovation promoter’s point of view, the study of uses in terms of acceptance and acceptability adopts the point of view of users. The approaches that claim to use this perspective are numerous and sometimes contradictory, but they converge on the idea of technological non-determinism: to be accepted, a technology must be re-appropriated by the user. Among the most well-known theoretical models, Davis’ (1989) Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is the reference point (see Figure 4.1).

Technological Change and the Individual

147

For the TAM, the effects of beliefs on utility and perceived ease of use are the main determinants of user acceptance of the technology. These normative beliefs are assessed by the respondent’s feeling expressed in a questionnaire about his or her approval (or disapproval) of items related to these two factors. Perceived usefulness Attitude towards use

External variables

Behavioral intent towards use

Use of technology

Perceived ease-of-use Figure 4.1. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (source: Davis, 1989)

Perceived usefulness is “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance” (Davis, 1989). The perceived usefulness will be high if the individual thinks that: – the system will allow him/her to learn faster; – using the system will not be a waste of time; – the system will make it easier to learn; – the system will be very useful for learning. Research has shown that perceived usefulness can be affected by multiple variables, which fall into three categories. A first category covers the characteristics of the user (age, sex, professional category, seniority, etc.). A second relates to organizational functioning (support from external leaders or consultants, communication policy, social influences of professional groups, etc.). A third concerns the characteristics of the technological team itself (functionalities offered, ergonomic quality, task/technology suitability, etc.). Perceived ease-of-use refers to “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be free from effort” (David, 1989, p. 320). Perceived ease-of-use is related to items such as: – using the system will be easy for him/her; – the system will be flexible to use;

148

Technological Change

– no problems will be encountered when using the system; – it will be easy to find out how to use the system. Originally, the TAM was used to explain the adoption of applications such as word processing, internal e-mail and video conferencing. Its application now extends to practices concerning the general public (social media, mobile Internet). 4.2.3. The individual in the use phase The acceptance of the technology and its use do not necessarily overlap. While acceptance, particularly in Davis’ case, is a matter of attitude, use is a matter of behavior. 4.2.3.1. The located acceptance In the context of real use, the question is no longer that of the acceptability of the technological object, but what it allows (or does not allow) one to do or obliges (or does not oblige) one to do. With this in mind, Bobillier Chaumon’s (2016) work focuses on testing technology in real-life situations, what he calls “situated acceptance”, i.e. the concrete experience of the tool in real life. For this occupational psychologist, the individual and personal dimension – that relating to the operator’s own activities, in their cognitive and emotional aspects – is not the only one to be taken into consideration. There are also three other dimensions to consider: – the organizational dimension, which involves the operator’s relationship with the organization of work, in particular the control exercised by the technological equipment over its actions; – the interpersonal dimension, relating to the collective activities in which the operator is involved and which may be affected by the technological equipment; – the identity and professional dimension, which concerns the individual’s “power to act” and their ability to have their professional identity recognized. 4.2.3.2. Towards a unified model of acceptance and use? In response to the profusion of models, Venkatesh et al. (2003) proposed a unified model of technology acceptance and use, called UTAUT (Unified

Technological Change and the Individual

149

Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology). This model, which incorporates the most significant elements of the eight theories considered most important at the time, justifies the use of ICTs based on four fundamental determinants of behavioral intent defined as follows: – performance expectancy: the degree to which a person believes that the use of technological equipment will help them to achieve gains in their work performance; – effort expectancy: the degree of ease associated with the use of the technological equipment; – social influence: the effect of environmental factors such as the opinions of a user’s friends, relatives and superiors on user behavior; – facilitating conditions: the extent to which a person believes that an organizational and technical infrastructure exists to support the use of technological equipment. Such models are well suited for research, but seem unwieldy in real life. However, their contribution to managerial thinking cannot be ignored (see the example in Box 4.3). Through company digital social networks (CDSNs), companies hope to promote cross-functionality in exchanges and foster the emergence of new forms of collaboration. What is the actual situation? To understand the reasons for using CDSNs, researchers proposed a self-administered questionnaire (50 items) to a population of 555 employees in a large transport company. The company wanted above all to make the CDSN useful for carrying out daily work and facilitating collective exchanges. However, it appears that CDSNs are perceived as relevant for developing activities outside daily production. The type of work (expertise, supervision or other) and the professional category have no effect on the construction of a belief regarding the use of CDSNs. It ultimately appears to be a partial device whose use may seem incidental, but not without utility. The results, the authors conclude, suggest that a technology may be perceived as useful, even if it is little used. Box 4.3. The use of a corporate digital social network (source: Barville-Deromas et al., 2018)

150

Technological Change

4.2.3.3. The symbiotic approach The symbiotic approach does not separate adoption from use, considering it as an ongoing process. Based on Licklider’s (1960) theory that sees the computer as a symbiont (an organism that lives in symbiosis with humans), it involves a very close coupling between humans and technical objects. The anthropomorphic semantics of the symbiotic approach focuses on the emergence of devices that mimic the cognitive capacities of human beings in which human and non-human registers are merged. This approach, which has been closely linked from the outset with the scientific and industrial community of artificial intelligence, is enjoying a resurgence in popularity. For Brangier, Dufresne and Hammes-Adélé (2009), who are part of this trend, the dominant paradigm, of technology as an entity external to humans who are conceived as acceptance agents deciding whether or not to use a technology, is outdated. Indeed, it is not in harmony with a world in which technological artifacts are taking up more and more space in the activities of humans, who are transferring some of their skills to them, with technological equipment becoming a part of themselves. Since humans and technologies are mutually dependent and interact, these authors evoke a techno-symbiosis, noting that individuals can no longer carry out certain activities today without their techno-symbionts, which have become human extensions. The case reported in Box 4.4 seems to us to illustrate this symbiosis. In this case, the “social network” is not an agreed expression, but a reality where the social and digital are combined and where we find the spirit of community and freedom that marked the origins of the Internet. It also shows that digital technology can be a means of social inclusion. More than anything else, it is isolation that dehumanizes homeless people: surveys show that they cruelly feel the rejection of passers-by and suffer most from their exclusion. However, although there are now a multitude of services offered by associations to combat loneliness among the homeless, these actions are not well coordinated. For example, there may be three associations that organize searches on the same street, while others are ignored. Based on this observation, Entourage, a French association based on a digital social network, connects residents, homeless people and grassroots associations in order to recreate a link, even a tenuous one, between residents and homeless people. The basic digital tool is an interactive map that lists the solidarity actions underway in

Technological Change and the Individual

151

each neighborhood. By bringing this information to the attention of local residents, Entourage empowers them to act on behalf of the homeless by helping them directly or by referring them to appropriate services, without interfering with the work done by other actors. In addition, it also offers physical meetings around festive activities. Box 4.4. Entourage, a local social network for mutual assistance (source: Charlier et al., 2019)

4.2.4. The individual between subject and object 4.2.4.1. The notion of the technical individual according to Simondon The symbiotic approach that pays equal attention to technical objects and human subjects brings us back to the philosopher Simondon (1958) for whom the machine is a “technical individual” as it “carries its tools” and becomes capable of doing without even a human auxiliary – which, according to the philosopher, is in no way detrimental to human progress. Simondon explains, for example, how in the innovation process of combustion engines, initially associated but distinct environments end up becoming one. Although not dealing with digital technology, this reflection is stimulating when thinking about the development of a composite device combining human beings and ICTs. Manufacturing, which used mainly manual work, included machines, but their activity was used alongside human activity: manufacturing used real technical individuals, while in the workshop, it was humans who lent their individuality to the accomplishment of technical actions. In the 19th Century, following manufacturing, the factory was a technical unit where the division of labor was embodied in the machine independently of the worker who had become a spectator of the result of the machines’ operation, since humans were no longer the control center. There was therefore a change in the relationship between the technical object and the human being, reduced to the status of a simple auxiliary of the machine and then alienated or even expelled. This thought obviously evokes line work in mass production and the meaningless work of Chaplin’s Modern Times. This representation of industrial work, which dates back to the early 20th Century, may have seemed outdated until it entered the world of services. In the digital age, the meaning of work is once again questioned: “in the digital

152

Technological Change

world, who will master the purpose of work?”, asks Gomez (2017, authors’ translation). For Simondon, in terms of the empowerment of machine work, humans’ “liberation” would allow them to hold above all the status of tool carriers – the machine becoming a fully “technical individual” instead of the human. The latter would repair and supervise the machines. The construction of technical individuals frees us from the role of technical individual; humans must now supervise, surround the technical individual, take care of both the elements of the machine and its integration into the whole. Humans would then find their place above tool carrier status. This conception of course implies a complete reform of the labor system, a redefinition of human work, work to be shared in order to let machines do the work that has hitherto alienated the human subject. 4.2.4.2. Reviewing resistance to change in the light of the “technical individual” While we agree with the above, we must admit that it is not always the individual who resists, but sometimes also the technical object. This observation extends beyond material techniques, as Teglborg et al. (2015) have shown. Based on a longitudinal case study, these authors note that resistance to change by non-human actors is linked to the interrelationship within technical systems between human and non-human actors. A case study allowed them to identify three types of resistance. The first comes from the unthinkable or a bias in the design of the artifact (non-human actor). The second results from a system effect, when the resistance effects within the device combine and have a multiplier effect. In addition, the authors argue that, while the effects of resistance by non-human actors may be obstructive, they may also be productive, in that they are able to generate learning. Let us take the example of management software packages. As noted in Chapters 1 and 3, although they are adaptable and configurable, they are based on specific organizational models. Thus, the processes included in these software packages, insofar as they convey a specific logic of action, sometimes constitute a constraint to work as its designers have planned; otherwise, they risk being counterproductive (see Box 4.5).

Technological Change and the Individual

153

The SAP (Systems, Applications and Products in Data Processing) software package comes from the MRP (Material Requirement Planning) systems for calculating the component parts required by the German mechanical industry. It is the structure of this industry, its organizational modes in force in the 1970s and its production modes that have been included in the software, that make the software much less suitable for flow industries or those where the number of elements to be supplied is lower, or even for service companies in which it introduces unnecessary complexities. Thus, far from being the innovative software for managing companies, integrated management systems may appear to some observers to be obstacles to the agility required by the new economy: – they have a double-scale paralyzing power: they encourage pyramidal structures and discourage any significant change, while an important aspect of competition is played out and will be played out according to the ability to invent new structural forms; – they strengthen the capacity of management to control the units, thereby limiting the autonomy of the periphery in contact with the environment. Optimizing decision-making procedures in a rather fixed world where cost improvement is the main driving force of competition, integrated management systems are more difficult to adapt to an economy of responsiveness and flexibility where costs, quality, deadlines and innovation all play a role simultaneously; – they complete the division between design and execution, while, to cope with risks and to ensure the commitment of all agents, companies are more than ever calling upon the initiative of their employees, which implies a more flexible division of labor; – by their automatic nature, they tend to keep companies in the pattern of using substitutable commonplace skills, with agents being able to implement only the processes and procedures codified by publishers. Box 4.5. SAP: a technical individual’s resistance to change (source: Gilbert and Leclair, 2004)

The study reported in Box 4.5 shows the relevance of applying the concept of resistance to change to a technical object: the management software package slows down the development of agility and opposes

154

Technological Change

the transformation of organizations involved in new environments. However, it would be an exaggeration to see this resistance only as obstructive. The implementation of an integrated management software package can have positive effects, by contributing to collective dynamics and by encouraging the development of new skills that go well beyond the optimization of management processes. 4.3. Beyond the content of activities, a transformation of working structures The effects of digital technology are not limited to accompanying pre-existing activities currently being carried out, facilitating their exercise, or modifying the influence of some of them. However, we must be careful not to make too general an assessment, as digital technology encompasses various technical objects whose effects on activity are far from identical. 4.3.1. Variable effects depending on the technological equipment Not all technologies are equal in the way they constrain or, on the contrary, empower users. In his study of the organizational properties of digital technologies in the workplace, Bobillier Chaumon (2013) distinguishes three types of technologies, depending on the room for maneuver they leave to the individual. The first category includes prescriptive technologies, including technological equipment that places high constraints on the activity: ERP, workflows, certain business software packages with frozen scripts, such as in call centers. Requiring the application of strict procedures for the execution of simple and repetitive (and therefore formalizable) tasks, these ICTs closely restrict the individual’s ability to take initiative. Technology makes individuals dependent, telling them what to do and how to do it. This is the world of neo-Taylorism. The second category is composed of flexible technologies that offer resources and means to the individual to imagine and realize the full scope of their projects. We will have here, for example, office software, messaging, the Internet, smartphones and design tools for architects and engineers.

Technological Change and the Individual

155

However, Bobillier Chaumon notes that these ICTs can also lead to a form of prescription of subjectivity when individuals’ behavior is required to be similar to the machines they use, including injunctions to be more innovative and more efficient, etc. The discretionary technologies in the third category are at the confluence of the two previous ones, in that they provide a possible framework for action which the individual can use at will. They guide and inspire the user in their task, who can, at any time, abandon and go beyond it to develop their own work. This category includes digital corporate networks and knowledge management tools. Here, the constraint is more subtle than in prescriptive technologies since it depends on an individual’s “free” commitment to collective norms, often from peer groups. These distinctions overlap with those between prescriptive technologies and decision- or implementation-support technologies discussed in the previous chapter. 4.3.2. The emergence of new work characteristics As Brangier and Valléry (2004, pp. 216–217) point out, new characteristics of work appear with digital technology: – the relationship between the pace of work and the pace of productivity is evolving towards an asynchronous mode. It is redefined to take into account the fluidity of the process; – working time no longer determines productivity, which now depends more on the profitability of the installations and the machine time consumed than on direct intervention by agents. The operator becomes “a controller of the fluidity and capacity of the process” (see Box 4.6). In the banking sector, back-office tasks refer to all administrative management operations (support, control, etc.). In contrast with front-office services, for which they process the information, they are carried out without contact with the customer in a very standardized and, as such, relatively automated manner. Until the early 2000s, back-offices were only bodies for carrying out administrative monitoring of commercial operations conducted by front-offices. This monitoring was based on a process consisting of six tasks: (1) contradictory

156

Technological Change

reconciliation, (2) the preparation of settlements and deliveries, (3) the sending of information concerning the transaction, (4) the resulting accounting records, (5) the provisional management of the settlement (or its verification) and (6) the accounting of the settlement (or its verification). One of the most typical activities of a back-office operator was to prepare and route information captured while leaving the front-offices to the accounting systems. It was a flow regulation activity for which the guarantor was the operator. The implementation of an automated chain, covering all financial flow regulation activities, recomposed the activity in the process control register. The challenge was to develop a fluid back-office. This fluidity was made possible by a technical– organizational coupling combining the development of computerization and flexibility. Operators could then devote themselves to new tasks (surveillance, diagnosis, control, incident analysis, etc.) to ensure this fluidity. Box 4.6. Changes in the structure of tasks in a banking back-office (source: Brangier and Valléry, 2004, p. 218)

The traditional conception of the company can therefore also be challenged, with new forms of production and distribution emerging. We are thinking, in particular, of online platforms and the transformation of the activities they have brought about for taxis, real estate agencies, hotels and craftsmen. To take only the example of drivers, who are now isolated, they buy and maintain their own vehicles, bearing the risk of variations in frequency alone, investments and commercial risks not being covered by the site or the exchange platform. Digital technology is changing the conditions in which work is carried out, in particular, it is facilitating the growth of teleworking and shared workspaces, since Wi-Fi and the cloud (storing data on remote servers) now make it possible to work almost anywhere. 4.3.3. The growth of telework Telework could rightly be considered as emblematic of the transformations that have affected the world of work since the mid-1990s (Vayre, 2019). On the one hand, it is part of the gradual erasure of the

Technological Change and the Individual

157

work/non-work boundary. On the other hand, it meets the requirements of new forms of work that call for autonomy, empowerment and subjective engagement of employees. While it may have initially appeared mainly as a concession to workers – a social benefit – the influence of economic and societal factors in its development should not be overlooked. The conception of work has evolved, both among managers and employees. Companies are developing new forms of working time arrangements in response to the requirements of productive efficiency (better work organization, fight against time-consuming activities, etc.). Changes in work organization also respond to a need of employees who have greater flexibility in carrying out their work and, for the most qualified categories, wish to extend it to monitoring the balance between their professional and private lives. In this sense, telework is a response to the movement to erase the boundaries between work and non-work that we mentioned at the beginning of this chapter and which has been greatly facilitated by the use of digital technologies. After optimizing the productivity of their industrial activities, companies have made efforts to increase the competitiveness of their tertiary activities. It is on these that international competitiveness will focus in the future, as it has focused in previous decades on increasing industrial productivity. The service has become a sector of activity in which companies generate a substantial part of their turnover. In addition to this tertiarization of the economy, there is also the need to get closer to the consumer – or end-user – of the product. Telework appears to be a competitive organization of the tertiary sector providing elements to meet these new efficiency constraints within the new flexible economy. Finally, telework is also a mass social phenomenon, affecting 10–20% of the working population in industrialized countries. It is a response to automobile congestion in metropolitan areas, the increase in transport times and the costs involved. As for the effects of telework in the professional, family and social fields, the literature review conducted by Vayre (2019) shows contrasting results. In the professional field, on the one hand, telework contributes to concentration, productivity, efficiency and quality of work, performance, as well as to a sense of control over work (time, task, organization), autonomy

158

Technological Change

and motivation at work, organizational involvement and job satisfaction. On the other hand, it also has negative effects such as loneliness, isolation, professional exclusion, misunderstanding and hostility of the professional environment, reduction in the volume and quality of exchanges with the professional environment, or even a brake on career development and promotions. However, she notes, telework covers multifaceted situations whose impacts are balanced by moderating factors that nuance the effects of telework. These factors can be positive, such as the physical layout of the home, the technical and material support of the company, the support of the hierarchy and colleagues, or negative, such as the place of telework (exclusively home vs. dedicated professional spaces), and the intensity of telework (at home full-time or part-time). 4.4. Technological changes and individual skills It is common to hear or read that smartphones, digital tablets and the Internet require radically new skills. What should we be led to think about this? We cannot endorse this discourse for all the reasons we have given in Chapter 1, in our critique of technological determinism. This obviously does not mean that technological change has no impact on the skills required to carry out activities where digital technology is very present. As soon as activities are transformed, this has an impact on skills. To address this topic, we will first define the notion of skills before addressing the question of their production in relation to digital technologies, and then we will discuss the digital skills framework, a rapidly expanding tool. 4.4.1. Skills and their production 4.4.1.1. Definition and the stakes of skills While the term skills is widely used, it does not mean that it has a unique meaning. When an orientation psychologist, a specialist in “skills assessment”, meets an ergonomist, a specialist in “skills analysis”, or even a head-hunter, a specialist in “skills assessment”, and both use the term “skills”, it is not clear whether they mean the same thing. Our reference to activity leads us here to favor the ergonomics of human activity, which has also developed as robotization and computerization have spread, thus

Technological Change and the Individual

159

transferring repetitive manual tasks to automata. De Montmollin (1995, p. 78) is one of the few authors who has focused on clarifying the meaning of the concept of ergonomic skills: “Skills correspond to the hypothetical structures [...] that allow the operator to give meaning, for action, to work situations (and in particular the information they provide). The skills are therefore described from the point of view of the activity. We always talk about skills for a particular task, or a particular type of task” (authors’ translation). Within companies, new technologies have made tasks more complex, developed mental work and justified going beyond the level of task analysis alone to approach work analysis in terms of cognitive processes. At the same time, verbal activity has become more important. Today, in increasingly automated companies, work is becoming dematerialized. Until recently, the model for recognizing operators’ qualifications was largely based on industrial work based on physical effort and gestural skills practiced on the material. Then, with the implementation of new technologies, it was technoscientific knowledge that was given priority. Today, professional skills are no longer reduced to their technical aspects. Changes in work, due to the search for new forms of flexibility, are based on interpersonal cooperation and a broad understanding of the work process. They therefore require new skills from operators, skills that are more a matter of professional conduct, “interdisciplinary skills”, than the technicality of a profession; also, some people mention, for want of anything better, the need to develop soft skills. 4.4.1.2. Acquisition and development of digital skills We are now leaving the field of ergonomics, the development of skills being usually the field of trainers. However, it would be simplistic, as we will see, to limit the production of skills to training activities only. Interest in skills development is usually linked – by consulting firms, large companies and national and international organizations – to a staff approach to human capital. This refers to the body of knowledge and skills that a population possesses. Investment in this capital is expected to determine the company’s profitability and competitiveness. We are therefore interested in the modalities of acquiring this capital, assuming that the

160

Technological Change

expenses incurred are investments. Human capital is supposed to reflect the value attributed to the qualities in which we invest. The state of this capital is assessed by considering the level and duration of training or by carrying out skills analyses. To judge its dynamics (the way it is constituted), it is undoubtedly necessary to examine the pedagogical mechanisms, as well as the concrete work situations and their modalities of regulation. Indeed, while school and professional training can play an important role, they are not the only vectors. Many of the basic digital skills are acquired in the field, through practice, observation, participation, exchange and support. Of course, it is quite different when it comes to training in advanced technologies in order to change jobs, such as becoming a developer, digital content producer or digital project manager. But, just as it is now possible to drive a car without being a motorist, it is very easy to skillfully surf the Internet to compile documentation on a specific subject, without knowing the protocols used for data transfer that allow this research. 4.4.1.3. Digital training and training using digital technology Digital training is offered with a variety of content. At the European Union (EU) level, eight key skills (combinations of knowledge, competencies and attitudes) have been defined which are considered necessary for personal development, active citizenship, social inclusion and employment (European Commission, 2012). Digital skills are one of them, promoted in the same way and separately as basic science and technology skills. In fact, almost all EU countries have put in place national strategies for the development of e-skills. Symmetrically, the use of ICT as a teaching tool is also seen as promoting the development of interdisciplinary skills and, as such, highlighted in national education policies. The situation varies from country to country. Thus, for example, from the selection in Table 4.2, all countries agree that the use of ICT in education programs promotes analytical skills development and collaboration, while the acquisition of other skills is not considered by all to be related to the use of digital technology.

Technological Change and the Individual

Denmark Spain Creativity/ innovation

X

X

Analytical mind

X

X

Problem solving

X

Decisionmaking

X

France Netherlands Austria Finland

X

X

United Kingdom

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Collaboration

X

X

Adaptability

X

X

X

X

Initiative

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Responsibility

X

X

161

X

Table 4.2. ICTs for skills development (source: Eurydice, 2012)

The EU notes that the presence of equipment does not mean that it is actually used in the curriculum and therefore stresses the need to train teachers and improve technical infrastructure. Nevertheless, these recommendations seem to us to be too invested in technological determinism. Associating a digital environment with a training system obviously does not guarantee an automatic production of skills. More broadly, the use of digital technology in a course is not necessarily equivalent to pedagogical innovation. For example, the design of an e-learning course requires more than just the teacher’s command of ICT. The lessons provided must be reconfigured or they will be distorted. 4.4.2. Digital skills as frames of reference In companies, as well as at the national level, the implementation of digital skills as frames of reference appears to be a lever for the development of pedagogical and professional uses of digital technology. Following the recommendation of the European Parliament and Council of 18 December 2006 on key skills for lifelong learning, digital skills can be defined as the “safe and critical use of information society technologies”.

162

Technological Change

Most professional activities require rapid adaptation to a variety of uses of digital tools, necessary for both work and social life. The acquisition of digital skills is therefore essential everywhere. They have been listed in reference systems covering more or less extensive skill fields. Thus, in order to identify the shortcomings of populations and to support European countries in designing their policies and programs in this field, the European Commission has developed a digital skills framework, Digcomp, which includes 21 skills grouped into five fields of skills (see Box 4.7). 1. Information and data processing 1.1. Navigation, retrieval and filtering of data, information and digital content 1.2. Evaluation of data, information and digital content 1.3. Data, information and digital content management 2. Communication and cooperation 2.1. Interacting through digital technologies 2.2. Sharing through digital technologies 2.3. Engaging in citizenship through digital technologies 2.4. Collaborating through digital technologies 2.5. Internet etiquette 2.6 Digital identity management 3. Creation of digital content 3.1. Developing digital content 3.2. Integration and re-development of digital content 3.3. Copyright and licenses 3.4. Programming 4. Safety and security 4.1. Protective devices 4.2. Protection of personal data and privacy 4.3. Protection of health and well-being

Technological Change and the Individual

163

4.4. Environmental protection 5. Problem solving 5.1. Solving technical problems 5.2. Identification of technological needs and responses 5.3. Creative use of digital technologies 5.4. Identification of digital skills gaps Box 4.7. Digcomp, a European reference framework for e-skills (source: Kluzer and Priego, 2018)

This reference system can be used for many purposes. In training, it is the basis for self-assessment tools, such as the Europass self-assessment grid for digital skills or the Ikanos online tool from the Spanish Basque Country. The European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP) has developed a self-assessment grid for digital skills based on Digicomp. Available in 24 languages on the Europass portal, all citizens have access to it to assess their skills and record the result in their European passport. The grid follows the structure of the framework (that of version 1.0), specifying, for each of the 21 skills, statements that reflect a level of proficiency. By completing the grid, a person can position himself/herself as an elementary, independent or experienced user on each of the skills. Starting from Digcomp, the Ministry of Economic Development of the Spanish Basque Country created Ikanos, an online self-assessment questionnaire, in 2014. The tool allows citizens and workers to assess their digital skills in 30 questions, taking about 15 minutes to answer. Simple and user-friendly, the results are immediately available at the end of the questionnaire. This tool is available in Euskara (language spoken in the Basque Country), Spanish and English. 4.4.3. No digital skills outside the activity Just as we were led, following Bobillier Chaumon, to speak of situated acceptance, with reference to real activity, it seems preferable to us to consider skills only in direct reference to the situations that mobilize them.

164

Technological Change

Like many other authors who have examined this topic, let us recognize that skills reference frameworks, digital or otherwise, are of little use outside the training activities they develop. For the specialist in work analysis, the ergonomist, there can be no question of trying to identify, outside activity, individual skills, even if we directly question the operator. Nor will we go into any further development of the notion of the level of mastery of a digital skill and a fortiori its value. These are subjects that also raise questions because of the social conventions to which they are subordinated. We must admit, along with De Montmollin (1984), that “nothing allows the ergonomist to affirm, for example, that solving a problem is worth more than using a code, or even that solving a problem with complex algorithms is worth more than solving a problem with simple ones” (authors’ translation).

5 Experiencing Technological Change

The previous three chapters have addressed technological change at different levels: social, organizational and individual. They have thus provided insights from different disciplines (anthropology, history, philosophy, economics, psychology) on the subject. This chapter proposes to mobilize these different elements to address the issue of the dynamics of technological change and finally to suggest appropriate practices and change management strategies. To this end, it focuses on supporting technological change within work organizations. This focus allows for a better understanding of the subject and is justified by the fact that much of the technological change comes from and affects organizations, and by the need for managerial decision-makers to have guidelines. The working organizations also have the particularity of grouping together the three levels described in the previous chapters. Thus, organizations are made up of individuals involved in systems of activities and having to use technical objects (Chapter 4), as well as of collectives of individuals whose dynamics of work and cooperation can be modified by technological change (Chapter 3), and finally they are embedded in a societal ecosystem in which they play a key role (Chapter 2). This chapter begins by presenting the different threats and opportunities associated with technological change (section 5.1). It thus takes up elements disseminated in the previous chapters, but resituates them at the level of working organizations. It then points out that responding to these threats and seizing these opportunities are linked to the ability to combine social and technological innovations (section 5.2). Finally, it addresses the question of

Technological Change, First Edition. Clotilde Coron and Patrick Gilbert. © ISTE Ltd 2020. Published by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

166

Technological Change

the strategy for managing technological change, and makes some managerial recommendations (section 5.3). 5.1. Threats and opportunities associated with technological change in organizations The previous chapters have mentioned different types of threats and opportunities associated with technological change. We summarize them here and then study their transposition into working organizations. 5.1.1. Overview of threats and opportunities associated with technological change Table 5.1 summarizes the threats and opportunities associated with technological change, illustrating them with examples already used in previous chapters and recalling the primary disciplines that have addressed them. Thus, Chapter 1 discussed, on the one hand, the potential job losses associated with technological change, which may be accompanied by the possibility of automating tasks previously carried out by human beings, and, on the other hand, the construction of a technicist discourse, exaggerating the qualities of technological change and partly masking its negative counterparts. On the other hand, it also mentioned more optimistic discourses on technological change, linking it to social progress in particular. Chapter 2 highlighted several types of threats associated with technological change: technological stress, which corresponds to a malaise linked to the excessive use of new technologies; violence, born of the historically established link between technologies and war; crime, where technology enables criminal actions, as is the case for cybercrime; discrimination, where technology becomes exclusive or discriminating, which is the case, for example, when technologies (automobile, medicine, visual recognition, etc.) do not take sufficient account of the diversity of human characteristics; and finally, ecological degradation, linked among other things to the fact that technological changes are leading to lifestyles that consume more energy resources. But it also suggested cases where a technological change could represent an opportunity, particularly in the service of a more inclusive society, or by providing more environmentally sustainable solutions. Chapter 3 referred both to the threat of a prescriptive and alienating technology, leaving aside people who do not have the

Experiencing Technological Change

167

necessary skills to master it, and to the opportunity of a technology which assists the human at work and in the implementation of complex projects. Finally, Chapter 4 suggested that technology could be integrated into activity systems, in particular, by facilitating certain activities. Threat/opportunity

Chapter 1 Threats

Chapter 1 Opportunities

Chapter 2 Threats

Example

Disciplines

Automation and job destruction, unemployment

Automation of production lines

Technological ideology, lies about technology

Presentation of nuclear power as Philosophy a highly sophisticated form of Political energy production science

Social progress

Progress in printing that has contributed to the dissemination History of knowledge

Economics History

Technological stress

Excessive use of ICTs

Psychology

War, violence

Technology in the service of war

Economics History

Criminality

Cybercrime

Economics History

Discrimination

Technology designed primarily for certain populations

Sociology

Ecological damage

Automotive, energy consumption, etc.

Ecology Philosophy

Technologies to promote the A more inclusive society inclusion of people with disabilities

Sociology

Progress in the field of Technologies for recycling or sustainable development waste reduction

Ecology

Prescriptive technology, alienation

Production line, management software packages

Sociology

Digital divide

Removal of individuals who do not master new technologies

Psychology Sociology

Chapter 3 Opportunities

Technology to assist in realization and work

Assistance in the production of prototypes and models

Economics Ergonomics Sociology

Chapter 4 Opportunities

Technology that facilitates daily and professional life

Remote communication tools

Ergonomics Psychology

Chapter 2 Opportunities

Chapter 3 Threats

Table 5.1. Overview and characterization of threats and opportunities associated with technological change

168

Technological Change

In addition, Table 5.1 also seeks to report on the disciplines that can highlight or shed light on a particular threat. Of course, this categorization does not reflect the great complexity of each subject and the overlap between disciplines. However, it shows that these threats have been addressed by a wide range of human and social science disciplines. Thus, while economics has made it possible to highlight the threats to employment and the links, particularly financial and economic, between war, crime and technology, sociology has been able to highlight the risks of discrimination, alienation and exclusion of individuals according to their command of technology, as well as the contributions of technology to a more inclusive society. Philosophy, for its part, has highlighted the existence of a technicist ideology and the associated risks, particularly in ecological matters. Psychology has focused on the negative effects of technologies on individuals, highlighting the risks of discomfort and stress, as well as the contributions of technology to activity systems. Finally, history is essential to place technological change in a temporal context and to identify threats that may have occurred in the past, and the social progress to which technological and logical change may have contributed.

5.1.2. Threats organizations

and

opportunities

also

concerning

work

The overview of these threats and opportunities shows their great diversity. It also shows that they cover different levels (societal, organizational, individual). However, it is also possible to transpose them to the level of working organizations (see Table 5.2). Thus, technicist ideology is relatively common in work organizations, including overconfidence in technology, and the idea that a tool can significantly improve an organization’s efficiency and performance. For example, a company can sometimes implement a tool and build a discourse around the fact that it will lead to efficiency gains, forgetting the difficulties generally associated with this type of transformation (see Box 5.1).

Experiencing Technological Change

Threat/opportunity

Technological ideology, lies about technology

Transposition to work organizations Discourse exaggerating the merits of a new tool

Dismissals, departure Automation and job destruction, unemployment plans, restructuring

169

Example Implementation of a software package whose qualities have been exaggerated and difficulties hidden: a tool that does not meet a real need Dismissals following the automation of a production line

Social progress

Improvement of working Dissemination of machines to conditions and social reduce work accidents climate

War, violence

Competition between companies

Increased competition in areas where technological change is rapid (e.g. digital, telecommunications, etc.)

Cybercrime

Personal data file retrieved by hackers

Discrimination

Discrimination

Recruitment algorithms that discriminate against certain profiles

A more inclusive society

More inclusive organization

Work tools enabling people with disabilities to perform the same tasks as non-disabled people

Ecological damage

Excessive energy consumption

Data storage centers

Progress in the field of sustainable development

More ecological organization

Energy-saving technologies (e.g. automatic light switch-off, etc.)

Prescriptive technology, alienation

Prescriptive working technologies

Production line, software package management

Technology to assist in realization and work

Technology to assist in realization and work

Software package modeling

Technology that facilitates daily and professional life

Technology that facilitates professional life

Tools that facilitate remote working (e.g. e-mails, video conferences, etc.)

Digital divide

Removal of individuals who do not master new techniques

Digitization of all work processes, without sufficient training of individuals

Technological stress

Stress at work related to ICT

Burn-out

Criminality

Table 5.2. Transposition of threats to work organizations

170

Technological Change

In 2011, the French Army launched a new computerized military payroll tool called Louvois. This tool, which took several years to develop, had several objectives, including harmonizing payroll tools between the various army corps and improving efficiency in payroll management. However, very quickly, problems appeared. While many military personnel did not receive enough money, others received too much. This was partly due to the multiplicity of bonuses and allowances received by the military, which also contributed to the effects of these errors: since military personnel can receive very different amounts of money each month because of these bonuses and allowances, the persons concerned were not immediately able to detect that they received too much or too little money. Finally, the tool had to be abandoned and other software had to be developed. Box 5.1. The implementation of a tool aimed at efficiency gains, forgetting the associated difficulties

In addition, automation can lead to redundancies. In other cases, technological change can, on the contrary, be a source of social progress for organizations, for example, when it contributes to improving the social climate or working conditions. For labor organizations, war can take the form of competition between firms, exacerbated by a technological change as illustrated by the digital sector, for example, and cybercrime can result in theft or piracy of data files on customers or workers, whether by internal or external actors (see Box 5.2). The press regularly reports on thefts or hacking of personal data files held by companies. Thus, in 2014, the operator Orange suffered several data file hackings, concerning both current and potential customers. In 2015, the online dating site Ashley Madison was the victim of data hacking, resulting in the online availability of site users’ personal data. In 2016–2017, Deloitte consulting firm was the victim of an attack on its client files. Box 5.2. Hacking into personal data files held by commercial organizations

The issue of discrimination is of great importance within work organizations. Indeed, many processes, including recruitment or promotion, can lead to the discrimination and exclusion of certain populations: women,

Experiencing Technological Change

171

the elderly or young people, non-white people, etc. Technologies can contribute to these discriminations, as is regularly denounced for recruitment algorithms (O’Neil, 2016), but they can also promote the emergence of more inclusive working environments. Companies’ concerns for ecology are reflected in the creation of CSR (corporate social responsibility) functions. However, technological change can contribute to both worsening the ecological balance of organizations, for example through the increasing use of energy-intensive data storage spaces, or on the contrary to improving it, for example through energy-saving technologies. Prescriptive technologies occupy a very important place in the world of work. Thus, assembly lines, or even management software packages, sometimes leave individuals with little margin of autonomy, which raises the question of their alienation. On the other hand, other technologies help individuals in their work and can free them from the most difficult tasks. The digital divide can take the form of the exclusion of people who do not master the technologies, for example, in the case of the implementation of a new digital work tool involving certain skills, through a lack of sufficient training of the people who will use it. Finally, technological stress takes the form of stress associated with the use of new communication tools in work organizations (Brillhart, 2004). Finally, this table indicates that, for work organizations, the threats and opportunities associated with technological change are numerous. Threats could justify the emergence and maintenance of technophobic discourse, as discussed in Chapter 1, for example, aimed at limiting the role of organizations in technological change. However, as we saw in Chapter 3, organizations play a major role in technological change: they are privileged places first of all for the production of new technologies and then for their dissemination. In addition, technological change is also a source of opportunities. So what solutions can be proposed? 5.2. Reconciling technical and social issues The effort to reconcile technical and social issues makes it partly possible to respond to the threats and opportunities described in the previous section, in particular, by triggering technological change in response to a social or societal need. Initially more present at the societal level, the notion of social innovation or responsible innovation can also be transposed to organizations.

172

Technological Change

5.2.1. Social examples

or

responsible

innovations:

definitions

and

Social innovation is generally defined as a response – not just a technical one – to poorly met social needs, in particular because the State or the market does not take them sufficiently into account. It is very similar to the notion of responsible innovation, i.e. an innovation that takes into account its negative externalities and seeks to limit their effects (Laurent, Baker, Beaudouin and Raulet-Croset, 2018). Social and responsible innovation thus covers a multitude of areas and objectives: the fight against poverty, unemployment, the management of demographic ageing and sustainable development, for example. Two perspectives can be proposed to define and study social innovation (Klein, Laville and Moulaert, 2014). Thus, the philanthropic perspective focuses on initiatives that aim to improve people’s living conditions, while the democratic perspective focuses on innovation as a factor of democratization of society. In both cases, social innovation is characterized by a specific process and ecosystem. 5.2.1.1. The social innovation process Social innovation arises first of all from an unmet social need. The first step is therefore to transform a collective need into a social need, i.e. to make it a cause that goes beyond the strict collective of the individuals concerned. Thus, the struggles against unemployment, poverty, poor housing and global warming are now considered to concern all societies (see Box 5.3). In Canada, in Manitoba, Aki Energy aims to support First Nation people in their transition to geothermal and solar energy sources. The objective is twofold: to ensure energy self-sufficiency and to provide local training and employment opportunities. Box 5.3. Example of social innovation in the field of sustainable development and professional integration

The second step is to propose a solution to meet this need. This solution generally combines a technical dimension with a social or societal dimension (see Table 5.3).

Experiencing Technological Change

Technical dimension  social dimension

Web platform/IT solution

Object/tool

173

Know-how

Sustainable consumption

Fairphone: Workshops for Platforms for the sale smartphone whose repairing objects (e.g. of second-hand parts can be replaced bicycles) clothing separately

Recycling

Recycling trash cans near farms

Workshops for refurbishing and reselling cell phones

Isothermal shelters for the homeless

Insertion structure specialized in the collection and reuse of electronic and office equipment

Charity

Platform for reselling concert tickets for the benefit of charities

Volunteer work

Platforms for connecting volunteers

Table 5.3. The technical and social dimensions of social innovation

This table gives several examples (not exhaustive of course) of a combination between a technical dimension (here: a platform, an object, know-how) and a social dimension (here: sustainable consumption, recycling, charity, volunteering). Thus, Internet platforms can be used to promote sustainable consumption through the sale and purchase of secondhand clothing, as well as through charity, with the resale of tickets with donations to charitable associations, or through voluntary work, with the establishment of links between volunteers and associations. As for technical objects or tools, the table mentions “Fairphones”, smartphones designed with separately renewable parts, which increase the lifetime of the device (see Box 5.4), or sophisticated recycling trash cans, as well as isothermal shelters for the homeless, designed to conserve heat and therefore provide (certainly temporary) shelter solutions in the event of extreme cold. Finally, the last column is devoted to know-how in the repair and refurbishment of objects, which is part of both sustainable consumption and recycling objectives. These skills can also be a means of integration for unemployed people.

174

Technological Change

The smartphone industry is highly polluting for several reasons including the use of rare metals in the manufacture of telephones and the very frequent replacement of devices by users, due to their rapid obsolescence. Faced with this situation, the Dutch company Fairphone offers a smartphone whose creation and production integrate environmental issues and respect fair trade rules. Thus, the “Fairphone” is a smartphone based on a modular construction. It consists of a set of modules (camera module, battery module, etc.) that can be renewed separately. In addition, the company seeks to use more responsible materials and is committed to good working conditions. Finally, the company mobilized a participatory fundraising campaign to launch the production of its products. The company has won several awards related to its commitment to the environment and fair trade including the United Nations’ “Momentum for Change” award in 2015 (for solutions to the social, economic and environmental challenges of climate change) and first place in Greenpeace USA’s 2017 ranking of the most environmentally friendly consumer electronics companies. Box 5.4. Fairphone, an innovation that combines social and technical dimensions

Finally, social innovation aims to address an unmet social need by combining a social dimension of changing practices with a technical dimension (e.g. digital platform, specialized know-how). It can be described as responsible insofar as it seeks to meet major societal challenges and aims at a form of ethics. 5.2.1.2. The actors of social or responsible innovation Another characteristic of social or responsible innovation is that it involves many actors, sometimes not used to cooperating together: companies, government actors, research institutions, non-market organizations (Klein, Laville and Moulaert, 2014). Thus, the social innovation ecosystem can be divided into several categories of actors: designers, funders, supporters and users. The designers of social innovations can have different statuses: associations, NGOs, companies, start-ups, individuals or groups of

Experiencing Technological Change

175

individuals, etc. Some innovations can be directly associated with the names of individuals, such as École 42 founded by Xavier Niel in France (see Box 5.5), while the affiliation of other initiatives is much more difficult to establish, as in the case of free software and code (see Box 5.6). École 42 was founded in France in 2013 and is gradually expanding internationally. This school aims to train developers and is characterized by original admission and operating methods. Thus, no diploma is required to be admitted, but candidates are tested on logic and memory. The training is free and is based not on lectures, but on project work. This system has several social interests. Firstly, it allows students who cannot afford to finance higher education to acquire recognized skills in a field with high recruitment potential. Secondly, it offers retraining opportunities for unemployed people. Every year, the school trains job seekers. The school is closely associated with the name Xavier Niel, one of its founders, known as the president of the French telecommunications group Iliad-Free. Box 5.5. École 42

Free software and code are characterized by the fact that their development, use, modification and distribution are free. They are sometimes considered as social innovations, in the sense that they promote a model of non-market organization and production and aim to meet a social need for access to computer tools for all. Unlike other social innovations that are linked to an individual or an organization, they are, by definition, generally not specifically linked to an individual: it is a collective of individuals (often anonymous) that contributes to them. Box 5.6. Free software and code

Financers of social innovations can take many different forms: – solidarity-based finance (investment funds specializing in the social and solidarity economy, for example); – corporate foundations;

176

Technological Change

– crowdfunding platforms; – public funders (States, local authorities, public institutions, etc.); – classic banks. These different actors are not mutually exclusive, as the same social innovation project can benefit from several funding sources. Actors who support social innovations can contribute in different ways. Thus, some actors aim to provide information and guidance to project leaders, while others aim to provide development and management assistance (incubators, professional networks, etc.). Finally, the users of social innovations are also extremely diverse (individuals, associations, etc.). Among these different actors, the role of States is both highlighted and questioned in the literature on social innovation (Laville, 2014). Indeed, by aiming to meet a social or collective need, social or responsible innovations sometimes take over from public authorities in certain fields traditionally covered by them (e.g. the fight against poverty, the fight against illiteracy). However, they do not necessarily reflect a disengagement of the State, which can support the shareholders of social innovations through financing or aid policies. Moreover, ensuring the conditions for the emergence of social innovations in sovereign domains could be an important quality of a truly democratic state (Laville, 2014). 5.2.1.3. Responsible technological innovation, a response to the criticisms and threats associated with technological change? Finally, social innovations seem to respond to the main threats identified in the first section, while at the same time allowing the main opportunities to be seized. In particular, they make it possible to meet certain societal challenges (recalled, for example, in Chapter 2) and seek to respect a form of ethics. In the field of technological change, we take this into account by calling them responsible technological innovations (see Table 5.4).

Experiencing Technological Change

177

Threat/opportunity

Social or responsible innovation

Examples of responsible technological innovations

Technological ideology, lies about technology

Social innovation aims to meet social needs, not create technologies that are of no real use

Organizations promoting the sustainable development and professional integration of local populations (e.g. Aki Energy in Canada)

Automation and job destruction, unemployment

A part of social innovation is at the service of the integration and employment of unemployed people

Refurbishing workshops employing people who have been unemployed for a long time (e.g. Ateliers du Bocage d’Emmaüs in France)

Social progress

Technological innovations Social innovation aims to that contribute to the meet social needs and is at improvement of working the service of improving conditions for certain living and working individuals (e.g. exoskeletons conditions for carrying heavy loads)

War, violence

Social innovation aims to meet social needs, including peace and healing

Criminality

Discrimination versus a more inclusive society

Technological innovations aimed at reducing the consequences of wars (e.g. humanitarian drones to deliver food or drugs, or to map territories)

Technological innovations Social innovation aims to aimed at reducing crime or meet social needs, combating the effects of crime including reducing crime (e.g. emergency telephones for victims of domestic abuse) Most social innovations serve a more inclusive society by addressing social needs not covered by dominant institutions

Technological innovations to improve access to entertainment, careers or services for certain populations (e. g. prostheses to allow individuals with lower limb disabilities to run)

A whole range of social Technological innovations aimed at sustainable Ecological degradation versus innovation is at the service sustainable development of sustainable development (e.g. Fairphones development in the Netherlands)

178

Technological Change

Prescriptive technology, alienation versus technology which facilitates professional activity

Social innovation puts people at the center of its development

Technological innovations that contribute to the empowerment of individuals (e.g. Solidarity Clouds for homeless people such as Reconnect in France)

Digital divide

Tackling the digital divide can be the subject of social innovations

Training networks for digital professions for unemployed people (e.g. Simplon.co)

Technological stress

Social innovation aims to meet needs and therefore does not create unnecessary technologies; information and communication technologies, in particular, are used to serve human beings (and not the other way around). In addition, combating technological stress can be the subject of social innovations

Solidarity Cloud services allowing homeless people to keep documents (e g. identity documents) in digital form (e.g. Reconnect in France)

Table 5.4.Responsible technological innovation, a response to the threats and risks associated with technological change

Thus, responsible technological innovation is applied to several areas that respond to many of these criticisms, in particular: the integration of unemployed people, which is to be compared with the risk of automation and job destruction, and sustainable development, to be compared with ecological risk. Moreover, responsible technological innovation aims to meet a social need and, in this respect, it responds to the risk of a technicist ideology disconnected from reality and the risk of war and violence. Thus, some innovations seek to reduce crime or the effects of war on individuals. Secondly, social or responsible innovation arises when a social or collective need is not covered by dominant institutions and therefore often benefits dominated populations, which explains its links with the social and solidarity economy (Laville, 2014). In this way, it partly responds to the risk of discrimination related to technological change. Finally, one of its characteristics is to put the human being at the center and to promote the social and human dimension over the purely technical dimension, which responds to the risk of prescriptive technology and the alienation of the

Experiencing Technological Change

179

human being through technology. Many responsible technological innovations also meet the objective of empowering individuals, which contradicts the image of an alienating and prescriptive technology. Fighting the digital divide is another area in which responsible technological innovations are multiplying, such as Simplon.co, a start-up that targets the most vulnerable populations. 5.2.2. Responsible technological innovations within organizations As this chapter is primarily devoted to technological change within organizations, particularly work organizations, it is now time to focus on the transposition of responsible technological innovations within organizations. Organizations thus maintain multiple links with responsible technological innovation: they are places of production, as well as of diffusion of these innovations. 5.2.2.1. Organizations as places of production for responsible technological innovations Many responsible innovations are the result of organized collectives of individuals: companies, associations, cooperatives, unions, NGOs, etc. The social and solidarity economy sector thus includes many of these organizations (see Box 5.7). In France, the social and solidarity economy sector includes cooperatives, mutual funds, foundations and associations, and in some cases, commercial enterprises. Cooperatives are based on the following principles: voluntary and inclusive membership, democratic governance, economic participation of members, member education and cooperation with other cooperatives. Mutual funds are organized on the basis of professional or territorial solidarity, and their status is governed by a code (le code de la mutualité in France, for example). Foundations manage private money to use it for a public cause. Associations are not-for-profit, and their status is also governed by laws (in France, the 1901 law). Finally, since the law of July 31, 2014 known as the “loi Économie sociale et solidaire” (Social and Solidarity Economy Act), commercial companies can also be part of the social and solidarity economy provided they meet certain criteria: – the purpose pursued must be other than the mere sharing of profits; – governance must be democratic with the participation of partners, employees and any other stakeholders;

180

Technological Change

– the company’s profits must be primarily used to maintain or develop the activity. In the European Union, the social and solidarity economy represents about 10% of all companies, for 6.5% of total paid employment. The concept of the social and solidarity economy does not necessarily have a stabilized terminology at the European level, but Stokkink and Perard (2016) define it according to the principles of action and organization: – individual non-profit-making; – democratic management (one person = one vote); – social or collective utility; – mixed resources, independence towards public authorities. Box 5.7. The social and solidarity economy sector in France and Europe 1 (sources: ministerial websites ; Stokkink and Perard, 2016)

The links between responsible innovation and the social and solidarity economy are particularly strong. Thus, the voluntary sector has historically been a laboratory for responsible innovation, particularly in the technological field, since associations have had to find solutions to social needs not covered by public authorities or companies (in the fields of housing, health, ecology, etc.). In addition, commercial companies can also offer responsible technological innovations. The Fairphone company already mentioned is an illustration of this. The challenge is therefore to identify the conditions for the emergence and production of these responsible technological innovations within market organizations. Based on the definition of social or responsible innovation, they seem to us to be as follows: – to identify an unfulfilled social need, sometimes not put on the agenda by public authorities; – to reason outside established structures and concepts; – to put the issue of economic and financial profit on the back burner; – to link the social and technical dimensions. 1 www.economie.gouv.fr/entreprises/structures-economie-sociale-et-solidaire-ess, accessed on November 2019.

Experiencing Technological Change

181

Thus, as we have seen, the first step is to identify an unfulfilled social need, sometimes not even put on the public agenda. However, if the need is not put on the public agenda, it means that, to identify it, it is necessary to reason outside established structures and institutions. Moreover, if the need is put on the public agenda but is not met, it probably implies that it is difficult to satisfy this need in established structures and institutions. In this second case too, reasoning outside established structures, institutions and concepts seem necessary. Secondly, as we have seen in the social and solidarity economy sector, social innovation is also characterized by putting the search for profit on the back burner (Oosterlynck and Moulaert, 2014). Finally, it is necessary to link the social and technical dimensions, as social innovation is based on the interweaving of the two (see Table 5.3). 5.2.2.2. Responsible technological democratizing organizations?

innovation,

a

vector

for

As mentioned above, a whole field of research is concerned with social innovation as a vehicle for democratizing society (Klein, Laville and Moulaert, 2014). Therefore, the transposition of this perspective to work organizations could imply that some social innovations related to technological change could make work organizations more democratic. Two elements and examples seem to us to support this point. First of all, a dialogue with employee representatives, an essential element of corporate democracy, can in some cases allow forms of social innovation linked to technological change. Oosterlynck and Moulaert (2014) thus give the example of a dialogue with social partners on the dissemination of new information technologies (see Box 5.8). Oosterlynck and Moulaert are interested in the Flemish Region in Belgium. This region is characterized by a very significant capitalist prism, which seems not to be very favorable to the development of social innovations. However, the authors give examples of situations where socio-political organizations have succeeded in bringing about social innovations in this context. In particular, they give the example of the battle fought by trade union movements in the 1980s to ensure that the introduction of new technologies into the working environment is the subject of consultations between employers and employees. In the early 1980s, the Flemish Government proposed a modernization program involving, in particular, the introduction of new technologies into companies. The whole program revealed a very capitalist and technicist orientation, seeing innovation

182

Technological Change

only under the prisms of technology and the market. However, the dissemination of this program within organizations was contested, particularly by the social partners. As a result of these challenges, the dimension relating to the introduction of new technologies in the workplace was the subject of several amendments: – creation of a research institute governed by the social partners on the social dimensions of new technologies; – extension of the scope of the dialogue between employers’ organizations and trade unions, hitherto focused on wages and working conditions, on new technologies. Box 5.8. Social dialogue and social innovation on digital tools (source: Oosterlynck and Moulaert, 2014)

Secondly, social innovation in some cases implies the active participation of workers in its production, and this is just as true in the case of responsible technological innovations. Organizational learning theory thus reflects a movement to integrate knowledge from work practice into organizational processes. It is therefore a vertical upward movement, which ensures that innovation responds to a need and consists of both a technical and a social dimension. Thus, an operator can innovate by developing new work tools or technologies, which can eventually be integrated into work procedures, and which other operators, in turn, will have to use or apply. This theory is thus based on the premise that workers are best able to develop innovations that meet their own work needs. Similarly, in the case of technological innovation to meet societal needs, it is sometimes workers who have had to deal with difficult situations who propose to their organization an innovation to meet these types of situations. Such participation may, in some cases, take the form of intrapreneurship, already mentioned in Chapter 3, when employees develop social innovations within their own companies (see Box 5.9). Some employees are looking to develop innovative activities with a social impact, in line with their profession. For example, executives in the financial sector are seeking to develop ethical investment funds within their companies (Nataxis, BNP Paribas, etc.) that meet the standards of socially responsible investment, or microfinance projects. In construction companies (Lafarge, for example), employees suggest offering affordable housing solutions for low-income households. At Veolia, an employee carried out a project to produce and sell drinking water in Bangladesh, involving local stakeholders (and, in particular, women). Box 5.9. Examples of social intrapreneurship

Experiencing Technological Change

183

Finally, social or responsible innovation is a form of change that combines a technological dimension with a social and societal dimension. In this way, it responds to some of the criticisms made by some researchers in the human and social sciences against technology. The development of responsible technological innovations requires the participation of different groups of stakeholders, including work organizations (e.g. companies), as producers and beneficiaries of these innovations. Indeed, the latter can contribute to organizational democracy through the development of dialogue and participation of employees and their representatives. 5.3. Managing responsible technological change This last section aims to build on the elements given in the previous sections to propose suggestions for improving the management of technological change. Indeed, while the literature on the management of organizational change is particularly abundant, we propose a change management model that takes into account the specificities of technological change and aims at a responsible technological change. 5.3.1. Organizational change management The literature on the conduct of organizational change is particularly abundant. It makes it possible to identify key dimensions for characterizing a change and the associated change management strategy (Barel and Frémeaux, 2009). 5.3.1.1. A prescriptive model for change management Among other things, researchers have proposed prescriptive change management models. Thus, Philips (1983) starts from the observation that there are three key factors for successful organizational change: the quality of the new strategic vision, the development and dissemination of the skills required for this strategic vision and organizational support (leaders, managerial line, etc.). He thus derives a four-phase planned change management model (see Figure 5.1). A first step is to build consensus within the organization on the need for change. This can be done, for example, by offering training on socio-economic change, by leaders speaking out or by setting up small groups of influencers convinced of the need for change and responsible for disseminating this conviction to those around them.

184

Technological Change

The second phase aims to launch a movement of commitment towards a specific change: the definition of the strategic vision and of the resulting organizational vision in particular. The third phase consists of defining and implementing actions to enable change: training if new skills are needed, changes in operating and working methods or job creation or reduction, for example. Finally, the fourth phase should make it possible to consolidate the new organization, for example by institutionalizing the new rules.

Figure 5.1. Example of a change model (source: adapted from Philips, 1983)

5.3.1.2. Contingency factors for change management However, this type of prescriptive model overlooks the fact that a change management strategy is contextual, in the sense that it also depends strongly on the type of change involved (Pettigrew, 1987; Weick and Quinn, 1999) and that there are alternatives to planned change. There are many types of organizational changes. Table 5.5 represents a non-exhaustive attempt at an overview that provides examples of dimensions that structure organizational change. The first dimension concerns the extent of the change and its reversibility. Some changes, such as a change in managerial culture or a massive reorientation of the organization’s activity, affect several departments and lead to in-depth organizational renewal. Conversely, other changes are less important: reorganization of a team, marginal modification of a work process. The extent of the change then determines the strategy to be adopted. Van de Ven and Poole (1995) thus distinguish situations of change that concern a single entity of the organization (a department, a site, for example), and situations that concern several or all entities. In France, the example of the social crisis of the late 2000s at France Télécom illustrates a change strategy that is not adapted to the scale of the targeted changes (see Box 5.10).

Experiencing Technological Change

185

Dimension

Examples

Authors

Scale of change

Global change, involving changes in several parts or departments of the organization, or local change, corresponding to experiments with new operating modes in small areas, before possible generalization

Van de Ven and Poole (1995)

Employee participation in change

Top-down approach, imposing change through the hierarchical channel, or bottom-up approach, favoring the emergence of innovations from the field

Philips (1983); Barel and Frémeaux (2009)

Steps in the process

Technical change (tools, machines, etc.) before social change (learning, culture, discourse about change, etc.) or vice versa

Philips (1983); Pettigrew (1987)

Source of the change

Market needs, increased competition, employee proposals, etc.

Van de Ven and Poole (1995)

Rate of change

Rapid or long-term change

Weick and Quinn (1999)

Change frequency

Organization/sector accustomed to permanent changes, or on the contrary to a certain stability: continuous or episodic change

Mintzberg (1979); Weick and Quinn (1999)

Characteristics of the organization

Age, size, status, organizational model, cultural inertia

Mintzberg (1979); Weick and Quinn (1999)

Table 5.5. The structuring dimensions of change and associated strategies

At the end of the 1990s, the French telecommunications administration, France Télécom, was confronted with very significant changes linked to its privatization and the internationalization of competition in the sector. A few years later, at the beginning of the 2000s, the company was very heavily in debt. To turn the company around, management focused on a strategy that combined sophistication and rapid renewal of offers and products, and a massive reduction in the number of employees (20,000 job cuts were planned). However, the magnitude of this change seemed disproportionate compared to the few years planned to achieve the objective. As a result, the means used were sometimes not very respectful of individuals: forced resignations and mobility, moral harassment, etc. Finally, the social crisis culminated in the late 2000s with suicides and suicide attempts by employees, particularly in the workplace. Box 5.10. An inappropriate strategy in view of the scale of change: the example of France Télécom

186

Technological Change

The second structuring dimension concerns the place given to individuals in change. Thus, some changes are decreed by the company’s management (see Box 5.10) and imposed on individuals without their participation: this is therefore a prescribed change (Van de Ven and Poole, 1995). On the other hand, some organizations seek to involve employees in change, through working groups or collective workshops to bring forward proposals. However, it is still necessary to distinguish between situations where the results of these collective reflections are really taken into account to define the facets of change, and those where employee participation is only illusory, in the sense that it does not influence the path of change (see Box 5.11). At the end of the 2000s, the management of one of the plants of the French company Poult decided to involve employees in reflection on strategy, in the context of economic difficulties. The plant therefore decided to devote a full day of work to collective reflection on the organization and work processes. As a result of this initiative, several hierarchical levels were abolished and the factory was organized into four autonomous units, instead of the compartmentalized departments that had previously prevailed. Subsequently, the same employee participation approach was extended to the entire company, and employees proposed other organizational changes aimed at improving employee productivity and autonomy. The company also embarked on a project to draft a “constitution” for the company by a group composed of one-third employees, one-third first-level managers and one-third executives. Box 5.11. When employees define the facets of change: the example of Poult (sources: press articles; Gilbert, Raulet-Croset and Teglborg, 2017)

The third dimension refers to a distinction between situations where change is thought of as primarily technical, and those where it is thought of as primarily human. Indeed, as we have pointed out, while, change is often both technical and human, organizations tend to strongly separate the two dimensions. Thus, a company that decides to change its main working tool can promote the “tool” vision, focusing on technical aspects, and, for example, on the operational and technical prerequisites for the implementation of the tool, or on the contrary a “human” vision, focusing on individuals and highlighting, for example, the need for training and individual and collective support. Moreover, this primacy given either to the tool or to the human can influence all stages of the process (see Figure 5.2).

Experiencing Technological Change

187

Figure 5.2. Promoting the technical or human dimension when changing work tools

Thus, when choosing the tool, the company may focus on technical considerations (technical specifications, functionalities, version changes envisaged, for example), or be more interested in what the tool will change for individuals, in terms of autonomy, skills implemented or daily activities. Then, when the tool is installed, the technical dimension focuses on compliance with the technical specifications or interfacing with the other tools. On the other hand, organizations that focus on the human dimension will pay attention to the challenges of training and coaching individuals, and will seek to listen to them in order to better understand the obstacles to tool implementation. Finally, tool assessment may also depend on the preferred dimension. Thus, indicators related to the productivity or use of the tool (functionalities used, number of bugs in the tool, for example) can be mobilized, or on the contrary indicators referring to people’s perception and experience with the tool or their well-being and autonomy. The fourth dimension refers to the factor that triggers change: the need to adapt to market developments, economic problems, as well as changes in management teams, employee proposals, etc. Van de Ven and Poole (1995) thus make the “generating force” of change a differentiating factor between four ideals of organizational change, and identify four types of generating force: institutional or regulatory changes, competition and the market, internal organizational conflicts, and the collective and consensual definition of new objectives. Indeed, the triggering factor of change strongly influences

188

Technological Change

the discourse held on the necessity and legitimacy of change, which constitutes a key element of the change management strategy, as we have seen (Philips, 1983). Box 5.12 thus returns to the rhetoric of the need for change in work organizations. Perret (2009) focuses on rhetoric related to change in organizations. Thus, the notion of “change” seems omnipresent under different terms: development, learning enterprise, continuous improvement, innovation, etc. This omnipresence is, in fact, based on three arguments often implicit in management discourse: change is necessary, represents progress and is permanent. These three arguments being little challenged, it is no longer the question “why should we change?” but the question “how can we change?” which is dominant, and with this question many models of change management have developed, aimed in particular at reducing individual and collective resistance to change. Finally, a consensual vision of change has gradually emerged in work organizations and management work: in this vision, change is positive, especially in cases where it is formulated on the basis of a consensus, i.e. an agreement between the different members of the organization on its outlines. However, the search for an apparent consensus can sometimes lead managers to manipulate workers by giving them the impression of participating in the definition of change when this is not the case. Box 5.12. The ideology of change within organizations (source: Perret, 2009)

The pace and frequency of change (dimensions 5 and 6) are important and interrelated dimensions. Thus, some organizations, because of the sector in which they operate as well as intrinsic characteristics, have a culture of permanent and rapid change. Weick and Quinn (1999) refer to this type of change as “continuous change”. In contrast, other organizations are characterized by a change that is described as “episodic”, less frequent and with a shorter time frame. Weick and Quinn then suggest that two paradigms of change should be distinguished. The first, described as “Lewinian”, is based on the following assumptions: organizational inertia, linearity of changes and developments, progressive development and the pursuit of objectives. In this model, change results from an imbalance or external intervention that makes the original organization obsolete. Conversely, the second model, described as “Confucian”, is based on the following assumptions: cyclical and permanent organizational movement, permanent change and no organizational inertia. Thus, the first model seems more

Experiencing Technological Change

189

suitable for studying and leading episodic changes, and the second for continuous changes. Finally, the characteristics of the organization constitute a dimension that strongly structures change (dimension 7). Thus, Mintzberg (1979) identified “contingency factors” affecting the structure of organizations and the distribution of power within organizations: age, size, sector of activity, etc. However, the structure and distribution of power, in turn, affect how change is approached (see Box 5.13). Mintzberg is known, in particular, for having proposed a typology of organizational structures and for having identified contingency factors explaining the adoption of such a structure for an organization. However, this typology can be used to identify organizational characteristics that are more or less conducive to change. For example, organizations described as bureaucratic are characterized by a form of structural inertia that makes change difficult and is not well adapted to innovate. Conversely, simple structures and adhocracies are the most likely to change. Indeed, the simple structure is based on a single person’s decision-making, which guarantees a form of agility; adhocracy, by its organic and decentralized nature, lends itself particularly well to the search for innovation. Box 5.13. Mintzberg and change management (source: Mintzberg, 1979)

The wide variety of situations linked to change therefore makes it difficult to formulate a single prescriptive model linked to a change management strategy. Moreover, a model such as the one proposed by Philips (1983) does not specify the content of phase 3 (“defining and implementing concrete actions related to change”), which seems to constitute the crucial phase of a change management strategy. 5.3.2. The specificities of technological change To clarify the content of this phase 3 in the case of technological change, it is first necessary to highlight the specificities of this type of change. 5.3.2.1. Managing unlearning and skills acquisition We have listed the conditions for the emergence and production of technological innovations that respect individuals within organizations. The ability (collective and individual) to unlearn seems to be a common

190

Technological Change

denominator under these different conditions. However, this requires that organizations manage their skills in a way that respects these cycles of unlearning and innovation. The literature on organizational innovation highlights the importance of moving beyond pre-existing rules and procedures for the development of innovation (Alter, 2000). This is all the more important in the field of responsible technological innovation, which also challenges the usual codes of innovation. However, this “unlearning” contrasts with the current logic in work organizations. Drawing on Schumpeter’s work and the expression “creative destruction”, Alter (2000) shows how much innovation and adoption of innovation require breaking free from socially established rules. This is all the more true in the business world, where there are two contradictory injunctions represented by the need for innovation and renewal and the need to respect codes, rules and procedures. He thus gives examples where an innovation that was rationally interesting could not be deployed in organizations. Beyond the world of work, there are many examples of technological innovations whose deployment is contrary to established habits and rules (see Box 5.14). Perhaps the best known example of an innovation’s failure to spread due to deeply rooted habits is the Dvorak keyboard. The current layout of the keys on the Qwerty (for English) or Azerty (for French) keyboards is linked to the operating mode of typewriters: it was necessary to give the bars time to fall back to prevent them from crossing and blocking the machine. The Qwerty and Azerty arrangements therefore move the most used keys away from each other. This slows down the rate of typing. However, the physical constraint of bar crossings has disappeared with the keyboards of modern computers. A new keyboard, named Dvorak after its inventor, has since been proposed (for the English language): this keyboard seeks to optimize typing speed with a better layout of letters. This keyboard therefore seems to fully meet the objectives of users who most of the time seek to speed up typing time. However, the spread of the Dvorak keyboard has never been able to overcome the fact that users learn to type on Qwerty keyboards and are not ready to unlearn this habit to acquire another one. Box 5.14. An innovation that comes up against established habits: the Dvorak keyboard

Experiencing Technological Change

191

These examples illustrate a phenomenon known as path dependence (Arthur, 1989). Arthur points out that in the field of the adoption of new technologies, yields are increasing, in the sense that the more a technology is adopted, the more significant its use is, therefore the more improvements it will benefit and the more other technologies will be added to it, which will reinforce the adoption of the first. He then examines the adoption of competing technologies and shows that, in many cases, the technology that ultimately wins the competition for adoption is not necessarily the most “effective”, but has benefited from sometimes minor circumstances that led to its adoption first, and has quickly become a dominant or even monopolistic technology. In addition to the example of the Dvorak keyboard mentioned in Box 5.14, he illustrates his point with the example of nuclear power generation in the United States. Nuclear energy can be produced with light water, heavy water, as well as gas or sodium. However, in the United States, the nuclear industry is largely dominated by light water reactors, a choice that dates back to the first nuclear submarine (1954), while gas-fired reactors seem rationally more suitable. Path dependence is also present in work organizations, for at least two reasons. First of all, working requires relying on a number of tools, know-how and “ways of doing things”, which are all habits that are difficult to change. Thus, introducing a tool into an organization that requires changes in processes or work habits is always tricky and sometimes doomed to fail (see Box 5.15). Ammenwerth, Iller and Mahler were interested in the deployment of an IT documentation tool in hospital departments. While the adoption of the tool was easy and quick in the dermatology and psychiatry departments, it proved much more difficult in the pediatric department. The authors explained this using a potential adoption model of a new tool based on three factors: congruence between users (e.g. IT anxiety, motivation), the technical attributes of the tool (e.g. functionality, ease of use) and the tasks to be performed (e.g. complexity and organization). It is not the only model for understanding whether or not an innovation is adopted in an organization. Chapter 4 gave the example of Davis’ TAM model as an example. These models aim to explain the potential failures of adoption and therefore the deployment of new tools, including in work organizations. Box 5.15. The introduction of a new documentation tool in a hospital structure (sources: Davis, 1993; Ammenwerth, Iller and Mahler, 2006)

192

Technological Change

Secondly, as Alter (2000) points out, work organizations are based on a set of rules and processes that are difficult to challenge, which hinders innovation capacities. According to this sociologist, who partly takes up Schumpeter’s (1999 (1926)) work on the subject, the “entrepreneur”, i.e. the individual who wishes to propose an innovation in an organization, cannot be part of the rationalist aim of management, since he does not have previous experience or data enabling him to legitimize the interest of his innovation. In addition, the entrepreneur also faces individuals whose activity may be modified, or even threatened, by innovation. Therefore, it is in the entrepreneur’s interest to comply with the organization’s injunctions in the first instance, or even to conceal the potential effects of their innovation, until the latter’s interest is recognized within the organization. The entrepreneur is therefore always at some point in a situation of deviating from the organization’s rules: they must go beyond these rules, overcome them and probably sometimes unlearn them to be able to carry out their project successfully. While innovation requires some form of unlearning, this seems even more true for responsible technological innovations. Indeed, these innovations require a double renewal, technical and societal, as we have seen. In the previous section, we listed the conditions for the emergence of social innovations: reasoning outside established structures and concepts; putting the issue of economic and financial profit in the background; and linking the social dimension to the technical dimension. However, these conditions require unlearning ways of working that are deeply rooted in most work organizations. Indeed, the question of economic and financial profit remains most of the time the main issue for profit organizations. Moreover, as the previous chapters have shown, the decoupling of technology and social issues remains common, and success in linking the two therefore requires an unlearning of this decoupling. Finally, responsible technological innovations are also characterized by the networking of a number of actors not used to cooperating, for example large multinationals with local workers, or multinationals with associations. This once again requires a review of pre-established patterns of cooperation between the different institutions. The intrapreneurs mentioned in Box 5.9 have therefore had to insist in some cases in order to convince their organization to set up new partnerships with these unusual actors.

Experiencing Technological Change

193

However, unlearning is not necessarily seen as legitimate within work organizations, which are based on the rhetoric of building up skills rather than practices that challenge existing ones (Kuhn and Moulin, 2013). In fact, many factors can hinder “organizational unlearning” (Tsang and Zahra, 2008; Kuhn and Moulin, 2013): – the organization’s length of existence; – training seen only in terms of adaptation to the workplace; – very settled work routines; – rigid processes and rules. Thus, it is sometimes difficult, if not impossible, for organizations to promote the unlearning of rules, routines and skills. 5.3.2.2. What kind of skills management? However, unlearning is not enough: as Chapter 4 has pointed out, it is also necessary to be able to acquire and appropriate new skills (including knowledge, know-how and meta-knowledge; see Aubret, Gilbert and Pigeyre, 2005). Indeed, technological change is often accompanied by the emergence of new skills necessary to produce technological innovation as well as to seize it. Thus, as Chapter 4 noted, digitalization has gone hand in hand with the emergence of skills linked, for example, to communication on social networks or the use of digital tools. In addition, recent decades have seen an acceleration of change, leading to more uncertain predictions of the skills needed for work organizations. It then becomes necessary to disseminate interdisciplinary skills which are useful whatever the development of the organization (Aubret, Gilbert and Pigeyre, 2005). Two HR processes are particularly relevant: recruitment and training (Cadiz and Pointet, 2002). Recruitment allows individuals with new skills to enter the organization. It is particularly suitable in situations where a skill is difficult to develop internally. For example, nowadays, organizations are trying to recruit data scientist profiles, knowing that data expertise requires a significant amount of training time and high expertise, which makes it difficult to develop these skills internally.

194

Technological Change

The link between recruitment and technological change is twofold: an organization may want to recruit people who can propose innovations, or people who have mastered new techniques to capture innovations. In the first case, recruitment involves an assessment of a person’s potential for innovation. This can be a particularly difficult exercise because the potential for innovation is not measured against the most traditional recruitment criteria (diploma, professional experience, etc.). This may then require organizations to renew their recruitment process and criteria. This explains the development of new recruitment tools, such as the escape game or the video CV, which allow candidates to distinguish themselves with atypical skills. Moreover, recruiting a person with high innovation potential is limited if the new recruit must then comply with the organization’s codes and requirements, which can, on the contrary, hinder the spirit of innovation (Alter, 2000). In the second case, recruitment requires the assessment of expertise, which is done, for example, through the diploma criterion. However, this criterion loses its relevance with the development of self-study movements, particularly in the field of computer science (many self-taught people learn code or new computer languages by their own means). As a result, other recruitment practices are developing, such as hackathons, which allow candidates to be assessed in real IT development situations (see Box 5.16). A “hackathon” is initially an event that brings together groups of developers to do computer programming over several days (“hackathon” referring to the computer term “hack”, referring to a quick solution to a specific problem, and “marathon”). In recent years, companies such as Facebook and Google, as well as Microsoft and Cisco, have been using hackathons to recruit developers or data experts. They ask candidates to work on a concrete problem with a reward for the best solutions, as well as a position within the company. The hackathon format makes it possible to put individuals in a very concrete situation of work and collaboration (since hackathon participants generally work in teams), and thus to identify the individuals with the most technical and collaborative skills. Box 5.16. Hackathons, useful for recruiting developers?

Experiencing Technological Change

195

Work organizations may also choose to develop and disseminate skills internally. This then involves training aimed at developing the innovation potential of individuals or enabling them to appropriate new technologies without having to resort to external recruitment. Three training models stand out in particular: a vertical top-down diffusion model of skills (from top to bottom, through company training, for example), a vertical bottom-up diffusion model (from bottom to top, through reverse mentoring, in particular) and a horizontal diffusion model (by peers). Some companies set up ambitious and costly training plans, sometimes based on internal trainers, particularly in large companies. This training can be useful in disseminating work rules and procedures. In the case of technological change, such training can be mobilized to support change, for example, in the case of the implementation of a new work tool (Aladwani, 2001). Training then becomes a means of encouraging employees to use the new tool (see Box 5.17). The implementation of a new work tool, for example a new information system or a new application, requires employees to develop both new skills related to mastering the tool and to modifying their work processes and practices according to the characteristics of the tool. For example, salespeople who use an information system to find out which products are in stock or on the shelf, or technicians who use a failure management application, or public service reclassification agents who have to fill in new forms in software, must adapt their working practices accordingly (relationship with the customer or user, time spent on the tool, information to enter into the tool for example). The training of operators seems to be essential to enable them to appropriate the new tool. Box 5.17. The implementation of a new work tool

On the other hand, training of this type does not seem to be well suited to developing the innovative potential of individuals. More recently, companies have experienced a development in reverse mentoring, which characterizes situations where individuals are led to train people who are higher up in

196

Technological Change

the hierarchy or have more years of experience. This system is particularly well suited to the dissemination of skills considered new (e.g. related to new digital technologies), or to the development of the organization’s innovation potential. Indeed, the younger generations are considered to master these new skills more easily and to have a higher potential for innovation because of their new view of the organization than the older generations (see Box 5.18). Reverse mentoring was popularized by General Electric in the late 1990s, when the company’s CEO asked the 500 most senior executives to be supported by junior employees to learn how to use IT tools, particularly the Internet. This system has developed rapidly, and today large organizations such as Cisco, HP and Orange are mobilizing it, especially on the subject of digital technology. These programs are presented as having several advantages: promoting intergenerational exchange, benefiting mentees who are gaining skills and employee mentors who have the opportunity to interact with very senior executives, and of course contributing to the dissemination of skills within the organization. Other organizations (in France, Pernod Ricard, Adecco and AccorHotels in particular) have communicated on the establishment of “shadow comex”, parallel executive committees made up of young employees. The objective of these shadow comex is to propose innovations in products or ways of working for the organization. This movement is therefore based on the premise that young people have a greater potential for innovation than older employees. Box 5.18. Reverse mentoring in different organizations

Finally, some topics and work environments are more suitable for the horizontal dissemination of knowledge through a system of peer-to-peer exchanges. This peer-to-peer diffusion experienced several transformations between the 20th and 21st Centuries, from communities of practice to networks of ambassadors and networks of collective competence (Alter, 2000). Communities of practice, like companionship, are made up of groups of individuals who work together or on the same subject, and are thus led to

Experiencing Technological Change

197

find together and share among themselves solutions to practical and concrete problems in their daily work. Networks of ambassadors are made up of employees who, on a given subject, will be identified as being able to help or train their colleagues (see Box 5.19). Several major French companies have deployed a network of employee digital ambassadors. One network, designed by a consulting firm called D-Sides, operates on a voluntary basis: volunteer employees help their colleagues to use digital tools, advise their team on how to digitalize certain processes and contribute to reflection on the changes in working methods brought about by digitalization. The contingencies related to each company have contributed to differentiated implementations (in terms of the time spent on the mission or the form of network animation, for example), but in all cases, this network aims to reduce the digital divide by developing peer-to-peer sharing of knowledge and skills. D-Sides explains that this modus operandi is particularly suitable for digital technology, since the digital world is characterized by promoting horizontality and sharing. Box 5.19. A network of digital ambassadors

Finally, innovation in work organizations requires a form of unlearning, all the more so when this innovation goes against the usual reference frameworks (pursuit of profit, efficiency, myth of technical rationality, etc.), as is the case for social innovation. However, this unlearning must go hand in hand with skills management to develop and disseminate the skills required to innovate and keep pace with technological change. 5.3.2.3. Strategies for managing technological change To conclude this book, we mobilize the contributions of the previous sections to address the question of the management of responsible technological change and thus provide some recommendations in this area. The contributions of the previous sections allow us to identify the specificities of technological change and how change management can take them into account (see Table 5.6).

198

Technological Change

Dimensions

Threat management and seizing opportunities inherent to technological change (section 5.1)

Employee participation in innovation or its diffusion (section 5.2)

Unlearning (section 5.3)

Technical skills management (section 5.3)

Sub-dimensions

Change management

Automation and job destruction, unemployment

Supporting the employees affected

Social progress

Studying from the outset the effects of technological change on individuals and the social climate

Technostress

Implementing anti-stress measures (stress related to technological change)

Discrimination versus more inclusive organization

Involving anti-discrimination experts in the early stages of change processes

Ecological degradation versus sustainable development

Involving sustainable development experts upstream of change processes

Prescriptive technology, alienation versus implementation assistance technology

Promoting technologies that meet real needs and leave room for maneuver to individuals

Digital divide

Training all employees in new technologies

Responsible technological innovation

Integrating the principles of social or responsible innovation: responding to a need, including a technical and social dimension, putting the human being at the center

Employees who propose innovations

Making the organization’s rules and codes more flexible in order to preserve the innovation potential of individuals

Need to unlearn old technologies or ways of doing things in order to be able to innovate and appropriate new ones

Accepting the disappearance of certain skills

Recruitment

Recruiting people with innovation potential or mastering new technologies

Training

Training employees in new techniques or developing their innovation potential: top-down training, reverse mentoring, communities of practice or networks of ambassadors

Table 5.6. The specificities of technological change

Experiencing Technological Change

199

Thus, the first dimension concerns the management of risks related to technological change identified in the first section of this chapter. The challenge for work organizations is to limit these risks or the effects of these risks on individuals. This involves, in particular, efforts to support employees, for example, by redeploying employees whose jobs may be lost, or by training employees to ensure that they have the necessary skills to cope with this change. The example of digital ambassadors mentioned above (see Box 5.19) illustrates how a company can try to ensure a good diffusion of digital skills. This also requires upstream reflection on the consequences of technological change for individuals and the social climate, and raising the awareness of the various actors on certain subjects: stress at work, discrimination and ecological degradation in particular. With regard to stress at work, it may be appropriate to put in place stress measures specifically related to technological change. In addition, involving expert actors in the fight against discrimination and sustainable development (internally, the diversity department or the CSR department, for example, as well as external consultants if necessary) from the outset of the change project can help to limit the risk of discrimination and ecological degradation. Finally, the risk of alienating individuals by technology can be avoided or reduced by taking into account the criterion of the room for maneuver left to individuals when choosing technologies and making changes. The second dimension concerns the participation of workers in the production and diffusion of innovation. This point, discussed in the second section of this chapter, is divided into two sub-dimensions. Firstly, we discussed the notion of social or responsible innovation, and how this notion partly responds to the risks inherent in technological change. Therefore, one way for organizations to ensure responsible technological change is to integrate into the change process the principles of responsible innovation: to verify that technological change responds to a real need, that it has a human dimension and not only a technological dimension, or that the change process puts people at the center. This refers to Figure 5.2 and the distinction between a process that focuses on technical aspects and one that focuses on human aspects. Then, in connection with the notion of social innovation, we stressed the need for employee participation in change. We also pointed out (in the third section of this chapter) that, while organizations regularly issue

200

Technological Change

injunctions for change and innovation, internal codes and procedures often stifle creativity. Therefore, ensuring employee participation in change may require flexibility in these rules, codes and procedures. The third dimension concerns the notion of unlearning. In the third section, we pointed out that unlearning (of ways of working, as well as of codes and conventions) is an essential condition for technological change, but that organizations often see unlearning as a failure. Accepting the disappearance of certain skills seems to be both a difficulty and an important issue for organizations. The fourth dimension concerns the management of technical skills. The management of technological change influences key processes such as recruitment and training. In the context of recruitment, it is a matter for organizations to recruit people with a potential for innovation or mastering new technologies. In both cases, this requires a reflection on the recruitment process and the mechanisms used to select applications: exercises to assess potential or the command of a rare technological skill. We have thus given the example of hackathons for assessing mastery of the most advanced computer skills (see Box 5.16). On the training side, in the same way, organizations can have two objectives: to develop the innovative potential of individuals, or to train them in new technologies. Once again, this may require mobilizing original training mechanisms differently from top-down company training: reverse mentoring, networks of ambassadors, etc. 5.3.3. An integrative scheme for the management of responsible technological change Finally, the management of technological change, while taking up certain dimensions of change management in general, has specific features that should be kept in mind when setting up a strategy in this area. In this last section, we propose to combine the contributions of the two previous sections to propose an integrative model of responsible technological change management. We thus use Philips’ (1983) model, presented in Figure 5.1, adapting it to take into account the various elements mentioned above, and, in particular, to recall the risks inherent in technological change and the actions that organizations can take to limit them (see Figure 5.3).

Experiencing Technological Change

201

Figure 5.3. Leading responsible technological change (source: adapted from Philips, 1983)

Thus, in the case of technological change, the first phase, which corresponds to the construction of a consensus on the need for change, presents a risk (linked to the technicist ideology) of illusions about the validity of technologies and therefore of technological change. At this stage, the actions to be taken to limit this risk are aimed at ensuring that this change meets a real need and fully understanding the potential negative effects of the technology. Mobilizing the principles of social innovation can be a solution at this stage (technological change must meet a need, have a technical and social dimension, put people at the center). The second phase refers to the definition of a specific technological change. This phase presents several risks related to the technology in question: this technology may be alienating, discriminatory or contribute to ecological degradation. In addition to ensuring that the technology meets a real need, involving experts in the fight against discrimination and sustainable development in the choice of technology can help to limit these risks.

202

Technological Change

The third phase corresponds to the definition of the actions necessary to support technological change. The main risk in this phase is to focus on the technical dimension rather than the human dimension (see Figure 5.2). To limit this risk, it is advantageous to carry out actions focused on individuals at work: training and support. Moreover, enabling unlearning seems appropriate to promote the acquisition of the skills necessary to appropriate a new technology. The fourth phase, which we have added to Philips’ original model, is aimed at evaluating technological change. This assessment may be limited to technical aspects (productivity gains or the number of bugs in the tool, for example). Conversely, assessing a technological change that is more respectful of individuals and more sustainable may also involve assessing the effects of change on individuals (technostress, well-being at work) and individuals’ perceptions of change. Finally, the fifth phase refers to the institutionalization of the new organization or the new technology. This institutionalization involves, among other things, the formalization of new rules, new procedures and new ways of working linked to the new technology. The main risk then lies in excessive formalism and in the definition of rules and procedures, leaving little room to maneuver for individuals, which again highlights the notion of alienating technology. To limit this risk, organizations must ensure that they maintain flexibility in the appropriation of technology.

References

ACADÉMIE NATIONALE DE MÉDECINE, Parité en santé : la recherche scientifique et la médecine ne peuvent plus ignorer les différences biologiques entre les sexes, Report, June 2016. AKRICH M., “Comment sortir de la dichotomie technique/société”, in LATOUR B., LEMONNIER P. (eds), De la préhistoire aux missiles balistiques. L’intelligence sociale des techniques, pp. 105–131, La Découverte, Paris, 1994. AKRICH M., CALLON M., LATOUR B., Sociologie de la traduction. Textes fondateurs, Presses des Mines, Paris, 2006. ALASWANI A.M., “Change management strategies for successful ERP implementation”, Business Process Management Journal, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 266–275, 2001. ALBEROLA E., CROUTTE P., HOIBIAN S., “La “double peine” pour des publics fragilisés face au tout-numérique”, Annales des Mines-Réalités industrielles, no. 3, pp. 32–36, 2016. ALTER N., L’innovation ordinaire, PUF, Paris, 2000. AMMENWERTH E., ILLER C., MAHLER C., “IT-adoption and the interaction of task, technology and individuals: A fit framework and a case study”, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1–13, 2006. ARTHUR W.B., “Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events”, The Economic Journal, vol. 99, no. 394, pp. 116–131, 1989. AUBRET J., GILBERT P., PIGEYRE F., Management des compétences. Réalisation, concepts, analyses, Dunod, Paris, 2005.

Technological Change, First Edition. Clotilde Coron and Patrick Gilbert. © ISTE Ltd 2020. Published by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

204

Technological Change

BARDIN L., “Du téléphone fixe au portable. Un quart de siècle de relations interpersonnelles médiatisées en France”, Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie, vol. 112, pp. 97–122, 2002. BAREL Y., FRÉMEAUX S., “Les conditions de succès d’une approche descendante du changement managérial. Le cas d’un hypermarché”, Management & Avenir, vol. 2, no. 22, pp. 30–51, 2009. BARLEY S.R., “Technology as an occasion for structuring: Evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments”, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 78–108, 1986. BARVILLE-DEROMAS N., BOBILLIER-CHAUMON M.E., CIPPELLETTI E. et al., “Quand les technologies s’incarnent dans l’activité : le cas des réseaux sociaux numériques d’entreprise”, Psychologie du travail et des organisations, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 325–339, 2018. BAUDET J., Histoire des techniques. De l’outil au système, Vuibert, Paris, 2016. BAWDEN D., ROBINSON L., “The dark side of information: Overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies”, Journal of Information Science, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 180–191, 2009. BELK R.W., “Extended self in a digital world”, Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 477–500, 2013. BELOVA O., KING I., SLIWA M., “Introduction: Polyphony and organization studies: Mikhail bakhtin and beyond”, Organization Studies, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 493–500, 2008. BERNOUX P., Sociologie du changement. Dans les entreprises et les organisations, Le Seuil, Paris, 2004. BIA FIGUEIREDO M., MORLEY C., “Une lecture structurationniste des pratiques de management de projet SI”, Systèmes d’information et management, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 34–87, 2015. BIJKER H., HUGHES T.P., PINCH T., The Social Construction of Technological Systems, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1987. BOBILLIER CHAUMON M.E., Conditions d’usage et facteurs d’acceptation des technologies dans l’activité : Questions et perspectives pour la psychologie du travail, HDR Thesis, University of Grenoble, 2013. BOBILLIER CHAUMON M.E., “Acceptation située des TIC dans et par l’activité : Premiers étayages pour une clinique de l’usage”, Psychologie du travail et des organisations, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 4–21, 2016.

References

205

BONNEUIL C., JOLY P.B., Sciences, techniques et société, La Découverte, Paris, 2013. BOSE D., SEGUI-GOMEZ M., CRANDALL J.R., “Vulnerability of female drivers involved in motor vehicle crashes: An analysis of US population at risk”, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 101, no. 12, pp. 2368–2373, 2011. BOSTROM N., “The transhumanist FAQ: version 2.1”, World Transhumanist Association, 2003. Available at: https://humanityplus.org/philosophy/ transhumanist-faq/ [accessed 9 March 2019]. BOURNIGAL J.M., HOULLIER F., LECOUVEY P. et al., Agriculture Innovation 2025: 30 projets pour une agriculture compétitive et respectueuse de l’environnement, Report, Inra, 2015. BRANGIER E., VALLERY G., “Aspects psychologiques et organisationnels du développement des nouvelles technologies de la communication et de l’information”, in BRANGIER E., LANCRY A., LOUCHE C. (eds), Les dimensions humaines du travail : théories et pratiques de la psychologie du travail et des organisations, pp. 213–250, Presses universitaires de Nancy, Nancy, 2004. BRANGIER E., DUFRESNE A., HAMMES-ADELÉ S., “Approche symbiotique de la relation humain-technologie : Perspectives pour l’ergonomie informatique”, Le travail humain, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 333–353, 2009. BRETON P., Histoire de l’informatique, La Découverte, Paris, 1987. BRILLHART P.E., “Technostress in the workplace: Managing stress in the electronic workplace”, Journal of American Academy of Business, vol. 5, no. 1/2, pp. 302–307, 2004. BROD C., Technostress: The Human Cost of the Computer Revolution, Addison Wesley, Boston, 1984. BROUSSE C., “La vie quotidienne en France depuis 1974. Les enseignements de l’enquête Emploi du temps”, Économie et Statistique, no. 478/479/480, pp. 79–117, 2015. CADIX A., POINTET J.-M., Le management à l’épreuve des changements technologiques : impacts sur la société et les organisations, Éditions d’Organisation, Paris, 2002. CALLON M., LASCOUMES P., BARTHE Y., Agir dans un monde incertain. Essai sur la démocratie technique, Le Seuil, Paris, 2001. CALLON M., “Quel espace public pour la démocratie technique ?”, in CEFAÏ D, PASQUIER D. (eds), Les sens du public. Publics politiques, publics médiatiques, pp. 197–221, Le Seuil, Paris, 2003.

206

Technological Change

CARDON D., À quoi rêvent les algorithmes. Nos vies à l’heure des big data, Le Seuil, Paris, 2015. CARON F., La dynamique de l’innovation : Changement technique et changement social, XVIe-XXe siècle, Gallimard, Paris, 2010. CELLER B.G., LOVELL N.H., BASILAKIS J., “Using information technology to improve the management of chronic disease”, The Medical Journal of Australia, vol. 179, pp. 242–246, 2003. CÉPÈDE M., PICARD F., TUGAULT M.J. et al., “Section II : les conséquences de la motorisation”, Économie rurale, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 30–43, 1951. CHAINTREUIL J.-N., RH & Digital. Regards Collectifs de RH sur la Transformation Digitale, Diateino, Paris, 2015. CHANDLER A.D., “Organizational capabilities and the economic history of the industrial enterprise”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 79–100, 1992. CHAREYRON P., “Hoplites numériques. Le combat d’infanterie à l’âge de l’information”, IFRI, Focus stratégique, vol. 30, 2011. CHARLIER T., EYNAUD P., VULIN B., La transformation numérique : Quels enjeux pour le développement des entreprises de l’ESS ?, IAE de Paris/France Active, Paris, 2019. CHIAPELLO E., GILBERT P., Management Tools: A Social Sciences Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2019. ÇOKLAR A.N., ŞAHIN Y.L., “Technostress levels of social network users based on ICTs in Turkey”, European Journal of Social Science, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 171–182, 2011. COLLARD F., “Les énergies renouvelables”, Courrier hebdomadaire du CRISP, vol. 7, nos 2252–2253, pp. 5–72, 2015. COOREN F., “Ventriloquie, performativité et communication : ou comment fait-on parler les choses”, Réseaux, vol. 163, no. 33, pp. 33–54, 2010. CORRELL S., “Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations”, Americal Sociological Review, vol. 69, pp. 93–113, 2004. CREDOC, Baromètre du Numérique, Étude annuelle, ARCEP/CGE/Agence du numérique, 2016.

References

207

CRESWELL R., Prométhée ou Pandore ? Propos de technologie culturelle, Kimé, Paris, 1996. CROSBY A.W., The Measure of Reality: Quantification in Western Europe, 1250–1600, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987. CROZIER M., The Bureaucratic Phenomenon, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1964. CROZIER M., FRIEDBERG E., Actors and Systems: the Politics of Collective Action, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980. CURIE J., HAJJAR V., MARQUIÉ H. et al., “Proposition méthodologique pour la description du système des activités”, Le travail humain, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 103–118, 1990. DAGOGNET F., Eloge de l’objet : pour une philosophie de la marchandise, Vrin, Paris, 1989. DAUMAS M., “Le mythe de la révolution technique”, Revue d’histoire des sciences et de leurs applications, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 291–302, 1963. DAVIS F.D., “User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts”, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 38, pp. 475–487, 1993. DAVIS F.D., BAGOZZI R.P., WARSHAW P.R., “User acceptance of information technology: A comparison of two theoretical models”, Management Science, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 982–1003, 1989. DEBRESSON C., Understanding Technical Change, Black Rose Books, Montreal, 1987. DEFÉLIX C., PICQ T., “De l’entreprise étendue à la “gestion des compétences étendue” : enjeux et pratiques en pôles de compétitivité”, @GRH, vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 41–66, 2013. DEMOLI Y., “Carbone et tôle froissée. L’espace social des modèles de voitures”, Revue française de sociologie, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 223–260, 2015. DESCARTES R., Discours de la méthode, Jan Maire, Leyde, 1637. DIMAGGIO P.J., POWELL W.W., “The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields”, American Sociological Review, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 147–160, 1983. DOWEK G., GUIRAUD D., KIRCHNER C. et al., Rapport sur la création d’un comité d’éthique en sciences et technologies du numérique, Technical Report, INRIA, 2009.

208

Technological Change

DUDEZERT A., La transformation digitale des entreprises, La Découverte, Paris, 2018. DURU-BELLAT M., “École de garçons et école de filles…”, VEI Enjeux, vol. 138, pp. 65–72, 2004. EDGERTON D., “From innovation to use: Ten eclectic theses on the historiography of technology”, History and Technology, an International Journal, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 111–136, 1999. EL WAFI W., BRANGIER E., ZADDEM F., “Usage des technologies numériques et modèles de la perméabilité des frontières entre la vie personnelle et la vie professionnelle”, Psychologie du Travail et des Organisations, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 74–87, 2016. ELLUL J., The Technological Society, Knopf, New York, 1964. ELLUL J., The Technological System, Continuum, New York, 1980. ELLUL J., The Technological Bluff, W. B. Eerdmans., Grand Rapids, 1990. ENGESTRÖM Y., Learning by expanding, Orienta-Konsultit Oy, Helsinki, 1987. ENGESTRÖM Y., “Activity theory and individual and social transformation”, in ENGESTRÖM Y., MIETTIN R., PUNAMAKI R.L. (eds), Perspectives on Activity Theory, pp. 19–38, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999. EUROPEAN INSTITUTE FOR GENDER EQUALITY, Gender equality index 2015: Measuring gender equality in the European Union 2005–2012 (country profiles), 2015. EURYDICE/COMMISSION EUROPÉENNE/EACEA, Developing Key Competences at School in Europe: Challenges and Opportunities for Policy – 2011/12, Eurydice report, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2012. FÉDÉRATION DES INDUSTRIES DE LA MÉCANIQUE, Guide pratique de l’usine du futur. Enjeux et panorama de solutions, 2015. FLEURY N., GUILLAS-CAVAN K., LERAIS F. et al., “Dialogue social sur la stratégie de l’entreprise : éléments de bilan et perspectives”, La Revue de l’Ires, vol. 1/2, no. 94/95, pp. 115–154, 2018. FLICHY P., “Internet et le débat démocratique”, Réseaux, no. 4, pp. 159–185, 2008. FOUCAULT M., Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Vintage Books, New Yok, 1977. FOURASTIÉ J., Le grand espoir du XXe siècle : progrès technique, progrès économique, progrès social, PUF, Paris, 1949.

References

209

FREDERICK C., “The new housekeeping: How it helps the woman who does her own work”, Ladies Home Journal, pp. 70–71, 1912. FRIEDMANN G., The Anatomy of Work: Labor, Leisure and the Implications of Automation, MacMillan, New York, 1964. GALLOT S., VERLAET L., “La transparence : l’utopie du numérique ?”, Communication & Organisation, no. 1, pp. 203–217, 2016. GARDEY D., “Sténodactylographe : de la naissance d’une profession à sa féminisation, 1883–1930”, Les Cahiers du MAGE, no. 1, pp. 53–61, 1995. GARDEY D., Écrire, calculer, classer. Comment une révolution de papier a transformé les sociétés contemporaines (1800–1940), La Découverte, Paris, 2008. GARVIN D.A., “Comment Google a converti ses ingénieurs au management”, Harvard Business Review, August-September 2014. GERBERT P., LORENZ M., RÜSMANN M. et al., Industry 4.0. The future of productivity and growth in manufacturing industries, Report, Boston Consulting Group, 2015. GILBERT P., BOBADILLA N., GASTALDI L. et al., Innovation, Research and Development Management, ISTE Ltd, London, and John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2018. GIDDENS A., The Constitution of Society, Polity Press, Cambridge, 1984. GIEC-IPCC, Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Report, 2014. GILBERT P., LECLAIR P., “Les systèmes de gestion intégrés : une modernité en trompe-l’œil ?”, Sciences de la société, vol. 61, pp. 17–30, 2004. GILBERT P., RAULET-CROSET N., TEGLBORG A.C., “L’entreprise libérée : analyse de la diffusion d’un modèle managérial”, Revue internationale de psychosociologie et de gestion des comportements organisationnels, vol. XXIII, no. 56, pp. 205–224, 2017. GILLE B., The Renaissance Engineers, Lund, Humphries and Company, London, 1966. GILLE B., The History of Techniques, Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New York, 1986. GIMPEL J., The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, Penguin Books, New York, 1976.

210

Technological Change

GLENDINNING C., “Notes toward a neo-Luddite manifesto”, Utne Reader, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 50–53, 1990. GOFFI J.Y., La philosophie de la technique, PUF, Paris, 1988. GOMEZ P.Y., “Le sens du travail à l’ère numérique”, Revue Projet, vol. 6, pp. 36–42, 2017. GORDON S., FORD R., “On the definition and classification of cybercrime”, Journal in Computer Virology, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 13–20, 2006. GRANJON F., “Fracture numérique”, Communications, vol. 1, no. 88, pp. 67–74, 2011. GRANVILLE K., “Facebook and Cambridge Analytica: What you need to know as fallout widens”, The New York Times, 18 March 2018. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/facebook-cambridge-analyticaexplained.html [accessed 2 April 2019]. GREENAN N., HAMON-CHOLET S., MOATTY F. et al., TIC et conditions de travail. Les enseignements de l’enquête COI, Research Report, Centre d’études de l’emploi, Noisy-le-Grand, 2012. GURVITCH G., “Société, technique et civilisation”, Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie, vol. 45, pp. 5–16, 1968. GUSTON D.H. (ed.), Encyclopedia of nanoscience and society, Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2010. HABERMAS J., Toward a Rational Society, Beacon Press, Boston, 1970. HALES D., Renewables 2018, Global Status Report, Renewable Energy Policy Network 2018, Report. Available at: http://www.ren21.net/status-ofrenewables/global-status-report/ [accessed 20 April 2019]. HARARI Y.N., 21 Lessons for the 21st Century, Spiegel & Grau, New York, 2018. HAUDRICOURT A.G., La technologie, science humaine. Recherches d’histoire et d’ethnologie des techniques, pp. 37–46, Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Paris, 1987. HAUPTMANN S., STEGER T., ““A brave new (digital) world”? Effects of In-house social media on HRM”, German Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 26–46, 2013. HEGE A., DUFOUR C., “Les pratiques des acteurs d’entreprise face à la longue maladie et au handicap en Allemagne”, La Revue de l’IRES, vol. 4, no. 67, pp. 59–93, 2010.

References

211

HEIDEGGER M., Technology and Values: Essential Readings, 1954. HERF J., Reactionary modernism: Technology, Culture, and Politics in Weimar and the Third Reich., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986. HOFSTADTER D., Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid, Basic Books, New York, 1979. HOTTOIS G., Le signe et la technique. La philosophie à l’épreuve de la technique, Aubier-Flammarion, Paris, 1984. HOTTOIS G., “Humanisme et évolutionnisme dans la philosophie de la technique”, Revue internationale de Philosophie, vol. 41, no. 161, pp. 278–295, 1987. HSIAO K.L., “Compulsive mobile application usage and technostress: The role of personality traits”, Online Information Review, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 272–295, 2017. HSIAO K.L., SHU Y., HUANG T.C., “Exploring the effect of compulsive social app usage on technostress and academic performance: Perspectives from personality trait”, Telematics and Informatics, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 679–690, 2017. HUGUES T., “The evolution of large technological systems”, in BIJKER W., HUGHES T., PINCH T. (eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems, pp. 51–82, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1989. IGLESIAS O., BONET E., “Persuasive brand management – How managers can influence brand meaning when they are losing control over it”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 251–264, 2012. INNIS H., Empire and Communications, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1950. INSEE, Espérance de vie – Mortalité, INSEE Références, 2016. INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF ROBOTICS, Robots and the workplace of the future, Working Document, Frankfurt, 2018. JACOB R., DUCHARME J., Changement technologique et gestion des ressources humaines : fondements et pratiques, Gaëtan Morin, Montreal, 1995. JARRIGE F., Technocritiques : du refus des machines à la contestation des technosciences, La Découverte, Paris, 2016. JAVEAU C., “Éthique et technique : le vieux débat reste ouvert”, Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie, no. 88, pp. 173–187, 1990.

212

Technological Change

JENA R.K., MAHANTI P.K., “An empirical study of Technostress among Indian Academicians”, International Journal of Education and Learning, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1–10, 2014. JONAS H., Le principe responsabilité, Flammarion, Paris, 2008. KEMP P., L’irremplacable, une éthique de la technologie, Cerf, Paris, 1997. KLEIN J.-L., LAVILLE J.-L., MOULAERT F., “L’innovation sociale : repères introductifs”, in L’innovation sociale, pp. 7–44, ERES, Paris, 2014. KLUZER S., PRIEGO L.P., DigComp into action: Get inspired, make it happen. A user guide to the European Digital Competence Framework, European Union, Luxembourg, 2018. KRISHNAN S., “Personality and espoused cultural differences in technostress creators”, Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 66, pp. 154–167, 2017. KUHN A., MOULIN Y., “Un exemple d’obstacle au désapprentissage. Le cas de la culture paternaliste à Bata Hellocourt”, Revue internationale de psychosociologie et de gestion des comportements organisationnels, vol. XIX, no. 47, pp. 241–257, 2013. KUUTTI K., “Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research”, in NARDI B. (ed.), Context and Consciousness – Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 17–44, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1996. LAGACÉ M., CHARMARKEH H., LAPLANTE J. et al., “How ageism contributes to the Second-level digital divide: The case of Canadian seniors”, Journal of Technologies and Human Usability, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1–13, 2015. LAPERCHE B., LEFEBVRE G., LANGLET D., “Innovation strategies of industrial groups in the global crisis: Rationalization and new paths”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 78, no. 8, pp. 1319–1331, 2011. LATOUR B., Aramis, or The love of Technology, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1996. LAURENT B., BAKER M., BEAUDOUIN V. et al., Innovation et Participation. Approches Critiques, Presses des Mines, Paris, 2018. LAVILLE J.-L., “Innovation sociale, économie sociale et solidaire, entrepreneuriat social. Une mise en perspective historique”, in KLEIN J.-L., LAVILLE J.-L., MOULAERT F. (eds), L’innovation sociale, pp. 45–80, ERES, Paris, 2014.

References

213

LAWLER E.E., LEVENSON A., BOUDREAU J.W., “HR metrics and analytics: Use and impact”, Human Resource Planning, pp. 27–35, 2010. LAWRENCE P.R., LORSCH J.W., “Differentiation and integration in complex organizations”, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–47, 1967. LEMONNIER P., “Technique (système)”, Dictionnaire de l’ethnologie et de l’anthropologie, pp. 697–698, 1991. LEONTIEV A.N., Activity, Consciousness and Personality, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1978. LEROI-GOURHAN A., Evolution et Techniques – L’homme et la matière, Albin Michel, Paris, 1943. LEROI-GOURHAN A., Milieu et techniques, Albin Michel, Paris, 1945. LÉVY P., L’intelligence collective. Pour une anthropologie du cyberespace, La Découverte, Paris, 1994. LÉVY P., Cyberculture, Odile Jacob, Paris, 1997. LIAO S.M., SANDBERG A., ROACHE R., “Human engineering and climate change”, Ethics, Policy & Environment, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 206–221, 2012. LICKLIDER J.C., “Man-computer partnership”, Ekistics, pp. 165–169, 1960. MAGGI-GERMAIN N., “Les accords “libératoires” sur l’emploi des travailleurs handicapés”, La Revue de l’IRES, vol. 4, no. 67, pp. 99–121, 2010. MAIER C., LAUMER S., ECKHARDT A., “Information technology as daily stressor: Pinning down the causes of burnout”, Journal of Business Economics, vol. 85, no. 4, pp. 349–387, 2015. MARCHIORI D.M., MAINARDES E.W., RODRIGUES R.G., “Do individual characteristics influence the types of technostress reported by workers?”, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 1–13, 2018. MARTIN M., “La rationalisation du travail ménager en France dans l’entre-deux guerres”, Culture Technique, pp. 157–165, 1980. MARX K., ENGELS F., The Communist Manifesto, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1999. MAUSS M., Techniques, Technology, and Civilisation, Berghahn Books, New York, 2006. MAYER-SCHÖNBERGER V., CUKIER K., Big Data. A Revolution that will Transform how we Live, Work, and Think, Eamon Dolan/Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Canada, 2013.

214

Technological Change

MCLUHAN M., The Medium is the Massage: An Inventory of Effects, Random House, London, 1967. METZGER J.-L., “TIC et travail : de l’étude des usages à la critique de l’impératif de changement”, in GRANDJON F. (ed.), Communiquer à l’ère numérique, Regards croisés sur la sociologie des usages, pp. 91–125, Presses des Mines, Paris, 2011. MIDLER C., JULIEN B., LUNG Y., Innover à l’envers, Dunod, Paris, 2017. MINSKY M., The Society of Mind, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1985. MINTZBERG H., The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the Research, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 1978. MONTMOLLIN M. (de), L’intelligence de la tâche, Peter Lang, Bern, 1984. MONTMOLLIN M. (ed), Vocabulaire de l’ergonomie, Octarès, Toulouse, 1995. MUMFORD L., The myth of the Machine, Harcourt, New York, 1966. OECD, Science, Technology and Industry Outlook 2014, OECD Publishing, 2014. OECD, The Future of productivity, OECD Publishing, 2015. OGBURN W.F., Recent social trends in the United States, Report of the President’s Research Committee on Social Trends, pp. 132–152, 1933. OGBURN W.F., “How technology changes society”, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 249, no. 1, pp. 81–88, 1947. O’NEIL C., Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy, Crown, New York, 2016. OOSTERLYNCK S., MOULAERT F., “L’innovation sociale en Flandre : Apports et limites”, in KLEIN J.-L., LAVILLE J.-L., MOULAERT F. (eds), L’innovation sociale, pp. 175–192, ERES, Paris, 2014. ORLIKOWSKI W.J., “The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations”, Organization Science, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 398–427, 1992. PARAPONARIS C., CINA M., CAMPILLO V., “Les ingénieurs de conception industrielle dans la révolution numérique”, Les études de l’emploi cadre, APEC, nos 2018–38, 2018. PAVE F., L’illusion informaticienne, L’Harmattan, Paris, 1989.

References

215

PERRET V., “Quand le changement devient soluble ou l’idéologie managériale du changement organisationnel”, in LECA B. (ed.), Les études critiques en management : une perspective française, pp. 209–231, Presses de l’Université Laval, Québec, 2009. PETTIGREW A.M., “Context and action in the transformation of the firm”, Journal of Management Studies, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 649–670, 1987. PHILLIPS J.R., “Enhancing the effectiveness of organizational change management”, Human Resource Management, vol. 22, nos 1–2, pp. 183–199, 1983. PHILLIPS L., “Armed resistance”, Nature, vol. 488, pp. 576–579, 2012. PICHAULT F., Le conflit informatique : gérer les ressources humaines dans le changement technologique, De Boeck, Brussels, 1990. PILLON J.-M., “Le pointage et le placement ? Quand Pôle emploi échoue à régler ses contradictions au moyen de logiciels”, Gouvernement et action publique, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 81–103, 2015. QUINTON S., “The community brand paradigm: A response to brand management’s dilemma in the digital era”, Journal of Marketing Management, vol. 29, no. 7/8, pp. 912–932, 2013. RABARDEL P., People and Technology: a Cognitive Approach to Contemporary Instruments, University Paris 8, (retrieved April, 29, 2018 from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01020705, 2002). RAGOWSKY A., SOMERS T.M., “Enterprise Resource Planning”, Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 11–15, 2002. RAGU-NATHAN T.S., TARAFDAR M., RAGU-NATHAN B.S. et al., “The consequences of technostress for end users in organizations: Conceptual development and validation”, Information Systems Research, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 417–433, 2008. RICŒUR P., “L’éthique, la morale et la règle”, Autres temps, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 52–59, 1989. RIFKIN J., The Third Industrial Revolution: How Lateral Power is Transforming Energy, the Economy, and the World, Macmillan, New York, 2011. RINALDI A., “The ten commandments for computer ethics from the computer ethics institute”, The Net: User Guidelines and Netiquette, 1996. Available at: http://www.fau.edu/rinaldi/net/ten.html. RIOUX J.-P., La révolution industrielle : 1780–1880, Le Seuil, Paris, 1971. ROGERS E.M., Diffusion of Innovations, The Free Press, New York, 1983.

216

Technological Change

ROUSSEAU D.M., “Is there such a thing as “evidence-based management””, Academy of Management Review, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 256–269, 2006. ŞAHIN Y.L., ÇOKLAR A.N., “Social networking users’ views on technology and the determination of technostress levels”, Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1437–1442, 2009. SALE K., Rebels Against the Future: The Luddites and Their War on the Industrial Revolution: Lessons for the Computer Age, Addison Wesley, Reading, 1995. SAUVY A., La machine et le chômage : le progrès technique et l’emploi, Dunod/ Bordas, Paris, 1980. SCHUMPETER J.A., The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1926. SCHWAB K., The Fourth Industrial Revolution, Crown Business, New York, 2017. SEGRESTIN D., “Les nouveaux horizons de la régulation en organisation : le cas des progiciels de gestion intégrés”, in DE TERSSAC G. (ed.), La théorie de la régulation sociale de Jean-Daniel Reynaud, pp. 61–76, La Découverte, Paris, 2003. SEGRESTIN D., DARRÉON J.L., TROMPETTE P. (eds), Le mythe de l’organisation intégrée. Les progiciels de gestion, Presses universitaires du Mirail, Toulouse, 2004. SÉRIS J.P., La technique, PUF, Paris, 2013. SEWELL G., “The discipline of teams: the control of team-based industrial work through electronic and peer surveillance”, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 397–428, 1998. SFEZ L., Technique et idéologie. Un enjeu de pouvoir, Le Seuil, Paris, 2002. SHAPIRO J.R., WILLIAMS A.M., “The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’ and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields”, Sex Roles, vol. 66, pp. 175–183, 2012. SILVERSTONE R., HIRSCH E. (eds), Consuming Technologies. Media and Information in Domestic Spaces, Routledge, London, 1994. SIMON H., The New Science of Management Decision, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1960. SIMONDON G., On the Mode of Existence of Technical Objects, University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, 1980.

References

217

SPENCER S.J., STEELE C.M., QUINN D.M., “Stereotype threat and women’s math performance”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 35, pp. 4–28, 1999. STAR S.L., GRIESEMER J.R., “Institutional ecology, “Translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39”, Social Studies of Science, vol. 19, pp. 387–420, 1989. STOKKINK D., PERARD P., L’économie sociale et solidaire en Europe, Note d’analyse, Think Tank “Pour la solidarité”, 2016. TARAFDAR M., TU Q., RAGU-NATHAN B. et al., “Crossing to the dark side”, Communication of the ACM, vol. 54, no. 9, pp. 113–120, 2011. TAYLOR F.W., The Principles of Scientific Management, Harper, New York, 1911. TEGLBORG A.-C., GILBERT P., RAULET-CROSET N., “The management device in the blind spot to resistance to change”, Revue de Gestion des Ressources Humaines, vol. 4, no. 98, pp. 18–29, 2015. THOMPSON E.P., The Making of the English Working Class, Open Road Media, New York, 2016. THOUMIE P., Recherche technologique et diffusion de l’innovation au service du handicap, Report for the French Youth, Education and Research Ministry, 2004. TOPÇU S., “Dossier engagement public des chercheurs. Nucléaire : de l’engagement “savant” aux contre-expertises associatives”, Natures, Sciences, Sociétés, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 249–256, 2006. TOURAINE A., L’évolution du travail ouvrier aux usines Renault, Éditions du CNRS, Paris, 1955. TRIST E.L., “On sociotechnical systems”, in PASMORE W.A., SHERWOOD J.J. (eds), Sociotechnical Systems: A Sourcebook, pp. 43–57, University Associates, San Diego, 1978. TSAI W., “Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance”, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 996–1004, 2001. TSANG E.W.K., ZAHRA S.A., “Organizational unlearning”, Human Relations, vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 1435–1462, 2008. TURKLE S., Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other, Basic Books, New York, 2011.

218

Technological Change

VEN A.H., POOLE M.S., “Explaining development and change in organizations”, The Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, no. 3, 1995.

VAN DE

VAUJANY F.-X. (de), De la conception à l’usage. Vers un management de l’appropriation des outils de gestion, EMS, Paris, 2005. VAYRE E., “Les incidences du télétravail sur le travailleur dans les domaines professionnel, familial et social”, Le travail humain, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 1–39, 2019. VENKATESH V., MORRIS M.G., DAVIS G.B. et al., “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view”, MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003. VINCK D., Sociologie des sciences, Armand Colin, Paris, 1995. VOUILLOT F., “L’orientation, le butoir de la mixité”, Revue française de pédagogie, no. 171, pp. 59–67, 2010. VYGOTSKI L., Thought and Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2012. WANG K., SHU Q., TU Q., “Technostress under different organizational environments: An empirical investigation”, Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 3002–3013, 2008. WEBER M., Economy and Society, University of California Press, 1978. WEF, The Future of Jobs. Employment, Skills and Workforce Strategy for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, Report, 2016. WEICK K.E., QUINN R.E., “Organization change and development”, Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 50, pp. 361–386, 1999. WEIL S., La condition ouvrière, Gallimard, Paris, 1951. WHITE L., Medieval Technology and Social Change, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1969. WINNEFELD JR P.A.S., KIRCHHOFF C., UPTON D.M., “Facteur humain et cybersécurité : les leçons du Pentagone”, Harvard Business Review, pp. 100–110, February-March 2016. ZUBOFF S., “Big other: Surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization”, Journal of Information Technology, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 75–89, 2015.

Index

A, B, C actant, 21, 22 additive manufacturing, 92 adoption, 98, 99, 129, 131, 135, 142, 144–146, 148, 150, 189, 191 appropriation, 23, 95, 118–121, 127, 132, 138, 141, 142, 144, 202 augmented reality, 7, 89 Big Data, 74, 91 Cloud, 92, 156 cybercrime, 39, 56 cybersecurity, 92 D, E, G determinism social, 15, 17, 19 technological, 2, 13, 14, 19, 26, 27, 158, 161 digital marketing, 64, 89 skills, 159–163 framework, 158, 162 disability, 39, 43, 66–70, 72, 75, 167, 169

discrimination, 67, 72, 74, 76, 77, 166, 168, 170, 178, 198, 199, 201 duality of the structural, 26 e-democracy, 47, 48 e-HR, 93 ecology, 78, 79, 81, 84, 86, 171, 180 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), 17, 104–106, 154 extended enterprise, 97, 100 gender, 43, 75 H, I, J, L hackathon, 194 impact, 15, 19, 38, 39, 158 incubator, 102 innovation diffusion of, 21 responsible technological, 176, 178, 179, 181, 190 social or responsible, 172, 174, 176–178, 180, 183, 198, 199 Internet of Things, 91, 92 intrapreneurship, 103, 128, 182 job destruction, 9, 167, 169, 177, 198

Technological Change, First Edition. Clotilde Coron and Patrick Gilbert. © ISTE Ltd 2020. Published by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

220

Technological Change

located acceptance, 148, 163 Luddism, 8 M, N, P, R market pull, 143 nanotechnologies, 60, 61 Netiquette, 63 participation, 6, 46, 47, 54, 128, 145, 160, 179, 182, 183, 186, 199 path dependence, 191 perspective anthropotechnical, 1, 20, 41 socio-technical, 113, 133 planned change, 184 prescriptive technology, 104, 107, 111, 113, 166, 178 R&D, 45, 46, 50, 87, 88, 96, 98, 100, 101, 143, 144 resistance to change, 152, 153 reverse mentoring, 195, 196, 198, 200 robot, 10, 40, 55, 59, 65, 66, 72, 91, 125

S, T, U, V social network, 13, 54, 88–90, 94, 102, 112, 113, 116, 149, 193 State, 22, 44–46, 52, 172, 176 surveillance society, 12, 105 sustainable development, 60, 167, 169, 172, 177, 178, 198, 199, 201 symbiotic approach, 150, 151 technicist ideology, 10, 168, 178, 201 technological bluff, 11 individual, 135, 151–153 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), 146–148, 191 technophobia, 7 technostress, 44, 52, 53, 202 telework, 112, 118, 156, 157 transhumanism, 6, 62 transparency, 13, 47, 48, 140, 141 unlearning, 189, 190, 192, 193, 197, 200, 202 ventriloquism, 17, 18

Other titles from

in Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Management

2020 ANDREOSSO-O’CALLAGHAN Bernadette, DZEVER Sam, JAUSSAUD Jacques, TAYLOR Richard Sustainable Development and Energy Transition in Europe and Asia (Innovation and Technology Set – Volume 9) CERDIN Jean-Luc, PERETTI Jean-Marie The Success of Apprenticeships: Views of Stakeholders on Training and Learning (Human Resources Management Set – Volume 3) DIDAY Edwin, GUAN Rong, SAPORTA Gilbert, WANG Huiwen, Advances in Data Science (Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Data Analysis Set – Volume 4) DOS SANTOS PAULINO Victor Innovation Trends in the Space Industry (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 25) GUILHON Bernard Venture Capital and the Financing of Innovation (Innovation Between Risk and Reward Set – Volume 6)

MASSOTTE Pierre, CORSI Patrick Complex Decision-Making in Economy and Finance

2019 AMENDOLA Mario, GAFFARD Jean-Luc Disorder and Public Concern Around Globalization BARBAROUX Pierre Disruptive Technology and Defence Innovation Ecosystems (Innovation in Engineering and Technology Set – Volume 5) DOU Henri, JUILLET Alain, CLERC Philippe Strategic Intelligence for the Future 1: A New Strategic and Operational Approach Strategic Intelligence for the Future 2: A New Information Function Approach FRIKHA Azza Measurement in Marketing: Operationalization of Latent Constructs FRIMOUSSE Soufyane Innovation and Agility in the Digital Age (Human Resources Management Set – Volume 2) GAY Claudine, SZOSTAK Bérangère L. Innovation and Creativity in SMEs: Challenges, Evolutions and Prospects (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 21) GORIA Stéphane, HUMBERT Pierre, ROUSSEL Benoît Information, Knowledge and Agile Creativity (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 22) HELLER David Investment Decision-making Using Optional Models (Economic Growth Set – Volume 2) HELLER David, DE CHADIRAC Sylvain, HALAOUI Lana, JOUVET Camille The Emergence of Start-ups (Economic Growth Set – Volume 1)

HÉRAUD Jean-Alain, KERR Fiona, BURGER-HELMCHEN Thierry Creative Management of Complex Systems (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 19) LATOUCHE Pascal Open Innovation: Corporate Incubator (Innovation and Technology Set – Volume 7) LEHMANN Paul-Jacques The Future of the Euro Currency LEIGNEL Jean-Louis, MÉNAGER Emmanuel, YABLONSKY Serge Sustainable Enterprise Performance: A Comprehensive Evaluation Method LIÈVRE Pascal, AUBRY Monique, GAREL Gilles Management of Extreme Situations: From Polar Expeditions to ExplorationOriented Organizations MILLOT Michel Embarrassment of Product Choices 2: Towards a Society of Well-being N’GOALA Gilles, PEZ-PÉRARD Virginie, PRIM-ALLAZ Isabelle Augmented Customer Strategy: CRM in the Digital Age NIKOLOVA Blagovesta The RRI Challenge: Responsibilization in a State of Tension with Market Regulation (Innovation and Responsibility Set – Volume 3) PELLEGRIN-BOUCHER Estelle, ROY Pierre Innovation in the Cultural and Creative Industries (Innovation and Technology Set – Volume 8) PRIOLON Joël Financial Markets for Commodities QUINIOU Matthieu Blockchain: The Advent of Disintermediation RAVIX Joël-Thomas, DESCHAMPS Marc Innovation and Industrial Policies (Innovation between Risk and Reward Set – Volume 5)

ROGER Alain, VINOT Didier Skills Management: New Applications, New Questions (Human Resources Management Set – Volume 1) SAULAIS Pierre, ERMINE Jean-Louis Knowledge Management in Innovative Companies 1: Understanding and Deploying a KM Plan within a Learning Organization (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 23) SERVAJEAN-HILST Romaric Co-innovation Dynamics: The Management of Client-Supplier Interactions for Open Innovation (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 20) SKIADAS Christos H., BOZEMAN James R. Data Analysis and Applications 1: Clustering and Regression, Modelingestimating, Forecasting and Data Mining (Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Data Analysis Set – Volume 2) Data Analysis and Applications 2: Utilization of Results in Europe and Other Topics (Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Data Analysis Set – Volume 3) VIGEZZI Michel World Industrialization: Shared Inventions, Competitive Innovations and Social Dynamics (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 24)

2018 BURKHARDT Kirsten Private Equity Firms: Their Role in the Formation of Strategic Alliances CALLENS Stéphane Creative Globalization (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 16) CASADELLA Vanessa Innovation Systems in Emerging Economies: MINT – Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria, Turkey (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 18)

CHOUTEAU Marianne, FOREST Joëlle, NGUYEN Céline Science, Technology and Innovation Culture (Innovation in Engineering and Technology Set – Volume 3) CORLOSQUET-HABART Marine, JANSSEN Jacques Big Data for Insurance Companies (Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Data Analysis Set – Volume 1) CROS Françoise Innovation and Society (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 15) DEBREF Romain Environmental Innovation and Ecodesign: Certainties and Controversies (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 17) DOMINGUEZ Noémie SME Internationalization Strategies: Innovation to Conquer New Markets ERMINE Jean-Louis Knowledge Management: The Creative Loop (Innovation and Technology Set – Volume 5) GILBERT Patrick, BOBADILLA Natalia, GASTALDI Lise, LE BOULAIRE Martine, LELEBINA Olga Innovation, Research and Development Management IBRAHIMI Mohammed Mergers & Acquisitions: Theory, Strategy, Finance LEMAÎTRE Denis Training Engineers for Innovation LÉVY Aldo, BEN BOUHENI Faten, AMMI Chantal Financial Management: USGAAP and IFRS Standards (Innovation and Technology Set – Volume 6) MILLOT Michel Embarrassment of Product Choices 1: How to Consume Differently

PANSERA Mario, OWEN Richard Innovation and Development: The Politics at the Bottom of the Pyramid (Innovation and Responsibility Set – Volume 2) RICHEZ Yves Corporate Talent Detection and Development SACHETTI Philippe, ZUPPINGER Thibaud New Technologies and Branding (Innovation and Technology Set – Volume 4) SAMIER Henri Intuition, Creativity, Innovation TEMPLE Ludovic, COMPAORÉ SAWADOGO Eveline M.F.W. Innovation Processes in Agro-Ecological Transitions in Developing Countries (Innovation in Engineering and Technology Set – Volume 2) UZUNIDIS Dimitri Collective Innovation Processes: Principles and Practices (Innovation in Engineering and Technology Set – Volume 4) VAN HOOREBEKE Delphine

The Management of Living Beings or Emo-management

2017 AÏT-EL-HADJ Smaïl The Ongoing Technological System (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 11) BAUDRY Marc, DUMONT Béatrice Patents: Prompting or Restricting Innovation? (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 12) BÉRARD Céline, TEYSSIER Christine Risk Management: Lever for SME Development and Stakeholder Value Creation

CHALENÇON Ludivine Location Strategies and Value Creation of International Mergers and Acquisitions CHAUVEL Danièle, BORZILLO Stefano The Innovative Company: An Ill-defined Object (Innovation between Risk and Reward Set – Volume 1) CORSI Patrick Going Past Limits To Growth D’ANDRIA Aude, GABARRET

Inés Building 21st Century Entrepreneurship (Innovation and Technology Set – Volume 2) DAIDJ Nabyla Cooperation, Coopetition and Innovation (Innovation and Technology Set – Volume 3) FERNEZ-WALCH Sandrine The Multiple Facets of Innovation Project Management (Innovation between Risk and Reward Set – Volume 4) FOREST Joëlle Creative Rationality and Innovation (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 14) GUILHON Bernard Innovation and Production Ecosystems (Innovation between Risk and Reward Set – Volume 2) HAMMOUDI Abdelhakim, DAIDJ Nabyla Game Theory Approach to Managerial Strategies and Value Creation (Diverse and Global Perspectives on Value Creation Set – Volume 3) LALLEMENT Rémi Intellectual Property and Innovation Protection: New Practices and New Policy Issues (Innovation between Risk and Reward Set – Volume 3)

LAPERCHE Blandine Enterprise Knowledge Capital (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 13) LEBERT Didier, EL YOUNSI Hafida International Specialization Dynamics (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 9) MAESSCHALCK Marc Reflexive Governance for Research and Innovative Knowledge (Responsible Research and Innovation Set – Volume 6) MASSOTTE Pierre Ethics in Social Networking and Business 1: Theory, Practice and Current Recommendations Ethics in Social Networking and Business 2: The Future and Changing Paradigms MASSOTTE Pierre, CORSI Patrick Smart Decisions in Complex Systems MEDINA Mercedes, HERRERO Mónica, URGELLÉS Alicia Current and Emerging Issues in the Audiovisual Industry (Diverse and Global Perspectives on Value Creation Set – Volume 1) MICHAUD Thomas Innovation, Between Science and Science Fiction (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 10) PELLÉ Sophie Business, Innovation and Responsibility (Responsible Research and Innovation Set – Volume 7) SAVIGNAC Emmanuelle The Gamification of Work: The Use of Games in the Workplace SUGAHARA Satoshi, DAIDJ Nabyla, USHIO Sumitaka Value Creation in Management Accounting and Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach (Diverse and Global Perspectives on Value Creation Set –Volume 2)

UZUNIDIS Dimitri, SAULAIS Pierre Innovation Engines: Entrepreneurs and Enterprises in a Turbulent World (Innovation in Engineering and Technology Set – Volume 1)

2016 BARBAROUX Pierre, ATTOUR Amel, SCHENK Eric Knowledge Management and Innovation (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 6) BEN BOUHENI Faten, AMMI Chantal, LEVY Aldo Banking Governance, Performance And Risk-Taking: Conventional Banks Vs Islamic Banks BOUTILLIER Sophie, CARRÉ Denis, LEVRATTO Nadine Entrepreneurial Ecosystems (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 2) BOUTILLIER Sophie, UZUNIDIS Dimitri The Entrepreneur (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 8) BOUVARD Patricia, SUZANNE Hervé Collective Intelligence Development in Business GALLAUD Delphine, LAPERCHE Blandine Circular Economy, Industrial Ecology and Short Supply Chains (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 4) GUERRIER Claudine Security and Privacy in the Digital Era (Innovation and Technology Set – Volume 1) MEGHOUAR Hicham Corporate Takeover Targets MONINO Jean-Louis, SEDKAOUI Soraya Big Data, Open Data and Data Development (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 3) MOREL Laure, LE ROUX Serge Fab Labs: Innovative User (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 5)

PICARD Fabienne, TANGUY Corinne Innovations and Techno-ecological Transition (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 7)

2015 CASADELLA Vanessa, LIU Zeting, DIMITRI Uzunidis Innovation Capabilities and Economic Development in Open Economies (Smart Innovation Set – Volume 1) CORSI Patrick, MORIN Dominique Sequencing Apple’s DNA CORSI Patrick, NEAU Erwan Innovation Capability Maturity Model FAIVRE-TAVIGNOT Bénédicte Social Business and Base of the Pyramid GODÉ Cécile Team Coordination in Extreme Environments MAILLARD Pierre Competitive Quality and Innovation MASSOTTE Pierre, CORSI Patrick Operationalizing Sustainability MASSOTTE Pierre, CORSI Patrick Sustainability Calling

2014 DUBÉ Jean, LEGROS Diègo Spatial Econometrics Using Microdata LESCA Humbert, LESCA Nicolas Strategic Decisions and Weak Signals

2013 HABART-CORLOSQUET Marine, JANSSEN Jacques, MANCA Raimondo VaR Methodology for Non-Gaussian Finance

2012 DAL PONT Jean-Pierre Process Engineering and Industrial Management MAILLARD Pierre Competitive Quality Strategies POMEROL Jean-Charles Decision-Making and Action SZYLAR Christian UCITS Handbook

2011 LESCA Nicolas Environmental Scanning and Sustainable Development LESCA Nicolas, LESCA Humbert Weak Signals for Strategic Intelligence: Anticipation Tool for Managers MERCIER-LAURENT Eunika Innovation Ecosystems

2010 SZYLAR Christian Risk Management under UCITS III/IV

2009 COHEN Corine Business Intelligence

ZANINETTI Jean-Marc Sustainable Development in the USA

2008 CORSI Patrick, DULIEU Mike The Marketing of Technology Intensive Products and Services DZEVER Sam, JAUSSAUD Jacques, ANDREOSSO Bernadette Evolving Corporate Structures and Cultures in Asia: Impact of Globalization

2007 AMMI Chantal Global Consumer Behavior

2006 BOUGHZALA Imed, ERMINE Jean-Louis Trends in Enterprise Knowledge Management CORSI Patrick et al. Innovation Engineering: the Power of Intangible Networks

WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT Go to www.wiley.com/go/eula to access Wiley’s ebook EULA.