Each reply must be a paragraph long of at least 550 words or more not including references which should supported by citing at least 4 peer-reviewed journal articles between 2017-2021 for each reply. Your reply must be in current APA format and must include a reference list. Make sure that you are adding new and relevant information with each reply. Reference sample make sure to include DOI-Drollinger, T., Comer, L. B., & Warrington, P. T. (2006). Development and validation of the active empathetic listening scale. Psychology & Marketing, 23(2), 161-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20105
The organizational structure is a formal organization of staff and roles into a group, where decisions are made and actions are carried out. It is the mission of information technology (IT) to process, track, and distribute data to support management, decision-making, and control of an organization. An organization's structures are changed when IT is implemented, because the relationship between IT and organizational structures is complex (Chen, 2007). Continuously addressing and evaluating how IT impacts the function and efficiency of the company is essential. Technological frameworks include the processes of collecting data, storing it, and creating a secure environment in which to store it (Jung et al. 2019). Additionally, the organization's structure and viability depend on its ability to execute technical operations and adapt its infrastructure within authorized boundaries. It is common for companies to hire specialized consultants or even a whole team dedicated to the development of a new technology structure in an effort to meet market and consumer requirements. Similar to this, corporations establish internal barriers so they can distinguish themselves from their competitors. Businesses can achieve a competitive advantage by creating organizational boundaries. Due to this, businesses should implement a technical system designed to adapt to the social boundaries of the organization (Lu, et al. 2018).
Technology is an important element of theory-based processes for organizations. Managing technology, infrastructure, and functionality efficiently is crucial to an organization's success. Data and knowledge collection, data storage, and the efficient use of data are all part of an organization's technology system. In today's business environment, many companies employ IT professionals to deal with all technical aspects of the business. When it comes to the organizational limits, it is a way of differentiating between an entity and the outside world. In order to attain sustainable competitive advantages, companies can formulate effective plans based on organizational boundaries. Although boundary protection is necessary for businesses against external pressure, boundaries should also allow for positive environmental exchange. Organizations that achieve market success should adopt technological frameworks that allow them to enforce their preferred limits, regardless of the system they use (Scott et al. 2016). In this discussion thread, we will assess the interrelationship between technology systems and social boundaries across a variety of organizational theories, including natural, rational, and open perspectives.
Rational Systems Perspective
In an organization, logical structures promote formality and functionality. All the participants to the organization contribute to the achievement of its objectives through their activities (Scott et al. 2016). Organizations see this approach as a useful tool for achieving their goals. With this theory, a division of labor and strict adherence to rules and regulations are established, as well as a hierarchy for decision-making. Organizational structures that allow for skills and specialization are essential in this strategy. Technical competence is one of the distinctive characteristics of Weber theory, because it enables specialization. It also includes the use of technology to enhance marketing and promotional efforts (Mori, 2017). This approach emphasizes the formal organizational structure, in which different members have varying levels of expertise that allow them to contribute towards the various organizational objectives. Through the use of technology, organizations can develop expertise in various fields that support their overall objectives. The rational view of an organization is that it is a closed structure in which most of its functions are confined to the organization (Scott et al. 2016). When workers join a business and are devoted to their positions and duties, this approach protects the organization. In keeping with this principle, the company's social boundaries ensure that it becomes distinct from the outside world and that all participants focus on their role and responsibilities.
Natural Systems Perspective
The natural organization system emerged in response to the natural system to introduce more humanistic values and to encourage other social structures. It supports the workers' freedom of expression in their duties and condemns the use of excessive formalities. From this point of view, human relations theory is a popular ideology. Mayo created this theory to demonstrate the importance of the human factor in business following the Hawthorne experiments (Scott et al. 2016). This theory argues that workers are being used as engines that are purely driven by financial gains by theories such as science management. Technology is considered in a logical framework by taking the social, cultural, and political factors into consideration. However, from the viewpoint of natural systems, technology is viewed as a human innovation that is designed to solve problems and satisfy employee needs (Scott et al. 2016). Several reports claim the organization is protected from the outside world by limits within the natural perspective. By recognizing the serious consequences of dysfunction, this viewpoint promotes good employee relations. Similarly, internal limits are less restrictive because employees are encouraged to speak freely and the company is able to meet workers' needs. Organizations that believe in this theory recognize the importance of technological frameworks as well as the fact that all businesses have permeable limits (Scott et al. 2016). According to Colossians 1:16, “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him”. This states that God created all things whether considered natural or otherwise. Without his wisdom and love nothing will be possible, which can be directly correlated to business success in every facet.
Open Systems Perspective
In almost every way, the organization's open view of structures differs from those of the previous two. Among other things, it recognizes that no single organization can survive on its own, and encourages businesses to keep close contact with outside forces. It is imperative that organizations create networks that enable inputs and outputs to flow freely. Transparency helps organizations stay on top of important issues, such as the supply chain, social and policy concerns and the outside competition (Rautianen et al., 2012). Furthermore, they benefit from the transfer of information, technological advancements, and the free exchange of ideas. Among the ideas in that perspective is the suggestion that all organizations should be open. Open organizations also have the advantage of introducing innovative technology that allows them to increase efficiency, streamline work processes, and provide better customer service (Rautianen et al., 2012).
In providing consistency in interpretation, organizational boundaries play a major role in providing shared understanding and promoting engagement. In open systems, there are fewer barriers between organizations and the outside world (Perkmann et al. 2014). For organizations, the only limits are those that screen out the negative aspects while allowing for the benefits to come through. However, establishing such boundaries can be challenging due to the difficulty of determining when and where they should be permitted, such as in what areas and what timeframes (Scott et al. 2016). Organizations with open structures are more versatile and affect the environments of their customers and stakeholders more directly. There are many factors that can contribute to the permeability of a border, which can make it difficult to define open boundaries. Even though this strategy can provide several benefits, it might not be as useful if it is undermined by outside influences.
Areas of Technology Causing Issues for Participants
It is common for most organizations to use technology that is sourced from outside the organization. The technology can often control the inputs and outputs of the organization, making it a key factor in determining the organizational structure (Garcia-Sanchez et al. 2018). Faster processing speeds and secure data storage make the use of technology in business a recognized process and quality improvement tool. While organizations may gain benefits from technology, the new roles are often taken away from others due to its use. The implementation of technology in several industries have resulted in the elimination of jobs and have left many people unemployed (Lu, et al. 2018). The architecture of these technological frameworks is also a concern for participants. Using complex technology can complicate a certain process and hinder the productivity of employees. Researchers have found that certain workers are restricted in their ability to perform their jobs by the technology they are required to use to complete their daily tasks. Technology-enhanced factors like decentralization and diversity of interests affect the world in which these workers operate (Scott et al. 2016).
Issues w/ Organizational Boundaries for Participants
Since organizations' logical and natural perspectives are closed structures, they restrict their interactions in and outside the world. By contrast, the open system approach allows industries to create a network of free inputs and outputs. Participants may be affected differently by both perspectives of organizational frontiers. Recruiting and aspirational goals of recruiters are affected by the theory of bureaucracy. Based on this theory, employees should be solely concerned with the business. The approach is misleading, however, since it does not account for the workers' personal needs, such as their family obligations (Yusof et al. 2019). Participants may also have issues with this view according to the dispute theory. Conflicts can arise when new members join an organization with competing priorities and interests. As an example, some participants of the organization may have long-term objectives, while others may be involved in organizations with short-term goals. As a result of the tight limits, some members are more regulated, which can lead to cyclical trends in the working environment (Brix, 2019).
The views of open systems have gradually evolved from rational to natural since the development of organizations theories. The reasons for these changes can be attributed to the inefficiencies of the different perspectives. In order to achieve competitive advantage, companies need to incorporate technology into their processes. Technology enables businesses to produce products at a more effective and faster rate. Furthermore, it's important to keep in mind that the interaction between members of an organization results in limitations. An open-system view must also be able to distinguish what is acceptable and what is not. Regardless of whether permeations are beneficial or detrimental, the organization must be able to control them (Scott et al. 2016).
Technical arrangements and organizational boundaries play a significant role. In different areas of the enterprise, technology makes it possible to increase productivity and the performance of activities. In addition to enhancing physical information and knowledge, it provides organizational versatility and diversity. Businesses have grown and been able to achieve their objectives with greater efficiency by trying to work across boundaries. Although these two factors may negatively impact participants, they are critical for the sustainability of organizations as well as the achievement of defined objectives.
Brix, J. (2019). Ambidexterity and organizational learning: Revisiting and reconnecting the literatures. The Learning Organization. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/2271740947?parentSessionId=CYgh%2BKheYXNCFzViuw4MAPpYb3W%2FHIJBX2eLqMvUUqc%3D&pq-origsite=summon&accountid=12085
Chen, C. (2007). Information technology, organizational structure, and new product development: The mediating effect of cross-functional team interaction. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Retrieved from https://ieeexplore-ieee-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/document/4344956
Garcia-Sanchez, E., Garcia-Morales, V.J., & Martin-Rojas, R. (2018). Influence of technological assets on organizational performance through absorptive capacity, organizational innovation and internal labor flexibility. Scholarly Journal. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/2110081151?parentSessionId=4l5EyUG%2B450eQmClVAWi%2FIyy%2FfyP7dEHY%2BsPISt59i0%3D&pq-origsite=summon&accountid=12085
Jung, Y. & Vakharia, N. (2019). Open systems theory for arts and cultural organizations: Linking structure and performance. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society. Retrieved from https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/doi/full/10.1080/10632921.2019.1617813
Lu, D., Marlow, J., Kocielnik, R., & Avrahami, D. (2018). Challenges and opportunities for technology-supported activity reporting in the workplace. Conference Paper Presented At The 2018 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324668901_Challenges_and_Opportunities_for_Technology-Supported_Activity_Reporting_in_the_Workplace
Mori, G.T. (2017). Examining hindrance of bureaucracy on management innovation for organizations. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. Retrieved from https://advance-lexis-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/search?crid=36aad8d6-0cde-41aa-b39b-f261e37478f1&pdsearchterms=HEADLINE(%22Examining+Hindrance+of+Bureaucracy+on+Management+Innovation+for+Organizations%22)&pdtypeofsearch=urlapi&pdfiltertext=urn%3Ahlct%3A16&pdstartin=urn%3Ahlct%3A16&pdsearchtype=bool&pdpost=%2CMTA3NDY0NA%5Esource%5EInternational+Journal+of+Academic+Research+in+Business+and+Social+Sciences%5ESource%5EFalse%5Enews&pdmfid=1516831&pdisurlapi=true
Onday, O. (2018). The relationship between concepts of rational, natural, and open systems: Managing organizations today. International Journal of Information, Business Management. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/1966054435?parentSessionId=1lGCxKtlaXNqFI0eQQe1eGf7jfbbbtPUraXaDZhBXbE%3D&pq-origsite=summon&accountid=12085
Perkmann, M. & Schildt, H. (2014). Open data partnerships between firms and universities: The role of boundary organizations. Research Policy. Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/science/article/pii/S0048733314002248?via%3Dihub
Rautianen, M., Pihkala, T., & Irkavalko, M. (2012). Family business system models – A case study and some implications of open systems perspective. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship. Retrieved from https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/doi/abs/10.1080/08276331.2012.10593566
Scott, R. & Davis, G. (2016). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural, and open system perspectives. Routledge.
Yusof, M.M., Ho, J.A., Siew Imm, S.N., & Zawawi, D. (2019). Weeding out deviant workplace behavior in downsized organizations: The role of emotional intelligence and job embeddedness. Asian Journal of Business Research. Retrieved from https://www.magscholar.com/ajbr/ajbrv9n3/ajbr190070.pdf