Connected workers bring many advantages and challenges to 21st Century organizations. A connected worker is any individual who has an ability to utilize relationships in a communications network for knowledge, information sharing, and data. Unconnected workers on the bottom of the picture (above) represent the lack of connectedness versus the connected worker at the next level. The more connected workers are in networks to other individuals, the greater value the connected worker brings to his or her organization. Jarche (2013) refers to the value that connected workers bring to organizations as a key indicator of “relationship capital.” The following organizational chart is a depiction of the advantages and disadvantages that are associated with networked or connected workers in the workplace:
“Pros and Cons of Connected Workers in the Workplace”
Today’s freely available Internet can be viewed as opportunities for individuals to connect, cooperate, and collaborate in and out of the workplace. This is being done in much the same manner that large companies, institutions, governments, and organizations have only been able to accomplish in the past (Madden & Jones, 2008). The ability to produce goods and services in newly established markets has emerged on a global scale due to the capabilities of connected workers. Without institutional hierarchical structures of management restricting the flow of information and decision-making, workers are experiencing a sense of greater autonomy and organizational commitment (Hatch & Cunliffe, 2013). This sense of self-directed management and organizational commitment has evolved from leadership’s ability to enact transparency and accountability. However for organizations to sustain themselves, they may need to constantly be involved in the evolution of the Internet and its tools. The Internet serves as the “communication channel” for global networks (Silicon Republic, 2014). As the Internet has shifted from a communication channel to a commerce highway, services that improve the quality of people’s lives will be in high demand. While civil society reaps the benefits of being able to conduct communication and commerce over the freely available Internet, other safeguards are needed to thwart criminal activity and terrorism throughout the globe. Through a sense of “shared awareness” and “group coordination,” we can embrace the tools that enhance our capabilities (Shirky, 2008, p. 187). A more educated and connected world will improve our chances of experiencing more efficient and secure on-line interactions/transactions.
References:
Arauz, M. (2009). Design for networks, not just groups of individuals. Retrieved from: http://www.mikearauz.com/2009/06/design–for-
networks–not–just–groups-of.html
Hatch, M. J., & Cunliffe, A. F. (2013). Organization theory: Modern symbolic and postmodern perspectives, (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Jarche, H. (2013). Networks are the new companies. Retrieved from:
http://www.jarche.com/?s=networks+are+the+new+companies&submit=Search
Madden, M., & Jones, S. (2008). Networked workers. Pew Research Internet Project. Retrieved from:
www.pewinternet.org/2008/09/24/networked–workers
Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York: Penguin Publishing, Inc.
Silicon Republic (2014). Insight’s Martin Serrano: Nations should plan for the internet of things. Retrieved from:
http://www.siliconrepublic.com/comms/item/36262-insights-martin-serrano-n/
misshydrangeabloom 
Dear missyhydrangeabloom,
Do you think that institutions will have to change their hierarchical structures to truly lead society successfully? The old ways will not work with the new technology. Also, along that line, what safeguards will thwart terrorist and criminal activity while keeping communication open and free? Maybe we should work on terrorism and crime – Pope Paul VI said, “If you want peace, work for justice.” Would our efforts be better spent in these arenas with the vast technology in place?
Irene
Technology has created a new dynamic in the workplace and I am wondering what implications that has for the hierarchical structure. Is the boss in charge or merely the facilitator?
I am also a firm believer that people react in violent means because they feel they have been wronged. If we examined the reasons why terrorists were blowing up planes rather than having every passenger taking off shoes and belts at airports, we might make the world safer and bring peace. It won’t be a perfect world but leadership will be pro-active rather than reactive.
Irene
Irene,
Here’s a little philosophy to get the “wheels spinning.” It is the duty of a leader to not only “do the right things,” but to do all things possible within their abilities to “ensure that workers are doing things the right way”. In this case, the boss assumes the responsibility and manages the ways that people are “doing things the right way” and that “the right things are being done.” The boss may actually do the facilitating or delegate.
Sometimes the best offense is a defense and at times the defense has to go on offense. That’s how I view national security. To be proactive we have to train to react in a multitude of ways. Now we guard the land, air , sea, and the Internet.
JD
Hi Irene,
Out of necessity, institutions will need to assess how their organizational structures are impacted as technology evolves (Shirky, 2008). Due to the enhanced job capabilities that connected workers bring to their organizations, less management is needed to coordinate and collaborate with employees (Jarche, 2013). These workers already have the ability to do the communication, cooperation, and collaboration amongst themselves. Adding more management may simply restrict the flow of progress and efficiency that is accomplished through the vast networks of established operations by connected workers.
Freedom comes at a price. Our government does have filters and monitors our communications to prevent terrorism and crime. This includes monitoring financial transactions that occur in order to prevent terrorist organizations from funding their activities and attacks. Because so much of our daily interactions are dependent on the Internet, cybersecurity has become one of the nation’s top defense priorities for the 21st century (White House, 2014).Efforts by national defense and intelligence agencies are coordinated to keep the peace and work for justice. However intrusive one may feel by communications monitoring, safeguards are in place to warn us of those that may intend to do us harm.
References:
Jarche, H. (2013). Jarche, H. (2013). Networks are the new companies. Retrieved from:
http://www.jarche.com/s=networks+are+the+new+companies&submit=Search
Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York, Penguin Publishing, Inc.
White House. (2014). Cybersecurity. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign-policy/cybersecurity
I focused in on the this quote from your post since it something I have been struggling with…
Without institutional hierarchical structures of management restricting the flow of information and decision-making, workers are experiencing a sense of greater autonomy and organizational commitment (Hatch & Cunliffe, 2013).
That is the message I feel has been conveyed through much of the reading, but I have been wrestling with the institutional hierarchal structures aspect. I certainly do agree with the concept of change in the flow of information has broadened and workers are not entirely reliant upon the boss for information. Where I have questioned this is how it applies to all industries and occupations. As a service worker, in retail or food service, how much has changed in the information flow from boss to subordinate and what level of autonomy is there in decision making.
I have a high level of autonomy in the work that I do and the resources I bring to the to the building level teams, but I am also keenly aware the resources must support the mission and vision of the leadership. I was recently part of a grant reading committee and several of the grants were selected or not selected on the basis how they support the organizational goals. So I see both sides, some areas of employment have developed that autonomy, but other have not.
We all have the ability to lead in any group, organization, or institution. When I stated the following thoughts, I did so based upon the premise that the information flow can actually travel in both directions. A Team Leader in a fast food restaurant can lead his or her team by working alongside coworkers. Some fast food restaurants hold team meetings as shifts overlap. Individual workers gather together to discuss and problem-solve issues with Team Leaders and Managers. The information gathered from workers interacting with customer feedback is relayed back to management. (My sister-in-law managed a restaurant and discussed these leadership practices.) Without institutional hierarchical structures of management restricting the flow of information and decision-making, workers are experiencing a sense of greater autonomy and organizational commitment (Hatch & Cunliffe, 2013). When groups of individuals come together and share information, make decisions, and collaborate, one user’s identity may create stronger ties to the identity of the group (Shirky, 2008). As leaders we must be better listeners and share some of the decision-making at all levels. There are certainly some occupations which cannot have the transparency with employees and the general public for employee skill levels and security reasons. Do you see your organization restructuring away from traditional models of leadership and communication?
Reference:
Hatch, M.J., & Cunliffe, A.F. (2013). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives, (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York: Penguin Publishing, Inc.
Thanks for the reply and the insight from someone within the industry I mentioned. I still do wonder how much information a front line employees is able to contribute to changing the organization. If you are small, most certainly, but if you are a franchise, the hierarchy would be even more difficult to change. As well, would the individual even be able to see how their contribution was used as the layers of filtering are placed upon it. I also wonder about international workplaces that do not have a western influence from the US or Europe.
When I worked in Japan, the up and down the hierarchy could take a very long period of time and might not go very far up the chain of command. AS the outsider, I could circumvent the rules to some extent, but once I knew the “rules,” I was expected to follow the process. In the end the boss was the boss and input from a subordinate in any form was generally disregarded.Since that has been many years ago, I don’t know how much openness there is within organizations now.
What a great inclusion of a chart to correspond with your blog post. I certainly do agree that there is an expansion of goods and services across a global scale due to the connectivity that exists between the workers of various organizations, thanks to the internet.
In addition, I think that the aspect of shared awareness is truly how institutions can thrive and be successful simply because they are made aware of what is occurring in the workplace and how it can impact their productivity. I am a firm believer that isolationism can lead to degradation
In your workplace, do you find yourself benefiting or suffering from the connectivity that exists?
David,
I find that there are benefits and times when too much connectivity can be distracting. What I have been trying to figure out is to establish when I need to know things. In other words, I need to establish with workers when to notify me of things. Lately, I have done things on a weekly basis. Thing change so quickly on a day-to-basis, that staying connected is helpful. Sometimes I question whether its best to design for networks rather than individuals. In other words, as the network changes individuals will either adapt or adopt new tools to work with a changing network. Does this make sense?
JD
Thanks for a very succinct and well structured post that captures all the key pros and cons of connected workers. You wrote about group coordination to help us reap the benefits and also reduce the risks of networked workers, can you provide some examples about how this can be done?
Also, as networked workers become more autonomous and empowered are you concerned about the possibility of a lack of accountability?
Paolo,
I jumped over to your blog to give you a comment and an answer in more depth. A couple of things I forgot to mention is that connected workers pose risks of sometimes bringing in new devices from home that have not been approved by the organization or workplace. For instance, if you happen to bring in a new piece of technology that has enhanced capabilities and bypasses your institution’s filters and network security; there is an issue. Security and privacy will always be a concern to address with connected workers. It has gotten to the point that most Human Resource departments will create Technology User Agreements and have all workers see a short presentation and sign off to the workplace agreement. Violations of the Technology User Agreements may result in job termination for employees.
So much to consider! :]
JD Booth
Correct, the more connected a worker is the more value brings to an organization. I believe that a connected worker, or one who knows how to solve issues using a number of tools over the Internet, brings a tremendous amount of value to an organization. Long gone are the days of single communication avenues where one has to retrieve information from a manager or supervisor. Now, employees can gather information and resources from horizontal and vertical paths to knowledge. Their networks have the ability to span professions, states, countries, and even continents. This brings a wealth of previously untapped knowledge to many organizations. Additionally, the ability to produce goods and services has been greatly increased in production materials, marketing, and direct sales to the end user. Manufacturers of goods have emerging markets to tap and sale their products in. Education is the key. We have to ensure we educate those who are connected and how that connectedness could benefit them and potentially harm them.
Good post and good conversation here. I particularly like the graphic from Arauz. Interestingly, following your “connections”, it appears that Mike shifted to WordPress in 2010, Tumblr in 2012, and is now on Twitter but not blogging. Networking continues to evolve.