Throughout mankind’s history work has been accomplished in a group. Early man took advantage of group efforts in order to fell larger prey. Cooperation was needed when systematic rabbit hunts were conducted.
As chronicled in Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith, specialization and division of labor resulted in dramatic improvements in productivity. For example, in pinmaking the division of labor and cooperative efforts of many resulted in the increase of pin production by a factor of a hundredfold or more per laborer compared to a worker doing every part of pin production himself.
The assembly line of Henry Ford took the division of labor principle and wedded it to automatization afforded by technology. The output gains were even greater than that in Adam Smith’s age. Again, there is a cooperation across groups of individuals — this time numbered in the thousands.
Initially, the effect of the computer on the world of work did not primarily involve cooperative efforts. The gains were in computing power, ability to deal with large sets of data, and financial and accounting capabilities. The mainframe computer did not link individuals. With the advent of the personal computer, however, and the development of the networking of individuals within a company, the computer became a means of facilitating combined efforts, this time with a dramatic increase in information and decision-making capabilities.
The next big step in “cooperative technology” came with the Internet. The information shared in this case went beyond the boundaries of just one company. Email and websites had impacts beyond just one company. They brought together companies and customers and facilitated cross-company cooperation.
In the last few years, the most concentrated version of “cooperative technology,” Social Networking, has become a force to reckon with. At first, Social Networking was overwhelmingly used for personal uses. In the last year, it has made its impact forcefully upon businesses. Whereas PC networking in the 1980’s and 1990’s focused upon the connectivity to enhance information flow, the focus of Social Networking ostensibly promotes “relationships” among individuals in business and between businesses and their customers, in addition promoting individuals (as in Twitter).
Caveat to Complexity
With each step of more complex technology there is a caveat for the participant. The division of labor and specialization of pin making was vastly more productive, but for the worker there was a deadening routinization of work. With the assembly line there was a forced march pace for the worker, along with a limited sense of accomplishment if all you were doing was putting on the rear view mirror.
With the Internet, and especially Social Networking, there is an illusion of “relationships” and “friends” that is built online. You may have 264 “friends” or 537 connections. At the very least, certain dangers must be borne in mind with Social Networking. The first I’ll categorize as Tenous Connections, the second as “Living in a Virtual World and the third as “Are We Men or Mitochondria.
Tenous Connections – Are the friends or connections persons that we really know? Would we recommend each of them to someone else as reputable and skilled business persons? Would we trust them with information about our business? If the answers to these questions about these individuals is no, what is the nature of the friends and connections we make on Social Networking sites?
Virtual World – Is the Social Networking space that we are working in allowing us to achieve more ROI for our business, or is it a virtual world that beckons to us and pulls us more and more into it, without producing sufficient tangible results for our business, or results that take so much time to achieve that it is counter-productive?
Are We Men or Mitochondria? – It appears that the power source of the cell (for all nucleated cells) in living organisms, the mitochondria, once had an individual life of its own, instead of being just a subservient organelle in a cell. It sometimes seems to me that when I’m on the Internet too long, especially when I am involved in Social Networking interactions, that I am losing my autonomy and am driven by external sources, like the mitochondria. Are we, like the assembly line workers of Henry Ford, vulnerable to a loss of autonomy, this time not due to physical production quotas, but due to our captivity to the Social Networking space and its tenous, but ever-increasing connections?
Tags: small business indianapolis
