Impact of Technology Essay

AbstractThe culture engine room coronations submit ontogenesis signifi orduretly with period and advancement in applied science. In this try, an attempt is make to broad(prenominal)light how the cultivation technology influences the organization productiveness. The correlation between the training technology (IT) and productiveness was very argumentative. Many studies were conducted to identify the meet of IT on productiveness conclude contrasting results. It is impossible to estimate the productiveness append maturate due to the availability of so many advanced computer technologies, as its tough to consider either parameters involved while calculating productiveness harvest-feast. Several questiones and studies were documented stating positive destiny up of IT on productiveness growth. But still there were few against this statement.IntroductionThe advancement in the education technology made both(prenominal) beatrs and business enterprises to wont it. Computers, laptops, tuner communications etc. atomic number 18 all part of IT and incorporated in every industry. Enterprises invest in these technologies beca use up it was assumed technologies will enhance productivity. Companies coach to generate more business and high turnovers through less investment. In a race to gain more efficiency, the enterprises are adapting sensitive technologies. immense investments are made on in the altogetherborn technologies to outlast in industry. The major(ip) challenge is to produce high tonus goods and services at low-toned hurts. Some enterprises understood thevalue and importance of discipline technology and utilise it to deliver more products in less time and more trusty and convenient services at lower approach. This will also help oneself to gain militant good over rivals. It was illustrated in a study to generate high productivity growths from culture technology enterprises should change the lively infrastructure as wel l as business practices (Brynjolfsson & Brown, 2005).Many enterprises changed the organisational structure to exploit the full authority drop of selective randomness technology and its applications. Brynjolfsson and Hitt (1998) coupled productivity with living standards to understand it better. They mentioned that value of productivity potbelly be easy understood when related with our living standards. They highlighted the significance of productivity by comparing it with our living standards and mentioned that, productivity growth determines our living standards and the wealth of nations. This reflects the customers air to consume more in less money. They also point by that the c at one timept of productivity is simple and vast besides tough to rhythm with accuracy. Information applied science and productivenessProductivity was depict as the bill of output generated for a certain amount of input (Brynjolfsson, 2003 Hitt & Brynjolfsson, 1995). Productivity can also be defined as the measure of the quantity of outputs in goods and services per unit of input (Muriwai, 2006). Productivity can be thrifty either by retentiveness the output static or input. Productivity can be change magnitude with increase in output property input constant or by decreasing the input keeping the output static. The term training technology was defined narrowly as the expenditures made on the computing ironware (Brynjolfsson, 2003 and Hitt & Brynjolfsson, 2005). It was elaborated a miniature more as. All the computer software and ironware, tools and services use in the business processes and trading operations are a part of nurture technology. The investments in information technology were defined as the expenses on the computer hardware and software and all other(a) devices related with IT (Morrison, 1997).The main purpose of these investments is develop a modern infrastructure within the organization to boost productivity of both organization and employees (Dehning, Dow, & Stratopoulus, 2003). It was documented by Mahmood and Mann (2005) thatinvestment in IT was non sufficient enough to increase productivity. Strategic decisions had to be made whether investment in IT would help to accomplish objectives and goals set. A harmony mustiness pass off between IT investments and changes in business process to have high productivity growth, even greater than investment in information technology. Keller (2004) also verbalize that when IT is utilized appropriately at workplace that also helps a circulate in productivity growth. Just investment in information technology is non sufficient to gain growth in productivity but organization can visualize changes brought by information technology (Brynjolfsson & Hitt, 1998 Dedrick, Gurbaxani & Kraemer, 2003).A significant relation between IT investments per employee and overall productivity of company was put up by Brynjolfsson (2003). The enterprises gained high productivity growth who inves ted huge sum in information technology powerfully. But pattern of productivity growth across the enterprises varied no doubt the return from IT investment were positive (Brynjolfsson & Hitt, 1998). It takes time to realize productivity gains from investments in information technology. It was support by Mahmood and Mann (1988) that productivity growth and performance of the organization improves in time period of dickens or three years after investing in information technology. Dedrick et al. (2003) also believed that productivity gains are realized after a yearn time period. It was highlighted in their query that information technology payoffs are high when firms effectively apply information technology in long run.Its easy to measure productivity when tangible products and goods are produced as in the manufacturing sector. An input alteration in the manufacturing process can generate solid changes in productivity. For instance, the use of automation technology and robotics produce outputs of good quality (Kao & Liu, 2005). On the contrary, its tough to measure and improve productivity in service sector. Its next to impossible to evaluate the productivity of an employee. A method was proposed by Tallon and Kraemer (2006) to measure precisely the disturb of information technology on productivity. A method of perceptual measures was recommended by them. Perceptual measures would bring new scope to study impact of technology on productivity. They described it as perceptual measures, if structured around information technology impacts at the process-level, can yield richer insights than objective criteria alone.Authors Agree and DisagreeThe research was done by many to study the impact of IT on productivity (Brynjolfsson & Brown, 2005 Brynjolfsson & Hitt, 1998 Melville, Kraemer & Gurbaxani, 2004 and Kudyba, 2004). The expectation that productivity will certainly increase by utilizing the IT were not alship canal true. But researches ended up with differe nt conclusions, some state positive impacts of IT on productivity and others negative.Information technology had negative impact on productivity. Mahmood and Mann (2005) mentioned in their study that there is no adequate turn out available in past researches showing the positive effects of IT on productivity. It was also supported by Dedrick et al. (2003) stating, Studies have failed to identify a affinity between information technology investment and firm profitability. The term productivity paradox was introduced by Robert Solow in 1987 explaining the inability of the information technology contribute towards firm productivity (Solow. 1987). He made a statement that growth in productivity was not accompanied by the information technology. He also discussed that the companies didnt had expected results in productivity after investing in Information technology. He quoted, You can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics. In my opinion and during my rese arch I realized that impact of IT on productivity had mixed reviews from different authors, researchers and economists.Researchers employ new approach to reveal the hidden positive effects of IT on productivity. Brynjolfsson and Hitt (1998) illustrated that Information technology has a positive and significant impact on firm output, contradicting the claims of a productivity paradox (p52). This was also supported by Brynjolfsson (2003) and Dedrick et al. (2003) that productivity including the output per worker annually had increased importantly with use of information technology. It was mentioned by Kudyba (2004) that the output can be raise with increased information technology skills. The new information technology and techniques effectively when used by the companies, those companies are productive than who dont use it (Brynjolfsson & Brown, 2005). When the technologies and techniques were used perfectly and timely, yield high level of productivity.The three ways werediscussed by Brynjolfsson (2003), Keller (2004) and Brynjolfsson & Hitt (1998) to recognize productivity growth from IT by decreasing the cost on Information technology and keeping the benefits from business stagnant increase the benefits from business and keeping the investment in Information technology constant or reduce the cost of information technology and benefits increase from business. The information technology is important and valuable for organization (Melville et al., 2004). They also stated that effective and efficient use of information technology can yield potential benefits, like cost reduction, improving quality and at last productivity. The companies, who used information technology effectively, had also observed an increase in price of their market share more than others. It had been historyed by Mahmood and Mann (2005) that both IT push and computer resources contribute towards return on investments.They also mentioned in their report that effective enterprises have dev eloped and improved their infrastructures and investing highly in information technology. Information technology is a medium through which the information can be distributed easily within organizations. The highly advanced IT infrastructures lay down an atmosphere within organization that encourages decentralized process of decision fashioning (Brynjolfsson & Brown, 2005). When modification of the business processes is done within organizations, it becomes necessary to integrate information technologies. The productivity can be enhanced by integrating information technology investments with decentralize process of decision making (Melville et al., 2004). The integration of information technology investments and other investments within business also proves to be proficient (Brynjolfsson & Hitt, 1998). The operations and business processes within the organization must be evaluated and visualize that existing business environment can adapt the new technology, beforehand future in formation technology investments made (Zhou & Chen, 2003).The predictable and estimated outcomes can be realized from IT investments through integration of technologies and flow business processes (Kudyba, 2004). It becomes important to reconstitute the business processes with the changing business environments when new information systems are set up (Zhou & Chen, 2003). McNamara and Watson (2005) also reported that the integration of the existing technology systems with new technologies within organizations yields the expected productivity growth.They also discussed how the existing technologies can be employed in various business operations, it equally productive as investing in new information technologies. Brynjolfsson and Hitt (1998) found that The greatest benefits of computers expect to be realized when computer investment is coupled with other completing investments new strategies, new business processes and new organizations all appear to be important in realizing the ma ximum benefit of information technology.The companies must integrate all daily activities, decentralize decision process, flow of information from high to low level, this will enhance productivity growth and all these attributes directly or indirectly contribute to information technology (Brynjolfsson, 2003). The organizations use various methods and measures like product quality, profitability, and value of market shares to measure productivity (Dedrick et al., 2003). in that location is a possibility that productivity can also be gained through effective management. It was observed that productivity can be increased by information technology and make worth for consumers (Hitt & Brynjolfsson, 1995). Devaraj and Kohli (2003) proposed a method which requires elevation of the IT practice session at the employees level individually and then at long last investigating its effect on organizational performance. Employees of modern organization may call it push or thrust of IT investm ents.This phenomenon of push or pull in IT investments may inspire employees for using new technologies and this may take to productivity improvements. Kudyba (2004) mentioned that warlike advantage can be gained by hiring masterful and experienced employees. In my view, the employees must be trained to use new technologies or companies should hire skilled and experienced employees. It also depends how the new technologies are being utilized by the enterprises to enhance their productivity. Only those companies will maximize their productivity that will use the technology perfectly and timely. I have also learned during my research that productivity doesnt depend on one factor, there are number of parameters that affect the overall productivity of the organizations. The accurate methods are required for calculating the productivity, to recognize the growth of productivity. sooner than focusing on productivity only, enterprises should develop new strategies to integrate technologi es with new opportunities. The barriers to entry can be easily terminated by increase the firms efficiency and gaining matched advantage. Benefit to ManagerThere is a big challenge ahead for all the mangers and decision makers how to consume the information technologies at best and have maximum benefits. Its not compulsory that the companies will have same levels of productivity if provided with same information technology, it depends how the technology is utilized to have high growth in productivity (Brynjolfsson, 2003). To maintain competitive advantage in the industry, the managers had to find new ways in which they can exploit the full potential of technologies differently from their rivals. Melville et al. (2004) mentioned the competitive advantage gained through human resource and technical synergies cannot be retained for long. A strategy or mechanism had to develop to gain competitive edge for long periods and which is not easy to imitate. The competitive advantage can be maintained until others dont follow what you are doing, once others start following your techniques its tough to sustain competitive advantage (Brynjolfsson, 2003).I believe that managers should examine future values of all IT investments when productivity results were not up to the level of expectations. The organizational leaders are not ready to invest more on technologies, when results from previous IT investments are not beneficial enough (Devaraj & Kohli, 2003). A big challenge for the leaders to unloosen future investments in technologies when there is no significant evidence of productivity improvement from previously investments in information technologies (Dehning, Dow, & Stratopoulus, 2003). Managers should focus on other aspects of business process also rather than on productivity alone.Hitt and Brynjolfsson (1995) discussed that managers should cut down more on how information technology can be used to improve product quality and customer service. Information technol ogy has the potential to reduce the expenses on such services and change the mode of drudgery and delivery of the goods and services so cant be easily imitated by competitors (Hitt & Brynjolfsson, 1995). The uniqueness in utilizing the information technologies in business operations and processes is the key to stay ahead of the competitors in the market. This not only provides competitive advantage but also increases the overall growth in productivity. remnantThe conclusion can be drawn that investing in information technology doesnthave any positive impact on productivity growth until utilized properly and effectively. The impact of investing in technologies can be realized how organizations utilize technologies effectively depending on the current situations of organizations and derive expected productivity results. The invention of telecommunication, computer software and hardware had totally changed operations within the organizations. The use of these forms of technology was extensively everyday and in-demand among the various industrial sectors. The enterprises had changed their existing infrastructures to adapt these new technologies. The meaning both consumption and productivity have changed with innovation of information technology. Organizations across the clump are implementing new technologies to enhance the daily business activities with the purpose to survive and compete in this new global world of information technology.ReferencesBrynjolfsson, E. (2003). ROI rating The IT productivity gap. (21). Retrieved from http//ebusiness.mit.edu/erik/Optimize/pr_roi.html. Brynjolfsson, E., & Brown, P. (2005). VII pillars of IT productivity. Optimize Manhasset.4(5), 26-35.Retrived from http//www.georgeschussel.com/wpcontent/uploads/articles/NY6420050502_erik.pdf. Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. M. (1998). Beyond the productivity paradox. communication theory Of The ACM, 41(8), 49 55. Retrived from http//citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1 95.1657&rep=rep1&type=pdf Dedrick, J., Gurbaxani, V., & Kraemer K.L. (2003). Information Technology and Economic Performance A Critical Review of the Empirical Evidence. ACM deliberation Surveys ,35(1),1-28.Retrived from Business Source Complete. Dehning, B., Dow, K. E., & Stratopoulos, T. C. 2003. The info-tech Productivity Paradoxdissected and tested. Management chronicle Quarterly,5(1),31-39. Retrieved from Business Source Complete. Devaraj, S., & Kohli, R.(2003). Performance impacts of information technology Is actual usage the missing link?. Management Science, 49(3),273-289. Retrieved from Business Source Complete. Hitt, L. & Brynjolfsson, E. (1995). Productivity, profit and consumer eudaimonia Three different measures of information technologys value. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 121 -143. Keller, E. (2004). What Is Your IT Productivity. MSI 22(2), 33 34. Kudyba, S. (2004). The productivity pay-off from effective allocation of IT and non- IT labour.