Technological Change. Clotilde Coron

Technological Change - Clotilde Coron


Скачать книгу
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.

       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

       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 microprocessor-based 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.

      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.

      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

      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)


Скачать книгу