Quality and Innovation

The best definition for technology that I’ve found comes from the dictionary:

• Technology - The sum of the ways in which social groups provide themselves with the material objects of their civilization. (Random House Unabridged Dictionary)

The phrase “social groups” acknowledges that people are a critical part of developing and
applying technology. “Provide themselves” indicates that technology is closely linked to the context
in which it is used, and deals with artifacts that people or systems create. “Material objects” implies
tangible artifacts or outcomes (e.g. processes, products, tools). And because civilization is defined as
an “advanced state of human society,” technology, therefore, is concerned with advancing human capabilities.

Using this definition as a baseline, note that quality systems (e.g. ISO 9000, CMMI, even David Allen’s GTD!) are technologies, and social networks are a foundational concept for both quality and innovation to take root.

Technology management is the combination of science, engineering and management knowledge and practice, with technology as the central means of wealth and value creation. (Khalil, 2000) This definition can nicely coexist with any of the historical definitions of management covered in a previous post.

Kearns et al. (2005) has attempted to make the connections between general management and technology management more explicit, by developing a model to describe the spheres of influence of the technology manager. The “Six Facets Model” illustrates that technology management is an integrative, multidisciplinary field, focused on effective problem solving:

• Product and Process Integration through systems thinking, quality management system development, and benchmarking (for example)
• Evaluation (at the organizational, technical and personal levels)
• Planning (including strategic plans, work plans, and environmental assessment)
• Implementation of quality systems, documentation systems, organizational processes, software, project execution, project planning and control
• Change Management involving both management and leadership of change
• Training and Engagement to cultivate individual and organizational capabilities, and promote workforce development

Additionally, in all of these areas, technology managers must remember that communications and networking have been identified as important mechanisms for actively implementing change.

There are also alternatives to the Kearns Six Facet Model that you can read about here.

---

Kearns, M.B. et al. (2005). The six facets model: technology management in the effective implementation of change. International Journal of Innovation & Technology Management, 2, 77-100.
Khalil, T. (2000). Management of technology: competitiveness and wealth creation.

A wide variety of definitions of “management” have been employed over the past century. Most of these definitions describe what managers do, with more recent research providing definitions that have emerged from exploring these managerial activities in the context of what results managers achieve. Over 25 years ago in 1982, Warren Bennis estimated that over 350 definitions of management had been proposed, all in the context of leadership, and all with some degree of “correctness”. This illustrates that there are many different ways to look at what management really is!

The perceived role of managers has converged substantially over the past several decades. Fayol (1949) identified the four behaviors of planning, organizing, coordinating and controlling as central to the task of management. Mintzberg (1973), as part of his doctoral dissertation, studied a collection of real engineers and managers to figure out the primary functions of the management role, and the jobs that managers actually did. He found that managers performed tasks in three basic areas: interpersonal communications, information gathering and assessment, and decision making. Kotter (1982), unsatisfied by the limitations of this study, followed up by observing a group of CEOs in their natural habitat. He found that social networking was not only the key activity of managers at the executive level, but the primary way in which they were able to execute and achieve their agendas. Luthans (1988) studied the results from all of his predecessors, and against the backdrop of a new data set, found that there were elements of accuracy in all of the prior definitions. He concluded that Fayol’s “traditional management” was complemented in the modern workplace by “people management” – followed by Mintzberg’s communications, and Kotter’s networking.

According to Kotter (2007), management is “the structured process of creating order amid complexity.” He contrasts his definition with a view of leadership as systemically inspiring a social group towards change within a dynamic external environment. This is consistent with the Burns (1978) view of transformational leadership as a combination of idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized attention, and inspirational vision.

---

Bennis, W. (1982). What is leadership?
Burns (1978). Leadership.
Fayol, H. (1949). General and industrial management.
Kotter, J.P. (1982). The general managers.
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work.