The continuity of pipeline security depends on technology systems to sustain an effective environment to connect with each pipeline task.
Sociotechnical systems combined with the four sociotechnical organizational factors (management, procedural, technical, and cultural) from part I of maintaining high security and pipeline peace of mind is needed to continue to connect organizational reliability and create exceptional value for stockholders, stakeholders, and employees.
Wang, Li, Fu, Sun, Tong, and Zhang (2011) combined communication technology in work approaches. A sociotechnical approach in organizational environments is encouraged by pipeline management because of various work approaches. Monty Eyler of Eyler Drilling INC. stated, “For us, we don’t rely so much on a hierarchy to enforce rules and procedures, instead, we try to focus on utilizing all of our employees for information, inspection and enforcement, you have to use multiple sources of information gathering and procedural implementation to achieve results.” Information communication technology (ICT) is the underlying factor for egalitarian organizational guarantee for total control of information during each approach. As cited in Walker (2008) the pattern of interaction is the ground- breaking point of breakthrough in organizational growth. Collins (2001) connected technology systems with technology applications to discover a pattern of organizational buildup. The buildup equals point of breakthrough plus organizational patience and discipline will produce extraordinary results.
A formula created to discover organizational growth is technology sophistication divided by technology accelerators equals’ organizational momentum. Pipeline management has the responsibility to distinguish the difference in organizational success and organizational momentum (Collins, 2001). In the wake of growth and various technology applications, pipeline management has the opportunity to simplify cultural difference and sociotechnical system operations that affect crew performance. Sociotechnical systems inextricably intertwine pipeliners, society, and technology (Strauch, 2010). Technical elements such as electronics and ICT create a pattern buildup (Collins, 2001). The point of breakthrough in organizational environments highlights how pipeline management styles evolved abruptly to shift TS’s little by little to establish a sociotechnical approach on the right of way. Collins (2001) reached a conclusion that organizational success is not overnight, not found in meetings, no magical word, or one grandeur managerial decision, only through evolution of the organizational environment is success achieved. Strauch (2010) interrelated social skills, ICT, IO’s, people, and society into a form of “intrateam communication” (p. 1). Intrateam communication produces coordination of technical skills and user-friendly relationships.
An evolutionary change instead of a revolutionary change allows the pipeline contractor or organization a chance to focus on each situation. Meanwhile, continuing education training and TS expertise in ICT correlates the behavioral patterns in the environment to discover organizational POT or point of breakthrough. Stoel and Muhanna (2011) connected information systems and organizational literature to allow organizational camaraderie to permeate each implemented technology system. The problem is discovering the right pipeline managers, inspectors, foreman, and awarding the right contract to the appropriate contractor possessing a vision of unexasperating doubt of organizational change (Collins, 2001). An organizational caveat is the next step to assuage innocuous organizational paradigms. Which, the time to discover three predominant paradigms are complaisant to current organizational environment and possess the faith to “confront the most brutal facts of your current reality” (Collins, 2001, p. 132) embellishes each pipeline crew and will reach each pipeline covered task along the right of way. According to Strauch (2010) culture permeates sociotechnical factors as mentioned in part I of the Maintaining High Security and Pipeline Peace of Mind article in the May/June issue. The four factors provided meaning and sustain value over those involved in a particular pipeline crew. Hogue, Sambamurthy, Zmud, Trainer, and Wilson (2006) win the business and technology race because of the business technology management model (BTM) on level five of the BTM maturity model. Hogue et al. (2006) suggested, “Continuous process optimization, experimentation, and innovation” (p. 22) to maximize the benefit of change for the organization.
The continuity of pipeline security depends on technology systems to sustain an effective environment and the decline in pipeline incidents is the focus to connect with each pipeline task while connecting innovation is discussed next in part III of Maintaining High Security and Pipeline Peace of Mind.
Author: Mike Thomas is a Doctor of Management candidate at The University of Phoenix in Organizational Leadership with over 16 years of pipelining experience. He is currently a pipeline inspector in the northeast region of Oklahoma. His expertise encompasses pipeline safety, integrity, and inspection for assorted pipeline clients. He may be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Collins, J. (2001). Why Some Companies Make the Leap and other don’t: Good to Great. New York, NY. Harper Collins Publishing Inc.
Cheng, J. and Koa, L. (2004). An Investigation of the Diffusion of Online Games in Taiwan: An Application of Roger’s Diffusion of Innovation Theory. Journal of American Academy of Business, 52(2), 438-446.
Haavik, T. (2011). On Components and Relations in Sociotechnical Systems. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 19(2), 99-109. Doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5973.2011.00638. x.
Hogue, F., Sambamurthy, V., Zmud, R., Trainer, T., & Wilson, C. (2006). Winning the 3-legged race: When business and technology run together. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Salimi, S., Karaminia, R., and Esmaeili, A. (2011). Personality Traits, Management Styles and Conflict Management in a Military Unit. Journal of Military Medicine, 13(1), 11-16.
Strauch, B. (2010). Can Cultural Differences Lead to Accidents? Team Cultural Differences and Sociotechnical System Operations. Human Factors, 52(2), 246-263. Doi: 10.1177/00872081362238.
Stoel, D. and Muhanna, W. (2011). IT Internal Control Weaknesses and Firm Performance: An Organizational Liability Lens. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 12(4), 280-304.
Walker, G., Stanton, N., Salmon, P., and Jenkins, D. (2008). A Review of Sociotechnical Systems Theory: A Classic Concept for new command and control paradigms. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 9(6), 479-499. doi:10.1080/1463920701635470.