Robert Stensrud and Donna Ashworth

     Many demographic and social changes affect the nature of the way we work. However, the advancement of computer and information technologies is having, and will continue to have, an especially profound impact on the way employees work and live (Hakken, 1993). For example, computer literacy is quickly becoming a prerequisite to many types of employment. Telecommuting is becoming commonplace, removing the restraints of brick and mortar of the traditional office. Many scholars believe we are witnessing the devolution of labor-intensive work and that we sit at the edge of the information revolution. According to Howard (1995):

"In the post-industrial information age, the balance of work has tipped from hand to head, from brawn to brain. Workers don’t just run machines and push paper; they control information. And information is displacing capital as the essential resource for industrial success (p. 23)."

Communications technologies and computer networking are making it possible for organizations to develop more flexible methods of production. We in vocational rehabilitation (VR) may not see ourselves as production workers, but we are in fact funded, among other things, by the number—thus production—of rehabilitates each year. These same technologies also support new patterns of communication and information access within organizations, which is facilitating the change in bureaucratic approaches to management, with the promise of vigorous internal networks, more effective collaborative work relationships, and significant reductions in hierarchical structures of control (Sproull & Kiesler, 1991).

These same technologies allow groups within organizations to coordinate geographically. Collaborative applications such as computer-based conferencing, shared databases, shared applications, project management, and video-conferencing can be used to help dispersed people work together. "As business spreads out around the globe, information proliferates, and competition grows ever more intense, computer-supported collaborative work will become perhaps the most important source of competitive advantage" (Dew, Leigh, Drew, Morris, & Curson, 1995). The idea of having individuals travel to all parts of a state for meetings, trainings, or workshops will dissolve. Access to this material can be provided in the workplace and/or in the home.

We are more familiar with the words "telecommuting" and "telecommunications." The idea of telecommunication is not new. Since the 1970s, individuals have been working from their homes to avoid the commute to an office. The Europeans use the word "telework" when individuals within an organization utilize computer technology to work from their homes (Feng, 1998). Telework is the evolution of telecommuting.

Telework encompasses the entire organization and changes the way organizations perform work tasks. It involves taking individuals and their work out of the normal working context (e.g., the field office) through technological support, and relocating them to mainly, but not exclusively, the home. The VR professional can provide services from their homes, at the client’s work site, or anywhere those services would be needed. The field office or satellite office will be a meeting place for mundane responsibilities such as filing and will become more of a social gathering place. A team-telework solution can significantly improve the geographical flexibility for information workers such as VR counselors in the organization and execution of work (Feng, 1998).

When a new technology is introduced into an organization, a predictable process occurs. Whether one considers telephones, copy machines, fax machines, or computers, organizations change through discrete, progressive steps. The same holds true when one considers how state VR agencies currently are adapting to the existence of the Internet as a resource for consumers and counselors. During the first stage of adaptation, organizations tend to be unaware of the new technology and only a few "innovators" know of its existence. These innovators may be consumers, counselors, or other agency personnel. What makes them unique is that they have learned about the new technology through their own efforts. They probably have given more thought to its impact on them personally than to the impact on their employer. These innovators may have access to the technology at home before they do at work. They also tend to teach themselves about its use and network with others who share their interest in exploring it.

During the second stage of organizational adaptation, people who work with the innovators tend to learn of their pursuits and try to learn how the technology may relate to their jobs. These people could be called the "early users" of the technology. For them, the new technology is less a curiosity than a new tool with which to do their jobs. They bring a practical approach to its use. They also may be the first ones to get access to the technology at their worksite.

During the third stage of the process, the organization as a whole begins to recognize the value of the new technology and allocate resources to its exploration and use. At this stage, the administrative structure of the organization offers tentative support for using the technology and begins considering its applicability to ongoing operations. This stage of "tentative administrative support" includes workgroups that explore the technology’s applications, experimental sites where the technology is put into use and studied, and managerial planning related to the cost and difficulties of introducing the technology to the whole organization. This is the stage during which systems change must occur. The organization as a whole must reconsider how work gets done and how the new technology can restructure that work to improve outcomes and processes.

During the fourth stage, the "use" stage, the technology is integrated into the operations of the organization. Everyone has equal access to the technology. They may not have equal competence or interest in its use, but the technology is available. During this stage, administrative systems and direct service systems are altered to use the new technology. The organization has adapted to the new technology and allowed it to affect everyday operations.

The Internet, as an emerging technology, can be expected to have a similar impact on state VR agencies. In many cases, the innovators who first introduced the Internet to VR were consumers who used it as an accommodation for work, social support, and self-advocacy. As the Internet became more known to VR personnel, its acceptance increased rapidly. This was more common among those people who were comfortable with computers, however, and those who used computers less were reluctant to explore the applications of the Internet.

As VR personnel and consumers explored the use of the Internet, they found a tremendous array of resources that previously had been inaccessible. They found information pertaining to specific disabilities, job opportunities, educational programs, support groups, government databases, and more. The specific functions of electronic mail, listservs, chat rooms, and World Wide Web browsing allowed for the rapid and distant collection and exchange of information. This began to move many VR agencies into the "use" stage, where the nature of consumer-counselor, counselor-supervisor, and local office-state office were unalterably changed.

Much of the change in these relationships occurred because the Internet altered how information flowed within, around, and outside the VR agency. While memos and telephone calls allowed the exchange of information, these tended to include only a limited number of people. When more people where involved, meetings, training sessions, and conferences tended to use one-way communication and could not effectively handle its exchange. Information flow between consumers and counselors also tended to be one-way, from counselor to consumer. Those points in the rehabilitation process that were specifically designed for the exchange of information were short-lived. Information flow between VR and other agencies also was severely restricted. Among local agencies, everyone was too busy learning to cope with their own new federal regulations to keep informed about events in other agencies. Local collaboration often perished under case loads, paperwork, meetings, and crises. Distant collaboration was impossible, being restricted to a few national conferences at which people could exchange ideas and anecdotes, only to return home and face the same issues they left.

The Internet gives people more information than they want. Rather than be confronted with too little information about a specific disability, the labor market for a certain job, or the cost of living in a distant community, today’s rehabilitation counselors have at their fingertips far more information than they need (or often care for). As they contemplate this information, the consumers may come with their own plan of where to move and what to do based on their own Internet search. A consumer in Alaska with fibromyalgia may join a listserv and get information from a researcher in Virginia about the best treatment for this condition. The consumer can take that information to his or her local physician and argue for a course of treatment other than what the physician prescribed. A counselor in one state can compare administrative interpretations of the Workforce Investment Act (P.L. 105-220) with counselors in several other states to determine how idiosyncratic their state’s interpretation may be.

In each case the direction of information flow has changed, the number of information channels has increased, the speed of information movement has increased, and the availability of information has exploded. Given a computer, a modem, and an Internet provider, anyone can get information on anything. They may not, however, feel assured of the accuracy of the information they receive. Coping with this—the directional flow, the number of channels, the speed of movement, and the availability of information—will require a dramatic change in managerial practice. Add to that the fact that the Internet has no mechanism to qualify the information that is disseminated, and you have a tremendous challenge over the next several years for VR administrators and counselors.

Recall what it was like being a counselor in the 1970s. Manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM II) were simple and based on minimal research. Most diseases were somewhat understood and their treatments simple. Job placement involved subscribing to the local newspaper. In this environment, counselors did the best they could with minimal information. They were limited in their resources, and this constrained the scope of possibilities they could offer consumers. Like the backyard mechanic, counselors had to fix what they could with the few tools they had. Counselors in rural offices could easily feel isolated with too few resources to address many of their cases.

In the Internet age, the role of the counselor changes dramatically. The counselor’s role changes from that of a channeler of information to a facilitator of information flow. In the 1970s, counselors got what information they could and gave it to consumers. In the Internet age, counselors point out sources of information for consumers to gather themselves. Counselors assist consumers in finding their own information and encourage them to think as broadly as possible about living and career options.

The counselor’s role changes from that of an expert to that of a disability and labor market intermediary. In the 1970s, counselors were their own best resource. They would spend much of their time collecting information to assist consumers. The more they did this, the more they became an expert in providing information to consumers and were the person to whom consumers turned with questions. In the Internet age, all the information consumers need is available to them directly. Counselors need only know where to look and refer consumers to those resources. The locus of expertise shifts from the counselor to the consumer. Disability information, independent living information, and labor market information are things consumers obtain for themselves. Counselors guide, advise, and caution consumers as they pursue their own searches. The counselor’s role changes from that of someone with limited resources to that of someone with overwhelming resources. Did you say you want to move to Santa Fe, New Mexico and seek employment as a self-employed businessperson? Let’s look on the Internet and compare the average salary here with the average salary in Santa Fe. Then, let’s examine the cost of the average home and the other costs of living here and in Santa Fe. We can examine the number of small business operators in that city and the number of small business failures per year. We can examine the labor force, the unemployment rate, and the number of people earning different levels of income. If you like, we can check the quality of the schools, the average commute time, the average weather, and the cost of auto insurance for your car. Do you want to move there? We can get an estimate for moving costs and apartment rental while you look for a house. We can connect you with any professional you may need from real estate agents to physicians. OK, so Santa Fe doesn’t look so good. Let’s look at Wichita, Kansas; Jackson, Mississippi; and Bellingham, Washington. When counselors had few resources, the placements were poorer but the decisions were easier. With the Internet, counselors and consumers have too many choices. Developing an individualized plan of employment could take some time if we want to be thorough.

The counselor’s role changes from that of a person who emphasizes his or her interpersonal skills to someone who emphasizes his or her electronic skills. As the Internet facilitates communication by making it electronic, it also changes communication by removing personal contact. Employer development can be done by traveling to Web pages and communicating through e-mail. Contacts with consumers can be made through e-mail, and services can be provided by referring them to specific home pages on the World Wide Web.

When asked what keeps government from gaining more value from information technologies, the two major factors cited by those directly involved are "lack of long-term leadership" and "lack of funds" (Mechling & Fletcher, 1996). Budgeting is essentially making a distinction between saying "yes" to some proposals and "no" to others. Rehabilitation agencies are strapped for funds, so it isn’t surprising that many information technology (IT) proposals get a "no" and are left unfunded. It is to be expected and is not necessarily errant unless the wrong proposals are not getting funded.

Many believe that there is a systemic bias that makes government unsuccessful at identifying and funding appropriate IT projects. Private corporations have used technologies to improve their organizations due to pressures of a competitive market. The pressures on the public sector evolve around legislative mandates that may call for greater efficiency. These pressures are generally not life-threatening to any public organization; thus, the public sector has fallen behind in using IT to improve efficiency (Mechling & Fletcher, 1996). Government agencies try to improve by playing catch up, but their decisions are often poor, leading to embarrassing failures. Budget overseers then become ever more suspicious of further IT funding requests. IT projects, because they often involve new learning areas for organizations, are seen as risky regardless of their value. Governments tend to avoid risk, and therefore we find an underinvestment in projects that can’t be proven by experience.

Besides systemic bias, government budgeting typically focuses on the next year of spending. Government then tends to overlook multi-year and multi-agency opportunities in funding IT projects. There is also a reluctance to seek alternative funding sources. This results in making the funding of high-value IT projects harder than it should be. In a society based on information, with a public demanding better service, this is a problem.

All is not lost. Jerry Mechling and Victoria Sweeney with the Harvard School of Business offer the following directions for improving IT budgeting in government (Mechling & Sweeney, 1997):

• Better participation. Training those involved in the IT budgeting process and bringing in others who could add value but typically aren’t heavily involved.

• Better portfolios. Defining what IT projects are best and increasing the investments in those areas that add value to the organization.

• Non-tax funding. Finding ways to fund projects that do not rely on the traditional tax levy budget.

Education. Managers generally know what results they are seeking, be it serving more individuals who are severely disabled or making more employer contacts, but they don’t know much about how IT can assist with increasing the results they seek. Executive decision makers need to understand the value IT can add in goal attainment and, likewise, IT managers need to understand agency operations and organizational processes. Without the sharing of this information, IT managers and executive decision makers will lack the ability to work together to target areas where technology can have the greatest impact for the organization.

Strategic planning and performance measurement. Government agencies often neglect to include IT projects in the overall strategic plan. IT projects are seen as separate activities and aren’t included in any of the agency’s performance measures. Agencies need to develop IT projects that are integral to accomplishing the organization’s goals.

Line leadership. IT managers and staff specialists propose and justify most IT projects. Many times these individuals do not understand the overall operational needs of the organization. This is often the purview of the line manager. The line manager should be involved in IT project development and budgeting. This would increase the efficiency of IT endeavors and allow the line manager the opportunity to have a better understanding of IT issues.

Oversight involvement. Executive office holders as well as legislatures rarely participate in any IT budgeting decisions. Some even see this type of participation as problematic. Too many questions. Too much education needed. Ironically, these individuals have the greatest ability to protect investments in IT. Informed allies in the legislature and administration can be a valuable asset to an agency’s technology plan.

Contracting. Contracting routine IT to suppliers may increase IT investments. This would allow IT departments time to focus on strategic concerns that involve others in the organization.

Research and development and learning investments. Government needs to invest in "learning" with technology. Taking a time-out and using a totally new approach utilizing technology may result in new ways of improving processes. This involves a certain amount of risk. Not all approaches are going to be successful, and therefore it may appear as if the agency has wasted valuable resources. These failures, however, can lead to new directions not previously thought to be possible.

Infrastructure investments. Government can benefit from building an IT infrastructure that allows for sharing of data through local and wide-area networks as well as through the Internet. This will require a long-term commitment for updating and maintenance. Investing in the infrastructure will facilitate further innovative investments.

Cross-boundary investments. The push for sharing of information and monies across organizations gives a promising scenario for IT investment. Cross-boundary initiatives can bring organizations together for their shared interest. It can enhance the work processes of collaborating agencies and make government more accessible for citizens and private-sector organizations.

Revolving funds. Relying totally on a tax-based investment process for IT initiatives will certainly leave most organizations with the "short end of the stick." Agencies need to look at other nontraditional funding sources. One such option would be to establish a revolving fund that would be available for agencies to borrow from for their IT proposals. Agencies could repay the fund from cost savings from their projects.

Performance contracts. Performance contracting allows organizations not only to purchase equipment such as computer hardware, but also to document improvements in organizational performance as a result. Vendors are not paid until they’ve achieved the results for which the contract was written.

Dew, P.M., Leigh, C., Drew, R., Morris, D.T. and Curson, J. (1995). Collaborative working systems to support user interaction within a Virtual Science Park. Information Services and Use, 15, pp. 213-228.

Feng, L. (1998). The Virtual Workplace, Team-Telework and the New Geographical Flexibility for Information Workers. University of Strathclyde: Idea Group Publishing.

Hakken, D. (1993). Computing and social change: New technology and workplace transformation, 1980-1990. Annual Review of Anthropology, 22, 107-132.

Howard, A. (1995). A framework for work change. In A. Howard (Ed.), The Changing Nature of Work (pp. 1-44). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Mechling, J., & Fletcher, T. M. (1996). Information Technology in Government: The Need for New Leadership. Boston: Harvard University.

Mechling, J., & Sweeney, V. (1997). Overcoming Budget Barriers: Funding Information Technology Projects in the Public Sector. Boston: Harvard University.

Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Link to Top of Page

Document Links Menu

Table of Contents  -  Introduction  -  Chapter 1  - Chapter 2  - Chapter 3  -  Chapter 4  - Chapter 5 

Glossary - Standards for Ethical Practice of  WebCounseling  - Internet Addresses -  Resources

Computer Literacy Self Survey  - Web Site URLs for Regional RCEPs, CRP-RCEPs and DBTACs

Link here to email  Leon Oehlers, MS, CRC - Region 6 RCEP Webmaster to report broken hyperlinks, new URLs, and/or additional information:  loehlers@rcep6.org

End of Page.