TRUST AND IDENTITY IN SOCIO TECHNICAL GAP Essay Example

period is besides characterized by rapid information exchanges ; thereby, redefining the function of information, doing it cardinal and critical in administrations and in about all modern-day human interactions ( Calder & A ; Watkins, 2008 ) . As such, this period is known non merely as the epoch of globalization where trade barriers among and between states have been minimised if non wholly removed but it is besides considered as the epoch of information ( Calder & A ; Watkins, 2008 ) . One of the most of import factors that contributed to the rapid exchanges of information is the fast stage promotions in computing machine engineering ( Purser, 2004 ) . Computer has reinvented itself in such a manner that computing machine systems progress `` from hardware in the 1950s and 1960s, to commercial information processors in the 1970s, to personal computing machines in the 1980s, to computing machines as communicating tools in the 1990s. At each phase, system public presentation increased '' ( Whitworth, 2006:533 ) . In consequence, `` Each decennary computer science has reinvented itself, traveling from hardware to package, from package to HCI, and now from HCI to societal computer science '' ( Whitworth, 2009: 394 ) . Furthermore, as computing machine engineering continues to develop, its constructions and models have progressively become the arena wherein societal interactions and connexions between people transpire. Hence, the interrelatedness and interconnectedness between human existences and computing machine engineering has become one of the aboriginal properties of the human status of the modern-day period. This phenomenon is known as socio-technical system.

The term socio-technical system was coined out from the plants of Eric Trist

and Fred Emery of the Tavistock Institute, London ( Stranks, 2007 ) . It was the consequence of the `` 1950 's fabrication instances where the demands of engineering confronted those of local communities '' ( Whitworth, 2009: 394 ) . As such, the term is chiefly understood in organisational constructions as `` an attack to complex organizational work design that recognizes the interaction between people and engineering in workplaces. The term besides refers to the interaction between society 's complex substructures and human behavior. Within this construct, society itself and most of its infrastructures, are complex socio-technical systems '' ( Stranks, 2007:100 ) . Furthermore, the whole construct is based on a general systems theory, which supports the impression that each portion is built-in and independent yet at the same clip interdependent in stead of their common interactions. Furthermore, the system is non reduced to its parts or the parts into the whole system. Rather it seeks to turn to and understand any fluctuations or concerns that arise from the common interactions of the parts. ( Whitworth, 2009 ) . However, one of import duality manifests itself as socio-technical system permeates the life of the society - the socio-technical spread.

The socio-technical spread is the looking incongruence between what society wants and demands and what computing machine engineering offers ( Whitworth, 2009 ) . This happens because most computing machine engineerings develop without clear parametric quantities of the societal wants or the logic and history of the society ( Whitworth, 2006 ; 2009 ) . In this respect, the human dimension is trivialised as the proficient systems become more dominant, thereby, heightening and widening the

spread between the two ( Kling & A ; Star, 1998 ; Whitworth, 2006 ) . In this sense, if the modern-day human status is characterised by the interconnectedness and continued interrelatedness between human-social dimension on one-hand and computing machine technological promotions on the other, so there is a necessity to clear up and clarify the job sing socio-technical spread in footings of some of its aspects -trust and individuality.

The conceptual elucidation of these constructs is indispensable non merely because it is critical in the apprehension of the modern-day human status. Besides because, current socio-technical systems built on cyber infinite opens new signifiers of human dealingss and menaces to these dealingss. This becomes more important as browsers are `` going the cosmopolitan platform on which terminal users launch information hunts, electronic mail, multimedia file transportation, treatment groups, and many other Internet, intranet, and extranet applications. Their online usage seems likely to increase, as such minutess become even more platitude '' ( Mihanda & A ; Whitworth, 2005: 370 ) . In this respect, this subject involves all the stakeholders of this issue and that it is an of import affair of concern because of the continued increasing figure of computing machine users worldwide and of the unabated fast stage promotions in computing machine engineering. Likewise, turn toing and understanding the world of the spread opens the possibility of the human dimension no longer trivialized and the technical/technological dimension no longer perceived as being removed and isolated from physical world.

The undermentioned subdivision of the paper will be covering with the literature reappraisal of the issue.

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Human Society: A GENERAL PERSPECTIVE

Since the ancient period, understanding the

beginning, basicss, and kineticss of the society has pegged the involvements of minds ( e.g. The Republic ) . In fact, until now, there is an ceaseless attempt in seeking to put the down rules and guidelines that will enable human existences to cognize and derive a clearer perceptual experience of the society where they belong ( Babb, 2002 ) . In most discourses pertinent to society, there are four basic rules that serve as the foundation in minimizing it. These are foremost, the prevailing premise sing human nature and bureau ( Gardner, 1999 ) . This presupposes an premise pertinent to human nature. It accepts as a truism the impression that human existences are embodied, rational existences who are capable of doing determinations, understanding the context or status that they find themselves and at the same clip capable of moving on the determination that they have come up with ( Gardner, 1999 ; Ricoeur, 1992 ) . This presupposition is normally perceived as inherent in human nature ( Gardner, 1999 ) . Furthermore, this property is claimed to be present in each single individual who have existed, is bing and is to be. The 2nd premise is the presence of other human existences who portion and posses the same human nature ( Ricoeur, 1992 ) . The 3rd is the world of the human universe, which refers non merely to the universe that is created by the human custodies but besides to the physical world that defines and redefines human nature and human status ( Merleau-Ponty, 1962 ) . The 4th presupposition is the presence of establishments that helps modulate human interactions in order

to keep and prolong peace and order in the society ( Ricoeur, 1992 ) .

Fig 1

WORLD WORLD

HUMAN EXPERIENCE

I OTHERS

Institution

SAME HUMAN

Nature

IDENTITY KNOWLEDGE

WORLD WORLD

Figure 1 shows in a really simplistic mode the intricate relation nowadays in the society. The single human individual has an interpersonal relationship with other human existences and a relation with establishments that society itself has created in order to keep peace and order. In add-on, the universe serves as the fertile land with which all these dealingss are connected and interacted. Therefore, supplying humanity with human experience, cognition and a solid foundation with which one can specify one 's individuality. In this respect, individuality is non merely the name. Rather, it becomes a separating property of the individual, as the single individual attempts assert his/her ego in the thick legion differentiated individuals within the societal domain. This impression becomes more important as the dealingss set up by the person, whether with other human existences or establishments, is grounded on the outstanding rule of trust, which assumes that others will non deliberately harm the individual but will in fact act and seek for the attainment of the common good ( Abdul-Rahman & A ; Hailes, 2000 ) .

Trust is a societal phenomenon ( Abdul-Rahman & A ; Hailes, 2000 ) wherein `` swearing a individual means believing that when offered the opportunity, he or she is non likely to act in a manner that is damaging to us, and trust will typically be relevant when at least one party is free to let down the other, free plenty to avoid a hazardous relationship, and constrained plenty to see that relationship an attractive option. In

short, trust is implicated in most human experience, if of class to widely different grades '' ( Gambetta, 2000, p 219 ) . Furthermore, there are different grades and degrees trust. These are: 1. the interpersonal trust which is the sort of trust that you with your household, friends and relatives.2. The system trust is trust that one gives to establishments or societal systems. And 3. the last sort of trust is dispositional trust which is the basic trust that 1 has towards other that the others will non deliberately harm the individual but will seek and move towards the common good ( Abdul-Rahman & A ; Hailes, 2000 ) . And how does swear and individuality relates with one another in the societal domain?

Fig 2

Figure 2 shows the complex relation that bing among individuality, trust and society. Identity is necessary as one presents one 's ego in the society, trust becomes necessary since in the presence of others `` we normally expect or

believe that they will follow with our outlooks, 'be just, honest, and sensible in their traffics with us ' ( Solomon and Flores, 2001 as cited in Khodyakov, 2007, p 121 ) . However, in the modern-day period, human interaction is no longer merely transpirating within the socio-physical kingdom. Human interactions are besides go oning in practical communities in the practical world.

2.2. VIRTUAL COMMUNITY: A New PLATFORM FOR TRUST AND

Identity

E-society is a modern-day development ensuing from the fast stage promotions in computing machine engineering and the desire to do easy entree to necessary services. E-society is a wide-range `` applications from e-government, e-democracy, and e-business to e-learning and e-health '' ( Magoulas,

Lepouras & A ; Vassilakis, 2006, p 1 ) , all of which are being transacted in the digital sphere. This is made possible since the underlying rule that supports the construction of e-society in the practical universe and the practical universe itself is the calculating substructure. Calculating substructure covers both the hardware engineerings every bit good as the package and communicating mediums ( Brooke et al, 2004 ) . Furthermore, this is an of import development chiefly because the system is designed in order to ease human- human interactions. In consequence, `` practical societies can be developed from: 1.Immersive universes with embodiments, e.g. , multiuser keeps ( MUDs ) , first individual taws. 2. Information exchange systems, e.g. , peer-to-peer ( P2P ) , computing machine supported concerted work ( CSCW ) , chat suites, and hunt engines such as Google. 3. Monetary exchange, e.g. , auction houses such as Ebay, bartering systems ( recognition brotherhoods and on-line classifieds listings ) , or PayPal. These can be subsumed within the old class if money is taken to be merely another sort of information. 4. Shared executing environments ( runing systems ) ; and, on a wider graduated table, Grid calculating '' ( Brooke et al, 2004, p 4 ) . In this respect, if in the practical universe human-to-human interaction is really go oning so namelessness, unfairness, rip offing and misgiving should be avoided as these behaviors contribute to the prostration of the interaction and a certain degree of trust should be encouraged in order to ease cooperation ( Gambetta, 2000 ) . However, how can swear be established in the practical universe?

Establishing trust

in the practical universe depends on the system. What does this mean? Brooke ( 2004 ) highlights the importance of embodiments as a point for individualization and designation in on-line games since they serve as practical individualities. However, he besides claims that there is a looking job with this context of individuality since a individual human individual may command several embodiments therefore `` holding a individual ( existent ) physical individuality, but multiple practical individualities '' ( Brooke, 2004, p 6 ) is allowed in the practical universe. In the physical universe, nevertheless, holding multiple individualities is mark of psychological unwellness or if deliberately done fraudulence. This consequences in the fluidness of individuality. It becomes dependent on the context and system ( Brooke, 2004 ) . As such, though individuality is critical in the physical and societal kingdom, practical universes with practical individualities, is no longer indispensable in set uping trust. However, he claims that repute is indispensable since it determines whether participants will go on playing with another gamer that has a repute of being a darnel or a client covering with a known cyberspace agent who does non present.

On the other manus, Cheung & A ; Lee ( 2000 ) in a survey conducted sing trust in cyberspace shopping claim that trust in the seller is the consequence of the combination of the repute of the seller in footings of protecting and procuring the information of the client and unity of the seller in the practical universe. In the same mode, the external environment, which refers to third party acknowledgment and the legal model of the physical and societal domains, increases the assurance

of the vendee counterpart perceived hazard. This manifest the world that the repute and unity of the seller is more of import compared with the impression of individuality in the practical universe. Abdul -Rahman & A ; Hailes ( 2000 ) , similarly, have conducted a survey sing trust in practical communities. Although they have limited their treatment on interpersonal trust, they have come up a trust theoretical account with which they have concluded that experience and repute are the primary factors that will set up and heighten trust in the practical universe.

FIG 3

This figure shows that trust in practical universe technically ask a good repute, which is attained base how one has interacted with others in practical universe or communities. Identity is non as an of import factor in the practical universe as it is in the socio-physical universe because individuality in the practical universe does non needfully imply individual individualization. Rather, the digital sphere allows multiple individualities by a individual user, which deconstructs the socio-physical apprehension of individuality.

In this sense, although the factors that contribute to the constitution of trust is different in the practical universe compared with that of the socio-physical universe, what is discernible is the fact that set uping trust in the practical universe is still every bit necessary as it is in the socio -physical universe for `` if we are non prepared to bank on trust, so the options in many instances will be so drastic, painful, and perchance immoral that they can ne'er be lightly entertained. Bing incorrect is an inevitable portion of the bet, of the acquisition procedure strung between success and letdown, where merely if

we are prepared to digest the latter can we trust to bask the former. Asking excessively small of trust is

merely as ailment advised as inquiring excessively much '' ( Gambetta, 2000, p 235 ) .

2.3. SOCIO-TECNICAL GAP: Trust AND IDENTITY

Human interactions irrespective whether it transpires in the socio-physical domain or in practical universe, necessitate the creative activity of the sphere where trust between and among the members of the society can turn and further. This is indispensable since trust underlies all human societal interaction, as such, critical in the flourishing of human interaction ( Khodyakov, 2007 ) . Whether it is thick trust, the trust that is given when one enters into interpersonal relationship or weak trust the sort of trust given to establishments or other individuals, swearing others that they will non deliberately seek to harm and destruct you but are willing to come in into a collaborative action with you in order to farther good is more frequently than non good to the agent instead than detrimental.

Trusting calculating substructure that it will go more human centred and antiphonal to the socio-physical demands of the society opens the possibility of promoting applied scientists to develop engineering that is non merely rooted in the research labs but is anchored on societal demands ( Whitworth, 2006 ; 2009 ) . This is non a unsighted spring of religion, but it is a trust anchored on experiences and current necessity of societal development ( Khodyakov, 2007 ) . This is claimed based on the premiss that if computing machine technological promotions are built-in portion of the socio-physical human status, it is but necessary that society trust it,

accepts it and concepts and deconstructs it in such a manner that it affirms human bureau and it progressively becomes human centred ( Kling & A ; Star, 1998 ) . Technical systems on the other manus, if it seeks to prosecute continued growing, so it must fulfill and be antiphonal to societal demands. For merely in this manner that a symbiotic relation built on trust can be established between society and engineering. And, therefore easy bridge the spread. There is no manner and no sense in perpetuating the socio-technical spread for such an act is damaging both to the society and to engineering ( Kling & A ; Star, 1998 ; Whitworth, 2006 ; 2009 ; Brooke, 2004 ) . This place is claimed even if trust in the socio-physical universe and trust in the practical world may necessitate different factors for its constitution ( Abdul-Rahman & A ; Hailes, 2000 ; Cheung & A ; Lee, 2000 ; Brooke, 2004 )

In the terminal, the undermentioned points are raised.

Trust is indispensable irrespective whether human-to-human dealing transpires in the socio-physical universe or in the practical universe.

The necessity of individuality depends on the system that uses it.

Trust in the socio-physical universe necessitates individuality while trust established in the practical universe necessitates repute and does non see individuality as next-to-last factor.

Trust is necessary in bridging the socio-technical spread.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Trust as a societal phenomenon is complex and has continued to incur the involvements of minds since the ancient period. In the modern-day period, alterations in the human status has been important in such a manner that society is no longer confined within the parametric quantities of the

societal and the physical kingdom, but that the world of practical universe is a fact. In this respect, practical universe or practical society opens to humanity the opportunity to see falsifying from one dimension to another. However, this state of affairs is non without concerns. As there is the continued addition in computing machine users and developments in calculating engineering remains fast, the socio-technical spread widens. This spread is the consequence of engineering neglecting to run into societal demands. This is a immense concern since calculating substructures have become the sphere for human-to-human interactions, as such, it becomes a locale of societal interaction. In this respect, calculating engineerings should develop substructure that will do it more human centred and more cognizant of the demands of the society. A continued denial of the interrelated and intertwined relation between society and engineering is damaging non merely to society or to engineering but to the full humanity. Being such, the first measure that must be undertaken is to bridge the spread with trust.

Trust, though broad in range and composite in itself, allows society and engineering to run into in such a manner that the societal becomes proficient and the proficient becomes societal. This means that society will larn to swear engineering in such a manner it sees it as a good spouse in the chase of the good human life. While, engineering on the other manus, will see society as the solid and concrete background from where the benefits and goods of all developments should come from and redound. In this respect, any differences in the elements of trust should non be seen as a hinderance but as

an intrinsic difference, that highlights the differentiation between a practical society and society.

As such, the research worker impugns that in the following five old ages ; there will be an addition in an addition in computing machine engineering that is more antiphonal to human and societal demands. This will go on as teh symbiotic relation between society and engineering becomes more entrenched. Furthermore, as calculating engineering continues to progress, the demand to come up with regulations that are aware of the 1000s of old ages of human history and tradition will go a challenge. Furthermore, the demand for development of human-centered system will increase non merely in footings of organizational demands but besides in footings of bridging the spread between the rich and the hapless. Finally, the spread between society and engineering will easy contract as socio-technical systems consciously address concerns pertinent to socio-technical spread. ( 3500 WORDS )