Innovation and knowledge creation in the integration of technological, organizational and human systems

This paper explores the thinking that since a production system consists of technical components, information, materials and humans, then by looking at the design and creativity in the work activities of mining firms, spaces for innovation and knowledge-creation can be identified that can result in a holistic perspectives on the operation, maintenance, engineering and control of components of the system, that is, mine of the future (Abrahamsson & Johansson, 2008). This is because world's metal mining industry is currently challenged with the prevailing thinking that by replacing humans with machines at all levels in the value chain, a rapid increase of automation and integration of various processes and unit operations can occur, and which by implication can enhance the firm becoming economic viable and competitive. The main objective of this study is to develop the requisite knowledge that allows for the instilling of open collaboration between functions and new communication models in the workforce through the widespread use of social networking technologies in the production systems that will make cross value chain optimisation a reality. Analysis of contradictions (Engestrom, 2001) is used to identify the key systemic components of the organization's activity systems for which possible conflicts and troubles can emerge in the technological, organizational and human systems integration processes. In this analysis, the objective for the integration process is appraised against the emerged objectives of actors who carry out the required practices. In this appraisal, methods for creating awareness and insight in an organizational resistance (Abrahamsson, 2009) are used to stimulate creativity and innovativeness in the companies' organizational processes. Two levels of activity (i.e. object-oriented and subject-oriented) are analysed by considering who is engaged in that activity, what their intentions, goals and motives are, and what type of activity they are involved in. Object-oriented activity is analysed from the perspective of a subject using tools on a material object, where the subject of activity is the individual or group of individuals engaged in that activity. Subject-oriented activity (i.e. social interaction) is analysed from the perspective of two or more subjects involvement in an activity constituted through information exchange, personal interactions and mutual understanding. Thus in the analysis of object-oriented activity, inter-subjective relationships are considered, since the object-oriented and subject-oriented aspects of activity continuously transform into one another during task performance (Bedny & Karwowski, 2004). It is argued that by taking a holistic view of the system's functions, production systems can be designed to create harmony between the technical and the social system. It is argued that such design system cannot be conceived as adaptable to humans, but rather to regard humans as resources and/or possibilities of designing better systems (intelligent automation). The understanding here being that a production system must be seen to consists of humans/people and technology (i.e. it must be seen to consist of production processes, infrastructure and flows of digital signals, information, material, energy, products as well as human work and learning). It is therefore concluded that a holistic knowledge (i.e. design) of intelligent production systems entailing the integration between technical, organizational and human systems, as well as deep specialized knowledge in each area can be developed and implemented. The base of such design should also be the acquisition by industries of new mental images of their personal-selves based on new technologies and modern work organizations that support both high productivity and good working conditions. References 1. Abrahamsson, L. (2009). Some short texts on mining, production systems and human work science ... Working Paper. Dept. of Human Work Sciences, LTU.2. Abrahamsson, L. & Johansson, J. (2008). Future Mining - Workers' Skills, Identity and Gender When Meeting Changing Technology. Proceedings, First International Future Mining Conference Sydney, NSW, 19 - 21 November 2008: p 213 - 220.3. Bedny, G. Z., & Karwowski, W. (2004). Activity theory as a basis for the study of work, Ergonomics, 47(2), 134-153.4. Engestrom, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133-156.5. Jarzabkowski, P. (2003). Strategy as social practice: An activity theory perspective on continuity and change. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 23-55.