Reflections on the impact of social technologies on lecturers in a pathway institution

Education has evolved over time from face-to-face teaching to computer-supported learning, and now to even more sophisticated electronic tools. In particular, social technologies are being used to supple- ment the classroom experience and to ensure that students are becoming increasingly engaged in ways that appeal to them. No matter how educationally beneficial, however, new technology is affected by its users. To investigate this, lecturers at the Eynesbury Institute of Business and Technology (EIBT)—a Higher Education pathway provider—were surveyed to determine their perception and application of social technolog(ies) in their personal, but predominantly ‘professional’ lives. Utilising a qualitative and autoethnographic approach, one author provides an insight into their own attitude toward social technologies, coupled with responses to three open-ended questions. Thereafter, the same questions were posed to EIBT academic staff to understand their willingness or reluctance to use social technologies in their practice as part of their first-year pathway course(s)

IT Managers’ Narratives on Subordinates’ Motivation at Work

Little is known about managers’ perception of their subordinates’ motivation, especially how this perception influences managerial behavior. This study, conducted in the growing IT consultancy sector, focuses on how IT consultancy first-line managers construct their subordinates’ motivation. Since work motivation is a complex phenomenon, there is variation in how managers reduce this complexity. The empirical data was collected in semi-structured interviews with six team leaders (three female, three male) and are presented as narratives. In their narratives, the female team leaders present a more transformative view of their subordinates while the male managers present a more transactional view. The authors interpret this variation in the narrations as evidence that the issue of subordinate motivation is not seen as strategically important. This interpretation cast doubts on certain assumptions in organizational psychology theory