The last two decades of the 20th century were characterized by the extensive development of technical-electronic knowledge that had been brewing since the Second World War and which opened the way to all the technological deployment that even today surprises the most closely related to the subject.
Computers have taken over almost the entire contemporary world and today it is almost impossible to imagine everyday life without their presence, moreover, they have become so indispensable that their presence is sometimes inadvertent.
But technology, in reality, is less than it appears, because even with the sophistication of its components and the enormous scope it has, it requires the intervention of man, his decision and criteria to operate.
Without the intention of generating a technical discussion of the subject, it is important to point out that it is precisely when man and machine are combined that the presence of an instrument or tool is necessarily made that allows the optimal use of its benefits without falling into an illusory technocratic state.
For this, it is necessary to remember that in the late eighties and early nineties, at the height of this large-scale technological development, a tool emerged that questioned the administration of the moment and proposed radical changes that would transform organizations into entities worthy of electronic evolution, that tool is known as reengineering.
Reengineering represents a total change in the business conception, from the way of observing the process to the way of conceiving the result, in general terms it seemed the panacea of the end of the century, as it allowed organizations to take on the challenge of rethinking themselves. conscientious and responsible.
One of the most common characteristics of the companies that ventured to use reengineering to adjust to the new times was the acquisition of the latest technology offered by the market, assuming and expecting savings in time, costs and personnel.
Statistics showed that most of the companies that took on the challenge of radically changing their processes, rethinking their structure, functions and orientation, in addition to having invested huge sums of money to achieve it in technology and consulting firms, failed in their attempt. But how was it possible? Wasn't reengineering a good management tool? And if it was, why did the majority not achieve the expected success? Where was the fault?
When organizations decide to make important changes in their structure, functions and processes, they must do so in a cascade, first those who run it must understand and accept the change as a fact and then transmit that belief to their subordinates, but that is not where find the answer, it is possible to find it only in two simple and commonly forgotten facts: the common culture and the need to manage it.
Most of the companies that failed in the implementation of technology as part of their radical change seem to have forgotten the impact that this has on personnel and the need of the individual to know, understand and internalize the very importance of their presence, for Therefore, it was not simply a matter of implementing a new way of managing and observing the business, but of effectively managing that new vision, which is a fundamental part of the concept that the word Cyber management contains.
Cyber management is the action of efficiently and effectively administering, directing and controlling technological knowledge and its impact on organizational life. Its presence in companies cannot be considered a passing fad, since it is a permanent tool that must be part of the profile of those who direct the destiny of an organization.
Cyber management combines the administration and transfer of knowledge with the rational and optimal use of technology, not with the intention of moving man through the machine, but with the purpose of guiding their performance to the efficient use of it, in order to save costs and increase profits.
This management tool assumes as a challenge the need to train, train and develop the individual in what refers to technology, not from the basic concept of using the machine for purely operational purposes, because if it were so, its existence would be meaningless. It refers to the visualization of the use of technology as a strategic instrument.
When reengineering was used as a tool for change, a fear of being displaced with technology was instilled in the human resource, which was later corroborated by many when observing the results of the change and with it the loss of their jobs. The foregoing is not intended to assume that organizations were required to sustain an unnecessary workload once their processes were reoriented and their technology updated; It refers precisely to the lack of connection between the individual and the changing environment of the era and the importance of managing technology in day-to-day work, this as a consequence of the absence of programs and development plans that some companies they still present today and do not alter in a positive and significant way the technological culture of the organization.
The technology is still, in most cases, underutilized by the organizations that acquire it, limiting its use to word processors, digital presentations and, in some cases, spreadsheets. The presence of internal email, although widely disseminated, is not necessarily used by all the entities involved and the use of tools such as the Internet are hardly aimed at adding value to daily management, however, it is common to observe how those who have these facilities techniques flaunt them even when their utility is barely appreciated.
Although it could be pointed out that only companies that require and are in permanent contact with technology should make use of it in a more administrative way than others, such a statement would serve to demonstrate the lack of technological management based on management's own principles. contemporary.
Cyber management assumes the vision of technology as a complementary piece of administrative performance and not as a linear and operational means to record and store results, otherwise the primary concept of punch cards from former computers would be translated into electronic use of the disk, understanding the computer as the action that originated its name and not as the tool it has become.
Some companies still spend large sums of money moving monthly and even biweekly to their managers or directors for meetings whose purpose is to update or offer new guidelines, all without realizing the savings that the use of teleconferences and simultaneous data transmission would generate. This is a simple example of the strategic performance of the cyber manager, locating technological investment options that translate into the reduction of those costs that the organization assumes as common.
Cyber management has the following characteristics:
- Consider the use of technology as a complement to human talent. It involves the individual with the conscious use of technology to facilitate their processes and those of the company. It is present in companies whose culture is oriented to innovation. It does not restrict the use of technology, it promotes it. It encourages the creative thinking of human capital in the search to improve processes through technology. It promotes investment based on decreasing costs and increasing profits. It requires the collective use of the technological devices available in the company. Facilitates the transfer of knowledge.
Assimilating technology is not an easy task, in most cases it only ends up being accepted as a requirement, something that knowing strictly the basics is enough to face a minimum of challenges in contemporary companies. Today it is known that this is not enough, it must be managed, and a tool such as Cybergerencia offers the alternatives to face it successfully. Whoever does not manage technology is only under the illusion of technological advancement, without a doubt has not achieved it.
