Article Review on transformations that technology in the workplaces

Article review

This article revolves around the transformations that technology has introduced at workplaces and in businesses in terms of the way people communicate. The article claims that people no longer need to meet face to face with one another to transact businesses or communicate, but they only need to use technology to communicate and do business with one another. The main points centers around working at home with mobile devices, closer collaborations and unified communications (Burg, 2013).

The writer’s aim of writing this article is to show how technology enhances communication at workplaces and in businesses, and the way it transforms communication in these areas. In this respect, the writer uses different styles to propagate this aim.

Though the article contains authoritative and influential information about the way technology has transformed communication at workplaces, the article does not appear to have used credible sources as its references (Brooks-Young, 2002). This is irrespective of the fact that the article appears to have referred to some authoritative people and companies such as McKinsey in supporting its claims. With regard to this aspect, the article appears to have relied heavily on the author’s opinion together with the few people and companies cited in the article. At the same time, the article does not contain a reference list at the end to support its data even though it provides links to the companies cited in the article. Therefore, this aspect makes the article less authoritative in demonstrating how technology has transformed communication at workplaces. In order to make this article credible, the author should have included a reference list at the end of the article. At the same time, the author should have referred to the said references while preparing the article. Furthermore, the author should have relied on credible sources such as journals and books in preparing the article (Jonge, Scherer, & Rodger, 2006). This would have enhanced the credibility of the article. However, failing to do either of the above makes the article less credible.

Despite the fact that the author does not rely on credible sources in preparing the article, the author seems to have used different styles to put across his points and support them. First, the author appears to have divided the article in different parts that aim at supporting certain claims. In this case, the author uses subheadings that are informative and specific to the point, and upon using these subheadings, the author then goes ahead to support his claims effectively using these subheadings. Second, the author seems to have identified and relied on one unique person that is authoritative to his opinion. The said person is Puskar, and though the author does not show why this person would be a credible reference person, the author relies heavily on him to prove his points (Burg, 2013). My reaction to this article is that though it appears to contain credible information concerning the transformation of technology in communication processes, the article fails to support its arguments with credible sources. For this reason, even though the article appears to contain information, I am not persuaded that this information is factual in any way. This means that I cannot rely on the information published on this article even if I acknowledge its claim to be somewhat truthful.

With respect to my reaction to the information contained in the article, my concluding comment would be that the author of this article should use credible sources in preparing this article and show that he has relied on them (Anandarajan, Simmers, & Teo, 2006). Once the author incorporates credible sources in the article, I would be convinced that the information contained in this article is credible rather than opinionated.

References

Anandarajan, M., Simmers, C., & Teo, T. (2006). The Internet and workplace transformation. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe.

Brooks-Young, S. (2002). Making technology standards work for you: A guide for school administrators. Eugene, Or: International Society for Technology in Education.

Burg, N. (2013). How technology has changed workplace communication. Viewed 1 September 2014 < http://www.forbes.com/sites/unify/2013/12/10/how-technology-has-changed-workplace-communication/>

Jonge, D., Scherer, M., & Rodger, S. (2006). Assistive technology in the workplace. Elsevier: Mosby.