Editing Sociotechnical system (section)

===Responsible autonomy===
Sociotechnical theory was pioneering for its shift in emphasis, a shift towards considering teams or groups as the primary unit of analysis and not the individual.  Sociotechnical theory pays particular attention to internal supervision and leadership at the level of the "group" and refers to it as "responsible autonomy".<ref name="Trist & Bamforth 1951"/> The overriding point seems to be that having the simple ability of individual team members being able to perform their function is not the only predictor of group effectiveness.  There are a range of issues in team cohesion research, for example, that are answered by having the regulation and leadership internal to a group or team.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Siebold |first1=Guy L. |title=The Evolution of the Measurement of Cohesion |journal=Military Psychology |date=January 1999 |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=5–26 |doi=10.1207/s15327876mp1101_2 }}</ref>

These, and other factors, play an integral and parallel role in ensuring successful teamwork which sociotechnical theory exploits.
The idea of semi-autonomous groups conveys a number of further advantages.  Not least among these, especially in hazardous environments, is the often felt need on the part of people in the organisation for a role in a small primary group.  It is argued that such a need arises in cases where the means for effective communication are often somewhat limited.  As Carvalho states, this is because "...operators use verbal exchanges to produce continuous, redundant and recursive interactions to successfully construct and maintain individual and mutual awareness...".<ref>{{cite journal |last1=De Carvalho |first1=Paulo V.R. |title=Ergonomic field studies in a nuclear power plant control room |journal=Progress in Nuclear Energy |date=January 2006 |volume=48 |issue=1 |pages=51–69 |doi=10.1016/j.pnucene.2005.04.001 |bibcode=2006PNuE...48...51D }}</ref> The immediacy and proximity of trusted team members makes it possible for this to occur. The [[coevolution]] of technology and organizations brings with it an expanding array of new possibilities for novel interaction.  Responsible autonomy could become more distributed along with the team(s) themselves.

The key to responsible autonomy seems to be to design an organization possessing the characteristics of small groups whilst preventing the "silo-thinking" and "stovepipe" neologisms of contemporary management theory.  In order to preserve "...intact the loyalties on which the small group [depend]...the system as a whole [needs to contain] its bad in a way that [does] not destroy its good".<ref name="Trist & Bamforth 1951"/> In practice,<ref>A. Rice (1958). ''Productivity and social organisation: The Ahmedabad experiment''.  London: Tavistock.{{page needed|date=October 2020}}</ref> this requires groups to be responsible for their own internal regulation and supervision, with the primary task of relating the group to the wider system falling explicitly to a group leader.  This principle, therefore, describes a strategy for removing more traditional command hierarchies.