A Sociotechnical Plan: Brain-Computer Interface

 Introduction: A Blackberry Story

In 1984, two engineering students with a passion for innovation founded a software and computer science consulting company known as Research in Motion (RIM) (Choi, 2023). In its early days, RIM was involved with a variety of technology projects in search of a viable market niche. Unbeknownst to RIM, this pivotal moment came in 1989 when a Canadian telecommunication company (i.e., Rogers) contracted RIM to help build a mobile text network explicitly designed for mobile messaging (Adit, 2023). This initial exposure to the mobile communications industry gave RIM a significant competitive edge. Roughly seven years later, in 1996, RIM introduced a groundbreaking two-way pager with an integrated email service; this device was the first to bear the now-iconic “Blackberry” name. Recognizing that digital communication would soon surpass fax, RIM focused its strategy on email capabilities, which became central to success in the business market (Time for Designs, 2023). Combined with its physical novelties, such as the QWERTY keyboard, and unconventional marketing techniques, Blackberry quickly captured a dominant share of the enterprise mobile device market.

Blackberry’s early success is a textbook example of a sociotechnical design as it integrated a transformative device into the social ecosystem and achieved initial success. However, the company’s fall from grace did not come from poor planning or execution, but from innovative competitors that entered the market and a failure to anticipate social norms and adapt quickly enough to this changing environment. As noted by Adit (2023), if “Blackberry had recognized the potential of touch features in smartphones and altered their design by eliminating the physical keyboard,” the company could have capitalized on this shifting trend in an attempt to maintain their mobile dominance. The launch of the iPhone in 2007 represented a paradigm shift in the mobile computing industry that introduced a prominent touchscreen, robust application store, better operating system (OS), greater media capabilities, and much more (Choi, 2023). Suddenly, users wanted faster OSs, touchscreens, integrated applications, and seamless interfaces, which were not at the forefront of BlackBerry’s design. As such, Blackberry underestimated this social transition and continued pushing its design on users (i.e., physical keyboard and sluggish OS) rather than listening to user needs, which, ultimately, led Blackberry to fall behind and never recover.

Sociotechnical Relevance

The Blackberry exemplar is relevant to my sociotechnical plan, which centers on brain-computer interfaces (BCI) as a new modality of communication and control between humans and hardware. Like Blackberry during its dominance, the sociotechnical plan assumes a well-defined social need for such an advanced technology, which is a wireless capability to control devices with neural-linked gizmos for purposes such as medical, accessibility, and potentially leading to productivity enhancements. Take, for example, a recent article showcasing Apple’s new BCI, which allowed a man with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)—a disease that affects the nerve cells controlling voluntary motor functions—to control an iPad using his brain signals (Salman, 2025) however, as we have learned with Blackberry, a revolutionary technology today could be obsolete tomorrow. As advancements continue, the sociotechnical environment may shift unexpectedly due to external forces beyond the innovator’s control. This signaling shift could show itself in various ways, such as a mass transformation in social ethics or an innovation that challenges the initial design and social acceptance of BCIs. Taking a lesson from BlackBerry’s history book, anticipating these sociotechnical shifts can serve as a technological safeguard against premature obsolescence.

Forces of Impacting Brain-Computer Interfaces

Two forces, though not inclusive, shape the BCI industry: technical limitations and ethical considerations. Technically, BCIs face persistent challenges such as neural signal variability, frequent decoder training due to neural plasticity or electrode micromovements, and the complexity of acquiring accurate, high-resolution brain data, which is especially difficult in non-invasive applications (Maiseli et al., 2023). These concerns of data reliability, device convenience, and user adoption could hinder the social acceptance of these devices. Furthermore, invasive BCI types introduce additional safety concerns, such as the risk of infection, tissue damage, and biocompatibility issues, where the body could reject a foreign device. Ethically, BCIs raise profound questions about cognitive privacy, informed consent, data ownership, and device security. The lack of standardized BCI regulations has allowed some BCI applications to access and process sensitive brain signals without clear user awareness or control, signaling significant concerns with privacy and possibly user autonomy (Maiseli et al., 2023). Without advanced encryption, access protocols, as well as regulatory and ethical oversight, these systems risk breaching personal mental data or becoming targets of cyberattacks. The public concern over security, privacy, and accountability could influence regulatory policy and social trust, which will undoubtedly have a significant impact on defining how, and whether, BCI technology can be integrated into society.

Summary

The use of the Blackberry case study as a sociotechnical exemplar is to draw lessons for the development of BCIs by examining Blackberry’s early success in its innovative and socially accepted product, while also examining its failure to adapt to the shifting social trends and expectations. Similarly, BCIs showcase promising medical, accessibility, and productivity applications, but face external forces that could hinder their adoption. The technical forces challenging BCIs originate from factors such as signal variability and device risks, which affect usability, reliability, and acceptance. These forces give way to the ethical concerns about privacy, security, and transparency, which become increasingly important as technology becomes more deeply embedded in cognition and other biological functions. As with Blackberry, failing to anticipate social and technological shifts could render groundbreaking technologies obsolete. This, in turn, emphasizes that BCIs must not only remain technologically and ethically grounded but also adaptable to the evolving social landscape.

 

References

Adit, S. (2023, April 27). The importance of evolving product design: A case study of blackberry's rise and fall. Retrieved August 06, 2025, from www.medium.com: https://medium.com/design-bootcamp/the-importance-of-evolving-product-design-a-case-study-of-blackberrys-rise-and-fall-5c21ceaf395a

Choi, A. (2023, March 26). Case study: The demise of blackberry. Retrieved August 06, 2025, from www.alfredchoi.ca: https://www.alfredchoi.ca/blog/case-study-the-demise-of-blackberry

Maiseli, B., Abdalla, A. T., Massawe, L. V., Mbise, M., Mkocha, K., Nassor, N. A., . . . Kimambo, S. (2023). Brain-computer interface: Trend, challenges, and threats. Brain Informatics, 10(1). doi:10.1186/s40708-023-00199-3

Salman, A. (2025, August 06). Apple's brain-computer interface lets man with als control an ipad using only his thoughts in groundbreaking accessibility and neural technology breakthrough. Retrieved August 06, 2025, from www.wccftech.com: https://wccftech.com/apple-brain-computer-interface-man-controls-ipad-using-thoughts/

Time for Designs. (2023, October 10). The fall of blackberry: How ignoring innovation led to decline. Retrieved August 06, 2025, from www.timefordesigns.com: https://www.timefordesigns.com/blog/2023/10/10/the-fall-of-blackberry-how-ignoring-innovation-led-to-decline/