Krahn and Lowe, Work, Industry and Canadian Society:
Krahn and Lowe, Work, Industry and Canadian Society:
Lowe and Krahn (eds.), Work in Canada: Readings in the Sociology of Work and Industry:
This is the background for the reading in this Section. Notice that the basis for Weber's theory rests on assumptions about efficiency, authority, and rational-legal values. But these were just that -- assumptions -- and actual experiences within bureaucracies reveal a multitude of inefficiencies, challenges to authority from subordinates, and competing definitions of what is rational for whom. This is not to argue that, in principle, bureaucracy provided no improvements over traditional methods of organizing work.
Indeed, you probably can think of some good examples today of the advantages of bureaucracy rules and regulations. The criminal justice system comes to mind in this regard. While most Canadians would agree that criminal law is necessary to preserve social order, the actions of various workers -- police, lawyers, judges, correctional officers, prisoners, social workers, parole officers -- have their own interpretation of this goal. Each of these groups has their own definitions of how the system should operate, the importance of their role in it, what is "rational", who should have authority to make certain decisions, and so on. The three examples on page 190 of the textbook, from research by Merton, Blau, and Gouldner, make the same point. Another graphic expression of the disadvantages of bureaucracy is the military image invoked by Reich, in his quote on page 192, which draws attention to bureaucracy's oppressive regulations and expectations of conformity. Weber, and the managers who created the military-like structures described by Reich, overlooked the most crucial ingredient of any workplace -- people. As we will see below, the dehumanizing working conditions that were often the unintended consequence of bureaucracy are ultimately counterproductive, stifling innovation, motivation, creativity, and adaptation.
Developments in organizational theory have attempted to rectify the problems inherent in Weber's conception of bureaucracy. The alternative models of organizations briefly outlined on pages 193 to 194 of the textbook give a flavour of the diversity of perspectives on organizational life found in the scholarly literature. Read them over and draw your own comparisons. All of them have moved well beyond Weber's position that the bureaucracy was the only effective way to organize work under capitalism. But also note how contingency theory, for example, makes the same error as Weber in overlooking the individuals and groups who populate organizations. This leads to the problem of "reification" -- treating the organization itself as if it were a living thing, instead of looking at the dynamic relationships among the organization's participants as its driving force.
The reading further highlights the impact of technology on work organizations, an issue to which we shall return later in this Unit, and in Units 8 and 9. Finally, mention is made of one of the newest interpretations of organizations, coming from a post-modern perspective. Read Clegg's quote, on pages 194 ad 195, and try to draw parallels with some of our earlier discussions of post-industrial society, and the attendant transformations precipitated by economic restructuring. Just as post-industrial theory argues that we have entered a new industrial era, post-modernism advances a similar but more sweeping thesis about society having moved beyond the "modern" age as defined by mass consumption, Fordism and bureaucracy.
All this implies, of course, that organizations are significantly changing. How do scholars actually study the process of organizational change? This question is addressed in the discussions of strategy, and in the review of the research by Hinings and Greenwood on pages 195 to 196 of the textbook. Any discussion of changes in an organization's strategic plan, overall design, or technology raises fundamental sociological questions about how decisions are made. Keep in mind that the best-laid corporate strategic plans or technological changes can b derailed if these become the focal point for power struggles, conflicts, or informal employee opposition. These themes of power and conflict in organizations will be more fully amplified in Unit 8.
Finally, we turn to an informative study conducted not by sociologists, but the Auditor General of Canada. This article, in Work in Canada, is a fitting conclusion to this Section because it reiterates the importance of people. Having read about the inefficiencies of faceless, machine-like bureaucracy it comes as no surprise that well-performing organizations are ones which have developed a strong emphasis on the needs of people. The Auditor General's findings provide an instructive counterbalance to the negative aspects of bureaucracy documented in research by Merton, Blau, Gouldner, and Reich. The people emphasis of the well-performing organizations in the Canadian public sector also sets the stage for our discussion, later in the Unit, of how organizations can be humanized. At this point, it would be worthwhile to keep in mind that "performance" is defined through the eyes of management's terms. Employees and their unions may have their own views on this issue, as reflected in the debate between Carr and D'Aquino over productivity in Unit 2.
At the beginning of the reading (pages 197-199), you will find three useful ideas that may clarify your thinking about management. First, in order to avoid confusion over what constitutes "management", the reading makes the distinction between management ideology (the belief systems that justify their decisions), management actions (the actual day-to-day decisions they make), and management theory (the prescriptions for action, often based on academic research). Second, to further understand managers' actions, the reading discusses the social action perspective. This approach avoids the problem, discussed in Section 1, of reifying organizations by laying bare the social processes that give shape to -- and place limits around -- managers' actions. Third, the whole issue of management decision making is quite problematic, especially given the assumption that managers have a free hand in this regard. The fact that organizational politics can strongly influence decisions, and the often limited impact of executive decisions on the success or failure of the organization, suggest that such decisions are both constrained and limited. These three points, taken together, will equip you to critically assess different approaches to managing people in organizations.
The reading then investigates in some detail the two most influential "schools" of management: scientific management (which you will recall from Unit 1) and human relations. As you read about each, try to compare and contrast their underlying assumptions, their views of what motivates workers, and their solutions to the problem of gaining worker cooperation (the so-called labour problem). Also important is how in practice each approach actually treated workers -- something you may have directly experienced, given their lasting influence.
Scientific management, or Taylorism, was a highly publicized system of job redesign and worker control that originated in the early 20th century. It went hand-in-hand with the creation of bureaucracy and mass-production technology. Reading the selection on pages 200 and 201, can you pick out elements of ideology, theory and practice? Some historical background to the application of scientific management principles in Canada can be found in earlier readings (from Unit 1). Heron describes the application of "systematic" or efficiency management in Hamilton steel mills, and the detrimental impact on skilled workers. Lowe documents how the emergence of modern corporations and government bureaucracy relied, in large part, on the application of scientific management techniques. Features of scientific management -- such as piece rate payment systems, a highly specialized division of labour, time-and-motion studies -- are still common today in some industries. In this respect, the fast-food industry is a leading adherent of scientific management. In Unit 9, Reiter's article on Burger King will embellish this with a first-hand account of the highly regulated work environment of a fast-food outlet.
While scientific management treated workers like extensions of the machinery in the factory, human relations management places much greater emphasis on meeting their human needs. As you compare these two major management schools,. bear in mind that while in theory they are very distinct (Taylor, for example, totally rejected any investment in worker welfare as a waste of money), in practice many employers have combined bits and pieces from each approach. Workers often rebelled against the harsh treatment they received under scientific management, undermining the "efficiency" of the system. In the continual quest for solutions to the "labour problem" (how to integrate workers into the firm and gain their cooperation), managers often took a human relations approach to win workers support for corporate goals. On page 203 you will find an important distinction between three method for gaining compliance: coercive, utilitarian, and normative. Here is another useful conceptual tool for identifying the similarities and differences between various management tactics.
The history of the Hawthorne Studies -- and the continuing controversy over the quality of the research, its impact on management, and its theoretical implications -- is a fascinating subject in itself. As you read pages 203 to 206, attempt to form an overall impression of the importance of this school of management. You may well have experienced the application of some basic human relations principles (through a Personnel Department, of a Human Resources Department). Sociologically, what is particularly relevant about the Hawthorne Studies and the various management strategies they informed, is the emphasis on worker attitudes, work groups, and work place social relations. There is little doubt that the Hawthorne Studies highlighted for the first time how each of these is a key ingredient in any organization. Sociologists can use these insights to probe the ways workers resist management, and the basis for workplace conflicts and power struggles. But the human relations approach to management heads off in a quite different direction, seeking cooperation and harmony among all organizational participants.
In light of this last point, it is not surprising that in the last decade or so managers have placed considerable emphasis on remaking corporate culture. Culture is another vehicle for gaining the compliance of employees, who otherwise may not see eye-to-eye with management. Again, your own work experiences may have left you well acquainted with how managers have tried to fashion a dominant culture, getting everyone to "buy-in" (a favourite clichÉ) so that the "one big happy family" feeling can be fostered. The reading also encourages you to look at the other side of the culture concept. It can also be used to describe a culture of opposition or resistance, leading in some instances to the kind of militancy among unionized workers discussed below in Unit 8. Also note that the term culture takes us outside the organization into the larger society. This raises the question of which "culture" is more influential on workers' attitudes and behaviour: Is sit the organizational culture crafted by management, workers, or jointly? Or it the cultural values which workers acquire through socialization and education, bringing with them into the workplace? This is a fascinating question, especially in an era global business and the dismantling of national economic barriers through free trade.
Krahn and Lowe, Work, Industry and Canadian Society:
Lowe and Krahn (eds.), Work in Canada: Readings in the Sociology of Work and Industry:
There are several ways to interpret the critiques of old-style management presented on pages 210 to 211. In fact, it would be helpful in this regard to apply the distinction between management ideology, theory and practice (from Section 1). How much of this literature is rhetoric, how much is wishful thinking, and to what degree are these principles guiding concrete actions? Also observe the strong parallels between these management writers' calls for a "revolution" in our thinking about managing and organizing work, and the critical assessments of bureaucracy, Taylorism and Fordism presented in the sociological research reviewed above. This consensus strongly suggests that many organizations are in varying states of crises and are in the throws of trying to do things differently.
Among the various packages of organizational reforms is total quality management (TQM). Separating the use of TQM language from actual organizational changes along these lines is difficult. Still, it is interesting to note that otherwise quite skeptical sociologists (such as Hill, cited on page 212 of the textbook) see glimmers of hope in TQM for actually improving the use of human resources, thereby increasing employee participation and skill utilization. But also note that the stumbling block to TQM-style changes, and other the new management paradigms advocating employee "empowerment" is middle management and front-line supervisors. These are the groups who perceive they have a lot to loose, namely their power over subordinates.
The selection in the textbook ends with a reconsideration of how far these new approaches really go. You may have already detected elements of older versions of human relations management, suggesting that these are not new paradigms after all. But on the positive side, there are strong similarities between what you have just read of the new management and what the Auditor General (in Section 1) identified as the people emphasis so essential for high performance. In this sense, the Auditor Generals' report is empirical evidence that these new approaches may actually rejuvenate organizations. But we still need to pose the question: will employees perceive these changes to be beneficial to them as well?
Turning to the Zeidenberg and Olive articles in Work in Canada, after reading these you may be left with the impression that things are moving backward in some workplaces. Far from creating a evolution with potential improvements in working conditions, in addition to productivity gains, the tactics described in this pair of articles unquestionably erode job security and working conditions. Neither fit the model of a people-centred organization which the Auditor General and the writers just cited in the textbook selection call for. But note that each article has obvious links back to earlier themes in the course. Zeidenberg is proposing a shift to the kinds of "nonstandard work" you examined in Units 3 and 4, and a reversion to the homework arrangements criticized by Dagg and Fudge in Unit 5. And Olive describes more coercive methods of gaining the cooperation of workers, in some respects consistent with the work-harder-and-faster mentality embodied in Taylorism. How widespread these kinds of practices are can only be answered by careful research. Nonetheless, this juxtaposition of the examples from Zeidenberg and Olive with the kinds of positive directions proposed by Peters or TQM consultants should make us wary of predicting any clear direction for managerial reform, never mind a revolution.
Krahn and Lowe, Work, Industry and Canadian Society:
Lowe and Krahn (eds.), Work in Canada: Readings in the Sociology of Work and Industry:
Third, notice the importance of technology in the examples of QWL in the auto industry, mentioned on page 216 of the textbook, Davis and Sullivan's case study of Shell's chemical plant in Work in Canada. Technology is also a cornerstone of the job designs found in the two Swedish auto factories discussed on pages 219-220 of the textbook. These examples show that through strategies such as sociotechnical systems design it is possible to reorganize work around new technologies in ways which enhance skill and worker control. Think back to the initial discussions of the role of technology in the industrialization process, and the often negative consequences it had on workers (Heron's article on the Hamilton metalworkers again comes to mind, as does the reference in Unit 1 to the Luddites). From the present readings, it is clear that technology is not inherently bad, and that its impact depends on the decisions made about how to organize jobs so that workers control the technology, not vice verse, using it to develop new skills.
Fourth, be aware of the differing positions taken by unions vis-À-vis QWL. Think about the basis for many union's reluctance to join with management in pursuing organizational reforms. Contrast these reservations with the success of the Shell employee's union in negotiating a direct say in designing the new chemical plant. This issue is crucial, for it underscores the often lop-sided impact of work reforms. Too often, limited benefits flow to workers and claims about improved quality of working life remain just rhetoric. In other words, QWL can serve an ideological function (as mentioned in Section 2), cloaking the latest management push for worker cooperation and productivity in humanistic-sounding language. The discussion here about unions and QWL will be pursued later, in Units 7 and 8, where be undertake a comprehensive investigation of union-management relations.
In some respects, the QWL banner is almost too broad to be meaningful. Consider, for instance, its diverse intellectual roots on page 215 of the textbook. It is indeed remarkable that Scandinavian sociotechnical systems researchers, organizational psychologists, human resource managers, the political left, and the Auditor General of Canada (let's not forget the conclusions of this report, from Section 1) have reached a consensus on the need for more participative workplaces as an important goal. But now review the wide range of techniques used to achieve this end. Clearly, employee participation is very much a matter of degree. Try placing these various techniques on a continuum, form low participation and authority on one end, to high participation and job control on the other. As you review the assessments of QWL in Canada, you will see that the grounds for union opposition, are, in part, a response to the reality that most QWL schemes have been at the low participation end of the continuum.
A major exception is the Shell chemical plant in Sarnia, Ontario. As you read this case study, identify the ingredients for its success. Among these ingredients are the union's involvement as a full partner in the planing and implementing the sociotechnical design, the plant's costly continuous-process technology which required a skilled workforce, and the fact that the plant was a "greenfield" site (that is, there was no existing organizational structure, or culture, to change). Pay special attention to the process of planning, and the sociotechnical principles that guided this process. The design team had a clear vision of creating a post-bureaucratic, high participation organization in which human needs were as important as technical considerations. Perhaps most revealing about the case study by Davis and Sullivan (who, by the way, were the outside consultant and the union representative involved in the Shell project) in Work in Canada is the detailed description of how the work is organized into teams and how workers, and the union, have real power.
In these respects, the Shell plant is a benchmark against which other QWL initiatives can be measured. But the Shell facility in Sarnia is unique in North America. It is in Scandinavia that we find the most far-reaching work humanization, mainly because Swedish and Norwegian legislation make meaningful work a basic right (more about this in Unit 8). The final reading selection, on pages 219 and 220 of the textbook, compares how two Swedish auto makers, Volvo and Saab, have used sociotechnical design principles to reorganize work around advanced production technology. Here again you will see the concepts of teams, job rotation, job enrichment, and participative management in practice. While the descriptions of these two factories are brief, it is still useful to draw parallels with the Shell plant. Try to identify the similarities, and the differences, in a three-way comparison.
Krahn and Lowe, Work, Industry and Canadian Society:
Lowe and Krahn (eds.), Work in Canada: Readings in the Sociology of Work and Industry:
At one level, the question of what aspects of the Japanese system are generalizeable (posed on pages 220 and 221 of the textbook) revisits our earlier discussion, in Section 2, about corporate culture versus national culture. It would be helpful to quickly flip back to page 208 of the textbook and review Hofstede's international study of IBM employees. Hofestede discovered that, despite IBM's claim of a uniform corporate culture, national culture (along with age and education) was more influential on worker behavior and attitudes. Now look for the various examples in Walmsley's article, in Work in Canada, of how the workers in CAMI, Toyota or Honda plants in Canada resisted the imposition of certain aspects of Japanese management. Also note how some of the managers she interviews for the article talk about adapting Japanese work practices into Canadian culture, thereby developing a new hybrid Japanese-Canadian employment system. The key questions to consider, then, when you read the material in this Section are: Which aspects of the Japanese system reflect some of the principles we have already discussed about participative forms of work organization? Which elements are rooted in Japanese culture?
You should also try to extract from the readings the main positive and negative features of the Japanese system, or put another way, its costs and benefits for workers. Note, for example, the discussion on pages 221 to 222 of the textbook about quality circles, and further amplified in Walmsley's article. Wood argues that QCs are a vehicle for enlarging workers' use of their skills. But critics view them as another tactic by management to give workers more responsibility without increasing their authority. Also a source of complaints is the concept of kaizen, or continuous improvement. This echoes some of the language of Total Quality Management, which indeed borrowed heavily from Japanese management. For some workers, kaizen means having to continuously work harder. Another criticism is the lack of individuality, a strong value among Canadian workers, but difficult to achieve in corporations which emphasize the group over the individual.
Still, despite these debates about the impact of QCs and other Japanese innovations on workers, we need to account for the obvious success of some of the Canadian Japanese transplants. Most notable is Toyota's Cambridge plant, which won a prestigious quality award. Despite the complaints Walmsley documents, perhaps Canadian workers in Japanese transplants do have a better quality of working life, and more involvement in decision making, than their counterparts in most other large industrial enterprises. Does the Japanese approach embody the answers to a new style of management, as proposed in Section 4? As more transplants take root in Canada, it will be interesting to see whether a distinctive hybrid style of management does emerge.
Betcherman, Gordon, Keith Newton and Joanne Godin (eds.). Two Steps Forward: Human Resource Management in a High-Tech World. Ottawa: Economic Council of Canada, 1990.
Gillespie, Richard. Manufacturing Knowledge: A History of the Hawthorne Experiments. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. When Gaints Learn to Dance: Mastering the Challenges of Strategy, Management, and Careers in the 1990s. New York: Simon and Shuster, 1989.
Littler, Craig R. The Development of the Labour Process in Capitalist Societies. London: Heinemann, 1982.
Lincoln, James R. and Kerry McBride. "Japanese industrial organization in comparative perspective." Annual Review of Sociology 13 (1987): 289-312.
Morgan, Gareth. Images of Organization. Beverley Hills: Sage, 1986.
Peters, Tom. Thriving on Chaos: Handbook for a Management Revolution. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1987.
Ranking, Tom. New Forms of Work Organization: The Challenge for North American Unions. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990.
Rinehart, James. "Improving the quality of working life through job redesign: work humanization or work rationalization?" Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 23 (1986): 507-530.
Van Houten, Donald R. "The political economy and technical control of work humanization in Sweden during the 1970s and 1980s." Work and Occupations 14 (1990): 483-513.
Wells, Don. Soft Sell: 'Quality of Working Life' Programs and the Productivity Race. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 1986.
Zuboff, Shoshana. In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power. New York: Basic Books, 1988.
Back to SOC 366 Page