Forms of Work Organization - Literature review Example

The concept of work organisation is broad in context. In addition to defining the method in which work is managed and scheduled, it also encompasses elements that address interpersonal issues, design of various roles and carves the characteristics of an organization. The model of work organisation adopted by any firm has a direct co-relation with the performance that its workforce is likely to generate. However, this modelling is likely to be defined more by national or regional circumstances, rather than specific organisational requirements. The last few decades have given prominence to the understanding of work organization in reference to the advent of globalization; international trade being coupled with an increase in mobility of people and capital. The confusion around globalization makes it harder to concretely define the term itself. In many cases, it is the ‘prominent catchphrase for describing the process of international economic integration’ (Scholte, 2005, 16). In the context of the argument presented in this paper, globalization is viewed as an amalgamation of liberalization, universalization and westernization. Hence, it could be defined as the process of removing restrictions on movements between countries, creating a synthesis of cultures and spreading experiences to people in all corners of the world (Scholte, 2005). Work organisation is often linked with capitalism; an economic system which advocates the prominence of private ownership, wage labour and emergence of market forces as the dictating power in setting prices. Karl Marx referred to capitalist societies as an advanced form of social organization that would pave way for the working class to come to power (Whitley, 2000). The ideology revolved around the transformation of human society being a series of evolution that was controlled by the changing dynamics of the world and the requirements of the general population. Where socialist or communist systems once wielded a stronger control over the processes governing work organization, this was replaced by the capitalistic approach. In the latter approach, the barter system of goods exchange was replaced by introducing an item of use-value; initially gold and then paper money. Marx professed that the next change would be the working class coming to power, with its primary driving factor being the exploitation of labour or workforce, under which capitalists try to extract value for the owner or the “bourgeois” society (Whitley, 2000). Further progression of Marx’s work at the turn of the century has given rise to the concept of divergent capitalism. Due to the varying influencing factors that govern the workings of different nations, business systems have developed over time to give more distinguishing features to each one. The ideology of market economy, where various systems are configured by an array of factors within a country, has been developed further to offer two clear distinctions: liberal market economies and coordinated market economies. The former is resonant of the original capitalist approach adopted by the Anglo-Saxon model of governance, where greater freedom is offered within market trade. The latter is an amalgamated form of socialist and capitalist thinking, where freedom of trade is dominant but regulated by a relatively stronger institutional control. Both market economies offer distinct variations in the labour system or work organisation. Liberal market economies project a dynamic workforce that is often wage-oriented, and key to the rapid innovation practised by the industries that proper in the economy. The skill level is more generic to the overall industry, rather than being focused on a specific area. The work organisation in liberal market economies uses the shareholder theory as centric to the operations of the system. This means that the interests of shareholders and owners are held higher than the workers and other groups associated with the business system. On the other hand, coordinated market economies portray a balanced approach between socialist values and free trade. Institutions tend to focus on long-term objectives which fall within the approach of incremental innovation, and regulate the market to maintain a degree of control over business practices. Work organisation in coordinated market economies takes into account the stakeholder theory, giving importance to each entity involved in the overall organisational processes, including the workforce. Methods employed and the design of procedures reflects a continued interest in ensuring equal value is achieved for both the workers and the owners, as a stronger degree of inter-dependence exists between the entities. The work organisation in such market economies grows out of the national culture that forms a key focus of the institutional culture adopted by the firms, thereby creating a homogenous image of a single work ethic. The freedom in labour mobility brought about by the advent of globalisation appears to have enacted the shift in work organisation in many parts of the world. While the concept of outsourcing has gained prominence in the digital age, the flow of information or responsibilities is not the only change that has come about as a result of the borderless environment that has been created by the corporate world. Debate looms large over the effects of this movement on the economies of countries; developed nations appear to benefit from the low cost of manufacturing and services while their workforce ends up redundant in their core function and must change, while the developing nations take advantage of the strong demand to attract further investment into their skilled labour resulting in an increasing gap with the unskilled. However, the global market offers a third paradigm to work organisation, which has links to the enlarged cloud of globalisation that has overcome the business functions in a dominant way. This relates to new models that have been adopted in various nations and communities in result of troubling times that have been experienced by the workforce. The new models seem to exhibit a change in requirements, as either traditional work systems have failed due to recession of the national economy causing a collapse of the capitalist-focused corporate system, or the increased protectionism of socialist states creating a vacuum of investment for growth and improvement. Regardless of the scenario, Marx’s ideology of a worker-directed system appears to hold sway. Marcelo Vieta (2009) professes the emergence of empresas recuperadas por sus trabajadore (ERTs), which are worker-regenerated enterprises, in Latin America, as well as other countries of the world. The underlying value in such models is around self-management, which is different to entrepreneurship in several degrees. For one, the emergency of ERTs seems linked with conflicting social management among the workers and the owners of corporations, causing an innovation of so-called revolt to take effect and workers to establish themselves as the operators of the company in entirety; owners and labourers at the same time. Vieta (2009) cites the example of Argentina, whose national economy collapsed under the liberalisation model employed bring more capitalistic approach to the country in the 1990s. The collapse resonated with business declaring bankruptcies in the thousands each month, unable to cover the cost of existence due to decreasing demand in the domestic and international market for their products or services. With over 20 percent of the skilled workforce affected by the sharp downturn, the model of ERTs emerged and was taken up rapidly. The crux of the model is around workers occupying failing or failed organizations, and attempting to run the firm under self-management. By 2005, the phenomenon of ERTs had been accepted widely, with almost 180 institutions being run under this model, employing between 8000 and 10,000 workers. Brazil offers similar examples of worker cooperatives emerging since the 1990s, as a tool to combat the rising unemployment and gap in opportunities for the skilled workforce. Like ERTs, worker cooperatives have been created to continue competitive involvement of the nation and its industries in the international market (Lima, 2007). They are primarily a group of workers combining to take control of a failing establishment, and running the operations without any management oversight. In most cases, these cooperatives offer a flat hierarchy where each member is required to make an equivalent effort in ensuring completion of the objectives that are fundamental to the establishment. The rise of self-management groups in the form of worker cooperatives and ERTs is often linked to the lack of autonomy and delegation that exists in the corporate environment, especially the developing world (Keenoy et al). Countries like Argentina and Brazil have histories of being dominated by oligopolies or monopolies; the communist period and the turn towards a capitalist liberal economy both offered little to the workforce. The resulting collapses of each system disillusioned workers further, with many blaming poor management to be the key reason behind the failures of the economy. Argentina’s Baeun Hotel is one case study that provides an in-depth analysis of the workings of ERTs, while also showing the complexities that exist within the model, similar to any of the other models of work organisation (Evans, 2007). The Baeun Hotel holds an important place in Argentinean history as not an icon of the development for when the country played host to the football World Cup in 1978, but more as a symbol of the oppressive past under military dictatorship. It embodied the marginalization of class that had endured the nation for so long, with the elite enjoying the luxuries of life while the working class faced up to tough times. Despite all its prominence, the collapse of the economy in 2000 resulted in the Baeun declaring bankruptcy shortly after, and shutting its doors at the end of 2001. However, the hotel arose once again to national and international headlines when a group of Baeun workers forcefully occupied the hotel premises in 2003, and refurbished the interior over a year while fending off threats from the ex-owner and legal institutions. The hotel was reopened for the public in 2004 under the ownership of workers cooperative, and has become a regular haunt for political parties, trade unions and other activists in a sign of solidarity for the actions undertaken by the current owners. The authoritarian and hierarchical forms of organization have been replaced by a collective decision-making process, formally professed under the slogan “sin jefes o patrones”, translating to without bosses or owners. The concept of the model is that all members of the cooperative are equally involved in the workings of the hotel, with no one simply being the one giving the orders. While the utopian sense gained from such a model is acceptable, with some labelling it as “a concrete experience in the fight against exploitation of the oppressed sector” (Evans, 2007), the inner dynamics show that even the worker cooperative model possesses certain problems that are slowly affecting the group at the hotel. Bringing in new workers requires a conscious sense to be introduced, letting them know of the history and the stance that the worker’s cooperative is taking in relation to their action of occupying the site and the current operations. For this reason alone, a large part of the workers are family members or have some relation to a worker in the hotel. Then there are the instances from the decision-making process which have often resulted in disputes and arguments, because of a lack of overall control or uniform thinking over the goals that the hotel needs to achieve. Another concerning factor raised by some of the staff is the increasing power status arising within the administrative council, which shapes the outcomes of all deliberations into implemented processes. The lack of oversight on the council means that there is little space for transparent accountability. The shift to a participatory-democracy as a model of work organisation has grown in several regions of Latin America and Central Europe, giving more prominence to the heightened sense of workers in social management. Marx’s theory does hold significance when these cases are taken as examples; however, the complexities of the model of worker’s cooperatives and ERTs with power struggles and in-fighting is overshadowed by the sympathetic sentiments of the many supporters of egalitarian culture. References Atzeni, M. & Ghigliani, P. (2007) ‘Labour Process and Decision-making in factories under workers’ self-management: empirical evidence from Argentina’, Work, Employment & Society, Volume 21, Number 4, pp. 653 – 671 Azzellini, D. (2009) ‘Venezuela’s Solidarity Economy: Collective Ownership, Expropriation, and Workers Self-Management’, Working USA: The Journal of Labor and Society, Volume 12, pp. 171 – 191 Evans, W. (2007) ‘Counter-Hegemony at Work: Resistance, Contradiction and Emergent Culture Inside a Worker-Occupied Hotel’, Berkeley Journal of Sociology, pp. 33 – 68, Available at: http://www.estebanmagnani.com.ar/wp-content/05%20counter-hegemony.pdf, Accessed on 04 May 2010 Keenoy, T., Arthur, L., Anthony, P. & Smith, R., ‘The Meanings of ‘Worker Control’ in the Knowledge Economy: A Case Study’, Available at: http://www.uwic.ac.uk/ubs/research/wirc/publications.asp, Accessed on 04 May 2010 Lima, J. (2007) ‘Workers’ Cooperatives in Brazil: Autonomy vs Precariousness’, Economic and Industrial Democracy, Volume 28, Number 4, pp. 589 – 621 Palgi, M. (2006) ‘Pitfalls of Self-Management in the Kibbutz’, International Review of Sociology, Volume 16, Number 1, pp. 63 – 77 Scholte, J. (2000) Globalization: a critical introduction, Macmillan Press Limited Singh, P., Bartkiw, T. & Suster, Z. (2007) ‘The Yugoslav Experience with Worker’s Council: a Reexamination’, Labor Studies Journal, Volume 32, Number 3, pp. 280 – 297 Vieta, M. (2009) ‘The Social Innovations of Autogestion in Argentina’s Worker-Recuperated Enterprises’, Labour Studies Journal, Available at: http://lsj.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0160449X09337903v1, Accessed on 04 May 2010 Whitley, R. (2000) Divergent Capitalisms: the Social Structuring and change of Business Systems, Oxford University Press Read More