The Reality of Work Cultures in Modern Day - Essay Example

The Reality of Work Cultures in the Modern Day Introduction The modern ways of working can affect employees in many ways. These modern ways of working crumble an employee’s character in many ways. Each organization has its own unique work culture i.e. the way employees in what way workers in that organization work and this culture is the deciding factor whether the firm will be able to achieve its goal or not. (Kovary, 2013) In this essay I will discuss the issues workers face while working in the modern working environment mentioned by Richard Sennett in his book The Corrosion of Character. We will also discuss if the modern working environment makes employees disposable as suggested by Richard Sennett in his book. Workers are now considered to be Precarious workers. How modern way of working is corroding character 1) Flexibility: There are various issues highlighted by Richard Sennett. The first issue is of flexibility, the workers in the modern world are expected to behave very quickly and be very open to accepting change on a very short span of time, the workers should be able to take risks on a regular basis and not to be very dependent on formal trials and rules. Bureaucracy is a stringent institution in the modern world, however now its old ways are under attack as mentioned by Richard Sennett. People used to work blindly within everyday routines however now they have to forget their routines and do everything as it comes. In English language the word career referred to a road which was meant for carrying carriages and while referring to labour it meant a lifelong mean to achieve ones economic wants. The existence of flexibility in capitalism has changed the meaning of the word career. It redirects employees from one occupation to another suddenly. “Job”, a word of the English language of the 14th Century meant a piece of something that can be heaved about. The ideology of flexibility in the capitalism has brought back the well-known concept of job as people do bulges of labour and different pieces of work over a span of lifetime. It is rather obvious that flexibility will make people anxious as people do not know whether the risks they are taking will pay off or not, whether the paths they are pursuing are right or wrong. Terms like “free enterprise” or “private enterprise” have been coined to take off the blame from the capitalist system. Richard Sennett claimed that flexibility provides people with more freedom to shape their lives according to their will through attacking bureaucracy. It reduces the blame from the capitalist system regarding oppression. This new direction replaces new controls; it does not simply just eliminate the rules made in past, however these new controls are difficult to understand. This new capitalism is often referred to as the scribbled administration of force. 2) How flexibility affects character The second issue he speaks about is how the modern ways working effects an employee’s character. One of the most confusing portions of flexibility is the way it affects one’s personal character. Character is the principle importance one places on their personal yearnings and on the way one handles their relations with others. It mainly depends on how one connects with the outside world. It mainly emphasises on the individual’s long-term facet on their emotional experiences. It can be put across through loyalty and joint dedications, or through pursuing long-term objectives, or buy delaying rewards to later and achieving goals first. Character focuses on one’s individual attributes which they value in themselves and for which we want others to value us. The flexible capitalist system creates a number of questions about one’s character, such as considering living in a society which is very impatient how can one decide what is going to last and has value and what focuses on the present. Another question posed is how to distinguish between long-term and short-term goals in the economy in an economy that is dedicated towards short-term goals. Another question is that in institutions where redesigning and breaking is constantly taking place how can loyalty and joint dedications be maintained. 3) “No long term” The third issue Sennett highlights is of the new phrase “no long term”. Usage of new technology is considered as a trademark of the new capitalist system by various business leaders and journalists. However there is also another dimension of change i.e. new ways or managing ones time mainly working time. The most obvious symbol of this change might be the slogan “no long term”. In the working environment the process of step by step growth is now diminishing, also is the usage of a single skill throughout one’s lifetime. “Today, a young American with at least two years of college can expect to change jobs at least eleven times in the course of working, and change his or her skill base at least three times during those forty years of labour.” (Sennett, 1999) “No long term” is a standard where faith, loyalty and joint commitments are slowly eroding. The short time span in which one works in an institution reduces the chances of creating even informal trust. The concept of short term capitalism imposes a threat to one’s character, primarily those merits of one’s character that bring humans together and supplies each other with a sense of belonging. When considering family “no long term” denotes to keep going on, it is against obligations and forgoing. How can one protect its relations from getting destroyed when considering short-term capitalism? In history it can be seen that people that people had adjusted with the idea that their lives can be changed in a split second due to reasons like war or other natural disasters. Today vagueness exists even without any disasters; rather it is a part of one’s everyday life. Unsteadiness is now considered to be something very ordinary. 4) Re-Engineering The fourth issue he discusses is of re-engineering. The most noticeable piece of information about the concept of re-engineering is the phenomena of economizing of jobs. Economizing of jobs has a direct relationship with the growth of inequality as only a few number of middle-aged employees have found jobs on the same wage rate or higher. It was becoming obvious to businesses by the middle of 1990s that only in a fantasy can huge businesses make a new business unit strategy reduce staff and re-engineer all accordingly to their wants. Many efforts of re-engineering fail mainly because of the reason that businesses become impaired after letting go of employees. The motivation level and self-esteem of workers reduces after this process takes place. 5) Moving sideways Another issue he highlights is of moving sideways within jobs. Sociologists have coined the term “ambiguously lateral moves” for people who switch job experiences very often very when hierarchies change towards loose set of connections. In these moves a person is moving sideways however he believes that he or she is moving upwards. In a flexible set of connections people go through “retrospective losses”, as people who risk moves in a flexible business have limited amount of information about what their new positions will have in for them when they move sideways, thus when they review the decision they have made is whether a good or bad one. 6) Flexibility and older workers The concept of new economy and modern ways of working emphasise on the youth. This is another issue Richard pointed out. This change of emphasises towards youth conveys a strong message to the older generation. The knowledge an older person has gained over the years regarding a specific field or organization can get in way with what the superiors dictate regarding new changes. The flexible attitude of the youth is more beneficial to the organizations today. 7) Over qualification Another issue he pointed out if of workers being over qualified. Over qualification can be considered as a symbol of the beginning of a new system. Surveys in the U.S show that income increased by 34% for those who had a college degree as compared to those with a high school diploma. 8) Rico In his book, Richard Sennett conducts an interview with a man named Rico, who has knowledge about economizing of jobs, re-engineering etc. In this interview Rico tells us that his wife and he are often on the verge of having a breakdown and they feel like they are losing control over their lives. Rico has experienced switching jobs and having no sense of belonging in the company. With constant changes in his working life he is not able to give his children knowledge about values like trust, loyalty and commitment. The indifference that exists due to the concept of flexible capitalism is personal as it affects ones character. It affects each individual differently. The flexible capitalism makes an individual indifference towards a lot of things. It makes them indifferent towards their own character, they stop trusting people and believing in joint commitments. Precarious workers Precarious workers are increasing due to the existence of globalisation in economies and progress in technology. They are leading to a depletion of the manufacturing sector on a fast rate in developed economies; this is being replaced by the tertiary sector. In today’s world the employees have to be accepting towards the idea of flexibility. The idea of having job security is slowly disappearing from the world of employment. These factors are leading to an increase in precarious work. There are different features that point out that this certain type of work is precarious. The first feature is the sense of job security. Precarious employments do not give job security to employees. Nowadays one finds job with a few months of contract, due to this people find it difficult in doing simple things such as borrowing from the bank to just buy a house. The second feature is low pay. The third feature is that precarious workers are not given are not given enough protection and they might be laid off without a prior notice period. The challenges in the modern world are increasing on a daily basis, the economy and the labour force should stand up for their rights. Each employee should be given at least minimum security where they can be ready for any sort of circumstances. (Lewis, 2013) Conclusion Having compared all these circumstances in the modern world, there are clear indications to which the modern day working culture has an impact on the society, personally, mentally and socially. Characters of a person changes through development through time and with upcoming technological and working conditions constantly changing, work ethics are constantly evolving. Limitations are thus filtering out the workers in each stage leaving just a few major workers behind. This phenomenon as spread throughout the modern day work has caused major corrosion in working character. References Jobs Letter. 1999. Insecurity and the Corrosion of Character. Insecurity and the Corrosion of Character. As accessed on April 10, 2014, from http://www.jobsletter.org.nz/jbl10210.htm Kovary, G. 2013. Types of Work Cultures. Types of Work Cultures Comments. As accessed on April 10, 2014, from http://www.ngenperformance.com/blog/leadership-2/types-of-work-cultures Lewis, E. Z. 2013. Articles: Precarious Work - Edward Zammit-Lewis. As accessed on April 10, 2014, from http://www.edwardzammitlewis.com/articles/prec_work.html Sennett, R. 1999. The corrosion of character: The personal consequences of work in the new capitalism. NY: WW Norton & Company. Read More