The Complexity of Technology as the Prime Cause of Workplace Alienation - Essay Example

The Complexity of Technology as the Prime Cause of Workplace Alienation Introduction The modern workplace is organized around the working of technology, during the execution of the different work roles, whether it is an industry related to the production of industrial machines, wood toys or food products (Orlikowski 404). Additionally, the infiltration of different forms of technology into the workplace is not likely to end in the near future, despite the fact that the introduction of new technology or innovation influences the structure of society and organization (Turner, Turner and Van De Walle 288). The areas altered by the adoption of technology and innovation include the media used for the transfer of knowledge, the organization of the workplace and also the communication systems used for the exchange of information. The wide array of technological changes and the corresponding changes taking place at the workplace has evoked the attention of different groups (Orlikowski 407). The infiltration of workplace alienation is evident through the reduction of the worker’s consumption, irrespective of an increase in their productivity. Other changes that evidence workplace alienation include a reduction in the value of the worker, irrespective of increases in value creation and the reduction in the worker, irrespective of increases in the power of the work (Orlikowski and Scott 433). This paper will explore the complexity of workplace technology, and its relationship to workplace alienation – from the view points of different scholars, including Marx, Blauner, Zuboff and Nichollls and Beynon. Discussion Technology as a Cause for Workplace Alienation, according to Marx Karl Marx’s model of alienation – despite the fact that it was intended to reflect the evils of the Europe of the 19th century – resembles the predicaments of the worker in the modern capitalistic world (Cox 7). Marx targeted his analysis at the problems facing the working population of the industrial revolution era, and his aim was to inform and enlighten the society about the exploitation of workers (Hughes 36). Despite the fact that the writings of Marx were targeted at a given group from a particular era, his explanation of alienation is well represented in the hierarchical system of the modern capitalistic society. The system is characterized by the alienation of workers and the degradation of their autonomy, which made them to treat workers like machines – similar to the nineteenth century situation (Cox 7). Marx explored alienation from a materialistic point of view, and emphasized the crisis of free labor to highlight his arguments. He emphasized the ideological shift that labor was not only aimed at the production of commodities, but also produces the worker and labor as a by-product of the system (Hughes 36). With the emergence of the era of free wage labor, the products created as well as the worker became tradable in the market. According to the Marxian view of the worker as a product – the worker is regarded a machine that offers monetary worth to the employer (Cox 7). For that reason, he holds the position that the employer viewed the worker as a resource that needs to be controlled, so that his production outcomes can be maximized. Due to the subjection of the worker to increasing control, their autonomy is lost, which makes them to develop a sense of alienation from themselves, the production process, the products being produced and also his coworkers and the superiors. According to Marx, the capitalistic system makes the worker to feel alienated from the products generated by the production system, mainly because it is not produced due to its inherent value, but for the capitalistic value it represents (Hughes 36). In reality, the ultimate aim of the production process was not the product, but the money to be drawn from the product; the value of work was determined by the value it can yield. For that reason, the worker believes that the worker is dominated by the products they produce, which became the intrinsic core of his life. This is evident from the fact that the worker traded his creativity so that they could get money in return, without noticing that their creativity is lost forever (Hughes 36). Technology as a Cause for Workplace Alienation, according to Blauner Hodson points out that Blauner – through his study of alienation levels among American workers – emphasized the outlook that the attitude of workers gives indications of their levels of alienation (719). His view is different from the Marxist perspective that the worker is alienated automatically – due to their economic hierarchy – emphasizing that alienation is perpetuated through the workplace. Blauner notes that alienation is evidenced by the level of control over their work, the core interest of the worker in the work, the level of cooperation with peers and the extent of involvement when doing the work (Hodson and Sullivan 61). The major conclusion of Blauner is that the workers that are not alienated are the ones that do not do the work they do as a means to earn a livelihood, but as an expression of their identity and selfhood (Hodson 720). In giving examples of the American industries which were characterized by high levels of alienation, he noted that the workers of the textile industry are very comparable to machines, which is evident from their powerlessness and their high levels of alienation. The textile industry characterizes the alienated system in that, they are tied to machines and they are allowed little movement, so as to maximize output. Also, the standardization of the work allows them little or no opportunity to enjoy and pride in the work – despite the fact that they live in sub-communities with strong religious and kinship ties (Hodson and Sullivan 61). Apart from the alienating aspect of work, he notes that the workers in industries like the textile industry are not directly or subjectively alienated. The absence of subjective alienation, which is evident from the workers in the textile industry, is similar to that in other industries; Blauner, further emphasizes that their religious and kinship ascriptions can be traced to their less-educated nature (Hodson 720). In giving examples of the industries that subject workers to the most alienating work, Blauner refers to the assembly line, noting that 61 percent of the direct assembly line work feels highly alienated. In explaining the attributes of the assembly line work, which qualify it among the most alienating lines of work, Blauner explains that machines control the speed of workers; workers feel totally powerless and the production process is totally repetitive. More importantly, he notes that the work in this industry does not allow workers to mingle socially; therefore the alienation develops a level of hostility in them (Hodson and Sullivan 61). Blauner continued to report that work can be changed to become less alienating to workers, and the determining factors include that employers can increase job relations and the job can be widened – to offer more responsibility to workers. All in all, Blauner employs a non-Marxist outlook of alienation, emphasizing that alienation is not an objective situation conceived from the relations between the worker and the means of production. The sharp contrast shows that Blauner takes a different outlook from that adopted by Marx, and it is also likely that his inferences were flawed (Hodson and Sullivan 61). This can be inferred, from the fact that his ideas were based on the data collected using questionnaires; the data collected using questionnaires may have been very difficult to interpret, and therefore may have yielded a biased point of view. For examples, workers are likely to hide their dissatisfaction in their work, mainly because work is viewed like a component of their self-respect and outlook towards life (Hodson 720). Technology as a Cause for Workplace Alienation, according to Nicholls and Beynon Nichols and Beynon administered a study of seven British plants, but different from Blauner, they did not report any considerable differences in alienation from the study of the plants (Bary et al. 92). From the inferences of the study, they held that 50 percent of the work in the industry of study is entirely unskilled and manual in nature. The two reported that the workers employed to check the plant’s control dials also felt alienated, despite the fact that this work allowed them to remain actively engaged, flexible and creative. Following their findings, they concluded that Blauner’s conclusions that process technology could reduce the worker’s levels of alienation were totally unfounded (Bary et al. 93). Nichols and Beynon continued that there was little or no evidence to support the argument that more skill and offering workers more responsibility under their given job posts reduced the perceived levels of alienation (Browne 368). Their conclusions were that many of the jobs available in the chemical plants did not require much skills-base from the workers, therefore offering workers more responsibility or changing their job description to another, only made them feel a sense of isolation, which they attributed to higher levels of stress and boredom (Browne 368). Technology as a Cause for Workplace Alienation, according to Nicholls and Beynon Zubolf adopted a different attitude, and noted that the adoption of technology at the workplace can lead to the alienation of employees or their empowerment. Through the studies of organizations, for more than a decade, Zubolf concluded that at workplaces where workers were learning the integration of computers in the work process, they created an environment of empowerment of alienation (Ackerman et al. 143). In explaining the difference between the different roles of technology, Zubolf noted that, in the case of the organizations that employ technology to do the thinking for their workers, the technology being adopted became triggers of workplace alienation. Some examples of the work that alienated the workers, following the employment of technology included the case of the cash registers that are used for the calculation of change. However, the emphasis is that, in the case where an employer uses technology like computers, to facilitate the understanding of employees about the production process, which will improve their decision making became sources of motivation. The conclusion drawn from the decade of study was that, the usage of technology for empowerment or alienation was experienced in a totally different manner among the different groups (Ackerman et al. 143). Conclusion The modern workplace is organized around the working of technology, and the continual adoption of technology has led to an increase in the alienation of the worker. Marx holds that the alienation of workers starts from the outlook of the capitalistic society, where the worker produces for financial gain and not creativity. Blauner noted that the alienation of workers arises form control, where powerlessness and a lack of autonomy trigger their alienation. Nichols and Beynon emphasized that the acquisition of more skills and widening the scope of work does not reduce levels of alienation. Zubolf noted that technology can be used to trigger empowerment or the alienation of workers, in the case that it is used to do the thinking of workers. Works Cited Ackerman, Frank, Goodwin, Neva, Dougherty, Laurie, and Gallagher, Kevin. The Changing Nature of Work. Washington, DC: Island Press, 1998. Print. Print. Bary, Jim, Chandler, John, Clark, Heather, Johnston, Roger, and Needle, David. Organization and Management. London: Business Press, 2000. Print. Browne, Ken. Introducing Sociology for AS Level. 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Polity Press 2006. Print. Cox, Judy. "An Introduction to Marxs Theory of Alienation." International Socialism, 79 (1998): 1-22 Hodson, Randy, and Sullivan, Teresa. The Social Organization of Work. Fourth Edition. Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth, 2008. Print. Hodson, Randy. Dignity in the Workplace Under Participative Management: Alienation and Freedom Revisited. American Sociological Review, 61.5 (1996): 719-738. Hughes, John. Understanding Classical Sociology. 2nd Ed. London: Sage Publications, 1995. Orlikowski, Wanda. "Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations". Organization Science, 11. 4(2000): 404-428. Orlikowski, Wanda, and Scott, Susan. "Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization". Annals of the Academy of Management, 2.1(2008): 433-437. Turner, Paul, Turner, Susan, and Van De Walle, Gretchen. "How older people account for their experience with interactive technology". Behavior and Information Technology, 26.4(2007): 287-296. Read More