KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Business and Management Studies: An International Journal / 2019 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 5

HUMANIZATION, RATIONALIZATION OR SUBJECTIFICATION OF WORK? EMPLOYEE-ORIENTED FLEXIBILITY BETWEEN I-DEALS AND IDEOLOGY IN THE NEOLIBERAL ERA

İŞİ İNSANİLEŞTİRMEK Mİ, RASYONALLEŞTİRMEK Mİ YOKSA ÖZNELLEŞTİRMEK Mİ? İDİYOSİNKRATİK ANLAŞMALAR VE NEOLİBERAL DÖNEMDE İDEOLOJİ ARASINDA ÇALIŞAN ODAKLI ESNEKLİK

Severin HORNUNG
Thomas HÖGE
Sayfa
3090–3119
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Divisive management practices, politically motivated rhetoric, and inherently distorted theorizing are based on confounding “hidden modes” of workplace flexibility, the deconstruction of which advances scholarship.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This article discusses promises and pitfalls of employee-oriented workplace flexibility.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The concept of employee-oriented flexibility applies to broad-based programs and individualized approaches.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Divisive management practices, politically motivated rhetoric, and inherently distorted theorizing are based on confounding “hidden modes” of workplace flexibility, the deconstruction of which advances scholarship.
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

This article discusses promises and pitfalls of employee-oriented workplace flexibility. The concept of employee-oriented flexibility applies to broad-based programs and individualized approaches. Here, the focus is on idiosyncratic deals (i-deals), individually negotiated work arrangements. Reviewing the literature, theory on characteristics, prerequisites, and limits of mutually beneficial flexibility is developed in the context of the neoliberal reconfiguration of work, employment, and societies. The dialectic construction of antagonistic types is used to differentiate employee-oriented i-deals from ideological counter-applications of economic rationalization. The latter reflect neoliberal ideologies of individualism, competition, and instrumentality, the former humanistic ideals of individuation, solidarity, and emancipation. Symptomatic for psychological governance through “subjectification”, self-enacted forms of rationalization threaten to undermine humanization prospects. Divisive management practices, politically motivated rhetoric, and inherently distorted theorizing are based on confounding “hidden modes” of workplace flexibility, the deconstruction of which advances scholarship.

Abstract

Bu makalede, çalışan odaklı işyeri esnekliğinin vaatleri ve güçlükleri tartışılmaktadır. Çalışan odaklı esneklik kavramı geniş tabanlı programlar ve bireysel yaklaşımlar için uygundur. Bu çalışmada idiyosinkratik anlaşmalar (i-anlaşmalar) ve bireysel olarak müzakere edilmiş çalışma düzenlemelerine odaklanılmıştır. Literatür incelendiğinde, karakteristik özellikler, önkoşullar ve karşılıklı yarar sağlayan esnekliğin sınırları teorisi; iş, istihdam ve toplumların neoliberal yeniden yapılandırılması bağlamında geliştirilmiştir. Antagonistik türlerin diyalektik yapısı, çalışan odaklı idiyosinkratik anlaşmaları, ekonomik rasyonalizasyonun ideolojik karşı uygulamalarından ayırmak için kullanılmıştır. İkincisi bireyselliğin, rekabetin ve aracılığın neoliberal ideolojilerini, bireyselleşme, dayanışma ve özgürleşmenin eski hümanist ideallerini yansıtıyor. “Öznelleştirme” yoluyla yapılan psikolojik yönetimin belirtisi, kendiliğinden yasallaştırılan rasyonalizasyon biçimlerinin insanileşme beklentilerini yıkmakla tehdit etmesidir. Bölücü yönetim uygulamaları, politik motive edici söylem ve doğal olarak bozulmuş teorileştirme, işyeri esnekliğinin “gizli modlarını” karıştırmaya dayanmaktadır.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

HORNUNG, S., HÖGE, T. (2019). HUMANIZATION, RATIONALIZATION OR SUBJECTIFICATION OF WORK? EMPLOYEE-ORIENTED FLEXIBILITY BETWEEN I-DEALS AND IDEOLOGY IN THE NEOLIBERAL ERA. Business and Management Studies: An International Journal, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 5, 3090–3119. https://ajindex.com/articles/157595

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Adler, P. S., & Borys, B. (1996). Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 61-89.
  2. Adler, P. S., Forbes, L. C., & Willmott, H. (2007). Critical management studies. The Academy of Management Annals, 1, 119-179.
  3. Allan, C., O’Donell, M., & Peetz, D. (1999). Three dimensions of labor utilization: Job broadening, employment insecurity and work intensification. Current Research in Industrial Relations, 1, 13-24.
  4. Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2004). Interfaces of control. Technocratic and socio-ideological control in a global management consultancy firm. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29, 423-444.
  5. Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (1992). On the idea of emancipation in management and organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 17, 432-464.
  6. Archibald, W. P. (2009). Globalization, downsizing and insecurity: Do we need to upgrade Marx's theory of alienation? Critical Sociology, 35, 319-342.
  7. Bal, P. M., & Dóci, E. (2018). Neoliberal ideology in work and organizational psychology. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27, 536-548.
  8. Bal, P. M., Dóci, E., Lub, X., Van Rossenberg, Y. G., Nijs, S., Achnak, S.,. & De Gieter, S. (2019). Manifesto for the future of work and organizational psychology. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(3), 289-299.
  9. Bal, P. M., & Hornung, S. (2019). Individualization of work: From psychological contracts to ideological deals. In Y. Griep & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Handbook of research on the psychological contract at work (pp. 143- 163). Edward Elgar, Cheltenham UK Bal, P. M., & Rousseau, D. M. (Eds.) (2016). Idiosyncratic deals between employees and organizations: Conceptual issues, applications and the role of co-workers. Routledge, London and New York. Becke, G. (2017). The subjectivation of work and established-outsider figurations. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 42, 93-113.
  10. Box, R. C. (2011). Marcuse was right: One-dimensional society in the twenty-first century. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 33, 169-191.
  11. Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2014). High-involvement work processes, work intensification and employee well-being. Work, Employment and Society, 28, 963-984.
  12. Bromley, D. W. (1990). The ideology of efficiency: Searching for a theory of policy analysis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 19, 86-107.
  13. Brozovic, D. (2018). Strategic flexibility: A review of the literature. International Journal of Management