In a message dated 98-04-27 23:54:06 EDT, you write:
> It seems the work is never
> done. As organizations face crisis, the choice is to down-size by
> reducing staff. Often times, the downsizing is in human resources
> (people), not in functions.
True, far too often. Many places fail to see that they do have a choice,
though, and that downsizing is not the only alternative (and much evidence
is beginning to suggest that companies that downsize do not see the
restabilization they had hoped for). Home, rather than being the focal
point of our lives, is fast becoming simply the place we go to recover
from work. That's a sad commentary, with diverse causes.
> In a AQP newsletter, Peter Block writes:
> ^SIt seems that there has been a shift in values from quality improvement
> to transaction time and economics.^T .... ^SNow we seem to care more about
> cost cutting and speed that we do about customers and people.^T ...
I gain a lot from Block's more recent work. But sometimes he generalizes
perhaps too much. Organizations that we see shifting from quality
concerns to time and economics did not ever, I think, fully embrace the
quality paradigm (e.g., the philosophical foundation) to begin with. It
was simply one more lens through which to view the economics of business.
I see us as being poised at a turning point re: organizational evolution,
where people struggle with the entrenchment of Taylorism and human
assumptions embedded within that. Some companies do seem to be 'working
outside of the boxes' (or were never in the boxes to begin with!), while
others seem to desperately hold on to the traditional ways of
conceptualizing work. I'd guess we'll see these two juxtaposed for some
time yet. Is interesting to see, for instance, the push for participative
practices within the workplace, at the same time some companies argue over
whether or not "prairie dogging" policies need to be put into the
employee handbook.
> And later in the article, he writes ^SWe can begin by reclaiming the
> eight-hour workday. When will we say no to two people doing the job of
> four? We need to create economic literacy within our organizations so we
> can intelligently question the cost cutting demands we now accept so
> meekly.
Such a grassroots effort would be nice to see, on a larger scale than what
is currently happening. What will it really take, collectively, to begin
to loudly challenge the idea that 'this is just the way it is?'
> He ends the article by saying, ^SWe may not be able to change any of this,
> but we can certainly call it into question.^T
That, I think, is what is most critical. Lists like this are a start, as
well as the work we all do, or try to do. We must continue to question
the fundamental assumptions around which work is constructed, including
the changing meaning of work, the nature of the worker, and issues of
control and power. Consider the extent to which the experience of work is
educative, or miseducative.
--Terri tadeems@aol.com
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>