Table Of Content

ManagementDivided Management Divided ContradictionsofLaborManagement Matt Vidal 1 3 GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries ©MattVidal2022 Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted Impression:1 Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2021947706 ISBN978–0–19–879527–8 DOI:10.1093/oso/9780198795278.001.0001 Printedandboundby CPIGroup(UK)Ltd,Croydon,CR04YY LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork. ForEllen,withloveandthanks Preface This book had a long gestation period. From 2002 through early 2005, I conducted a field research project on labor management and supplier development in American manufacturing, including in-depth interviews withover100peoplein31manufacturingfirmsacrossWisconsin,Michi- gan and Illinois. I also conducted over 150 hours of direct observation. OverseveralmonthsIfollowedtwounionizedcomponentsuppliers(one for 15 months, one for seven) whose management agreed to implement a Labor-Management Partnership with support from the Wisconsin Re- gionalTrainingPartnership(WRTP),onebeingaHigh-PerformanceWork Organization framework supported by the International Association of Machinists. I followed a nonunion component supplier for 16 months, observingasupplierdevelopmentprojectrunbyaFortune500household- name company with support from the Wisconsin Manufacturing Ex- tension Partnership (WMEP), and participated in a day-long Lean 101 trainingsessionalongwithshopfloorworkers. Iobservedtwohalf-daymeetingsoftheWisconsinManufacturersDe- velopmentConsortium,agroupofsevenlarge,brand-namecorporations whoworkedtogetherwiththeWMEPandtechnicalcollegestodevelopa curriculumanddelivertraining(primarilyleanproduction)tolocalsup- pliers, one meeting of 14 supplier firms and the WMEP discussing the problems they experienced trying to implement just-in-time production and the training they needed to help them with it, and six meetings of a network of unions representing workers at six large, brand-name corpo- rations (three of which were in the WMDC) strategizing on how to fight outsourcingandorganizethedomesticsupplychain. IreceivedmyPhDfromtheUniversityofWisconsin-Madisonin2007, the same year that the first two journal articles based on this research were published. In the intervening years, while also working on several other research projects, I continued analyzing the data for this book and inductively developing the theory. I started reading Marx during my undergraduate years but only found the contemporary labor process literature during graduate school. The most influential contributions of the Preface vii contemporary literature deptict the workplace is a battleground of class struggle.HarryBravermanarguedthatthedegradationofworkisinherent tocapitalistmanagement.DavidGordonandRichardEdwardsportrayed managers as preoccupied with controlling labor to maximize the extrac- tion of surplus value and minimize the power of labor. Michael Burawoy theorized the workplace as the crucible in which class consciousness is formedandthecontemporaryAmericanworkplaceaseffectivelysubvert- ing working-class consciousness. These arguments and images did not resonatewithmyownexperiencesasaworker—fromseveralpositionsin kitchens,restaurantsandsupermarketstojanitorialwork,callcenterwork andjobsintwofactories(lightelectronicsassembly;machineoperatorin ametalfabshop)—otherthanthepartaboutsemiskilledmanuallaborbe- ing incredibly boring. Yet, critical studies of lean production seemed to confirmthepredictionsfromlaborprocesstheory:therhetoricpromised teamwork and empowerment but the reality was degraded, intensified workandincreasedmanagerialcontrol. As with my own personal work experience, my interviews and observations in American manufacturing firms were hard to reconcile with the picture painted by contemporary labor process theory and the criti- calscholarshiponlean.Workersweregenerallyinterestedinthesuccessof theirorganizationsandindoingtheirparttoensurethatsuccess(though oftendeeplyskepticalofmanagement).Managersingeneralwerenotfo- cused on—let alone preoccupied with—labor control or work speedup, and in many cases were focused on cross training their workers and including them in problem solving and decision making around process improvement. To be sure, there was labor-management conflict, but this wasgenerallyaboutcompetingvisionsofefficiencyandcontestationover changingworkplaceroutines,notaboutcontrol,autonomy,orthepaceof work. As I continued reading Marx, I found much that was not reflected in the contributions of Braverman, Gordon, Edwards, and Burawoy and I developed an interpretation different from theirs. I learned much from contemporary labor process theory, including the work of Pe- ter Armstrong, Rick Delbridge, Tony Elger, Andrew Friedman, Theo Nichols, Chris Smith, Vicki Smith, Phil Taylor, Paul Thompson, Steve Vallas, and Chris Warhurst, but continued to find its theoretical core— the control-resistance framework—of limited use for understanding my observations. In my search for relevant theory to understand and an- alyze my findings, I read widely across the sociology of work, human viii Preface resourcemanagementandemploymentrelations;organizationtheory,in- stitutionaltheory,andsocialpsychology;economics,economicsociology, andcomparativepoliticaleconomy. I am delighted to present this book, which offers a synthetic theoreti- calframeworkandresearchprogramfortheanalysisoflabormanagement andworkorganization.AlthoughmycasestudyisoncontemporaryAmer- ican manufacturing, the framework, which I call organizational political economy, is explicitly developed for comparative and historical research on organizations across sectors and countries. The foundation is historical materialism, including a classical marxist labor process theory and a stagetheoryofcapitalistdevelopmentinformedbyregulationtheory,into whichIintegratetheorganizationtheoreticconceptsofinstitutionallogics andorganizationalfields,managerialsatisficing,andoperationalroutines. Thetheoryproposesthatthewesternworldenteredapostfordiststagein the1990s,aftermorethantwodecadesoforganizationalexperimentation andinstitutionalchange.Withinthisstage,leanmanagementandworker empowermenthavebeeninstitutionalizedaslogicsofbestpracticeinthe manufacturing field and beyond. However, managers face contradictory pressuresbetweenensuringlabordiscipline(soworkersproduceoutputof sufficientquantityandquality)versusempoweringlabor(soworkerscan contributetoproblemsolvinganddecisionmakinginserviceofflexibility, continuousimprovement,andorganizationallearning). In the fifteen years since the data were collected, the core theoretical propositionshavebeencorroborated:leanproductionremainstheundis- puted model of global best practice in manufacturing and has spread to arangeofservicesectors.Conflictingstrategiesemphasizingstandardiza- tion or discretion, deskilling or upskilling, manual or cognitive labor are observed in a broad range of occupations, including production, social services,education,healthcare,administrativesupport,andsoftware.The bookpresentsevidencethatwithinmanufacturing,thecommonstrategy of using workers exclusively for routine manual labor is a satisficing ap- proach,inferior—intermsofachievingdynamicefficiency,includinglow costswithhighlevelsofquality,flexibility,andorganizationallearning—to astrategyofenlistingworkersinabstractcognitivelabor. As would be expected, my debts are many. I would like to thank all of the organizations that participated in my research and all of the individ- uals who gave their time to be interviewed, provided me with access to their organizations, facilitated access to other organizations or individu- als,orotherwiseallowedmetoobservetheirworkinglives.RhandiBerth, Preface ix Dawn Schaefer, and Bob Bergmann of the Wisconsin Regional Training Partnership,andMikeKlonsinskiandSteveStrauboftheWisconsinMan- ufacturing Extension Partnership, facilitated access to several companies andweregraciouswiththeirtimeandsupport.Steveprovidedhelpfulwrit- tenfeedbackononedraftpaper.Fourmanagerswereespeciallysupportive. TheplantmanagersatSecondTierSpecialist,MetalfabPlus,andMiniOE were particularly generous with their time and providing access to their companies and personnel. Paul Ericksen facilitated many introductions, openingmanydoorswithinhisownorganizationandothers,andremains agoodfriendtoday. TheresearchforthisbookwasmadepossiblebyagrantfromtheAlfred P. Sloan Foundation for the Advanced Manufacturing Project (AMP) re- searchconsortium.SueHelper,GaryHerrigel,DanLuria,JoelRogers,and JonathanZeitlinweretheprincipalinvestigatorsonthatprojectandJosh Whitfordwasafellowresearchassistant.Allofthesecolleaguesprovided guidance and feedback on my earliest papers, including the two publica- tions from 2007, which developed some parts of the analysis presented in this book. At the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the Sociology de- partment,theCenteronWisconsinStrategy(COWS),andtheEconomic Sociology brownbag seminar provided an intellectually rich and stimulating environment, and I received feedback on the earliest papers from severalcolleaguesatMadisonincludingIvanErmakoff,JenniferFarnham, Michael Handel, Chip Hunter, Pablo Mitnik, Matt Nichter, Jamie Peck, Jeff Rothstein, Rob White, and Erik Wright. Other Madison friends who helped shape my thinking in one way or another include Laura Dresser, MarkHarvey,BrentKaup,ShamusKhan,MonicaErling(néeWillemsen), BradManzolillo,ArthurScarritt,AmyQuark,MatíasScaglione,MattZei- denberg, and Jeff Rickert, a dear friend who passed far too soon. I also receivedconstructivecommentsonanearlypaperfromNinaBandelj. TheInstituteforResearchonLaborandEmployment(IRLE)atUCLA provided me with a postdoctoral fellowship and dedicated time to work on further analysis and drafts of my first paper drawing from the entire datasetanddevelopingthesynthesisoflaborprocessandinstitutionalthe- ory. UCLA was another stimulating place to be, including the IRLE and theComparativeSocialAnalysisseminar.Iamparticularlygratefulforthe supportandguidanceIreceivedfromRuthMilkman,thendirectorofthe IRLE,whocontinuestobeamentorandfriend.MichaelMannandLynne Zuckeralsoprovidedconstructivefeedbackonadraftpaper.