Control on the ‘Boundary-Work’ in Work-Life Articulation for Flexible Knowledge Workers. Insights into Gender Asymmetries

Anna Carreri

doi:10.3390/socsci9060107

Abstract

In the sociological literature, several studies have shown that the economic and organizational changes of the last decade, including the growth of the service sector and the diffusion of new technologies, have altered the productive and reproductive processes as well as their spatial and temporal dimensions typical of Fordism. In order to shed light on how knowledge workers facing job flexibility and insecurity position themselves with respect to the practices of (de)constructing the boundaries between productive and reproductive domains, specific analytical tools were applied, originating from the interdisciplinary field of boundary-studies, within a perspective focused on gender differences and the subjective experiences of time. With this approach, a discourse analysis was conducted on 37 qualitative interviews with knowledge workers who handle job flexibility and insecurity and who have care responsibilities to uphold at home. The results show that the permeability and flexibility of new (re)productive practices, often presented in neoliberal economy as new opportunities for knowledge workers, especially if they are female, are experienced differently by men and women: for men they represent a new control source, whereas for women they constitute a fictitious, if not constricting, process.

Highlights

The sociological literature has demonstrated how changes of economic-productive processes and the organizational models have altered the traditional segmentation ofproductive times and spaces (Chesley et al 2003; Towers et al 2006)
The analytical perspective of boundary studies (Allen et al 2014) opens up new ways forward in work-life balance (WLB) literature, both on the methodological and the theoretical level, to explore how subjects relate to temporality, that is to socialproductive times
The peculiarity of the target group —knowledge workers in precarious working conditions—allows me to focus on the modalities of work-life articulation that are distinct to the more traditional modalities characterized by Fordism (Murgia et al 2016)

Summary

Introduction

The sociological literature has demonstrated how changes of economic-productive processes and the organizational models have altered the traditional segmentation of (re)productive times and spaces (Chesley et al 2003; Towers et al 2006). A more mixed articulation of the time and the space dedicated to work and personal life has become diffuse. This is especially true for those carrying out activities involving a high level of knowledge, in which language and emotions represent the cornerstone of the productive process, and for those who use technologies, enabling the possibility to ‘work anytime and anywhere’ (Murgia et al 2016). In the case of these so-called ‘knowledge workers’ (Butera et al 2008), who generally make wide use of the most recent technologies, such working practices tend to cultivate a certain sense of organizational autonomy, albeit illusionary—at least in part—considering the processes of intensification and precarization of their work (Murgia and Poggio 2012; Pérez-Zapata et al 2016).

Objectives

Methods

Conclusion