Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
In the analysis of the sustainability of knowledge work environments, the intensification of work has emerged as probably the single most important contradiction. We argue that the process of knowledge work intensification is increasingly self-driven and influenced by subjectification processes in the context of trends of individualisation and self-management. We use a qualitative case study of a leading multinational company in the information and communications technology sector (considered to be ‘best-in-class’) to discuss this intensification and its linkage with self-disciplining mechanisms. The workers studied seem to enjoy a number of resources that current psychosocial risk models identify as health promoting (e.g. autonomy, learning, career development and other material and symbolic rewards). We discuss the validity of these models to assess the increasingly boundaryless and self-managed knowledge work contexts characterised by internalisation of demands and resources and paradoxical feelings of autonomy. Knowledge work intensification increases health and social vulnerabilities directly and through two-way interactions with, first, the autonomy paradox and new modes of subjection at the workplace; second, atomisation and lack of social support; third, permanent accountability and insecurity; and finally, newer difficulties in setting boundaries.
Highlights
While knowledge work expands, European trends in job quality remain ambiguous
We argue that understanding this growing sophistication of the normative controls, connected with subjectification processes is critical for explaining the trends of work intensification and overworking that impel knowledge workers to use autonomy to self-intensify and perceive their efforts as self-chosen
Atomisation and lack of social support While employees seemed to agree with their HR Director about the importance of personal initiative and autonomy in this highly demanding workplace, the workers’ testimonies do contradict the collaboration discourse highlighted by the HR Director
Summary
European trends in job quality remain ambiguous. In the last two decades, evidence has accumulated that highlights the fact that European economies have been experiencing a process of work intensification (i.e. increased effort at work1) (Burchell, Ladipo & Wilkinson, 2002; Green & Mostafa, 2012), that has affected knowledge workers, no longer safe from potentially harmful working conditions (Green, 2006; Pérez-Zapata, 2015; Worrall, Mather & Cooper, 2016). The transition towards self-management in a boundaryless knowledge work context challenges current psychosocial risk models that need to be re-invented in line with a more complex approach that, on the one hand, unpacks demands and control/resources and, on the other hand, considers the mechanisms involved in their formation (influenced by blurring and internalisation forces) and their interactions. In such environments, it becomes more and more difficult to attribute responsibilities and assess psychosocial risks, since experienced demands and control/resources (autonomy) are increasingly fused and perceived as an individual free. We argue that understanding this growing sophistication of the normative controls, connected with subjectification processes is critical for explaining the trends of work intensification and overworking that impel knowledge workers to use autonomy to self-intensify and perceive their efforts as self-chosen
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
